key

Members of Congress are looking to block the U.S. Navy from starting construction of the first nuclear-powered Trump class battleship until the service provides assurances that key weapon systems are “sufficiently mature.” The battleships are to be armed with railguns, high-power laser directed energy weapons, and other advanced weapons that have yet to be fully proven out. Legislators are also looking to compel the Navy to devise a strategy for future subvariants of the FF(X) frigate, including the potential for a version with a built-in Vertical Launch System (VLS). TWZ was first to confirm that the initial FF(X) design would lack a VLS, a decision that has prompted questions and criticism.

The battleship and frigate provisions are included in an early draft of the annual defense policy bill, or National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), for the 2027 Fiscal Year, which the House Armed Services Committee released late yesterday. The Trump class battleship and FF(X) are set to be some of the Navy’s top shipbuilding priorities in the coming years.

Tying the battleship construction timeline to weapon system progress

The section in the proposed legislation regarding the Trump class battleship is brief, reading as follows:

“The Secretary of the Navy may not enter into a contract or other agreement that includes a scope of work for the construction of the lead ship of the Battleship program until the date on which the Secretary certifies to the congressional defense committees that the weapon systems planned for inclusion in such lead ship are at a sufficiently mature technology readiness level.”

The provision does not name any particular weapon systems or define what level of “technology readiness” would be accepted as “sufficiently mature.”

The Navy currently plans to arm the 35,000-ton-displacement Trump class battleships with a mixture of nuclear and conventional missiles, an electromagnetic railgun, a pair of traditional 5-inch naval guns, various laser directed energy weapons, and additional weapon systems for close-in defense. The missiles, which will include hypersonic types, are to be loaded inside very large VLS arrays.

In terms of technological maturity, the railgun presents particular questions. Between 2005 and 2021, the Navy had an active railgun program. Despite promising developments, plans for an at-sea test were repeatedly pushed back before the entire effort was shelved. Major technical hurdles were cited as a key factor in that decision. The railgun itself was effectively placed in storage at White Sands Missile Range (WSMR) in New Mexico.

However, it emerged earlier this year that the Navy had conducted a new round of testing of the railgun at WSMR in February 2025. Whether the Navy has any plans to pick up where it left off with this prototype design, which was developed by BAE Systems, or pursue a new one remains unclear. General Atomics, which previously supported U.S. Army railgun efforts, has publicly expressed interest in being involved in arming the Trump class.

While the Navy has been very active in developing and fielding laser directed energy weapons, this is another area where the service has faced continued challenges in expanding their operational use. The plans for the Trump class specifically call for a 300-kilowatt-class laser, which is far more powerful than any of the designs the Navy has integrated on its warships to date. The service currently has eight Arleigh Burke class destroyers with the Optical Dazzling Interdictor, Navy (ODIN), as well as another one of those warships with the High Energy Laser with Integrated Optical-dazzler and Surveillance (HELIOS). HELIOS is a 60-kilowatt-class design, though there has been talk about scaling up its power rating to 150 kilowatts. ODIN’s power rating does not appear to be officially confirmed, but it is understood to be significantly lower than that of HELIOS. You can read more about all of this here.

The Intermediate Range Conventional Prompt Strike (IRCPS) hypersonic missile, another key component of the future Trump class arsenal, is also still in development. The first test launch from a warship, the stealth destroyer USS Zumwalt, is expected to come next year. IRCPS is the Navy half of a joint program with the U.S. Army, which is working to field a land-based version of the same missile. The Army refers to its complete weapon system as the Dark Eagle. The Army had suffered significant setbacks in the past with the Dark Eagle, but the service had blamed those issues on the launcher rather than the missile.

More context about what planned weapons systems for the Trump class may have prompted the House Armed Services Committee to include this section in the draft NDAA are likely to emerge as the proposed bill is refined. Nuclear propulsion and other planned aspects of the ship could present their own challenges during development and production. The U.S. Navy has not procured a nuclear-powered surface combatant of any kind since the Cold War.

For its part, the Navy has said it will leverage significant prior work on weapons and other systems to help reduce risk and ensure the battleship program remains on schedule.

“We intend to, with all we can do, use pull-through technologies, [including] things from that we’ve worked on with DDG(X),” Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle said at a hearing earlier this month. “It will have the SPY-6 radar. It will have the Baseline 10 Aegis combat system. It will pull through, of course, the A1B Ford class reactor plant and all the design that goes with that. The only thing inherently new to it will be the actual hull itself, and so most of the fixtures in it. And I would say the directed energy [weapons] and up gunning, that will also be new.”

One of the “mistakes that we’ve done before, quite frankly,” is “we’ve started to build before the design is mature enough,” the CNO also said at a roundtable on the sidelines of the Navy League’s Sea Air Space 2026 in April. “And we want to make sure that we’re at [sic] least a very, very high level – I won’t try to give a percentage, but you can think like 80% or more design – before the first weld is done.”

The Navy is understood to still be in the very early phases of laying out the Trump class design.

The provision in the draft NDAA could easily delay the start of work on the first of these battleships, which could set back the entire schedule for the program. As it stands now, the Navy is looking to order the lead ship, set to be named the USS Defiant, in Fiscal Year 2028. With an estimated price tag of $17 billion, this ship would cost more than each of the next three Ford class aircraft carriers, and is not expected to enter service in 2036. The Navy also currently plans to buy 14 more battleships between Fiscal Years 2029 and 2055. As TWZ has previously explored in detail, many significant questions remain about the future of the Trump class, including whether the program will ultimately come to fruition at all.

Plans for future FF(X) frigate subvariants

In its current form, the draft NDAA would also require the Secretary of the Navy to “submit to the congressional defense committees a strategy for the iterative development of the FF(X) class frigate” within 180 days of the bill becoming law. The Secretary would also be compelled to provide a briefing to update legislators on their progress in devising this strategy within 90 days.

