punish

SEOUL, Oct. 6 (UPI) — North Korean leader Kim Jong Un visited the country’s first 5,000-ton destroyer and called for bolstering naval power to “punish” threats to national sovereignty, state-run media reported Monday.

Kim visited the Choe Hyon destroyer on Sunday with high-ranking party and government officials as part of his tour of a military hardware exhibition, the official Korean Central News Agency reported.

Pyongyang launched the Choe Hyon at the Nampo Shipyard in April. The vessel is armed with a wide range of weapons, including nuclear-capable cruise missiles, according to North Korean reports.

Kim called the destroyer the “remarkable latest success” of the North’s warship-building industry and a symbol of the “rapidly developing naval forces of the DPRK,” KCNA reported.

The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is the official name of North Korea.

The North Korean leader added that the country’s naval power “should be exercised in the vast ocean to thoroughly deter or counter and punish the enemy’s provocations for the sovereignty of the state and its security interests.”

The de facto maritime border in the Yellow Sea, known as the Northern Limit Line, has long been a source of tension between the two Koreas. North Korea does not officially recognize the NLL, which was drawn unilaterally by the U.S.-led United Nations Command after the Korean War.

The boundary area has been the location for a handful of naval skirmishes in the decades after the 1950-53 war, including the North’s 2010 torpedo attack on a South Korean warship that left 46 dead.

In January 2024, Kim called the line “illegal” and warned that even the slightest violation of the North’s territory would be considered a “war provocation.”

He later repeated the threats, saying the boundary was a “ghost … without any ground in the light of international law or legal justification.”

More recently, South Korea’s military fired warning shots after a North Korean merchant vessel crossed the border on Sep. 25.

Pyongyang unveiled a second 5,000-ton warship in May, named the Kang Kon, but the vessel suffered an accident at its launch ceremony that left it listing on its side.

Kim, who was in attendance at the launch, called the mishap a “criminal act” and warned of serious consequences for those found responsible. At least four officials were arrested in the aftermath.

The Kang Kon was repaired and relaunched in June, although analysts have questioned whether it is fully operational.

The North has vowed to build another 5,000-ton destroyer by October 2026.

In 2007, eight years after becoming Venezuela’s president, Hugo Chávez revoked the license of the country’s oldest private television station. Eight months into his second term, President Trump suggested revoking the licenses of U.S. television stations he believes are overly critical of him.

Since he returned to office in January, Trump’s remaking of the federal government into an instrument of his personal will has drawn comparisons to elected strongmen in other countries who used the levers of government to consolidate power, punish their enemies and stifle dissent.

But those familiar with other countries where that has happened, including Hungary and Turkey, say there is one striking difference: Trump appears to be moving more rapidly, and more overtly, than others did.

“The only difference is the speed with which it is happening,” said David Smilde, who lived in Venezuela during Chavez’s rise and is now a professor at Tulane University.

Political enemies of the president become targets

The U.S. is a long way from Venezuela or other authoritarian governments. It still has robust opposition to Trump, judges who often check his initiatives and a system that diffuses power across 50 states, including elections, making it hard for a president to dominate the country. Some of Trump’s most controversial pledges, such as revoking television licenses, remain just threats.

Trump has both scoffed and winked at the allegation that he’s an authoritarian.

During last year’s campaign, he said he wouldn’t be a “dictator” — except, he added, “on day one” over the border. Last month, Trump told reporters: ”A lot of people are saying, ‘Maybe we like a dictator.’ I don’t like a dictator. I’m not a dictator.”

Even so, he has moved quickly to consolidate authority under the presidency, steer federal law enforcement to prioritize a campaign of retribution and purge the government of those not considered sufficiently loyal.

In a recent social media post, Trump complained to his attorney general, Pam Bondi, about a lack of prosecution of his foes, saying “JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED, NOW!!!” Days later, the Department of Justice secured a felony indictment against former FBI Director James Comey, whom Trump has blamed for the Russian collusion investigation that dogged his first term.

