WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Monday rejected a lawsuit from Republican attorneys general in 19 states aimed at blocking climate change suits against the oil and gas industry from Democratic-led states.

The justices acted on an unusual Republican effort to file suit in the Supreme Court over the Democratic states’ use of their own state courts to sue fossil fuel companies for deceiving the public about the risks of their products contributing to climate change.

The Supreme Court typically hears only appeals, but the Constitution gives the court authority to hear original lawsuits states file against each other.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito said they would have allowed the lawsuit to proceed for now. The justices don’t have the discretion to reject the complaint at this stage, Thomas wrote in a dissent that did not deal with the merits of the claim.

The Republicans’ complaint, led by Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, asserts that the Democratic states are trying to dictate national energy policy and will drive up the cost of energy across the country.

The Supreme Court also has so far turned away appeals by the energy companies seeking to get the justices involved in the issue.

The lawsuits filed by dozens of state and local governments allege that fossil fuel companies misled the public about how their products could contribute to the climate crisis. The lawsuits claim billions of dollars of damage from such things as severe storms, wildfires and rising sea levels.

The Republican action specifically sought to stop lawsuits brought by California, Connecticut, Minnesota, New Jersey and Rhode Island.

Only the federal government can regulate interstate gas emissions, and states have no power to apply their own laws to a global atmosphere that reaches well beyond their borders.

___

Follow the AP’s coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court at https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court.

WASHINGTON (AP) — In President Donald Trump’s idealized framing, the United States was at its zenith in the 1890s, when top hats and shirtwaists were fashionable and typhoid fever often killed more soldiers than combat.

It was the Gilded Age, a time of rapid population growth and transformation from an agricultural economy toward a sprawling industrial system, when poverty was widespread while barons of phenomenal wealth, like John D. Rockefeller and J.P. Morgan, held tremendous sway over politicians who often helped boost their financial empires.

“We were at our richest from 1870 to 1913. That’s when we were a tariff country. And then they went to an income tax concept,” Trump said days after taking office. “It’s fine. It’s OK. But it would have been very much better.”

The desire to recreate that era is fueled by Trump’s fondness for tariffs and his admiration for the nation’s 25th president, William McKinley, a Republican who was in office from 1897 until being assassinated in 1901.

Though Trump’s early implementation of tariffs has been inconsistent — with him imposing them, then pulling many back — he has been steadfast in endorsing the idea of 21st century protectionism. There have even been suggestions that higher import tariffs on the country’s foreign trading partners could eventually replace the federal income tax.

Experts on the era say Trump is idealizing a time rife with government and business corruption, social turmoil and inequality. They argue he’s also dramatically overestimating the role tariffs played in stimulating an economy that grew mostly due to factors other than the U.S. raising taxes on imported goods.

And Gilded Age policies, they maintain, have virtually nothing to do with how trade works in a globalized, modern economy.

“The most astonishing thing for historians is that nobody in the Gilded Age economy — except for the very rich — wanted to live in the Gilded Age economy,” said Richard White, a history professor emeritus at Stanford University.

Trump says high tariffs and low interest rates, like those the U.S. had after the Civil War, can hastily pay down today’s federal debt and fatten government coffers while boosting domestic manufacturers and enticing foreign producers to move to the U.S.

It’s not a new theme for him.

“I am a Tariff Man,” Trump declared in a 2018 online post. Campaigning for a second term last fall, Trump said of the McKinley era, “We were a very wealthy country, and we’re going to be doing that now.” Today, he says “tariff” is his favorite word and represents “a very powerful weapon that politicians haven’t used because they were either dishonest, stupid or paid off in some other form.”

The White House has rushed to raise tariffs on imports from China and on aluminum and steel made abroad while promising that import levies will soon increase on the European Union, as well as new, foreign-made cars, microchips and pharmaceuticals. Trump also increased tariffs on Canada and Mexico, though he later delayed most of them.

He has similar plans for potentially every country the U.S. does business with, saying broad “reciprocal” import taxes are coming April 2nd and will be consistent with levies other countries charge U.S. manufacturers to export their goods.

Dartmouth College economics professor Douglas Irwin said Trump advocating for modern tariffs by pointing to the 1890s is flawed.

“We did grow rapidly in the late 19th century,” he said. “But it’s a stretch to attribute it to tariffs.”

“The president is more accurate when he paints with a broader brush and says, ’Look, this entire period with fiscal surpluses we grew rapidly.’ That’s true of this 40-year period,” added Irwin, author of “Clashing over Commerce: A History of U.S. Trade Policy.”