The strategy would have to include the following:

• “Information on the estimated timeline for each planned variant (commonly known as a ‘‘Flight’’) of the FF(X) class frigate”
• “Details on the integration of additional capabilities for future Flights of the frigate, such as vertical launch systems or improved sensors, and implications for the space, weight, power, and cost of the hull form.”
• Any additional mission sets or combat functions that may be added to the concept of operation for FF(X) class frigates.”

The Navy has already confirmed that the FF(X) design will based on that of the Legend class cutter currently in service with the U.S. Coast Guard. As mentioned, the fact that the first of these frigates, at least, will lack a VLS array has raised significant questions about this program.

The FF(X) configuration that has been shown so far will have essentially the same integrated armament as the Navy’s much-maligned Littoral Combat Ships (LCS). The limitations of both subclasses of LCS explicitly led the Navy to pursue the Constellation class frigate. Despite the Constellation class being based on the established Franco-Italian Fregate Europea Multi-Missione (FREMM; European Multi-Mission Frigate in English), repeated design changes turned the program into a boondoggle. It was finally cancelled last November.

The Constellation class would have featured a 32-cell Mk 41 VLS array. There had already been a debate about whether this was sufficient VLS capacity to meet operational requirements, something TWZ previously explored in detail.

The Navy’s current stated vision for the Flight I FF(X) configuration is to utilize containerized weapons and other systems to make up for gaps in integrated capabilities. The frigates are also expected to act as motherships for future fleets of uncrewed surface vessels, which could provide additional distributed weapons and sensor capabilities and capacity.

“While Flight I of the FF(X) Class (currently planned as at least the first 2 ships) does not incorporate a traditional fixed VLS battery, it retains the capability to deploy VLS-equivalent payloads through modular, mission-tailored configurations,” according to the Navy’s 2027 Fiscal Year budget request. “This approach provides an inherent growth path for VLS and other capabilities through containerized solutions in early flights, reinforcing the platform’s adaptability while mitigating cost, schedule, and integration risks associated with fixed VLS installation.”

A containerized VLS, in particular, would be far more limited in capacity than a traditional built-in Mk 41 and Mk 57 array.

At the same time, the Navy’s budget documents make clear that there are already plans for “studies for future flights [that] will consider expanded capabilities including Vertical Launch Systems, and Anti-Submarine Warfare systems.”

Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII), the shipbuilder behind the Legend class design on which the FF(X) will be based, has shown multiple concepts for derivatives with integrated VLS arrays and other additional capabilities in the past, as seen in the video below.

Patrol Frigate Variants – Information Video

When it comes to the battleship and FF(X) provisions in the draft NDAA, it is also important to remember that this legislation is not yet finalized and could easily change in the weeks and months ahead. The House’s version of the bill will also need to be reconciled with what the Senate puts forward, a process often marked by lengthy negotiations. The House and Senate will both need to pass the finalized version, and then the President has to sign it into law.

As the name makes clear, the battleship program is of particular significance to President Donald Trump, which will be an important factor in these processes. Even before his first term, Trump had expressed interest in returning battleships to the Navy’s combat fleets, but there had been no indications of any formal moves to pursue this ship before last year. With the schedule the Navy has laid out now, major decisions about how to proceed in the production of these ships, if at all, will fall to the next administration. There are already massive competing priorities, and some members of Congress have already questioned whether the battleship effort is the best use of available resources.

It’s also worth noting here that Trump has long been very outspoken when it comes to Navy shipbuilding design decisions, especially from an aesthetic perspective.

The House Armed Services Committee has at least taken steps now toward putting a hold on production of the first Trump class battleship until it is confident that key weapon systems are mature, as well as pushing the Navy to lay a formal plan for future versions of the FF(X) frigate.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

May 27 (Asia Today) — OpenAI said Wednesday it will expand artificial intelligence-based cyber defense cooperation with the South Korean government, public agencies and companies in key industries.

The company announced its Korea Cyber Action Plan during a press conference at the JW Marriott Hotel in Seoul’s Seocho District. The plan is designed to give government agencies, public institutions and companies broader access to OpenAI’s advanced AI cyber models.

Jason Kwon, OpenAI’s chief strategy officer, said AI has entered a third stage as an “intelligence utility,” becoming core infrastructure for the economy and society after earlier phases focused on capability breakthroughs and broader access.

Kwon said South Korea is well positioned to adopt AI because it is a digital-first society that quickly embraces new technologies and has a “full-stack economy” with global semiconductor companies including Samsung Electronics and SK hynix.

“Advanced cyber AI capabilities should not remain in the hands of only a few,” Kwon said. “Korea’s key defenders should be able to use them to strengthen collective security and public safety.”

“Korea is a very important country for OpenAI,” he said. “We hope to become an important partner in Korea’s AI transformation and in strengthening national resilience.”

The Korea Cyber Action Plan is part of Daybreak, OpenAI’s global cybersecurity initiative that aims to build security into systems from the earliest stages of development. OpenAI says Daybreak is designed to help cyber defenders identify threats, generate patches and verify fixes across code and systems.

A key part of the plan is expanding Trusted Access for Cyber, a program that gives verified defensive users access to specialized cyber AI models. OpenAI said in April it was scaling the program to thousands of verified individual defenders and hundreds of teams responsible for protecting critical software.

Kwon said access for the South Korean government to the government version of the program is in its final stage. He said OpenAI is also discussing adoption of the private-sector program with several Korean companies.

Asked about potential misuse of cyber models and data leakage risks, Kwon said OpenAI is controlling risk by granting access only to “trusted defenders” who go through strict verification.

He also said OpenAI supports data residency in South Korea, allowing data to be processed on domestic servers. Public agencies and companies may also choose an option in which data is not stored at all, he said.

Kwon said OpenAI has begun talks with the Korea AI Safety Institute under the Ministry of Science and ICT. He said the company will draw on its experience working with AI safety institutes in the United States and Britain to help South Korea build its own model evaluation capabilities.