The same day, Trump ordered a sweeping crackdown targeting groups he alleges fund political violence. The examples he gave of victims were exclusively Republicans and his possible targets were those who have funded Democratic candidates and liberal causes. The week before, Trump’s Federal Communications Commission chairman, Brendan Carr, threatened ABC after a comment about the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk by late night host Jimmy Kimmel angered Republicans.

ABC suspended Kimmel for five days, but Trump threatened consequences for the network after it returned his show to the airwaves: “I think we’re going to test ABC out on this. Let’s see how we do,” the president said on his social media site.

Trump has said he is repaying Democrats for what he says is political persecution of him and his supporters. The White House said its mission was accountability.

“The Trump administration will continue to deliver the truth to the American people, restore integrity to our justice system, and take action to stop radical left-wing violence that is plaguing American communities.” White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said Saturday in response to a question about comparisons between Trump and authoritarian leaders.

U.S. unprepared for attacks on democracy from within

Trump opened his second term pardoning more than 1,500 people convicted of crimes during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, an attempt to overturn his 2020 election loss. He has threatened judges who ruled against him, targeted law firms and universities he believes opposed him, and is attempting to reshape the nation’s cultural institutions.

On Saturday, the president said he was going to send troops to Portland, Oregon, “authorizing Full Force” if necessary. It would be his latest deployment of troops to cities run by Democrats.

Steven Levitsky, a Harvard political scientist and co-author of the book “How Democracies Die,” said he is constantly asked by foreign journalists how the U.S. can let Trump take such actions.

“If you talk to Brazilians, South Koreans, Germans, they have better antennae for authoritarians,” he said. “They experienced, or were taught by their parents, or the schools, the danger of losing a democracy.”

Of the United States, he said: “This is not a society that is prepared for authoritarianism.”

‘America has become little Turkey’

Alper Coskun presumed the U.S. wouldn’t go the way of his native Turkey, where he served in the government, including as the country’s director general of international security affairs. He left as that country’s president, Recep Erdogan, consolidated power.

Coskun now laughs bitterly at the quip his countrymen make: Turkey wanted to become little America, but now America has become little Turkey.

“It’s a very similar playbook,” said Coskun, now at the Carnegie Foundation for International Peace. The difference, he said, is that Erdogan, first elected in 2002, had to move slowly to avoid running afoul of Turkey’s then-independent military and business community.

Trump, in contrast, has more “brazenly” broken democratic norms, Coskun said.

Erdogan, who met with Trump this past week, has had 23 years in office to increase his authority and has now jailed writers, journalists and a potential political rival, Istanbul mayor Ekrem Imamoglu.

“Trump is emulating Erdogan much faster than I expected,” said Henri Barkey, a Turkish professor and expert at the Council on Foreign Relations who lives in the U.S. and has been accused by Erdogan of complicity in an attempted 2016 coup, an allegation Barkey denies.

He said Trump is following in Erdogan’s path in prosecuting enemies, but said he has yet to use the Justice Department to neutralize opponents running for office.

“We have to see if Trump is going to go to that next step,” Barkey said.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has often been cited as a model for Trump. Orbán has become an icon to some U.S. conservatives for cracking down on immigration and LGBTQ rights. Like Trump, he lost an election and spent his years out of office planning his return.

When voters returned Orbán to power in 2010, he moved as quickly as Trump, said Kim Scheppele, who was an adviser to Hungary’s constitutional court and now is a sociologist at Princeton. But there was one difference.

To avoid resistance, Scheppele said, “Orbán had a ‘don’t scare the horses’ philosophy.” She said he spent much of his first year back working on legal reforms and changes to Hungary’s constitution that set him up to consolidate power.

In Venezuela, Chavez faced resistance from the moment he was elected, including an unsuccessful coup in 2002. His supporters complained the country’s largest broadcast network did not cover it in real time, and he eventually pulled its license.

Chavez later deployed the military as an internal police force and accelerated a crackdown on critics before he died in office in 2013.

