threaten

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s botched repairs at the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool have landed the National Park Service in a political predicament.

The beloved federal agency, its iconic park rangers and other employees have been serving the public while managing controversial demands by the Republican president — from revising exhibits at parks and other sites to the demolition of important structures under its stewardship, such as the White House’s East Wing, to arresting visitors for alleged vandalism at the pool.

Critics say the monthslong Reflecting Pool saga and other demands by Trump risk undermining the integrity of a federal agency that has long been held in high esteem by the American public.

“Never — not once in decades — have I witnessed such systematic degradation, disrespect and dismantling of the National Park Service as I see today under the thumb of President Donald Trump and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum,” said Bill Wade, a former park ranger and superintendent.

Wade, who now serves as executive director of the Association of National Park Rangers, wrote an op-ed for The Denver Post lamenting what he called the Trump administration’s “assault on the people, the mission and the values that have made the National Park Service one of America’s most valued institutions.”

The park service has been at the center of some of Trump’s most contentious actions during his second term. An executive order targeted funding and demanded reviews at national parks and other sites that Trump said advanced “divisive narratives” and “improper ideology,” resulting in changes to some exhibits on slavery or climate change.

The president has also ordered sweeping changes to historical monuments and buildings in Washington that fall under NPS’ purview, including the creation of a White House ballroom and a 250-foot-tall memorial arch. The agency meanwhile has lost at least one-quarter of its permanent workforce since Trump began his second term, through layoffs, forced retirements and resignations.

Park service employees “are being politicized and drawn into the absurdities and corruption of this administration” on a regular basis, said California Rep. Jared Huffman, the top Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee. He cited the pool project, the proposed arch and the executive order on exhibit materials.

The ongoing political assault on the agency “is unlike anything we’ve seen in this country, and it makes life miserable at agencies like the National Park Service,” Huffman said.

Reflecting Pool saga continues

Trump launched repairs at the Reflecting Pool earlier this year, hoping to address longstanding problems at the iconic site ahead of the America 250 celebrations. But the $16 million project faced immediate problems, including peeling blue sealant and a fierce return of green algae.

Trump blamed the sealant issues on vandalism without providing evidence, and felony charges were brought against a former Olympic canoeist, David Hearn, after he was accused of vandalizing the pool.

The U.S. Park Police, a unit of the National Park Service, arrested Hearn, who denied wrongdoing and said he briefly touched a chunk of the coating.

Charges against Hearn were dropped on July 31 after prosecutors acknowledged that damage was caused by a bungled installation rather than vandalism.

The advice and counsel of career officials and rangers — instantly recognizable by their signature flat hats and green-and-gray uniforms — has been ignored or pushed aside as Trump and Burgum make decisions regarding the failed pool repair, according to an Interior Department employee who was not authorized to discuss internal discussions and spoke on the condition of anonymity.

“It’s tragic,” said Ed Stierli, vice president of government affairs at the National Parks Conservation Association, another advocacy group. “The whole thing is a master class in how not to go about a public rehabilitation project.”

In the days since the dismissal of the charges, Trump has continued to lean on NPS in his repeated claims that vandals damaged the pool’s lining.

“A National Park Service career employee, a highly credible witness, saw David Hearn … in broad daylight vandalize the Reflecting Pool by ‘violently’ ripping and tugging at the Pool’s somewhat delicate coating,” Trump posted Aug. 9 on his Truth Social site. Hearn’s legal team said Trump “is continuing to attack an innocent man.”

Stierli, of the parks conservation group, called Trump’s reference to the unnamed park employee an example of the awkward position agency workers now face under Trump and Burgum, who has publicly backed Trump’s claims about vandalism at the pool.

“I think the public understands that unfortunately, you have the president of the United States directly driving decisions, both here in Washington and around the country,” Stierli said. The park service — and especially its career staff — “has very little control over this,” he added.

The White House and the Interior Department did not directly respond to requests for comment on the park service. The White House defended the pool project, saying Trump “promised to make D.C. safe and beautiful, and he’s delivering.”

“For years, the Reflecting Pool sat neglected, plagued with algae and leaking millions of gallons of water,” the White House said in a statement. “Fixing it was common sense.”

Park service morale is at its lowest point, a former official says

Wade, the former park superintendent, called the pool repair “a comedy of errors” and “a continuation of the incompetence” shown by the Trump administration.

“Most people realize the NPS is under the gun and can’t do much about it, even though they’d like to,″ he said, adding that morale at the agency is at the lowest point he can remember.

Edicts from Washington have made clear that speaking honestly about what is going on could cost staffers their jobs, Wade said. “There’s a very strong fear among employees at NPS,″ he said in an interview. “It’s very frustrating for them, as you can imagine.”

Trump’s proposed memorial arch has faced some pushback. A recent report by park service staff warned that the proposed gilded arch could disrupt the historical significance of dozens of sites around its planned location near the Lincoln Memorial.

The arch, which last month received initial approval from a key federal commission, would impact the “integrity” of dozens of historical properties because it would change “character-defining visual and spatial relationships” between them, the report said.

Americans view the National Park Service favorably

The park service is popular with Americans. About three-quarters of U.S. adults — including similar shares of Democrats and Republicans — have a favorable opinion of the agency, according to Pew Research Center polling from 2025. Only about 1 in 10 have a negative impression, and about 15% are unsure.

