4 US soldiers still missing in Lithuania, NATO walks back statement on deaths
4 US soldiers still missing in Lithuania, NATO walks back statement on deaths
A search for four American soldiers that disappeared during a training exercise in Lithuania is underway Wednesday.
The United States Army said in a statement that the soldiers from the 1st Brigade, 3rd Infantry Division were conducting tactical training in an area near Belarus when they went missing.
NATO had to walk back a false confirmation of the solders' death after Secretary General Mark Rutte spoke in Poland.
"He was referring to emerging news reports & was not confirming the fate of the missing, which is still unknown," acting NATO spokesperson Allison Hart posted on X following the Secretary General's remarks.
The Lithuanian Army wrote on X that it had, "no evidence or information confirming the death of the troops" and that a rescue operation was still ongoing.
The Army said that the M88 Hercules armored recovery vehicle the soldiers had been operating was found submerged in a body of water on the training ground in a joint search with Lithuanian military and civilian agencies Wednesday.
"The equipment and machinery that would be needed are now concentrated (here), the terrain is swampy, which will require heavier equipment and some extra supplies," Lithuanian Chief of Defense Raimundas Vaikšnoras told the country's public broadcaster LRT.
The U.S. Army said in an email to USA TODAY that the search continues.
This is a developing story.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
CartCon 2025: Tariffs, turbulence and the future of resilient retail
At second-annual CartCon conference in Napa Valley, CA, the tone was electric with anticipation but also laced with urgency. Billed as a summit for the company's expansive ecosystem of brands, vendors and strategists, the event served as both a product showcase and a pressure valve. Nowhere was that tension more visible than during one of the conference's hardest-hitting panels, a deep dive into the complexities of tariff policy and its ripple effects on global sourcing, consumer pricing and retail resilience. The panel consisted of three voices with rare insight into the collision of policy and commerce: Chris Smith, president of Summit Global Strategies; Tim Manning, former White House supply chain coordinator under President Joe Biden; and Nick Stachel, logistics strategy adviser at Izba Consulting. What followed was not a high-level overview, but a granular exploration of the legal, political and operational forces shaping how, and where, products are made, moved and sold. From globalization to geo-economics Smith opened the discussion by tracing the historical arc of U.S. trade policy. For decades following World War II, American trade strategy revolved around multilateralism. The U.S. saw global trade not just as an economic imperative but as a geopolitical tool, creating allies, raising standards of living and preventing conflict. But in 2016, that long-standing consensus fractured. The bipartisan abandonment of the Trans-Pacific Partnership signaled a sharp pivot. As Smith explained, the political center collapsed under the weight of the 'China Shock,' a term describing the decimation of American manufacturing towns due to offshoring. Smith described President Donald Trump's tariff policy as a psychological reset. Before Trump, U.S. tariffs averaged around 2%. Within months, they jumped to 18% in key categories. This wasn't just an economic strategy, it was anchoring. 'It's like burger sizes,' Smith said, relating back to Wendy's psychological marketing strategies. 'Before Trump, we had singles and doubles. Now the triple is on the menu, and everything else looks small by comparison.' Tariffs, he added, have become Trump's 'cat toy' — a provocative distraction wielded without consistent strategy. Even if future administrations soften tariff policy, Smith warned, the structure of global trade has already shifted. Retailers and manufacturers alike are building permanent workarounds. Inflation, particularly in consumer goods, is the slow-burning consequence. While Smith provided the philosophical backdrop, Manning broke down the legal tools underpinning today's tariff landscape. The real disruption, Manning emphasized, has come through the use, and misuse, of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Originally designed as a tool for national security sanctions, IEEPA has been repurposed by the Trump administration to enact sweeping tariffs with little congressional oversight. Manning described the legal and logistical chaos for businesses from these tactics. In just six weeks, the Trump administration issued 17 executive orders using IEEPA authority, stripping trade policy of its usual predictability and process. For businesses, this has been catastrophic. Sourcing strategies built over years have unraveled in days. 