In the U.S., Smilde said, people trust the country’s institutions to maintain democracy. And they did in 2020 and 2021, when the courts, staff in the administration, and elected officials in state and federal government blocked Trump’s effort to overturn his election loss.

“But now, here we are with a more pointed attack,” Smilde said. “Here, nobody has really seen this in a president before.”

Riccardi writes for the Associated Press.

Italy, who have not beaten England since 2012, appointed Soncin in September 2023 despite having only ever worked in men’s football, yet he has gradually won over his critics.

“There was a fair bit of scepticism about Soncin because he came in as someone who only had experience in the men’s game and who mostly coached at youth level,” Bandini says.

“But he has really brought something positive over the last couple of years and you can see that here.

“I felt like coming into this tournament, the energy around the group was much, much better than it had been at past tournaments.”

And on the pitch in Switzerland the team have delivered, finishing second in their group behind tournament favourites Spain with performances which have shown tactical flexibility and an ability to capitalise on opponents’ weaknesses.

“[Against England] it is going to be a technically fascinating game,” says Bandini. “I’m really curious to see how Italy approach it, because one of the strengths of Italy, one of the strengths of the coach at this tournament, is that he’s shown he can change things up.”

Italy have switched formations depending on the opposition, playing with a back five against the formidable Spain and a back four against Norway.

Against the Norwegians, it was a move to target their weakness at full-back – a strategy that worked to perfection and could be tested against the Lionesses too.

“When we talk about England, we talk all the time about the left-back position being one major headache that’s consistently come up for Sarina Wiegman,” Bandini says.

“Even when you look at the opposite side, Lucy Bronze likes to go forward. That’s part of her game.

“So I can very much see the wide areas being a focus in this game. They really are the strength of this Italy team – the options they have there are really strong.”

If Italy go to a back three, Bandini expects the wing-backs – Lisa Boattin and Lucia di Guglielmo – to threaten England with their dribbling skills.

“Italy have so many players who are confident running with the ball,” she adds.

When a country like Armenia sends a film out into the world, it’s not just art. It’s a way to preserve memory, to reach a scattered diaspora. Each film offers the world stories that might otherwise be forgotten. So when President Trump proposes a 100% tariff on all films “produced in foreign lands,” the damage isn’t limited to foreign competitors or outsourcing studios. It threatens to shut out small nations like Armenia, for whom cinema is a lifeline.

The proposal hasn’t taken effect — yet. But July 9 marked a turning point in Trump’s broader tariff agenda, with a deadline for reimposing sweeping trade penalties on countries deemed “unfair.” While the situation for films remains unclear, the proposal alone has done damage and continues to haunt the industry. The tariff idea arises from the worldview that treats international exchange as a threat — and cultural expression as just another import to tax.

Take “Amerikatsi” (2022), the extraordinary recent movie by Emmy-winning actor and director Michael A. Goorjian. Inspired by his grandfather’s escape from the Armenian genocide — smuggled across the ocean in a crate — the project is not just a movie; it’s a universal story rooted in the Armenian experience, made possible by international collaboration and driven by a deep personal mission. Goorjian filmed it in Armenia with local crews, including people who, months later, would find themselves on the front lines of war. One was killed. Others were injured. Still, they sent him videos from the trenches saying all they wanted was to return to the set. That is the spirit a tariff like this would crush.

Armenia is a democracy in a dangerous neighborhood. Its history is riddled with trauma — genocide, war, occupation — and its present is haunted by threats from neighboring authoritarian regimes. But even as bombs fall and borders close, its people create. Films like “Aurora’s Sunrise” (2022) and “Should the Wind Drop” (2020) carry voices across oceans, turning pain into poetry, history into cinema. These films don’t rely on wide releases. They depend on arthouses, festivals, streamers and distributors with the courage and curiosity to take a chance. A 100% tariff would devastate that.

Indeed, the ripple effects of such a tariff would upend the entire global film ecosystem. Modern cinema is inherently international: A Georgian director might work with a French editor, an American actor and a German financier.