A Washington Post/Ipsos poll from July found that about two-thirds of Americans say they are “dissatisfied” or “upset” about Trump’s Washington area projects, including construction of a new ballroom at the White House, painting the Reflecting Pool and building his triumphal arch. Republicans are more likely to be “enthusiastic” or “satisfied” with the projects.

About one-quarter of U.S. adults say Trump’s goal is to “make Washington more beautiful,” while about half say he has a “different goal.” In an open-ended question, many respondents speculated that Trump wants to glorify himself or leave his mark.

The pool and other recent controversies including the exhibit reviews jeopardize the agency’s credibility, Wade said.

“Whether interpreting the Civil War, discussing climate science or describing the complex stories of Indigenous people, rangers have sought to present evidence, not political ideology,’’ he said. ”That is now being lost.”

Daly writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Linley Sanders contributed to this report.

Political Pressure Puts Fed Independence Back in Focus

Federal Reserve Chair Kevin Warsh’s efforts to keep the central bank insulated from political pressure have become more difficult after President Donald Trump renewed his push to remove Fed Governor Lisa Cook.

Trump’s move, based on allegations of mortgage fraud that Cook’s attorney has called baseless, has brought the issue of Federal Reserve independence back to the centre of markets’ attention. It also suggests that the White House remains concerned that the Fed could raise interest rates as early as next month, despite Trump’s longstanding demand for lower borrowing costs.

The timing is particularly important. Futures markets put the probability of a quarter-point rate increase before the November midterm elections at about 75%, while the outcome of the Fed’s September 15-16 meeting is viewed as almost evenly balanced.

The pressure on Cook could ultimately backfire. If Trump fails to remove her, she could become more inclined to support tighter monetary policy. At the same time, the administration could be calculating that publicly challenging Cook gives Trump a political target if the Fed raises rates before the midterms.

Trump could then argue that a rate increase was politically motivated and intended to undermine his administration.

Trump Challenges Cook Ahead of Critical Fed Meeting

The White House last week sent Cook a letter saying Trump was “considering” removing her and demanded a response within three weeks to the allegations against her.

The deadline falls only weeks before the Fed’s next policy meeting, when the balance of votes could prove crucial.

The move also comes after a June Supreme Court ruling that recognised the Federal Reserve’s special statutory protections while leaving unresolved whether the allegations against Cook would provide sufficient grounds for her removal.

The dispute highlights the continuing uncertainty over how far presidential authority extends over the central bank.

“The issue of Fed independence has not yet been resolved,” said Tim Duy, chief U.S. economist at SGH Macro Advisors.

For Warsh, the confrontation creates an uncomfortable situation. He has only recently taken over as Fed chair and would likely prefer the opportunity to establish his own policy approach rather than become involved in Trump’s campaign for lower rates.

Yet maintaining that distance could be difficult. Trump has reportedly called Warsh repeatedly since he became chair in May.

Trump has also publicly praised Warsh while criticising other Fed officials for keeping interest rates too high, saying Warsh would like to see lower rates but faces a board that wants to maintain higher borrowing costs.

Inflation Keeps Pressure on the Fed

The political confrontation is taking place against a difficult economic backdrop.

Inflation has remained above the Fed’s 2% long-term target, while core price pressures remain elevated. The Iran-related energy shock of the past six months has added another source of inflationary pressure.

Those conditions complicate the case for immediate rate cuts.

At the same time, the Fed’s policy committee is becoming increasingly divided. Three members voted for a rate increase at the previous meeting, while Governors Chris Waller and Lisa Cook voted to keep rates unchanged, although both have indicated that further tightening could eventually be necessary to bring inflation back under control.

If Waller and Cook both support a rate increase at the September meeting, the previous 9-3 balance in favour of holding rates could become 7-5.

Former Fed Chair Jerome Powell could then become decisive if he switched his previous position and supported a rate increase.

That makes the political pressure on Cook particularly significant.

Bond Markets Face an Inflation Risk

The implications extend beyond the Fed itself and into financial markets.

Long-term Treasury yields have periodically risen and the dollar has weakened during previous episodes of political pressure on the central bank. Investors remain divided over whether the latest confrontation represents a temporary political storm or a deeper threat to the credibility of U.S. monetary policy.

The bigger concern for bond markets is the possibility that political pressure could lead to a Fed leadership and governing board more willing to cut rates despite persistent inflation.

That could increase the inflation risk premium demanded by investors holding longer-term government debt.

Barclays strategists warned that if confidence in the Fed’s willingness to defend its inflation target has begun to deteriorate, long-term bond markets may be underestimating the risks.

The combination of political pressure and uncertainty over Warsh’s approach to inflation could therefore become particularly important for longer-dated Treasury yields and inflation expectations.

Analysis: Why the Fed Battle Matters

The central issue is no longer simply whether the Fed cuts or raises rates at its next meeting. It is whether investors continue to believe that the central bank can make those decisions independently of the White House.

If markets begin to believe that political considerations can influence the composition of the Fed’s governing board, expectations for future inflation could become less firmly anchored. Investors may demand higher yields to compensate for the possibility that inflation remains elevated for longer.