Before Wednesday’s announcement, OpenAI had been deepening cooperation with South Korea’s public sector. On May 18, Sasha Baker, OpenAI’s head of national security policy, visited South Korea and demonstrated the company’s latest cyber-focused models to major agencies including the science ministry, the Foreign Ministry, the Interior Ministry, the Financial Services Commission and the National AI Strategy Committee.

On Tuesday, Kwon met with Ryu Je-myung, second vice minister of science and ICT, to discuss AI security cooperation. OpenAI also signed memorandums of understanding with Korea Water Resources Corp. and Korea Technology Finance Corp.

Kwon emphasized the company’s expectations for the Korean market.

“Korea is a country with very favorable conditions to turn AI into national competitiveness,” he said. “Based on ChatGPT, Korea is already one of the top 10 markets globally, and the speed of AI adoption is very fast.”

OpenAI said use of Codex in South Korea is also growing quickly. Weekly active users of ChatGPT Codex in the country have increased tenfold since the beginning of the year, placing South Korea among the top five countries by usage.

More than half of the requests come from non-development work such as document writing, analysis, research and operations, showing the potential for wider enterprise use, the company said.

Kwon said changes in OpenAI’s partnership with Microsoft have made it possible to provide OpenAI API services through a wider range of cloud providers, including Amazon Web Services, and that enterprise growth is expected to accelerate.

On pricing for enterprise services, Kwon said consumer subscriptions and corporate services are different, and that business customers already use contract-based pricing. Over the long term, he said OpenAI aims to provide stronger AI performance at the same cost or lower unit prices so more users can benefit.

— 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=20260527010008011

North Korea will convene a plenary meeting of the ruling Workers’ Party of Korea (WPK) next month for an interim review of state and party policies for this year, state media reported Monday.

The WPK’s political bureau has decided to hold the second plenary meeting of the ninth central committee in late June, according to the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA).

The meeting will be convened “in order to have an interim review of the implementation of the party and state policies for 2026 and discuss the work in the second half of the year and a series of important issues,” the KCNA said, without providing further details.

The North has recently been holding plenary meetings regularly at the end of June and December, while also convening them when important issues need to be discussed.

It remains to be seen whether North Korea will make major decisions regarding its policy stance against South Korea or the United States at the upcoming meeting, amid speculations Chinese President Xi Jinping may visit the North soon.

The planned June meeting comes as North Korea seeks to implement follow-up measures for decisions made at the ninth party congress held in late February.

The following month, the North revised its constitution to add a new territorial clause, defining its territory as the land bordering China and Russia to the north and South Korea to the south, while removing all references to unification with South Korea.

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.

Plans for a new tranche of upgrades for U.S. Army special operations MH-60M Black Hawk helicopters are heavily tied to continued progress, or lack thereof, on an improved engine. Work on the Army’s Improved Turbine Engine Program (ITEP) is ongoing now, but there have also been threats to cancel it entirely in recent years, and its future remains murky.

Officials from U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) talked about the intersection of future plans for the MH-60M fleet and ITEP during a roundtable at the annual SOF Week conference yesterday. TWZ was in attendance, along with other outlets. The Army’s elite 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment, also known as the Night Stalkers, operates the MH-60Ms.

The Army selected General Electric’s (GE) T901 as the winner of the ITEP competition in 2019. The engine remains in development, with flight testing involving a modified Black Hawk beginning in May 2025.

“We are following very closely what the Army is doing with ITEP. We are hoping that we will get it,” Lt. Col. Aron Hauquitz, head of the Technology Applications Program Office (TAPO), said at the roundtable yesterday. “We’ll be able to put it in our aircraft, and we’ll create the Block 2 variant of the MH-60M.”

In “FY30 [Fiscal Year 2030], we’re going to start either the Block 1.2 or the Block 2” upgrade program for the MH-60M fleet, Lt. Col. Cameron Keogh, the Program Manager for the MH-60 within SOCOM’s Program Executive Office for Rotary Wing (PEO-RW), also said at the roundtable. “It’s going to hinge on what’s going on with the Improved Turbine Engine, the T901 program that the Army’s running. We’re closely following that. If it continues to be successful, we will integrate that engine.”

To take a step back quickly, Night Stalker Black Hawks today already have an array of unique features compared to other H-60 variants in service elsewhere across the U.S. military and globally. This includes a terrain-following/terrain avoidance radar and other sensors, a variety of defensive systems, and an extensive communications suite, which you can read about in more detail here. A subset of the MH-60Ms are also configured as Direct Action Penetrators (DAP), which can be armed with a mix of guns, missiles, launched effects, and rockets to provide organic close air support during missions.

Cramming all of these capabilities on the MH-60Ms also requires significant changes to their core structure, and they are notably heavier than other typical H-60 variants. To account for this, the 160th’s Black Hawks already have YT706 turbine engines that are more powerful than the T701s found on standard Army models. GE makes both of these engines.

The YT706 has “higher fuel consumption, but it also has a higher output to help us keep that extra weight in the air,” Lt. Col. Keogh noted yesterday.

Integrating the T901 onto a typical Black Hawk will provide “50 percent more shaft‑power while delivering significantly higher fuel efficiency,” according to Lockheed Martin. Sikorsky, the prime contractor behind the H-60 family of helicopters, became a subsidiary of Lockheed Martin in 2015.

“The 50% power increase means a Black Hawk can transport additional fuel or payloads, such as launched effects, medical evacuation litters, forward area resupply loads or advanced sensor packages, without compromising aircraft performance,” Lockheed Martin highlighted in a press release earlier this month. “The engine’s performance at high altitude, high temperature conditions expands the Black Hawk’s envelope, giving commanders more options for insertion, extraction and reconnaissance missions in austere environments.”