“But, when you dig down to the details and say, ‘We raised tariffs in this instance,’ that’s where things go awry. Or the story doesn’t quite hold together as well,” Irwin said.

Was America really at its wealthiest from 1870 to 1913?

The Gilded Age featured extraordinary wealth for a small class of people that largely obscured rampant poverty for many other Americans. The name comes from a 1873 novel, co-written by Mark Twain, which satirized the greed and deceit of the era’s government and politicians.

Many contemporary leaders were openly influenced by the famed robber barons, builders of monopolies who stoked industrialization while shaping the way millions of other Americans lived and worked.

Rockefeller became the exemplar of the era when his Standard Oil empire made him the world’s first billionaire. Morgan was an investment banker and legendary financier of industrial interests. Cornelius Vanderbilt amassed a breathtaking fortune through shipping and railroads, while steel magnate Andrew Carnegie was also a dedicated philanthropist who argued the rich had a moral responsibility to use their wealth to better a deeply unequal society.

Overall, the U.S. economy grew rapidly between 1870 and 1913, though there were dips and recessions, too.

Some historians call it the second industrial revolution because of major increases in manufacturing and factory output. New industries like steel, electricity and petrochemicals boomed, as did sectors including construction and machinery.

But White said those years were marked by erratic economic growth, and those upturns were mostly fueled by millions of immigrants joining the U.S. workforce. Indeed, the number of U.S. residents jumped from 38.5 million-plus in 1870 to more than 106 million by 1920.

Another factor was the seizing of land from Native Americans during U.S. expansion west. That meant exploiting natural resources along the way — including gold, silver, timber, grazing and farmland, as well as coal, copper and oil, especially after the discovery of the Spindletop geyser in Texas in 1901.

Average wages rose, but so did inequality, with almost no social safety net. Working conditions were often so abhorrent, meanwhile, that the labor movement began gaining strength, as did progressive politicians clamoring for breaking up monopolies.

“This is the height of antimonopoly, political turmoil, the rise of labor in the United States,” said White, author of “The Republic for Which it Stands: The United States during Reconstruction and the Gilded Age, 1865-1896.” “And the reason was, people did not regard this as a particularly healthy economy.”

In fact, despite the growth, standards of living fell, including life expectancy and key health indicators, White said.

Could tariffs replace the federal income tax?

The modern federal income tax came into fruition with the ratification of 16th Amendment in 1913, ending the 43-year era when Trump says the country was wealthiest. He has not expressly detailed plans to end a national income tax since retaking the White House, and he can’t do so without an act of Congress and upending the federal budget in almost incalculable ways.

In fiscal year 2024, the federal government collected about $4 trillion in individual income tax and tax withholdings, according to the Treasury Department, compared with customs duties accounting for around $76.4 billion.

But the president nonetheless signed a Day 1 executive order calling for the creation of the External Revenue Service to “collect tariffs, duties, and other foreign trade-related revenues.” Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick suggested Trump’s goal there was “to abolish the Internal Revenue Service and let all the outsiders pay.”

Republican strategist Karl Rove, author of “The Triumph of William McKinley: Why the Election of 1896 Still Matters,” has defended the notion of low, reciprocal tariffs on U.S. foreign trading partners.

But Rove also says that tariffs can’t realistically replace a federal income tax. He noted in a February op-ed that from 1863 to 1913 tariffs brought in nearly half the U.S. government’s revenue but last year they accounted for less than 2% of federal revenue.

Why does Trump so revere McKinley?

In his inaugural address, Trump called McKinley a “great president” and “natural business man,” who he said “made our country very rich through tariffs and through talent.” Hours later, he signed an executive order overturning an Obama administration directive and renaming America’s tallest peak Mount McKinley.

But today’s economy is immeasurably different than in McKinley’s time.

Global communication is now virtually instantaneous. Back then, communication was cumbersome and products were often fully assembled before being exported. Shipping could take months. Today’s goods often contain raw material components or parts that need to be assembled that are sourced all over the world and then built in places different from where they are ultimately sold.

The disruption of such carefully calibrated, multinational logistical systems by the coronavirus pandemic was a key reason why everything from leather couches to flooring to microchips for new cars suddenly became scarce. And that helped feed record inflation beginning in 2021 that continues to dog the U.S. economy today.

Robert W. Merry, author of “President McKinley: Architect of the American Century,” said McKinley was the leading voice on tariffs at a time when they dominated policy discussions because they were the federal government’s chief source of revenue, given that no income tax existed.