'We're in a volatile environment,' Manning said. The cost of doing business now includes factoring in the potential for abrupt, unexplained swings in tariff exposure. Long-term investments have become high-risk bets, and in many cases, they're simply not being made. On-the-ground retail strategy Bringing the policy talk down to the warehouse floor, Stachel outlined how brands are actually coping with this new reality. In the short term, some are fast-tracking inventory from China before new tariffs hit, relying on expedited ocean freight and cross-docking at West Coast ports to minimize delays and avoid customs bottlenecks. Others are making subtler moves — like holding prices steady on high-visibility products – say, a gaming console – while raising prices on accessories and add-ons to recoup margin. Stachel noted that many brands have moved beyond the now-familiar 'China Plus One' strategy, opting instead for a 'China Plus Three' approach. They are spreading risk across Vietnam, India and Mexico, often working with global manufacturing giants like Foxconn that can seamlessly shift production across borders without retooling or retraining labor. In essence, brands are outsourcing flexibility itself. For those planning beyond the current election cycle, geographic diversification is no longer enough. Brands are factoring in port access, transportation infrastructure, exposure to natural disasters and local workforce stability. Some are eyeing countries like Morocco, Colombia and Thailand as next-generation sourcing hubs. Nearshoring to Mexico has particular appeal, not just because of its proximity to U.S. consumers, but because of the downstream economic benefits. 'We're still benefiting from a cross border perspective, from a transportation trucking perspective, from a warehousing perspective, as these border towns are growing, the economies in the small border towns are growing as well,' said Stachel. These sourcing shifts are backed by hard data prepared by Stachel. According to a comparative analysis of emerging manufacturing markets, countries like Vietnam, Indonesia and the Philippines are increasingly viable alternatives to China, not only in terms of labor costs but also port infrastructure and U.S.-bound vessel frequency. Vietnam, for instance, operates nearly 50 seaports, including Ho Chi Minh City and Hai Phong, both of which have multiple sailings to the U.S. each week. Indonesia boasts over 100 ports, including Tanjung Priok in Jakarta. Even Cambodia, though limited in scale, has weekly direct sailings from both Phnom Penh and Sihanoukville. These figures underscore the importance of transportation fluidity and market access in sourcing decisions. As Stachel emphasized, brands are no longer optimizing solely for cost, they're optimizing for resilience. Both Smith and Manning cautioned that the real reckoning may be ahead. While tariff impacts are already being priced in at the retail level, the broader inflationary wave has yet to crest. Smith called inflation the 'other shoe,' likely to drop later this summer as new tariffs pass through the supply chain and collide with already fragile consumer sentiment. Uncertainty, they agreed, has become the greatest tax of all. With businesses unable to predict future policy, many are frozen. Manning advised attendees to monitor key macroeconomic signals, including treasury bond activity, consumer confidence indices and safety stock drawdowns. Executive orders posted on he added, are the best early indicators of a sudden policy shift. What retailers are saying – and doing The audience at CartCon also offered candid perspectives. Through real-time polling, attendees offered a rare window into how brands are navigating the chaos. Asked what recent policy had most affected their supply chains, 68% cited China tariffs, with an additional 24% naming de minimis enforcement, or stricter checks on duty-free, low-value imports. In a sign of just how volatile the environment has become, 64% said they revisit their sourcing strategies quarterly. And nearly half, 47%, have responded by raising prices. Twenty-nine percent have changed sourcing countries, while 18% are simply eating the cost. Looking ahead, most brands aren't betting on reshoring. Asked if they expect to source more from the U.S. in five years, 70% said their sourcing would remain about the same, and 30% expected an increase. No one expected to source less. It was a striking rebuke of the idea that domestic manufacturing is due for a renaissance, at least for the retail segment. Tariffs and uncertainty are already impacting consumer demand. Thirty percent of respondents said they expect a consumer slowdown by Q4 2025, while 45% said they're already feeling one. And yet, the vast majority, 82%, said they are not cutting marketing budgets in response. In today's environment, visibility is survival. In a forward-looking poll, 81% of respondents said online shopping will be the dominant channel in the next decade, compared to just 6% for stores. Even more striking, 75% believe direct-to-consumer models can still succeed, suggesting that agility, not abandonment, is the key to survival. The post CartCon 2025: Tariffs, turbulence and the future of resilient retail appeared first on FreightWaves. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Rolls-Royce named winning bidder for UK small nuclear reactors