Sikorsky Begins Black Hawk® Ground Runs with U.S. Army T901 Improved Turbine Engines

“Higher fuel efficiency and lower maintenance demands lessen the supply chain burden in contested environments, a core tenet of the Army’s continuous transformation strategy,” the press release noted. “Improved specific fuel consumption reduces the number of refuel stops, extending mission endurance and shrinking the fuel footprint in forward operating bases.”

The boost in capability that the T901 is set to bring is especially relevant for Night Stalker MH-60Ms, given their unique attributes and mission requirements. The maintenance and logistics benefits would also be particularly attractive for the 160th. The Regiment routinely flies extremely demanding missions, often conducted across long distances and under adverse conditions, and staged from far-flung locations with limited access to established support chains.

Plans otherwise for the Block 1.2/Block 2.0 MH-60M upgrades are still evolving.

Right now, the core “focus on that is payload restoration. We’re trying to take weight out of the airplane [sic], [and] we’re trying to move the CG, the center of gravity, forward,” Lt. Col. Keogh explained. “How we’re doing that without reducing capabilities is we’re just kind of moving the capabilities around.”

“Somebody asked me earlier if we’re going to take the anti-ice system off the airplane to lose some weight. We’re not. We need the anti-ice, especially up in Washington State,” he continued. “We’re taking some of our heavier boxes, a lot of our avionics, we’re putting them up forward into the crew department, we’re putting them behind the pilots. That’s going to shorten cable runs – copper weighs a lot, you’d be surprised – and then it also helped with our CG shift, as well.”

“That’ll give the operators more butts in seats as they head out to the objective, and also give the air crews better fuel flexibility for mission planning,” he added.

To go back to ITEP, the new engine has long been expected to offer a major leap in performance to regular Army Black Hawks, as well as the service’s AH-64 Apache attack helicopters. However, as noted, the program has faced major uncertainty in recent years. The effort has suffered significant delays tied to manufacturing and supply chain issues. The T901 was also a central component of the Army’s Future Attack Recon Aircraft (FARA) program, which the service axed in 2024.

Last year, there were indications the Army was moving to cancel ITEP, too, with the service requesting no additional funding for the program in its 2026 Fiscal Year budget proposal. Congress subsequently interceded, appropriating another $238 million for continued work on the engine in the current fiscal cycle.

In its 2027 Fiscal Year budget request, the Army is again not asking for any new money for ITEP, which has raised new questions about the program’s future.

T901 First Engine to Test Mission Accomplished

At the Army Aviation Association of America’s (AAAA) 2026 Warfighting Summit last month, Army Maj. Gen. Clair Gill said he was “very excited about where they’re going there” with ITEP and that the engine was “almost nearing completion of certification.” Gill is the service’s Program Acquisition Executive for Maneuver Air.

ITEP is “performing as intended,” and “the resourcing that Congress added in 2025 and the resourcing that Congress added in 2026 is being used to deliberately continue that testing,” Army Brig. Gen. David Phillips also told TWZ and other outlets at a roundtable at the AAAA conference, but did not elaborate on future plans for the engine. Phillips is the Deputy Portfolio Acquisition Executive for Maneuver Air.

“We will need a little bit more money to get through the EMD [engineering, manufacturing and development] program, but it’s certainly not anywhere close to the money that we’ve already received for the program,” Mike Sousa, GE’s Executive Program Manager for the T901, had also told members of the media ahead of the AAAA conference, according to Breaking Defense. “So there is a little bit of money that is still required.”

Another factor now in all of this for the Army, as well as the Night Stalkers, is the expected arrival of the new MV-75 Cheyenne II tiltrotor in the next few years. The MV-75 offers massive boosts in range and speed compared to any Black Hawk variant. At the same time, that is also expected to come at a cost. As it stands now, the MV-75 is not expected to replace all of the Army’s H-60s, which will continue to play important roles for years to come. SOCOM and the 160th have a similar vision when it comes to the fielding of a special operations-specific version of the MV-75 and the future of the MH-60M.

“There will not be a one-for-one swap for MH-60M and MV-75. Don’t ask me what that exact number will be,” Dr. Steven Smith, head of SOCOM’s PEO-RW, also said at the roundtable yesterday. “We’re still going to need analysis to determine what that will be, but it will not be a one-for-one swap. We recognize that the M-60s will be required for the crisis response mission.”

As an aside, the 160th’s MH-60Ms, including examples in the DAP configuration, were a key element of Operation Absolute Resolve to capture Nicolas Maduro, then Venezuela’s dictatorial president, in January. TWZ explored the contributions of the DAP helicopters in detail at the time.

Altogether, the MH-60M is still on track to be a central component of the Night Stalker’s fleets for years to come, whether the helicopters are re-engined in the end or not.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

Kate Cassidy said that she was told her passport photo didn’t match her current appearance

People across the UK may need to update their passports before their holiday. The reminder comes after one woman was stopped and questioned at the airport.

According to GOV.UK officials: “You must get a new photo when you get a new passport, even if your appearance has not changed.” However, it also states that you will “need to get a new passport to travel abroad or prove your identity if you change your name” and “your gender.”

GOV.UK adds you will also need to get a new passport if “your appearance” has changed and “you cannot be recognised from your passport photo any more (for example, you’ve had plastic surgery).”

The reminder for UK passengers to update their travel document, if needed, comes as 27-year-old Kate Cassidy, who had been dating One Direction’s Liam Payne for two years at the time of his death in 2024, shared her experience getting flagged by TSA staff after she was told her passport photo didn’t match her current appearance.

While she said she understood the rules, she pointed out that “there are way better ways to handle things and word things.” In her TikTok video, viewed almost 1 million times, she said: “I just got genuinely ridiculed at the Fort Lauderdale airport. I’m at the security line, and I gave the guy my passport, and they obviously do a photo view.

“If it matches your passport, you get the green light, and if it doesn’t match your passport, you get the red light. I got the red light because my photo, I guess, didn’t match my appearance.”