But Trump differs with McKinley in using tariffs as a “bludgeon to get other countries to do our bidding on efforts that have nothing to do with revenue, or economic matters or trade.” The president has done that with Canada and Mexico, using tariff threats to try to force those countries to take harder lines against drug smuggling and illegal immigration.

“Nobody would have even considered such a thing in McKinley’s day,” Merry said.

McKinley champions the Tariff Act of 1890

McKinley grew up in Canton, in northeast Ohio, son of an iron foundries owner who was especially sensitive to overseas competition. He won a seat in Congress representing a steel-producing district and so promoted tariffs that one humor magazine used a cartoon on its cover to unflatteringly dub him the “Napoleon of Protectionism.”

As chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, McKinley championed the Tariff Act of 1890, which set the then-highest import tax in U.S. history, raising taxes to 49.5% on 1,500-plus items — everything from glass to tin plates to cayenne pepper. The results were quickly poor for the economy and for Republicans.

“It led to an increase in prices, a kind of inflation, even before the bill took effect,” Merry said. “The argument was, it was carte blanche for retailers and industrialists who basically jacked up their prices unnecessarily.”

Americans dealt Republicans landslide congressional defeats during the 1890 midterms, voting scores of incumbents out of office — including McKinley. The tariff fallout also helped Grover Cleveland win the White House for Democrats in 1892, after he lost his reelection the previous cycle.

McKinley rebounded, though. He was elected Ohio governor and eventually won the presidency in 1896 on a campaign slogan Trump has repeated: “I am a tariff man standing on a tariff platform.” His campaign also got boosts from big donations by major industrialists like Rockefeller, who were strongly opposed to McKinley’s populist Democratic opponent, William Jennings Bryan.

Just as in McKinley’s time, today’s business titans have worked to ingratiate themselves to Trump. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg was among the technology leaders who traveled to Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida, where Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, was already a fixture, before Inauguration Day.

Meta, Google and Microsoft joined other major firms donating $1 million to Trump’s inaugural committee, while Amazon Prime Video is set to distribute a documentary about first lady Melania Trump. Some business interests are hoping Trump will usher in a new era of antitrust, in which the government does less to block highly profitable corporate consolidation.

What was the ‘great tariff commission’?

Ignoring some of the political problems tariffs created for Republicans in his favored era, Trump instead has focused on repeating how import taxes after the Civil War helped the U.S. pay off debts it incurred during the fighting — and eventually achieve government budget surpluses.

From 1866 to 1893, the U.S. ran nearly three straight decades of budget surpluses, fueled largely by tariffs and high domestic taxes on things like alcohol and tobacco, as well as the sale of federal lands. Paying down debt helped lower interest rates.

Trump has even begun trumpeting what he calls the “great tariff commission of 1887,” which the president says was tasked with helping the government spend all those surpluses.

Irwin said there was a tariff commission, but it was actually convened five years earlier in 1882. It also recommended reducing tariffs, which Congress didn’t do.

“It’s hard to say it was a political success. It’s hard to say it was an economic success,” Irwin said. “Because we spent a lot of the 1890s with double digit unemployment.”

That’s because federal budget surpluses eventually began to effectively decrease the U.S. money supply and cause deflation. Meanwhile, higher tariffs increased the cost of living for many Americans, which, coupled with a financial crisis in Great Britain, helped trigger the Panic of 1893.

That resulted in railroad bankruptcies, a stock market crash and a crushing recession in which unemployment reached 25% nationally. Then-President Cleveland’s lack of solutions was a key factor in voters turning on him and the Democrats and toward McKinley three years later.

McKinley also differed with Trump on key issues

Trump has used his opening weeks back in office to champion U.S. expansionism in ways unseen in the modern era.

He’s refused to rule out U.S. military forces seizing back control of the Panama Canal and suggested buying Greenland from Denmark, making Canada the 51st state and even working with Israel to put American developers in charge of turning the Gaza Strip into a seaside “Riviera.”

There are echoes of McKinley there, because, as president, he moved to expand the reach of the U.S. The Philippines, Guam and Puerto Rico became American territories as part of the treaty that ended the Spanish-American War in December 1898.

But the comparison is not so easy. McKinley was also skeptical of U.S. expansionism, even writing himself a note at the start of the war and carrying it as a reminder, Merry said.

“While we are conducting war, and until its conclusion, we must keep all we get,” the note said. “When the war is over, we must keep what we want.”