Rolls-Royce has won a competition to be the first company to try to build small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) in the UK, as part of a government effort to push Britain to the frontier of nuclear energy technology. Great British Energy – Nuclear said on Tuesday that Rolls-Royce SMR was the preferred bidder for the programme, after a drawn-out competition that pitted the FTSE 100 manufacturer against two US-owned companies. The state-owned power company's announcement came as part of a broader push for nuclear power by the government, as it promised to invest £14.2bn to build the large Sizewell C power station in Suffolk. Related: Sizewell C power station to be built as part of UK's £14bn nuclear investment The nuclear investments will form a key part of the spending review due to be announced by the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, on Wednesday as the government tries to shift attention from a U-turn on winter fuel payments for pensioners. Sizewell C will produce 3.2 gigawatts (GW) of power, enough for about 6m homes. By contrast, Rolls-Royce's SMRs will provide about 470 megawatts each. A separate government release said SMRs would collectively generate up to 1.5GW of electricity, suggesting that Rolls-Royce will be granted permission to build at least three SMRs. The crucial difference between large plants such as Sizewell C and the mini nuclear sites is that SMRs will mostly be built to a single design on a factory line, rather than individually on-site. Those factory-built 'modules' will then be fitted together at the site, in an effort to make the construction of nuclear plants cheaper, less complex and less prone to the hugely costly delays that have plagued the Hinkley Point C plant. The SMR approach is unproven, with no sites yet fully operational anywhere in the world. They are also likely to face local and national opposition. The Green party on Tuesday said that nuclear power was slow and expensive. However, Rolls-Royce has argued that the pressurised water reactor technology it has chosen is well understood, and will allow it to start generating power by 2032 at the earliest. Datacentres for tech companies are a key target customer. Ed Miliband, the energy secretary, said: 'We are ending the no-nuclear status quo as part of our plan for change and are entering a golden age of nuclear with the biggest building programme in a generation.' The government did not reveal the locations of the first UK SMRs, which some in the industry had hoped for to speed the process along. They are likely to be sited beside retired nuclear power stations such as Oldbury in Gloucestershire and Wylfa in north Wales. Derby-based Rolls-Royce beat competition from the US companies Holtec and GE Hitachi, while the Canadian-owned Westinghouse dropped out of the competition earlier. Rolls-Royce SMR was always considered by far the favourite. The company is majority-owned by Rolls-Royce, with other investors including Qatar's sovereign wealth fund, BNF Resources controlled by France's Perrodo family, whose wealth stems from fossil fuels, the US energy company Constellation, and the Czech utility CEZ. The decision will nevertheless represent a further boost for Rolls-Royce, which saw its share price hit a record high this month, making it Britain's biggest manufacturer by market value. Rolls-Royce's share price rose 2.4% on Tuesday to hit a new record high of £9.12. The company has benefited from the recovery in demand for its jet engines, the increase in defence spending prompted by Russia's invasion of Ukraine, as well as efforts to renegotiate contracts by the chief executive, Tufan Erginbilgiç. Erginbilgiç said: 'This is a very significant milestone for our business and Rolls-Royce SMR. It is a vote of confidence in our unique nuclear capabilities, which will be recognised by governments around the world.' The decision to try to build SMRs has been subject to years of delay. Rolls-Royce first submitted a design proposal in 2015 in the hope of building the first reactor in 2025. That target date kept slipping back as Rolls-Royce awaited approval under Conservative and now Labour governments. The government said the move would create 3,000 jobs at the peak of construction, grow regional economies and strengthen energy security. It will aim for 70% of the parts to be based in the UK, although the delay has already meant Rolls-Royce has chosen a non-UK supplier for crucial pressure vessels. While the UK is due to get the first reactor, Rolls-Royce has already agreed to produce an SMR in the Czech Republic, and it is in the final two in a competition in Sweden.
CNBC
24 minutes ago
- CNBC
Why Elon Musk turned against Trump's $5 trillion mega tax and spending bill
President Donald Trump is pushing to pass a sweeping tax and spending bill by July 4, but the proposal is already sparking fierce internal GOP debate. The bill combines 2017 tax cut extensions with new Trump-era proposals, including deductions on American-made auto loans and changes to child tax credits. But not everyone is on board. Elon Musk has launched a high-profile feud with Trump over the bill, and key Republican senators are warning that the bill could add trillions to the national debt.