After showing her passport photo to the camera, she explained that airport security said she looked unrecognisable in comparison to the other picture. She said: “He calls over a woman, and she literally looks at my passport, she looks at me, she’s doing a double take, up and down, and this woman keeps going on and on and on about how, ‘this isn’t you, you’re giving me somebody else’s passport”.

Kate explained that the staff questioned, “new nose? New lips? Something to your eyes? New hair?”. Kate then pulled out her ID to confirm her identity, but she said that her ID was not hers either. Looking at Kate’s passport, ID and then her, Kate said: “She goes ‘one, two, three. Those are three different people’.”

READ MORE: Tesco makes ‘Kids Eat Free’ announcement affecting 332 stores from MondayREAD MORE: ‘Bungling doctors spent 7 years treating me for terminal cancer I never had’

The American social media influencer admitted: “I’m literally so embarrassed. She then goes and calls three different men over. One guy was like, ‘do you not have a work ID?’ and I was like, ‘I can pull up my Instagram, I don’t know what to do.’

“Keep in mind that everybody in line behind me is listening to this. I understand they’re doing their job. At the same time, I think there are way better ways to handle things and word things.”

In another video, after the airport incident, she listed exactly what procedures altered her appearance. She mentioned that she has cheek filler, chin filler, Botox, a boob job, nose job and lip filler.

She also noted she’s a natural blonde but dyes her hair brown. She further said she has “a whole head of extensions, fake nails, and I am also naturally super pale, so I do spray tans once a week.”

It’s not just travellers that need to think about this. Motoring experts on GOV.UK confirm: “You must change the photo on your driving licence if you cannot be recognised from your photo, for example, if you’ve had plastic surgery.” This includes learner drivers who will need to take their provisional licence to the test centre.

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s grip on his party slipped on Thursday as anger boiled over among Senate Republicans about a growing list of issues.

In a striking display of defiance, GOP senators abruptly derailed plans to vote on legislation to fund Trump’s immigration crackdown amid deep disagreements over security funding for a White House ballroom and a $1.8-billion fund to pay people who claim to have been politically persecuted.

The discontent had been building for weeks. Many senators had grown frustrated over Trump’s decision to endorse candidates running against longtime Republican incumbents.

Others, worried about rising costs as a result from the war in Iran, had aired concerns ahead of the midterm elections. But the breaking point came when the Justice Department, with little warning, pushed to create what it termed the “anti-weaponization fund.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) acknowledged the concerns over the fund Thursday after a reportedly contentious private meeting about it between Senate Republicans and acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche. He also conceded midterm politics had added to the tension.

“It’s hard to divorce anything that happens here from what’s happening in the political atmosphere around us,” Thune told reporters. “You can’t disconnect those things.”

A day earlier, Sen. Bill Cassidy, a Louisiana Republican who lost his primary race on Saturday to a Trump-backed challenger, expressed strong disagreement with the creation of the fund, which would be controlled by appointees without congressional oversight.

“People are concerned about paying their mortgage or rent, affording groceries and paying for gas, not putting together a $1.8 billion fund for the president and his allies to pay whomever they wish with no legal precedent or accountability,” Cassidy wrote on X. “If there needs to be a settlement, the administration should bring it to Congress to decide.”

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) also had harsh criticism for the fund.

“So the nation’s top law enforcement official is asking for a slush fund to pay people who assault cops? Utterly stupid, morally wrong — take your pick,” he said in a statement.

The discord was striking, partly because Republicans have largely steered clear of checking the president’s power, and Congress has been largely sidelined under the second Trump administration on the war in Iran and other issues.

“I don’t think the Republicans had any choice but to pull the plug until we come back in June, because they’re facing a bit of a mutiny within their conference,” Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) told The Times, saying he had heard that the meeting between Blanche and Republicans “didn’t go well.”

As tension simmered on the background, Trump seemed unbothered by the group of Republicans’ public rebellion against his agenda. When asked whether he was losing control of the Senate, he said he didn’t know.

“I only do what is right,” he told reporters in the Oval Office.

However, he expressed annoyance at lawmakers who would not support $1 billion in federal funding for security costs related to the ballroom project. He said the structure is being privately funded by him and other “great patriots.”

“We are making a gift to the United States,” Trump said. “This is being made as a gift from me and other people that are great patriots and spent a lot of money. We are building what will be the finest ballroom anywhere in the world.”

The $1 billion for security funding would be “very much a good expenditure,” he said. If Congress does not sign off on the money, Trump said the “White House won’t be a very secure place.”

Trump did not immediately comment on Thursday about the Senate’s delaying of the funding bill. The White House declined to comment on the matter.

Trump’s second-term actions have frequently tested the loyalty of Republican lawmakers, who have largely stayed in line. The settlement fund, with its ethical questions, appears to have crossed a line for some senators in a party that has traditionally opposed wasting taxpayer funds.

The money comes from the judgment fund, which is a Congress-approved ongoing appropriation that allows the Justice Department to settle cases and make payments.

Stephen Miller, a top aide to Trump, told reporters at the White House that the $1.8-billion settlement was “just a small measure of the justice” that many people are owed after being targeted by the federal government. Miller declined to say whether the White House was reaching out to senators to ease concerns about the fund.

Republicans in Congress decried the use of similar third-party settlements during the Obama administration, with House lawmakers repeatedly passing a bill aimed at stopping settlement slush funds, noted Molly Nixon, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute.

Though the Trump administration’s plan is novel because the settlement money isn’t going to a third party, the general concept has been offensive to Republicans in the past; the Republican-controlled House Judiciary Committee termed it an abuse in 2017.

“If you’re taking a consistent view, you’d be at least equally as opposed to this settlement,” Nixon said of Republican lawmakers.

That could be driving some of the opposition now, along with concerns about who is going to get the money and whether it could be distributed to people who wouldn’t have been able to make a successful case before a court of law, Nixon said.