That would make government borrowing more expensive and could create wider financial-market volatility.

Warsh therefore faces a critical test. He must balance his desire to reform the Fed with the need to demonstrate that monetary policy remains driven by inflation and economic conditions rather than presidential demands.

His decision at the next meeting could become an important signal to markets.

If Warsh supports tighter policy despite Trump’s pressure, he could strengthen perceptions of Fed independence. If he instead supports a more dovish position while political pressure intensifies, doubts about the central bank’s commitment to price stability could deepen.

For bond investors, the consequences could be significant. The immediate question may be whether rates rise in September, but the larger question is whether markets still trust the Fed to control inflation independently of the White House.

With information from Reuters.

Top executives of California’s two biggest utilities warned they would take action to protect their shareholders if Sacramento lawmakers fail to pass legislation limiting their companies’ liabilities for wildfires sparked by their equipment.

“If the legislature does not act, or if they act and don’t actually solve the problem, then we’re going to have to take action,” said Patti Poppe, chief executive of Pacific Gas & Electric, on a July 23 call with Wall Street analysts.

Poppe did not specify what her company would do, but made it clear any action would protect shareholders’ money. Previously, she told Wall Street analysts that if lawmakers failed to pass legislation to protect the utilities, PG&E would use its cash to buy back the company’s shares, according to a report by the bank Jeffries.

That could raise the company’s stock price and benefit shareholders, while reducing money available for the utility’s California programs.

The comments from Poppe and Pedro Pizarro, chief executive of Edison International, came just before the state Legislature returned from summer break Monday to begin the last four weeks of its session.

Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislators have been working behind closed doors to address the state’s escalating cost of wildfires, including those caused by the utilities, The Times reported last month. The big electric companies have told their investors they are talking to Newsom and lawmakers about a bill package that would protect shareholders from paying for utility-sparked fires.

On Tuesday, government fire officials released their investigation into last year’s devastating Eaton fire, blaming Edison’s century-old transmission line, which the utility kept in place even though it had not carried power since 1971.

Last week, Edison’s Pizarro echoed some of Poppe’s statements. He told Wall Street analysts on a conference call that he too was prepared to make financial changes if the legislature does not pass a comprehensive bill that cuts the utilities’ financial wildfire risk before the legislative session ends Aug. 31.

Any legislation that passes without a protective framework for utilities, Pizarro said, would “influence how we prioritize and deploy future capital.”

Pizarro declined analysts’ requests to say where the company would cut back, other than saying it would continue spending aimed at keeping its grid safe and reliable.

“We’re going to evaluate the totality of the package that comes to us and figure out our response that goes along with it,” Pizarro said.

Pizarro also told analysts that without legislation supporting the utilities, Edison’s credit rating could be downgraded. If that happens, he said, it could raise bills for electric customers since the utility may have to pay a higher interest rate for new borrowings.

“That could be a significant cost impact through the cost of debt that gets passed through to SCE customers if we don’t have a framework in the next four weeks that is credit supportive for our utility,” Pizarro told the analysts.

Newsom and lawmakers are drawing up legislation based on recommendations in an April study that the governor ordered last year.

The final report didn’t focus on utilities’ responsibility for sparking at least seven of the 20 most destructive wildfires in state history. It suggested ways to reduce the cost of wildfire liabilities, including by capping fees of attorneys representing victims and reducing payments to survivors for non-economic damages like pain and suffering.

The report also suggested that utilities should no longer reimburse property insurers for damages of fires sparked by electrical equipment. Insurers say this would increase premiums for homeowners.

Edison is now facing thousands of lawsuits from the victims of the Eaton fire, which roared through Altadena, destroying more than 9,000 homes and other structures and killing 19 people. The lawsuits claim it was negligent for the fire, which Edison denies.

The utility created a program to pay for victims’ damages if they agree to give up their right to sue.

Edison has so far paid more than $1 billion to victims. Experts say the fire’s costs could exceed the $21-billion state wildfire fund that Newsom and lawmakers created in 2019 to protect Edison, PG&E and San Diego Gas & Electric.

If that happens, Edison customers must pay for the rest under legislation that Newsom and lawmakers introduced in the final days of last year’s legislative session.

Because of utility protections in legislation that Newsom and lawmakers passed in 2019 and last year, Edison has said it expects its shareholders to pay little for the Eaton fire. The utility says it believes it will be reimbursed for its damage payments to victims by the state wildfire fund and through customer bills, according to the company’s financial disclosures.

A coalition of wildfire survivors, consumer advocates and other groups wrote a letter to Newsom last month, asking him for legislation that keeps utilities accountable for the fires they cause.

The coalition pointed out that despite billions of dollars in damages from the Eaton fire, Edison’s profits soared last year by more than 200% — from $1.3 billion in 2024 to $4.5 billion.

The company’s board also rewarded Edison executives with higher salaries and bonuses. Pizarro received $16.6 million in cash, stock and other compensation, up 20% from 2024.

“For-profit companies that repeatedly cause catastrophic harm must be held accountable, not protected and enriched,” wrote Joy Chen, executive director of Every Fire Survivors Network, who is leading the coalition, in the letter to Newsom.

The letter warned that without reform of current state laws protecting utilities, disasters like the Eaton fire could happen again.

