TOKYO — North Korea launched a suspected intermediate-range ballistic missile over Japan, Japanese and South Korean officers stated Tuesday. The missile, which was the primary North Korean projectile to move via Japanese airspace since 2017, landed within the Pacific Ocean.
Washington
North Korea fires ballistic missile over Japan, prompting evacuation order
North Korea has examined an unprecedented variety of missiles this 12 months because it diversifies and expands its weapons arsenal, a part of chief Kim Jong Un’s five-year plan. North Korea has performed 5 rounds of ballistic missile exams since Sept. 24, forward of Vice President Harris’s go to to the area final week.
In current weeks, the U.S., Japanese and South Korean governments have all performed army workouts designed to show the allies’ readiness to work collectively within the occasion of a battle. The newest launch got here as america and South Korea wrap up their joint army workouts involving the usRonald Reagan, a nuclear-powered plane provider.
On Tuesday, the U.S. and South Korean militaries performed a precision bombing coaching towards targets within the sea drills in response to the North Korean missile.
Whereas the allied international locations say the drills are defensive in nature, Kim’s regime has lengthy seen them as hostile acts and used them to justify its weapons improvement and nuclear program. Tuesday’s launch is the seventh time since 1998 that North Korea has launched a missile over Japan.
There are indicators {that a} new cycle of escalation is taking form, with North Korea rejecting overtures and probably making ready for a seventh nuclear check amid a diplomatic impasse with Washington and shifting safety dynamics within the area.
North Korea’s International Ministry introduced Tuesday that it helps Russia’s proclaimed annexation of elements of Ukraine, as Pyongyang and Moscow draw nearer within the aftermath of the invasion. In the meantime, the diplomatic feud between Japan and Russia is deepening, as Tokyo expelled a Russian consul Monday in retaliation for the detention and expulsion of a Japanese consul in Vladivostok. Japan was among the many international locations that imposed wide-reaching financial sanctions on Russia this 12 months.
On Tuesday morning, residents within the Aomori prefecture woke up to the noise of blaring sirens warning them of the missile launch. Fishermen who work off the coast of Aomori within the waters the place the missile fell instructed Japanese information shops that the launch was a critical menace to their security.
Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida convened a gathering of the Nationwide Safety Council in response and condemned the launch. Japanese officers stated they despatched the strongest phrases of condemnation attainable via diplomatic channels.
“The current repeated launch of missiles is outrageous, and we strongly condemn this,” Kishida stated.
The intermediate-range ballistic missile could also be much like, or might be, the Hwasong-12, in keeping with missile specialists. The missile’s attain consists of Japan and Guam, a U.S. territory within the Pacific Ocean to the east of Japan.
North Korea launched the missile from Chagang province within the northern a part of the nation, South Korean army officers stated. The missile was launched at 7:22 a.m., and it flew 4,600 kilometers (2,858 miles) for 22 minutes over Aomori prefecture earlier than touchdown within the Pacific, Japanese officers stated. Its most peak was 1,000 kilometers (621 miles).
From the North Korean perspective, there will not be many flight-path choices for a missile with a spread of above 4,000 kilometers aside from the route over Hokkaido and towards the Pacific Ocean, stated Masashi Murano, a Japan chair fellow on the Hudson Institute in D.C. The opposite choices can be seen as an effort to strike the U.S. mainland or to achieve Guam.
Whereas it’s not but clear whether or not North Korea fired a brand new missile or one it beforehand examined, Murano stated, Pyongyang could understand this second as an opportune time to check its weapons capabilities.
“The truth that the U.S. has hardly reacted to the each day launch of short-range missiles could have some bearing on this,” Murano stated. “As well as, the Biden administration has been centered on ongoing points — coping with the Russian invasion of Ukraine may have performed a job. In consequence, [Kim] could have thought it might now conduct the check with out sturdy U.S. punishment.”
America will “take all mandatory measures, involving all parts of American nationwide energy” to defend South Korea and Japan, Daniel Kritenbrink, the U.S. assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific affairs, stated at a web-based occasion held shortly after the launch, in keeping with Reuters.
Kritenbrink stated america would go away the door open to dialogue however “reply resolutely” to North Korea’s rising menace.
Min Joo Kim in Seoul and Julia Mio Inuma in Tokyo contributed to this report.
Washington
‘Civil War’ has a stark warning for Washington
In the 2014 film “Ex Machina,” director Alex Garland offered a chilling forecast of a future dominated by unchecked artificial intelligence. The groundbreaking sci-fi thriller prompted us to consider what happens when such technology is developed by an unscrupulous narcissist who sidesteps profound ethical quandaries. The film was both prescient and clear in its warnings: Be wary of concentrated power and take precautions to prevent such a catastrophe.
A decade later, “Civil War,” Garland’s latest dystopian offering, threads a similar cautionary tale, but with key differences. This time, the calamity is unfolding and its catalysts are largely unexplored.
The film’s vagueness has elicited mixed — yet strikingly similar — reactions across the political spectrum. On the left, critics accuse the film of “utter cowardice” and betraying audiences for not denouncing MAGA. Meanwhile, the right blasts the film for overlooking the “socialist, anarchist” roots of our divisions and its treatment of the media. Alas, both sides are essentially making the same argument by demanding that Hollywood vindicate their respective worldviews.
This isn’t just horseshoe theory. Social science teaches us this need for validation, known as confirmation bias, is endemic to the human condition. In this vein, central to “Civil War” is its auteur’s belief that Republicans and Democrats are more alike than partisans care to admit. The film is more concerned with probing the underlying psychology, incentives and structures that could precipitate a national cataclysm than it is with scapegoating individual politicians or the ideologies they champion as intellectual scaffolding. This approach may not flatter our partisan biases, but it offers a more truthful — and cinematically superior — alternative to more simplistic counterparts.