“The fund is going to plaintiffs who were victims of lawfare or weaponization. … Those are pretty ambiguous terms. They’re sort of in the eye of the beholder,” Nixon said. “It’s pretty easy to see how this could very easily become a quiet political claims process.”

Police officers who defended the U.S. Capitol during the Jan. 6, 2021, riot have already filed a federal lawsuit seeking to block the creation of the fund, arguing in part that it would compensate extremist convicted of committing violent crimes.

“The fund’s mere existence sends a clear and chilling message: those who enact violence in President Trump’s name will not just avoid punishment, they will be rewarded with riches,” the lawsuit says.

When Trump returned to office in January 2025, one of his first acts was pardoning or commuting the prison sentences of the 1,500 people who were charged in connection with the attack. Vice President JD Vance on Wednesday did not rule out that settlement money could go to those rioters, saying the money would be given out on a “case-by-case basis.”

Thune told reporters on Thursday that the Justice Department would have to come up with some guardrails to ease concerns among senators.

“We need to get some clarity,” he said.

Though the number of Republicans angry with Trump is significant enough to make or break legislation, the caucus appeared far from falling apart.

Senate Republicans blocked an attempt by Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) on Thursday to pass a bill to prohibit federal funds from reaching Jan. 6 rioters, an attempt to prevent the fund from being used to compensate them.

“I’m encouraged hearing some of my Republican colleagues agreeing with me,” Padilla said on the Senate floor. “Let’s stand up for congressional oversight as a unified Senate.”

Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) objected to Padilla’s bill, later writing on X: “PROUD to object today to Senator Padilla’s RIDICULOUS bill and stand up for ALL FREEDOM-LOVING AMERICANS.”

Schiff, who is working on an amendment that would target the fund, said other Republican colleagues he spoke to Wednesday evening were unhappy with the position Trump has put them in. He said Trump’s actions have helped underscore Democrats’ arguments against his party.

“All [it’s] doing is helping us make the case that the Republicans couldn’t care less about people’s cost of living … that there’s plenty of money for golden ballrooms for the president, there’s plenty of money for the president’s cronies, but there’s no money for the average family,” Schiff said.

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Commission of Fine Arts on Thursday approved the design for the triumphal arch that President Trump wants built at an entrance to the nation’s capital.

Commissioners, all of whom were appointed by Trump, approved the design despite overwhelming opposition from the public. Approval is a key step in the project’s process.

The proposed arch is one of several projects the Republican president is pursuing alongside a White House ballroom to leave his imprint on Washington.

He has said some of his other projects, such as adding a blue coating to the interior of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, will beautify the city in time for July 4 celebrations of America’s 250th birthday.

The U.S. Commission of Fine Arts approved the concept for the arch at its monthly meeting in April.

As presented to the federal agency, the arch itself would stand 250 feet tall from its base to a torch held aloft by a Lady Liberty-like figure on top of the structure. The statue would be flanked on top by two eagles and guarded at the base by four lions — all gilded. The phrases “One Nation Under God” and “Liberty and Justice for All” would be inscribed in gold lettering atop either side of the monument.

A public observation deck on top would provide 360-degree views of the surroundings.

The commission’s vice chairman, architect James McCrery II, said in April that he preferred the arch without the figures on top. Removing them would significantly reduce the arch’s height by about 80 feet. Critics of the project, including an overwhelming number of people who submitted public comment in April, said the arch would be taller than any other monument in the capital city and dominate the skyline.

At a height of 250 feet, the arch would dwarf the Lincoln Memorial, which is 99 feet tall, and be close to half the height of the Washington Monument, an obelisk that is about 555 feet tall.

McCrery also recommended that the lions on the base be removed because that animal is “not a beast natural to the North American continent.” And he objected to plans for an underground tunnel for pedestrians to get to the arch, which would be built on a traffic circle between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia.

Preliminary surveys and testing of the site began last week.

A group of veterans and a historian have sued the Trump administration in federal court to block construction on grounds that the arch would disrupt the sightline between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington House at Arlington National Cemetery, among other reasons.

Trump and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum have argued that Washington is the only major Western world capital without such an arch. Burgum’s department includes the National Park Service, which manages the plot where Trump wants to put the arch.

Trump’s rehab of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool is also the subject of a court challenge brought by the Cultural Landscape Foundation, which said the administration’s moves to repaint the bottom of the Reflecting Pool blue without first undergoing relevant reviews ran afoul of federal preservation laws governing historic sites.

The nonprofit group argued in a lawsuit filed last week that the changes at the Reflecting Pool are part of Trump’s broader effort to push through dramatic renovations in Washington without proper reviews and undermine the tone of the area.

A hearing in the case was scheduled for Thursday afternoon in federal court in Washington.

Superville writes for the Associated Press.

Los Angeles City Councilmember Nithya Raman, who serves the 4th District, makes her way across an empty, unnamed backlot, presenting her case to be the city’s next mayor.

“Studio lots like this one used to be filled with people, costumers, electricians, set medics, caterers, thousands of Angelenos making a living,” she says in the video posted on social media. “Now these lots are quiet. Since 2018, shooting days in the city have fallen by half.”

After telling voters this issue is “personal” (her husband is a TV writer and producer), criticizing Mayor Karen Bass’ leadership on the matter and outlining her own plans, Raman proclaims, “I’m running for mayor to make sure Los Angeles stays the film and TV capital of the world.”

Placing the concerns of the entertainment industry at the center of the city’s mayoral race would have been unthinkable even in the last election cycle. But the production crisis, which has rocked Hollywood and pummeled its workforce, has reached a critical juncture. The state of L.A.’s signature industry is now a political flashpoint alongside affordability, crime and homelessness in the upcoming election.

A person films an interaction between mayoral candidate Spencer Pratt and another person on his cellphone during a “Community Meet and Greet” event out of a house for sale on Long Ridge Avenue in a residential neighborhood of Sherman Oaks on Saturday.