“Altadena is not the first community to endure this cycle, and it will not be the last,” the letter said.

Global hunger declined for the third consecutive year in 2025, offering a rare piece of positive news for food security after years of setbacks caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, conflict and economic instability. Yet the United Nations warns that the gains remain fragile, with climate change, geopolitical tensions and disruptions to global trade threatening to reverse recent progress.

According to the latest State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World report, jointly produced by five U.N. agencies, approximately 645 million people or 7.8% of the global population experienced hunger last year. That marks an improvement from 8.1% in 2024 and 8.6% in 2022, continuing a gradual downward trend.

While the figures suggest the world is moving in the right direction, U.N. experts caution that achieving the goal of ending hunger by 2030 remains far from guaranteed.

Hunger Declines Across Every Continent

For the first time in several years, every continent recorded improvements in hunger levels, including Africa, where progress has historically been the slowest.

Asia accounted for much of the global improvement, led by significant gains in India, while Latin America and the Caribbean continued building on earlier successes. Several African nations—including Ethiopia, Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe and Senegal—also reported improvements after years of deteriorating food security.

Despite these advances, Africa remains the world’s most food-insecure region. Around 309 million people, or roughly one in every five Africans, continue to suffer from chronic undernourishment.

U.N. officials described the continent’s improvement as encouraging but modest, emphasizing that much more investment will be needed to sustain progress.

India Emerges as a Key Driver

India played a central role in reducing global hunger statistics.

Home to nearly one-fifth of the world’s population, the country has lowered hunger levels to below 10%, driven by expanded welfare programs, increased agricultural productivity and improvements in food distribution.

The country’s progress demonstrates how targeted government policies combined with economic growth can substantially improve food security even in densely populated developing economies.

Elsewhere, the Dominican Republic also achieved sufficient progress to be removed from the global hunger map.

Climate and Geopolitical Risks Persist

Despite encouraging trends, the U.N. warns that several emerging risks could quickly undermine global food security.

One of the most immediate concerns is the disruption to shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, where escalating tensions in the Middle East have increased transportation costs and driven up prices for fuel and fertilizers—critical inputs for agricultural production worldwide.

Higher energy costs inevitably translate into more expensive food production and distribution, placing additional pressure on consumers already facing elevated food prices.

Meanwhile, forecasters are monitoring the possible emergence of a strong El Niño weather pattern, which could reduce crop yields across many vulnerable regions through droughts, floods and extreme temperatures.

Together, geopolitical instability and climate shocks threaten both food availability and affordability.

Hunger Is Falling, But Healthy Diets Remain Unaffordable

The report also highlights an important distinction between reducing hunger and improving nutrition.

Although fewer people are experiencing chronic hunger, 2.69 billion people still cannot afford a healthy diet.

The U.N. estimates that a nutritious daily diet costs an average of $4.28 per person when adjusted for purchasing power—well beyond the reach of many households in low-income countries.

The affordability gap is especially severe in Africa, where 66.1% of the population cannot afford healthy food, more than double the levels recorded across much of Asia and Latin America.

Poor transport infrastructure, inadequate cold-storage facilities and fragmented regional trade continue to make nutritious foods such as fruits, vegetables, dairy and meat significantly more expensive across the continent.

Nutrition Challenges Extend Beyond Hunger

The report also warns that improving calorie intake alone is not enough.

Child malnutrition remains widespread in many developing countries, while anemia among women continues to worsen. At the same time, adult obesity is increasing globally, illustrating the growing “double burden” of malnutrition in which undernutrition and unhealthy diets coexist.

This reflects broader structural problems within global food systems, where inexpensive calories are often more accessible than balanced nutrition.

What’s Next?

U.N. experts remain cautiously optimistic that global hunger can continue declining through 2030, provided governments maintain investments in agriculture, strengthen international trade and improve resilience against climate shocks.

However, the outlook depends heavily on geopolitical stability. Continued conflict in the Middle East, disruptions to major shipping routes, worsening climate events or prolonged trade barriers could rapidly increase food prices and slow or reverse recent gains.

Analysis: Progress Is Real, But Food Security Remains Fragile

The latest U.N. report demonstrates that coordinated public policies, agricultural investment and social protection programs can reduce hunger on a global scale. India’s progress, alongside improvements across Latin America and parts of Africa, shows that meaningful change is possible even amid economic uncertainty.

Yet the report also highlights a growing challenge: food security is increasingly shaped by forces beyond agriculture itself. Climate change, global shipping disruptions, energy prices and geopolitical conflicts now influence what people eat as much as farming does. While hunger is declining, access to affordable, nutritious food remains out of reach for billions. Sustaining progress will therefore require not only producing more food, but building more resilient supply chains, improving regional trade and adapting agricultural systems to an increasingly volatile global environment.

With information from Reuters.

Brent crude edges up as tit-for-tat strikes imperial return to normality in key waterway.

Oil prices have climbed following the latest flare-up in hostilities between the United States and Iran.

Brent crude, the primary international benchmark, rose about 0.9 percent on Monday after tit-for-tat US and Iranian strikes over the weekend renewed doubts about a return to normal shipping in the Strait of Hormuz.