So sure, many American films use crew and facilities in Canada. But international co-productions are a growing cornerstone of the global film industry, particularly in Europe. Belgium produces up to 72% of its films in partnership with foreign nations, often France. Other notable co-production leaders include Luxembourg (45% with France), Slovakia (38% with Czechia) and Switzerland (31% with France). These partnerships are often driven by shared language, which is why the U.S. is also frequently involved in co-productions with Britain as well as Canada. Israel too has leaned into this model, using agreements with countries such as France, Germany and Canada to gain access to international audiences and funding mechanisms.

The U.S. government cannot unmake this system and should not try to do so. To penalize “foreign-made” films is to punish Americans too — artists, producers and distributors who thrive on collaboration. You can’t build a wall around storytelling.

Supporters of the tariff argue it protects American workers. But Hollywood is already one of the most globalized industries on Earth, and the idea that it suffers from too many foreign films is absurd. If anything, it suffers from too few. The result of this policy won’t be a thriving domestic market — but a quieter, flatter, more parochial one. A landscape where the next “Amerikatsi” never gets seen, where a generation of Armenian American youth never discovers their history through a movie screen.

If America still wants to lead in the 21st century — not just militarily and economically but morally — it should lead through culture and avoid isolation.

Stories like “Amerikatsi” remind us why that matters. A film that begins with a boy smuggled in a crate across the ocean ends with a message of joy and resilience. That’s not just Armenian history — it’s American history too. It cannot be separated. Unless we want that kind of storytelling priced out of our cinemas (and off our streaming platforms), we must keep the doors open.

For America to turn its back on stories like these would be a betrayal of everything film can be. And it would impoverish American society too. That way lies not greatness but provinciality.

Alexis Alexanian is a New York City-based film producer, consultant and educator whose credits include “A League of Their Own” and “Pieces of April.” She is a past president of New York Women in Film & Television and sits on the board of BAFTA North America.

St Helens took full advantage of a sloppy Leeds Rhinos performance to claim a deserved Super League victory.

Kyle Feldt kicked two penalty goals for the home side in the opening 25 minutes before Deon Cross extended Saints’ advantage by darting over for the game’s first try on the stroke of half-time.

Leeds improved after the break and brought themselves back into the contest when Riley Lumb went over in the corner for his 10th try of the season.

However, a string of handling errors in stifling heat limited the Rhinos’ momentum, and tries from Owen Dagnall and Tristan Sailor guaranteed the points for an injury-hit Saints side.

Leeds stay third in the table on 20 points after their first defeat in six, while St Helens are fifth, two points behind.

Rhinos won 17-4 when the sides met last month, but they were below par from the off in Lancashire.

Feldt’s two penalty goals came after Harry Newman committed a high tackle and James Bentley strayed offside, and those infringements were reflective of an error-strewn first period from Brad Arthur’s side.

Leeds’ one real opportunity in the first half came via a Ryan Hall interception, but the veteran winger was halted by a superb tackle by player-of-the-match Harry Robertson.

And when Leeds coughed up possession in their own 20 not long after, Sailor released Cross, whose clever show-and-go deceived Hall and provided a clear path to the line.

Half-time offered much-needed respite for Rhinos, who came out with more intensity at the start of the second half.

They came back into the contest after a magnificent Lachie Miller break – the Australian full-back evading several tackles before moving the ball out wide, where Lumb dotted down.

Jarrod O’Connor went close for Leeds with a darting effort, and as the game opened up, the momentum swung back and forth before St Helens delivered a telling blow.

Off the back of a scrum, deft hands from Jonny Lomax and Sailor put Dagnall into space. He stepped off his left foot to score his second try in two starts and Feldt converted to make it a 10-point lead.

Leeds – who completed just 69% of their sets and made 16 errors – never truly looked like bridging that gap.

Sailor made sure for Saints when he burst through a gap in the final stages to make it 18-4.