(Etienne Laurent/For The Times)

In campaign ads, interviews and the recent televised debate, the top three contenders: incumbent Mayor Bass, former reality TV villain Spencer Pratt and Raman, have made the ongoing production slump a pivotal topic, highlighting their plans to revitalize the industry while deploying the issue to undercut one another.

For decades, elected officials have not had to focus on the film and TV business, let alone turn it into a campaign issue. It was simply a given that local production would continue to play a dominant role in the city’s economy as it has for more than a century.

But the cumulative effects of consolidation, runaway production to tax-friendly states and countries and the end of the streaming boom has caused Los Angeles to lose billions in economic activity, shed some 57,000 jobs over the last four years and led to the closing of more than 80 film and television production service businesses across the city since 2022.

“For us, ‘save Hollywood’ is more than a slogan and more than headline. It is what needs to be done,” said Pamala Buzick Kim, one of the co-founders of Stay in LA, a grassroots campaign aimed at increasing film and television production in Los Angeles.

To be sure, the biggest driver of where studios and producers film are state and federal tax credits, over which the city has no control.

But Buzick Kim and others argue that “there is lots the mayor can do, hand-in-hand with the City Council.”

Mayor Karen Bass, center, walks with Avance Democratic Club President Nilza Serrano, to the right of Bass, during Avance’s politics and tacos event at Ernest E. Debs Regional Park in Los Angeles on Saturday.

(Christina House/Los Angeles Times)

For starters, say filmmakers and advocates, much can be done to tackle the city’s sclerotic bureaucracy, onerous regulations and a slow and costly permitting process that has pushed filmmakers to flee to friendlier and cheaper locales.

While steps have been put in place recently, including a pilot program offering reduced-cost filming permits for shoots that demonstrate a “low impact” to the surrounding community, many complain such steps have come too little and too late.

Scott Niner, president and owner of Dangling Carrot Creative, checks on woodwork being produced at his shop in North Hollywood.

(Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times)

“The industry is in collapse and people have been talking about fixing things for years, but all we get are incremental little changes,” said Ed Lippman, a location manager of 34 years who lives in Sherman Oaks and has worked on such shows as “ER” and “The X-Files” and movies including “Galaxy Quest.” “And if the city is not being business-friendly, the business will go elsewhere.”

Compounding the problem, the Los Angeles area has more than 100 jurisdictions, many of which have their own set of rules and regulations regarding filming.

“There needs to be universal standards,” said Travis Beck, a location manager for commercials, small films and music videos. “Burbank is different from Glendale, which is different from Pasadena.”

The recent kerfuffle over filming “Baywatch,” the lifeguard reboot at Venice Beach, underscored both the efforts to bring production back to L.A. — enticed by a $21-million tax credit — and the complex, baffling red tape required to film here.

When shooting began in March, the production encountered a number of hiccups, including that it needed nearly double the parking space it had received a permit for, which was not part of the original approvals.

An anonymous crew member claimed on Facebook that government restrictions had forced production to relocate from Venice Beach. Production staff denied they had relocated. However, the incident prompted a backlash, becoming a rallying cry over L.A.’s burdensome filming bureaucracy.

The “Baywatch” team quickly met with city and county officials and resolved the issue, securing an agreement for a 20% parking discount from the city, and the mayoral candidates used it as an opportunity to score political points.

Pratt slammed the city’s permitting problems.

“LA turned its back on Hollywood — now the golden goose needs CPR,” he wrote on his Substack.

Bass highlighted her administration’s leadership on the matter.

“The City of Los Angeles will always clear bureaucratic barriers, making it easier and more affordable to film in the entertainment capital of the world,” she wrote on X last month.

On April 21, the mayor unveiled programs to offer productions 20% discounts on city-owned parking lots and other equipment, reduced filming fees at places like the Griffith Observatory and reopened the Central Library for filming. Last August, she appointed Steve Kang, president of the Los Angeles Board of Public Works, as the city’s film liaison.

Raman has pledged her support for expanding the state’s $750-million tax incentive program, streamlining permitting and lowering fees and eliminating those for small productions. She has also said she will establish a dedicated city film office with a liaison who understands production.

Councilmember and mayoral candidate Nithya Raman speaks to a crowd at the “Families for Nithya” event at Vineyard Recreation Center in Los Angeles on Saturday.

(Myung J. Chun/Los Angeles Times)

“Los Angeles is losing Hollywood,” Raman said in a statement. “Not because productions want to leave, but because we’ve made it too hard for them to stay.”

On his Substack and various podcast interviews, Pratt has promised to slash location fees in half, speed up permit approvals, reduce on-set city staff for the majority of productions and waive all fees for shoots with budgets under $2 million.

All three candidates have attacked one another over their approach to Hollywood.

Pratt and Raman have said Bass moved too slowly to address spiraling production and retain film jobs, saying she enacted measures only recently as the mayoral race was heating up.

Speaking on the Monks & Merrill podcast, Pratt criticized Bass’ moves to cut costs to film at the Griffith Observatory, saying, “Who needs that shot right now with the homeless poop all around it?”

The incumbent mayor has defended her administration’s record with the entertainment industry.

Bass and Pratt have taken Raman to task, calling her out for what they say is her lack of advocacy during her time on the City Council.

“She feels very strongly about it. But never offered one motion on the industry, and when motions came up on the industry she either recused herself, or got up and walked out,” said Bass during a debate this month.

Citing a potential conflict of interest over her husband’s work in television, Raman refrained from voting on several motions related to Hollywood.

Many working in the industry would like to see full-throttled support coming from the mayor’s office that will get results. They note how New York City has successfully promoted itself as a leading film destination over the years. (Kang, the city’s chief film liaison, said the city is working on a similar marketing campaign to promote filming that will launch by early fall.)