Brent futures for August delivery stood at $73.21 a barrel as of 03:30 GMT, 127 cents higher than the day before the US and Israel launched their war on Iran on February 28.

“Brent’s partial rebound this morning reflects a market that had perhaps run too quickly on ceasefire optimism,” Fabien Yip, a market analyst at IG in Sydney, Australia, told Al Jazeera.

“Oil had nearly unwound its entire war premium, despite an MoU with no enforcement details and ongoing strikes. Thursday’s attack on a commercial vessel was a reality check, and this weekend’s tit-for-tat exchanges have compounded that,” Yip said.

Asian stock markets were mixed on Monday morning, with losses in Tokyo and Seoul and gains in Hong Kong and Taipei.

Japan’s benchmark Nikkei 225 was 0.7 percent lower, while South Korea’s Kospi was down 1.9 percent.

Japanese and Korean stocks tied to the AI boom saw some of the biggest losses amid heated debate about whether tech firms’ massive investments in the emerging technology will pay off.

Japanese tech giant SoftBank Group fell about 5 percent, while Advantest Corporation, a key maker of semiconductor testing equipment, slumped 3.7 percent.

South Korean memory chip giants Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix dropped about 5 percent and 4 percent, respectively.

Hong Kong’s benchmark Hang Seng Index and Taiwan’s Taiex both rose, gaining 2.2 percent and 1.4 percent, respectively.

“Quarter-end profit-taking is adding to the selling pressure, with investors locking in gains from what has been a remarkable run. The Kospi is up roughly 95 percent this year, and the Nikkei up 37 percent,” IG’s Yip said.

“The underlying concern, however, is whether the AI boom can continue to translate into sustained earnings growth, or whether margin pressure is arriving sooner than the market anticipated.”

US Central Command announced strikes against Iran on Friday and Saturday, citing Iranian attacks on two commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz, which in peacetime serves as a conduit for about one-fifth of the global trade in oil and liquified natural gas.

Iran responded to the strikes by launching a series of missiles and drones targeting US military assets in Bahrain and Kuwait.

Washington and Tehran agreed to cease their attacks and renew their negotiations on ending the war, multiple media outlets reported late on Sunday, citing unnamed US officials.

Axios, citing an unnamed senior US official, reported that the sides would hold talks in Doha, Qatar, on Tuesday.

Iran has yet to comment on the reported agreement to cease hostilities or the planned talks.

US President Donald Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian signed a memorandum of understanding to end the war on June 17, but the agreement has repeatedly come under strain due to flare-ups in hostilities and disagreements about the meaning of the text.

Fifa World Cup 2026 fans were quick to take to social media to share their reactions to tonight’s coverage.

Football fans voiced the same complaint minutes into tonight’s World Cup match on ITV.

Ahead of this evening’s match against Panama, England was sent through to the last 32 following matches against Croatia and then Ghana earlier this week.

So England fans were on a high prior to tonight’s game, which kicks off at MetLife Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey at 10pm UK time and 5pm US time.

However, just minutes into the coverage ahead of this evening’s match, viewers couldn’t stop themselves from flocking to X as two unexpected faces popped up on their screens.

Presenter Laura Woods welcomed none other than ITV legends Ant McPartlin and Dec Donnelly as they joined her at the channel’s stunning New York studio.

She asked about their opinion on tonight’s match, as well as about their own memories of previous World Cups but not everyone was happy to see the I’m A Celebrity hosts.

In fact, many commented that they were ‘switching off’ ITV’s coverage following their appearance.

“Ant and Dec FFS, I’ll switch back on at 9.55,” someone said on X (Twitter).

A second echoed: “Ant and Dec appeared. I switched to Five Live”, with someone else adding: “Ant & Dec being ‘interviewed’ during the World Cup may be the strangest thing I’ve seen during this whole event.”

Taking to X, a fan exclaimed: “Surely they could have got better than ant and dec for the World Cup, so annoying!”

Meanwhile, someone else asked: “No football people available tonight?”, as a fellow viewer sarcastically commented: “I was just saying to myself ‘We really don’t see Ant and Dec on the tellybox enough'”.

However, one fan defended the award-winning ITV duo, arguing: “Ant and Dec are much better than Neville and carragher.”

The last time England took centre stage was against Ghana which ended 0-0 at the Gillette Stadium in Boston.

Meanwhile, even though Scotland beat Haiti 1-0 in their first match of the World Cup 2026, they have since lost to both Morocco and Brazil.

The Fifa World Cup is available to watch on ITV and ITVX.

SEOUL, June 26 (UPI) — North Korean leader Kim Jong Un oversaw tests of a new rocket launcher system and other weapons as part of a plan to bolster firepower along the inter-Korean border, state-run media reported Friday, highlighting Pyongyang’s continued effort to modernize conventional weapons capable of threatening the Seoul metropolitan area.

The new weapons, tested at an undisclosed location Thursday, included an upgraded 240mm 24-tube multiple rocket launcher with an automated guidance system and an extended range of 56 miles, the official Korean Central News Agency reported.

Also tested were shells for a 155mm self-propelled howitzer with an extended range of 40 miles and a special warhead for a tactical ballistic missile. KCNA said the warhead was “aimed at inflicting fatal damage on major targets including airfields, ports and power facilities of the enemy.”