Shortly after winning reelection in 1900, meanwhile, McKinley began rethinking tariffs, as a stronger and still-growing U.S. manufacturing base made him more appreciative of foreign markets.

“McKinley began to see that, if we were going to be able to sell our goods overseas — as we were going to need to do because we would have more goods than we’d have a market for — we were going to have to accept goods as well,” Merry said.

He said that McKinley gave a speech in Buffalo, New York, outlining “this concept of reciprocity, which was: I’m prepared to bring down tariffs. Even me. Even William McKinley.”

“That was his first big initiative after being reelected,” Merry said.

In that speech on Sept. 5, 1901, McKinley said, “A policy of goodwill and friendly trade relations will prevent reprisals. Reciprocity treaties are in harmony with the spirit of the times. Measures of retaliation are not.”

Trump is now promising that similar, reciprocal tariffs will take effect next month. But actually successfully pulling that off will be another difference from McKinley, who never got the chance.

The day after his Buffalo speech, McKinley was shot by anarchist Leon Czolgosz. He died on Sept. 14, 1901.

NUUK, Greenland (AP) — Greenland is having a moment in the international spotlight as U.S. President Donald Trump maneuvers to gain control of the mineral-rich Arctic territory that most people know only as a huge icy island at the top of the world.

But Greenland, named by Viking adventurer Erik the Red to attract settlers, has a history of human habitation that stretches back more than 4,000 years.

The self-governing region of Denmark has been home to native peoples who crossed the Arctic from what is now Canada, Norse settlers, Lutheran missionaries and U.S. military personnel who used it as a base from which to protect the United States from Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union.

Now a warming climate and renewed competition for Arctic resources promise an economic boom for the world’s largest island, which is home to some 56,000 people, most from Inuit backgrounds.

Here are some of the milestones of Greenland’s history.

Circa 2,500 B.C.

The first humans arrive in northern Greenland from what is now Canada after the narrow strait separating the island from North America froze over. This was to be the first of six waves of immigration that brought Inuit peoples to Greenland.

Circa A.D. 985

The Norse explorer Erik the Red arrives in Greenland with a fleet of Viking ships, according to the medieval Icelandic sagas. The Norsemen established two settlements that had a peak population of 2,500-5,000 but disappeared around 1450 for unknown reasons.

1200

The Thule people, the final wave of Inuit migration to Greenland, arrive from what is now Alaska. These people spread throughout Greenland and are the ancestors of the Indigenous people who make up about 90% of the country’s population.

1721

Lutheran missionary Hans Egede arrives in Greenland to search for the lost Norse settlements. Finding no survivors, he builds a new settlement at Kangeq, near modern day Nuuk, Greenland’s capital, and begins efforts to convert the Indigenous people to Christianity. This marks the start of Denmark’s modern colonization of Greenland.

1814

With the dissolution of the Kingdom of Denmark and Norway, Greenland formally becomes a Danish colony. Danish authorities develop a policy of isolating Greenland from the outside world. Trade is controlled by a state-owned monopoly.

1854-1987

Invittuut in southwestern Greenland is the world’s only commercial source of cryolite, a mineral used in the production of aluminum. The mine produced 3.7 million tons of cryolite during its history, with most of it shipped to the U.S. Output peaked during World War II amid increased demand for aluminum to build military aircraft. The mine closed after it was depleted and manufacturers switched to synthetic cryolite.

1917

U.S. government recognizes Denmark’s right to the whole of Greenland. This recognition was part of an agreement between the two countries under which the U.S. acquired the Danish Virgin Islands for $25 million in gold.

1941-1945

U.S. occupies Greenland because of concerns that Nazi Germany could use the island as a base for attacks on North America. The occupation was carried out under an agreement with Denmark’s government in exile, which recognized Danish sovereignty over Greenland.

1946

U.S. President Harry Truman’s government offers to buy Greenland as part of an effort to secure military bases on the island because of “the extreme importance of Greenland to the defense of the United States.” Denmark rejects the sale of Greenland, but signs a long-term base agreement.

1953

Greenland ceases to be a Danish colony and becomes a county of Denmark because of a constitutional amendment. Real decision-making power, however, remains with the Ministry of Greenland in Copenhagen.

1979

Demands for Greenlanders to have more control over their own affairs culminates in the Home Rule Act, which establishes the Greenlandic parliament and gives local authorities control over issues such as education, health and fisheries. The legislation was approved by the Danish parliament and ratified by 70% of local voters.

