Military Plane Crashes In South Korea: What To Know
A South Korean navy plane crashed during a training flight on Thursday, military officials said, with the fates of four people on board unknown.
The P-3C patrol plane left its base in the southeastern coastal city of Pohang at 1.43 p.m. local time, but later crashed due to unknown reasons, the navy said.
The plane is believed to have come down on a mountainside, KBS World reported.
An emergency office in Pohang said that rescue workers and fire trucks were dispatched to the site after receiving reports from local residents that an unidentified aircraft had crashed and an explosion had been witnessed.
Pohang's Nambu police station also said the crash involved a navy patrol aircraft and it could not immediately confirm whether there had been any deaths or injuries.
Yonhap news agency reported that firefighters were trying to extinguish a fire and published a photo showing smoke billowing from the hills near a factory area in Pohang.
Manufacturer Lockheed Martin describes the P-3 as a the world's "premier multi-mission maritime long-endurance aircraft," which can conduct air, surface and subsurface patrol and reconnaissance tasks.
With more than 400 aircraft flown by 21 operators in 17 countries, the P-3 was critical in providing support for the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, Hurricane Katrina the following year, and the anti-piracy Operation Atalanta in the Gulf of Aden in 2009.
This is a breaking story. More to follow.
Related Articles
China Tests US Ally in Disputed WatersUS Could Reduce Troop Presence Near North Korea: WSJDOD Responds to South Korea Troops Report: 'Not True'China Issues No-Go Zone in Disputed Waters Claimed by US Ally
2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Liberal Lee Jae Myung wins presidential election in South Korea
Liberal candidate Lee Jae Myung has won Tuesday's presidential election in South Korea, with conservative rival Kim Moon Soo conceding defeat, Yonhap news agency reported. Lee, the candidate of the liberal opposition Democratic Party, assumed the presidency in the early hours of Wednesday after the National Election Commission confirmed his victory, Yonhap reported. He took office immediately as Tuesday's election was held to replace former president Yoon Suk Yeol, who was ousted over a failed bid to impose martial law at the end of 2024. According to Yonhap, Lee won 49.42% of the votes, while Kim received 41.15%. Voter turnout was extremely high at almost 80%. A step towards ending the political crisis With Lee, South Koreans have voted for a political change of direction. Lee comes from the left-leaning opposition camp and is a rival of the conservative Yoon. The early re-election of the president, who wields considerable power as head of the government and commander-in-chief, is intended to finally resolve the political crisis. A former human rights lawyer, Lee is in favour of expanding renewable energy production, strengthening workers' rights and pursuing a foreign policy of rapprochement with China and North Korea. Economically, he wants to push for a sustainable energy transition and increase government investment in artificial intelligence and other future technologies. Rags-to-riches story His biography is that of a classic rags-to-riches story. Born into extreme poverty as the fifth of seven children, Lee's father registered him with the authorities only after a considerable delay. His exact date of birth is therefore unknown. According to official sources, Lee is 60 years old, but some media outlets put his age at 61. As a teenager, Lee worked hard in factories to earn a living. He suffered several injuries, including a broken wrist that left him with a permanent disability. He later made a name for himself as a human rights lawyer and enjoyed a meteoric career in politics. Until 2021, he served as governor of the South Korean province of Gyeonggi. Lee faces major challenges Despite his popularity on the left side of the political spectrum, Lee is by no means uncontroversial. The new South Korean president has been embroiled in legal scandals until recently. A trial for electoral law violations almost cost Lee his presidential candidacy. Now, as head of state, he faces enormous challenges. In the first quarter, South Korea's gross domestic product unexpectedly shrank by 0.2%, and US President Donald Trump's threatened tariffs are also clouding the economic outlook for this export-driven nation. Domestically, South Korean society is also deeply divided. The rifts run between ideological camps, generations and genders.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
White House calls South Korea election 'fair,' expresses concern about Chinese influence
By Jeff Mason, David Brunnstrom WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The White House said on Tuesday that South Korea's election, which saw liberal party candidate Lee Jae-myung win the presidency, was fair, but it expressed concern about Chinese interference. "The US-ROK Alliance remains ironclad. While South Korea had a free and fair election, the United States remains concerned and opposed to Chinese interference and influence in democracies around the world," a White House official said in an emailed response to a Reuters request for comment made at an earlier White House briefing. "ROK" refers to the Republic of Korea. The official did not elaborate on the reference to alleged Chinese interference or connect it directly to the South Korean election. In recent days, however, right-wing allies of U.S. President Donald Trump have taken aim at Lee, who has spoken of the need to balance Seoul's relations with China and the United States. Laura Loomer, a far-right activist who has jockeyed her way up from online agitator to self-appointed Trump adviser, posted "RIP South Korea" on X on Tuesday after Lee's victory became clear. "The communists have taken over Korea and won the Presidential election today," she wrote. "This is terrible," she added. Loomer has shown herself to be highly influential: Several high-ranking White House officials were fired this year after she presented Trump with a list of national security staffers she perceived to be disloyal. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a statement congratulating Lee, and like the White House spoke about the two countries' alliance, also calling it "ironclad." He made no mention of concerns about China. "The United States and the Republic of Korea share an ironclad commitment to the Alliance grounded in our Mutual Defense Treaty, shared values, and deep economic ties," Rubio said. "We are also modernizing the Alliance to meet the demands of today's strategic environment and address new economic challenges." Rubio also said the United States would continue to deepen trilateral cooperation with South Korea and Japan, "to bolster regional security, enhance economic resilience, and defend our shared democratic principles." As South Korea's ousted former president, Yoon Suk Yeol, fought for his political life earlier this year, he raised unsubstantiated claims about possible fraud in South Korea's elections as one reason for his announcement of a martial law decree that had prompted his ouster. His backers adopted "Stop the Steal" slogans and expressed hopes that Trump would intervene to help, but that never came. Last week, without providing evidence, Trump ally Mike Flynn, a retired general who briefly served as the president's national security adviser during his first term, referred in a post on X to "signs of fraud" in the South Korea election, and said a fraudulent outcome would only benefit the Chinese Communist Party. Another Trump ally, Steve Bannon, explored a similar theme of Chinese election interference on his WarRoom channel last week.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
FEMA Is Not Prepared
This is an edition of The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. Who manages the disaster if the disaster managers are the disaster? That's a question that the people of the United States may have to answer soon. As hurricane season begins in the U.S., the Federal Emergency Management Agency is in disarray. Reuters reported yesterday that acting FEMA head David Richardson suggested during a meeting with employees that he was unaware of the very existence of a hurricane season. A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security dismissed the report: 'Despite meanspirited attempts to falsely frame a joke as policy, there is no uncertainty about what FEMA will be doing this Hurricane Season.' The spokesperson added, 'FEMA is shifting from bloated, DC-centric dead weight to a lean, deployable disaster force that empowers state actors to provide relief for their citizens.' FEMA employees, and Americans at large, might be forgiven for having doubts. Richardson has only been on the job since early May, when his predecessor was abruptly fired after telling Congress he did not believe that FEMA should be eliminated, as President Donald Trump has contemplated. Richardson is a Marine veteran who had been leading the DHS office that seeks to prevent attacks on the U.S. involving weapons of mass destruction, but he has no experience with disaster management. The Wall Street Journal reported that he had expressed surprise at how broad FEMA's remit is. (The last time FEMA was led by an administrator whose profession was not emergency management was the mid-2000s, under Michael Brown. If you don't know how that turned out, I recommend my colleague Vann R. Newkirk II's award-winning podcast on Hurricane Katrina, Floodlines.) But Richardson surely is aware of hurricane season. In mid-May, CNN obtained an internal document warning that FEMA was badly behind schedule. 'As FEMA transforms to a smaller footprint, the intent for this hurricane season is not well understood, thus FEMA is not ready,' it read. (DHS, which oversees FEMA, said the information was 'grossly out of context.') To calm worries at the agency, Richardson held a conference call. 'I would say we're about 80 or 85 percent there,' he told staff, according to ABC News. 'The next week, we will close that gap and get to probably 97 to 98 percent of a plan. We'll never have 100 percent of a plan.' That was not the most reassuring answer, and it looks worse now. The Journal reports that in the same meeting yesterday where Richardson suggested unfamiliarity with hurricane season, he also said the agency would return to its 2024 hurricane-preparedness strategy. How that will work is anyone's guess, given that FEMA has already slashed programs and staff since last year's hurricane season. (FEMA responded to my request for comment with DHS's statement, but did not answer specific questions or make any official available for an interview.) FEMA is not a large part of the federal government by budget or staff, but it is an important one because it directly affects the lives of ordinary Americans in their worst moments. Washington can seem distant and abstract, but disasters are not, and as Hurricane Helene last year demonstrated, even people living in supposed 'climate havens' are susceptible to extreme weather. In the aftermath of Helene, Trump grasped the widespread public fury at FEMA, which storm victims felt was not responsive enough, fast enough. (Major disasters are major, and even the best-managed response is going to be slower than anyone wants, but