Kim described the launches as a demonstration of the “great technological progress” made in implementing the party’s policy of “bringing about a change in the fire posture on the southern border.”

He added that the policy was intended not only to strengthen defenses but also to build a “deadly and destructive offensive posture to make no enemy dare to confront.”

Seoul, home to more than 10 million people, lies roughly 30 miles from the border, while the surrounding Gyeonggi Province is one of South Korea’s most densely populated and industrialized regions.

The tests come amid an extended push by Pyongyang to harden its military posture toward South Korea. Last month, Kim called for strengthening frontline defenses along the border to create an “impregnable fortress,” and Thursday’s weapons tests appear to represent the firepower component of that broader effort.

North Korea has ramped up fortification work near the Military Demarcation Line inside the DMZ, including the installation of barbed-wire fencing and preparations for mine-laying operations. South Korea’s Defense Ministry on Monday called the activity a violation of the armistice agreement that ended fighting in the 1950-53 Korean War.

Earlier this week, Pyongyang also commissioned its first 5,000-ton destroyer, the Choe Hyon, which Kim said is armed with nuclear-capable missiles. Images released by state media appeared to show missile launchers and radar systems resembling those found on Russian warships, prompting speculation that Pyongyang has received technical assistance from Moscow.

North Korea has deployed troops, artillery and weapons to support Russia’s war in Ukraine and is widely believed to be receiving financial support and advanced military technology in return.

While South Korean President Lee Jae Myung has sought to ease tensions with North Korea since taking office last year, he has also called for strengthening Seoul’s military capabilities in response to Pyongyang’s expanding weapons programs.

On Friday, South Korea’s Defense Ministry unveiled a plan to rapidly expand the military’s drone and counter-drone capabilities, citing lessons from modern conflicts and North Korea’s growing military cooperation with Moscow.

“Since North Korea is currently receiving technology transfer from Russia, we decided that we urgently need to proactively respond to various changes in the war operation environment,” Defense Minister Ahn Gyu-back said at a press briefing.

The plan calls for acquiring 20,000 low-cost reconnaissance and loitering drones by 2030 while accelerating the deployment of homegrown K-Lucas long-range suicide drones. It also includes expanded counter-drone capabilities, including laser weapons, high-power microwave systems and interceptor drones designed to defeat low-cost aerial threats.

As part of the strategy, South Korea aims to train 500,000 “drone warriors” across the army, navy, air force and marines. Ahn said drones should become “a universal means of combat” across the armed forces, with every soldier eventually able to operate them “like a second personal weapon.”

BEIRUT — Israel and Iran traded fire on Monday, all but derailing a brittle two-month ceasefire that had largely stopped the fighting in the U.S and Israel’s assault on Iran.

The tit-for-tat attacks between the two sides threaten to widen the scope of a conflict that has already killed and wounded thousands, displaced more than a million people and rattled economies across the globe — even while embroiling the U.S. in a war with no clear off-ramp.

“Israel and Iran must immediately stop ‘shooting.’ ” wrote President Trump early Monday on his social media platform, Truth Social.

Later, he wrote, “Both sides, Israel and Iran, are looking to do an immediate CEASEFIRE!”

“Final negotiations on ‘Peace’ are proceeding, subject to ignorance or stupidity getting in its way. The Blockade will remain in place, and in full force and effect, until a ‘Final Deal’ is reached. Things should move quickly.”

The latest escalation came after Israel attacked the suburbs of Lebanon’s capital Beirut on Sunday in what it said was a targeted strike against Hezbollah, an Iran-supported paramilitary faction and political party.

In recent days, Iran conditioned a ceasefire agreement with Israel and the U.S. on a cessation of hostilities across all fronts, including Lebanon, threatening it would respond to any Israeli action on the Lebanese capital. Israel rejects linking both battlefields, and insists on having a free hand to attack Hezbollah.

A number of U.S.-brokered ceasefires between the Lebanese and Israeli governments — but without Hezbollah involvement — failed to stop most of the fighting, with Israeli warplanes pounding wide swaths of Lebanon’s south while Hezbollah launched drones and missiles on northern Israel. Nevertheless, the Lebanese government has rejected being included in Iran’s negotiations with the U.S.

By Sunday night, Iran’s threats came to pass with several waves of Iranian ballistic missiles, which caused no injuries and were the first Tehran had fired at Israel since a ceasefire took hold in April. Iran’s military said the fusillade was a warning. But Israel said it would retaliate.

President Trump initially downplayed the Iranian attack on Sunday, saying in an interview with the Financial Times Iran’s barrage was “not going to have any impact on the deal.”

“We’ll see how it ends up. But they [the Iranian strikes on Israel] were attacks that did not kick at all,” he said.

“The deal may make it on its own merit, or not, but this will not have any effect on it.”

Trump also told the Axios news site he would talk to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to stop him retaliating against Iran’s barrage.

He also told the Financial Times that Netanyahu “won’t have any choice” but to accept the deal Trump negotiates with Iran.

“I call the shots. I call all the shots. He [Netanyahu] doesn’t call the shots,” Trump said.