“For all the talk about, ‘We need to support and bring back filming,’ if they just did basics like lowering the fees and simplifying the process … that would actually help people and get things produced,” said Chris Fuentes, 66, who worked for 30 years as a location manager until he retired last year.

“We’ve heard a lot of great things, but not all things are possible in the mayor’s remit,” said Buzick Kim, noting that tax incentives are a state and federal issue.

Still, she said, “the mayor must understand that Hollywood needs to be made a priority and to find and create inspired thinking to make things easier and cheaper.”

Kang agrees, but says there are limits to what the mayor can achieve.

“We definitely can do a lot to really open up the entertainment industry, but at the same time, we recognize the larger impact needs to come from Sacramento and Washington, D.C., because L.A. just does not have the resources to compete with other jurisdictions in providing millions of dollars in tax incentives,” he said.

For most working in the industry, they just want city leadership that will execute on more than just talking points.

“This is the birthplace of cinema,” Beck said. “It shouldn’t be so hard to film here.”

Andriy Yermak, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s former chief of staff and close aide, is now at the centre of the country’s biggest corruption investigation since Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022.

Anticorruption authorities named him an official suspect on Monday in an alleged multimillion-dollar money laundering scheme linked to a luxury housing project outside the capital, Kyiv.

Yermak appeared at a Kyiv court on Tuesday for a hearing related to the charges, which are part of a widening probe drawing in other senior figures associated with the president, including his national security chief.

While Zelenskyy is not accused of any wrongdoing, the scandal could potentially threaten Ukraine’s aspirations for European Union membership as it seeks to convince the bloc that its anticorruption drive is on track.

So, what are the charges against Yermak? Are other allies of Zelenskyy also under a cloud of suspicion? And what does this mean for Ukraine’s standing with its Western allies?

What are the charges against Yermak?

Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) say Yermak is suspected of involvement in an organised criminal group that allegedly laundered about 460 million hryvnias ($10.5m) through a luxury real estate project near Kyiv.

Prosecutors are seeking to impose bail of about $5.4m on the 54-year-old while they continue their investigation.

Yermak, who resigned in November, has firmly rejected the claims. In a post on Telegram after a court hearing on Tuesday, he described the accusations as “unfounded”.

“As a lawyer with more than 30 years’ experience, I have always been guided by the law. And now, in the same way, I will defend my rights, my name and my reputation,” he said.

At one point during the hearing, Yermak told reporters that he “owns only one apartment and one car”.

His lawyer, Ihor Fomin, labelled the allegations against his client “groundless” and denied any role by Yermak in laundering funds through the high-end development. Fomin told Ukraine’s public broadcaster Suspilne that “this entire situation has been provoked by public pressure.”

NABU director Semen Kryvonos defended the proceedings, stating that authorities move to issue formal notices only when they believe they possess enough evidence to sustain charges in court. He clarified that Zelenskyy was not subject to any investigation.

But the case has dragged the shadow of corruption closer to the Ukrainian president than ever before. That’s because it isn’t just Yermak who has been caught up in the accusations of fraud.

Have other Zelenskyy allies been implicated, too?

Timur Mindich, a wealthy businessman who was Zelenskyy’s former partner from the entertainment world – the Ukrainian president is a former comedian – has emerged as another leading figure in the scandal. He left for Israel after corruption allegations surfaced last year.

The probe has also brought Rustem Umerov, the head of Ukraine’s National Security and Defence Council, into the crosshairs of the authorities. Umerov, who until last year was Ukraine’s defence minister, is Zelenskyy’s main representative in United States-backed diplomatic efforts to end Russia’s war on Ukraine.

Prosecutors say Umerov has been interviewed as a witness in the luxury real estate development case.

The case is part of a broader anticorruption operation, dubbed “Midas” and led by NABU and SAPO. The operation was first made public in November, when prosecutors accused Mindich of engineering a $100m kickback scheme at Energoatom, charges the businessman has refuted.

Zelenskyy has yet to publicly respond to the allegations involving Yermak. On Monday, a communications aide said it was premature to comment on the case.

Ukraine’s government in July passed a law in an effort to strip the independence of NABU and SAPO, which were established in 2014 after a pro-democracy uprising against the then-government of President Viktor Yanukovych.

Within days, protests broke out against the move, forcing Zelenskyy to reverse course and sign a new law to restore the anticorruption institutions’ independence.

Why does this matter?

The scandal has emerged at a particularly sensitive moment for Ukraine, as Kyiv continues to make the case for military and financial support from its allies in Western Europe and North America.

Last July, US senators Jeanne Shaheen and Lindsey Graham released a strongly worded statement denouncing the attempt by the government to, at the time, curb the anticorruption work of NABU and SAPO.

“One of the most widely used talking points for ending support for Ukraine is that it was awash with corruption,” they said. “We acknowledge that Ukraine continues to make progress on this front and we urge the government to refrain from any actions that undermine that progress.”

Moreover, Ukraine’s bid to join the EU has increased pressure on Zelenskyy’s administration to demonstrate institutional independence and accountability.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz last month cautioned against a quick accession of Ukraine to the EU, saying Ukraine cannot join the bloc due to several key concerns, including ending the war and fighting corruption.

Ukrainian opposition politician Oleksiy Goncharenko said the allegations had now reached a point that Zelenskyy “personally cannot ignore”.

However, Olena Halushka, a board member at the Anti-Corruption Action Centre in Kyiv, said the case against Yermak and others was a “clear example that the checks and balances system really works”.

Speaking to Al Jazeera, Halushka said it proved that in Ukraine there are “law enforcement institutions functioning independently and professionally, exercising their powers in defence of democracy”.

“These institutions were protected by the Ukrainian society and European partners from the political attack last summer, and now we see the tangible results of their activities,” she added.

In a survey conducted on May 6 by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology, 54 percent of Ukrainians said corruption was a bigger threat to the country than the war with Russia.