Like William Wyler’s portrayal of post–World War II America and Sergio Leone’s reinvention of the Western, “Civil War” follows the tradition of incisive commentaries on American life filtered through a foreign lens. The British Garland, himself the son of a newsman, seems especially interested in political journalism’s role in our decay. The film is hardly coy about this — it begins and ends at the nexus of media and politics in Washington. If Garland were to expose the Beltway any more explicitly, he would literally have to hold up a mirror to it in a cameo.
These bookends invite us to scrutinize the role of the “Grift Industrial Complex” — the sordid ecosystem of fame-first politicians and their networks of online influencers and clickbait media platforms — in eroding our politics and culture. With the help of social media companies, those at the top profit handsomely off the paranoia, resentment and pervasive sense of victimhood they cultivate among their audiences.
Their exploitation is particularly troubling, not only because of the psychological harm it inflicts, but because a victimhood mentality inherently requires an aggressor. Viewing the other half of the country as enemies rather than as neighbors with differing opinions sets the stage for animosity.
One of the film’s most critical insights is that hatred leads to asking others “what kind of Americans” they are. In fairness, the nation may already be lost if significant numbers despise their countrymen on account of a few grifters. But you don’t have to believe we’re on the brink of an armed internal conflict to see the prudence in pumping the brakes.
In addition to muting, unfollowing and unsubscribing, a critical first step is recognizing that the Grift Industrial Complex thrives on the demise of institutions. This underscores the urgent need for people of good conscience within ostensibly nonpartisan organizations to reassert their independence, exercise restraint and resist indulging in divisive ideological projects.
In theory, our system is built to withstand self-interest and audience capture, but, as Madison famously argued in Federalist No. 10, a republican form of government is crucial for mitigating their effects. Much of our dysfunction — evident in real life and implied in “Civil War” — is rooted in the outsized influence of the federal government, especially the executive branch. Why else would the film’s fictional president go to such extreme lengths to secure a blatantly unconstitutional third term, if not for its expansive reach?
Politics should matter in a healthy society, but not that much. As the son of Cuban exiles, I’ve seen what happens when every facet of life becomes politicized, and it isn’t pretty. We should heed the film’s call for introspection and turn our attention inward — to our communities, houses of worship, families, friends and civic associations as better sources of meaning in life than the dopamine kicks we derive from D.C.’s made-for-Twitter controversies
For all the argument about “Civil War,” its most profound lesson — one that movie studios will certainly appreciate — is relatively simple: We should tune out the outrage hustlers, put down our phones and spend more time sharing experiences with fellow Americans, like enjoying movies, instead of fighting over politics. By doing so, we can begin to heal the wounds that Garland vividly portrays in his haunting depiction of our fractured nation.
Giancarlo Sopo is the founder of Visto Media and cultural writer. Follow him @GiancarloSopo.
Copyright 2024 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Washington
Schedule released for Washington Capitals and New York Rangers first round playoff series
Cancel your current plans because you have new plans. The NHL released the full schedule for the 2024 Stanley Cup playoffs early in the morning after the regular season finally concluded and we finally know when the Capitals’ first-round series against the Rangers is happening.
Per the NHL:
NY Rangers [M1] vs. Washington [WC2]
Game 1
3 pm – Sunday, April 21
at Madison Square Garden
ESPN, SN, TVAS
Game 2
7 pm – Tuesday, April 23
at Madison Square Garden
ESPN, SNE, SNO, SNW, TVAS
Game 3
7 pm – Friday, April 26
at Capital One Arena
TNT, truTV, MAX, SN360, TVAS
Game 4
8 pm – Sunday, April 28
at Capital One Arena
TBS, truTV, MAX, SNE, SNO, SNP, SN360, TVAS
*Game 5
Wednesday, May 1 TBD
at Madison Square Garden
*Game 6
Friday, May 3 TBD
at Capital One Arena
*Game 7
Sunday, May 5 TBD
at Madison Square Garden
* if necessary
The Capitals’ first round series will be aired on local TV as well. Per a Monumental Sports Network press release, “all Capitals games during the first round of the Stanley Cup Playoffs will be available on Monumental Sports Network to fans both on linear tv and via streaming platforms.”
The Capitals will enter the series as huge underdogs. The Rangers finished the regular season with the most standings points in the NHL while the Capitals squeaked in with the least, setting the salary cap era record as the team with worst goal differential to make NHL playoffs.
The victor of this series will go on to play the winner of the Carolina Hurricanes vs. New York Islanders in the second round.
Washington
Middle East conflict live updates: Israel carries out airstrike on Iran, Israeli official says
The Israeli military carried out an airstrike inside Iran, an Israeli official said Friday, in retaliation for an Iranian barrage of missiles and drones launched against Israel. It was not clear what damage the strike caused, but the official — who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive military matters — said it was intended to signal to Iran that Israel had the ability to strike inside the country.
-
World1 week ago
EU migration reform faces tight vote as party divisions deepen
-
News1 week ago
For communities near chemical plants, EPA's new air pollution rule spells relief
-
News1 week ago
See Maps of Where Eclipse Seekers Flocked and the Traffic That Followed
-
Politics1 week ago
What to know about the Arizona Supreme Court's reinstatement of an 1864 near-total abortion ban
-
News1 week ago
Video: Biden Hosts Japan’s Prime Minister at the White House
-
Politics1 week ago
House Republicans blast 'cry wolf' conservatives who tanked FISA renewal bill
-
Politics1 week ago
Kentucky governor vetoes sweeping criminal justice bill, says it would hike incarceration costs
-
World1 week ago
Romania bans gambling in small towns