Yet by the early morning on Monday, dozens of Israeli warplanes were striking western and central Iran. They hit a petrochemical complex in Mahshahr in southwestern Iran, and waged extensive strikes on “strategic defense systems,” according to Israeli military statements, in what observers said was a prelude to a wider offensive. Residents in Tehran, Isfahan, Tabriz and Shiraz reported powerful explosions.

The Israeli military said in a statement it expected several days of fighting with Iran but was prepared for a prolonged campaign. It said the strikes on Iran were conducted by Israel on its own, but that they had been done in “full coordination” with U.S. Central Command, which also helped in intercepting Iranian missiles launched at Israel.

But that distinction appeared to matter little to Iran’s foreign ministry spokesperson, Esmail Baghaei, who said in a press conference on Monday that the U.S held direct responsibility for recent ceasefire violations and Israel’s action “cannot be looked at in isolation from the U.S.”

“No one believes the Israeli regime would take any action without coordination with the United States,” he said.

“The U.S. bears responsibility for the Israeli regime’s aggression, and it will also be responsible for the consequences of any escalation in tensions.”

Iran launched additional barrages throughout Monday, targeting Israeli airbases in Nevatim and Tel Nof and a petrochemical plant in Haifa, according to a statement from Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps. It added Israel was engaging in “a dangerous game by targeting civilian and oil infrastructure — a game that will now encompass all regional energy targets, with global economic consequences resting on America.”

The renewed hostilities also saw Yemen’s Houthis — who receive support from Iran and Hezbollah, and are part of a regional network of Iran-backed factions — enter the fray with a pair of ballistic missiles lobbed at Israel. The Israeli military said one of the missiles was intercepted; the second fell short of Israel.

Houthi spokesman Brig. Gen. Yahya Sarea confirmed the attack in a televised statement on Monday, and said Israeli maritime navigation in the Red Sea would be targeted.

During the Gaza war, the Houthis attacked commercial shipping in the Red Sea — including ships with no link to Israel — to pressure Israel into lifting its blockade on the enclave.

But, unlike Hezbollah, which attacked Israel on March 2, three days after the U.S. and Israeli campaign on Iran, the Houthis had refrained from helping their ally, until Monday.

Their involvement now raises the specter of another squeeze on energy markets already beleaguered by closures on the Strait of Hormuz. Since the U.S.-Israeli assault, the Red Sea has acted as the main alternative conduit for energy supplies, especially for those from Saudi Arabia. If the Houthis closed the Bab Al-Mandab Strait, it would all but paralyze commercial flows.

Oil prices spiked in the wake of the exchanges, with Brent Crude rising 5% to hit $98 a barrel.

Manchester City are contemplating taking legal action over a promise to sign striker Erling Haaland by a candidate in Real Madrid’s presidential election.

Enrique Riquelme – a renewable energy magnate who is challenging current president Florentino Perez for the position – unveiled a Real Madrid shirt bearing Haaland’s name while on television on Wednesday, saying: “He has a release clause and would like to join Real Madrid.”

A swift denial was issued in a joint statement by Haaland’s father and agent, before City rubbished the suggestion.

“The stories which have emerged from Spain regarding the future of Erling Haaland are untrue,” the statement read. “There is no chance of this happening and there is no contractual clause to enable it.

“We are considering legal action for the use of our player image in this context.”

More to follow.

Buoyed by a new Congressional map favoring their party, California Democrats were eyeing Tuesday’s primary elections as a critical first step toward flipping a handful of House seats and taking back power in Washington.

Results from California’s massive and slow-moving election process were not immediately clear late Tuesday, as polls closed and mail ballots continued to be processed and counted. Still, Democrats were bullish about their chances of advancing candidates to November’s general election in all five districts that were redrawn in their favor as a result of last year’s Proposition 50 ballot measure.

“The path to winning back the House starts with voting in the June 2nd primary,” the California Democratic Party posted online Monday.

Meanwhile, California Republican Party Chairwoman Corrin Rankin urged Republican voters to make their own voices heard too.

“Like President Trump said, we need to make it too big to rig,” Rankin said on “The Benny Show.” “We need to swamp the vote.”

One of the most closely watched races was in the redrawn 22nd Congressional District in the Central Valley, where incumbent Rep. David Valadao (R-Hanford) is facing challenges from moderate Assemblymember Jasmeet Kaur Bains (D-Delano) and progressive college professor Randy Villegas.

Another closely watched race was in the redrawn 48th Congressional District in San Diego and Riverside counties, where Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Bonsall) decided to retire rather than run for reelection, and where Republican San Diego County Supervisor Jim Desmond — who is endorsed by Trump — is running against a pack of Democrats.

Prop. 50 — which Californians passed with nearly 65% of the vote a year ago — was California Democrats’ response to Texas Republicans redrawing their state’s Congressional maps in the GOP’s favor, at President Trump’s behest. It was also the only major Democratic counterpunch in the wider mid-decade redistricting brawl that has spread across the country in the last year.

Experts expect the redistricting battle to deliver a net gain of a handful or more House seats to Republicans. But Democrats could gain even more ground given Trump’s lousy approval ratings and the long history of midterm election losses for the president’s party.

Combined, those factors make the battle for control of the House incredibly close, which in turn makes the five seats up for grabs in California pivotal — and potentially decisive.