no one seems to think this was the best-managed response.) As a candidate, he was quick to say that the Biden administration should do more, but since becoming president again, he has taken steps to ensure that FEMA can and will do less. FEMA is also making recovery harder for the victims of past disasters. In April, the agency declined to declare a major disaster in Washington State, which would free up funding for recovery from a bomb cyclone in November 2024; the state's entire congressional delegation pleaded with him to reconsider. DHS also denied North Carolina more funding for cleanup after Helene, which Governor Josh Stein estimated would cost state taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars. The president also refused individual federal assistance to nine Arkansas counties struck by tornadoes in March, only reversing the decision after Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who served as press secretary in Trump's first administration, called the president directly. In the post-FEMA future that Trump has floated, states would be responsible for all disaster recovery. Some conservatives have long argued that states need to shoulder more responsibility for smaller disasters, but most states (and territories such as Puerto Rico) simply don't have the resources to respond to large-scale disasters like Helene. This is, after all, one reason the 13 colonies united in the first place: for mutual aid and protection. The federal government has much greater resources and, unlike most states, is not required to balance its budget annually. That makes it a crucial financial backstop. As Brock Long, who led FEMA during Trump's first term, told me last year, 'All disasters are locally executed, state managed, and federally supported.' FEMA has not, generally, been a partisan agency. Administrators may have different political views, but they try to provide help without consideration for politics. I've spoken with several administrators over the years, and they are consistently professional, don't take wildly differing approaches to their work, and are dedicated to emergency response. When an employee at FEMA was caught telling workers not to help people with Trump signs in their yards, it was rightly a scandal. Yet in his first term, Trump himself reportedly withheld or delayed disaster funds in multiple cases based on partisanship. His reversal on assistance for Arkansas residents raises the specter of a future in which only states whose governors are close to Trump can hope to obtain relief. And yet if FEMA isn't prepared for hurricane season, doesn't have sufficient staff, and is laboring under a president who would like to see it gone, the problem may not be that only the president's allies can get help from the federal government—but rather that no one can. Related: Hurricane Helene through the eyes of a former FEMA chief David Inserra: There are too many federal disasters. Here are three new stories from The Atlantic: Feudalism is our future. Ukraine's warning to the world's other military forces The GOP's new Medicaid denialism Today's News DHS Secretary Kristi Noem announced that the family of the man accused of Sunday's attack at a Colorado demonstration for Israeli hostages has been taken into ICE custody. Elon Musk posted on X calling President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act a 'disgusting abomination.' Mount Etna, an active volcano in eastern Sicily, erupted. No injuries resulted. Dispatches Work in Progress: Derek Thompson explains the No. 1 rule for understanding Donald Trump. The Weekly Planet: Our diets are awful for the planet. But we can't simply abandon food, Michael Grunwald writes. Explore all of our newsletters here. More From The Atlantic Diddy's trial is revealing a conspiracy, but it's not the one people expected. Dear James: 'I'm not very punk rock' Evening Read Nutrition Science's Most Preposterous Result By David Merritt Johns From 2023 Last summer, I got a tip about a curious scientific finding. 'I'm sorry, it cracks me up every time I think about this,' my tipster said. Back in 2018, a Harvard doctoral student named Andres Ardisson Korat was presenting his research on the relationship between dairy foods and chronic disease to his thesis committee. One of his studies had led him to an unusual conclusion: Among diabetics, eating half a cup of ice cream a day was associated with a lower risk of heart problems. Needless to say, the idea that a dessert loaded with saturated fat and sugar might actually be good for you raised some eyebrows at the nation's most influential department of nutrition. Read the full article. Culture Break Watch. Our writers and editors recommend five movies they could watch over and over again. Read. Susan Choi's new book, Flashlight, considers the evolution of rage. Play our daily crossword. P.S. Professional emergency managers are some of the most impressive people I've interviewed. To succeed, they have to be extremely practical, very creative, and totally unflappable. In 2015, while reporting an article on 'maximums of maximums'—the biggest hypothetical catastrophes the nation could face—I asked some sources what their nightmare was. 'What keeps me up is another form of a pandemic, respiratory transmitted, highly lethal virus,' Anthony Fauci told me. (Good prediction, doc.) But when I asked Craig Fugate, then FEMA's administrator, what kept him up at night, he answered in the way that only a veteran of many disasters could: 'Nothing.' — David Isabel Fattal contributed to this newsletter. When you buy a book using a link in this newsletter, we receive a commission. Thank you for supporting The Atlantic. Article originally published at The Atlantic