Tuesday’s primaries won’t determine if any of those five seats will indeed flip parties in November. However, the primaries will define those head-to-head races to come and better inform the odds of Democrats toppling Republican incumbents, experts said.

In addition to flipping the seats currently held by Valadao and Issa, Democrats are hoping to pick up three additional seats.

In the 1st Congressional District — which after Prop. 50 lost rural reaches of northeast California and picked up liberal North Bay communities — various candidates were vying for the seat long held by the late Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-Richvale), who died in January. They include Democratic state Sen. Mike McGuire and Republican Assemblymember James Gallagher, who is endorsed by Trump.

Voters from the existing district are also voting in a special election Tuesday to fill the remainder of LaMalfa’s term.

In the 3rd Congressional District, which lost an eastern rural stretch along Nevada and now holds more tightly to the Sacramento suburbs, Rep. Ami Bera (D-Elk Grove) — who currently represents a different district — is running to remain in Congress in a new seat.

Meanwhile, the 3rd Congressional District’s incumbent, Rep. Kevin Kiley (I-Rocklin), is seeking to do the opposite. He quit the Republican Party, became an independent and is now running for Bera’s current seat in Congressional District 6, which includes the city of Sacramento and Placer County suburbs.

In the 41st Congressional District, which became more liberal after Prop. 50 by losing voters in Riverside County and gaining them in Los Angeles County, a slate of candidates — including Rep. Linda Sánchez (D-Whittier), who currently represents a different district — are running to replace Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Corona). Calvert, a 17-term incumbent, decided to run in the neighboring 40th Congressional District instead.

In the 40th Congressional District, which covers a swath of inland Orange County and portions of San Bernardino and Riverside counties, incumbent Rep. Young Kim (R-Anaheim Hills) is now going head-to-head with Calvert, while also facing several Democratic challengers.

Other districts that were not part of the Prop. 50 shuffle are also attracting attention.

In the 11th Congressional District in San Francisco, several Democratic candidates are vying to replace Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco), the retiring former House Speaker, including state Sen. Scott Wiener; tech millionaire and Democratic political operative Saikat Chakrabarti; and Connie Chan, a member of the San Francisco board of supervisors who Pelosi endorsed.

Democrats are also closely watching several races where younger Democrats and progressives are challenging older incumbent Democrats, and where newer Democratic incumbents are seeking to hold onto their seats in relatively competitive districts.

Egypt races to salvage Gaza ceasefire as Israeli attacks and displacement threats push deal to the brink of collapse.

Egypt has launched an urgent diplomatic intervention to rescue a fragile Gaza ceasefire agreement that is on the brink of collapse.

The government warned Israel against expanding its occupation in Gaza, which would undermine efforts to end the war amid of wave of deadly air strikes.

According to an Egyptian intelligence official who spoke to Al Jazeera, Egypt has also invited a senior Hamas delegation, led by chief negotiator Khalil al-Hayya, for urgent talks to salvage the peace process.

The source described contacts between the parties as intense, saying Cairo was racing to arrange negotiations before the end of the week in order to prevent all-out war in Gaza.

The diplomatic moves come in the wake of renewed Israeli military attacks on Gaza and statements from top Israeli officials that threaten to unravel months of diplomacy.

At least 141 Palestinians have been killed in the last two weeks in an intensification of Israeli attacks.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday issued a directive ordering the military to expand the area under its control from 53% to 70%.

This fundamentally violates the US-brokered comprehensive peace plan signed in October 2025 under the Trump administration, mediators say.

Compounding the crisis, Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz also triggered regional outrage by publicly reviving a blueprint for the “voluntary migration” of Palestinians out of the enclave.

Speaking during an announcement confirming the assassination of Hamas’s newly appointed military chief, Mohammed Odeh, Katz asserted that the forced displacement scheme would be implemented “at the right time and in the right manner”.

Cairo sent a warning to the Israeli government, rejecting any measures designed to push Gaza’s residents towards voluntary emigration or direct Palestinians towards the Rafah crossing with Egypt.

Egypt has been coordinating with mediators in Qatar and Turkiye, as well as US officials, to return the process to a negotiating track, including revisions to the addendum of the original Gaza peace plan, designed to reduce violence.

The source said Egypt and its fellow mediators were aware that Netanyahu’s recent statements on expanding Israel’s occupation of Gaza, as well as attacks that killed Hamas military figures Izz al-Din al-Haddad and Mohammed Odeh, were driven by electoral calculations and compounded by difficulties Netanyahu faces in Lebanon.

Egypt has contacted United States officials to ask President Donald Trump to urgently restrain Netanyahu, given the recent Israeli escalations in Gaza, the source said.

A senior Hamas official abroad told Al Jazeera that Hamas had received Egyptian communications aimed at containing the escalation and preventing talks from collapsing, suggesting a meeting in Cairo was expected within days.

Hamas said the ceasefire was on the brink of collapse due to repeated Israeli violations, and called on the US and guarantor countries to take “serious and urgent” steps to compel Israel to honour its commitments.

Israel and Hamas agreed to a ceasefire in October to end two years of fighting, which had seen more than 72,000 Palestinians killed and the vast majority of Gaza’s population made homeless.

Despite a ceasefire still being in place, at least 929 Palestinians have been killed in Israeli attacks since October.