2009

Greenland becomes a self-governing country within the Kingdom of Denmark. The Self-Government Act, which was approved by more than 75% of Greenland voters and ratified by the Danish parliament, recognizes Greenland’s right to independence when requested by local voters. Denmark retains control of defense and foreign affairs.

2019

Trump sparks a diplomatic spat with Denmark after making his first offer to buy Greenland. Danish Prime Minister Mette Fredericksen rejects the idea, saying, “Greenland is not for sale. Greenland is not Danish. Greenland belongs to Greenland. I strongly hope that this is not meant seriously.” Trump quickly cancels a planned trip to Copenhagen.

2025

During a speech to a joint session of U.S. Congress, Trump says the United States needs Greenland for national security reasons. “I think we’re going to get it,” he says. “One way or the other, we’re going to get it.”

NUUK, Greenland (AP) — When U.S. President Donald Trump first suggested buying Greenland in 2019, people thought it was just a joke. No one is laughing now.

Trump’s interest in Greenland, restated vigorously soon after he returned to the White House in January, comes as part of an aggressively “America First” foreign policy platform that includes demands for Ukraine to hand over mineral rights in exchange for continued military aid, threats to take control of the Panama Canal, and suggestions that Canada should become the 51st U.S. state.

Why Greenland?

Increasing international tensions, global warming and the changing world economy have put Greenland at the heart of the debate over global trade and security, and Trump wants to make sure that the U.S. controls this mineral-rich country that guards the Arctic and North Atlantic approaches to North America.

Who does Greenland belong to?

Greenland is a self-governing territory of Denmark, a long-time U.S. ally that has rejected Trump’s overtures. Denmark has also recognized Greenland’s right to independence at a time of its choosing.

Amid concerns about foreign interference and demands that Greenlanders must control their own destiny, the island’s prime minister called an early parliamentary election for Tuesday.

The world’s largest island, 80% of which lies above the Arctic Circle, is home to about 56,000 mostly Inuit people who until now have been largely ignored by the rest of the world.

Why are other countries interested in Greenland?

Climate change is thinning the Arctic ice, promising to create a northwest passage for international trade and reigniting the competition with Russia, China and other countries over access to the region’s mineral resources.

“Let us be clear: we are soon entering the Arctic Century, and its most defining feature will be Greenland’s meteoric rise, sustained prominence and ubiquitous influence,’’ said Dwayne Menezes, managing director of the Polar Research and Policy Initiative.

“Greenland — located on the crossroads between North America, Europe and Asia, and with enormous resource potential — will only become more strategically important, with all powers great and small seeking to pay court to it. One is quite keen to go a step further and buy it.”

The following are some of the factors that are driving U.S. interest in Greenland.

Arctic competition

Following the Cold War, the Arctic was largely an area of international cooperation. But climate change, the hunt for scarce resources and increasing international tensions following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine are once again driving competition in the region.

Strategic importance

Greenland sits off the northeastern coast of Canada, with more than two-thirds of its territory lying within the Arctic Circle. That has made it crucial to the defense of North America since World War II, when the U.S. occupied Greenland to ensure that it didn’t fall into the hands of Nazi Germany and to protect crucial North Atlantic shipping lanes.

The U.S. has retained bases in Greenland since the war, and the Pituffik Space Base, formerly Thule Air Force Base, supports missile warning, missile defense and space surveillance operations for the U.S. and NATO. Greenland also guards part of what is known as the GIUK (Greenland, Iceland, United Kingdom) Gap, where NATO monitors Russian naval movements in the North Atlantic.

Natural resources

Greenland has large deposits of so-called rare earth minerals that are needed to make everything from computers and smartphones to the batteries, solar and wind technologies that will power the transition away from fossil fuels. The U.S. Geological Survey has also identified potential offshore deposits of oil and natural gas.

Greenlanders are keen to develop the resources, but they have enacted strict rules to protect the environment. There are also questions about the feasibility of extracting Greenland’s mineral wealth because of the region’s harsh climate.

Climate change

Greenland’s retreating ice cap is exposing the country’s mineral wealth and melting sea ice is opening up the once-mythical Northwest Passage through the Arctic.

Greenland sits strategically along two potential routes through the Arctic, which would reduce shipping times between the North Atlantic and Pacific and bypass the bottlenecks of the Suez and Panama canals. While the routes aren’t likely to be commercially viable for many years, they are attracting attention.

Chinese interest

In 2018, China declared itself a “near-Arctic state” in an effort to gain more influence in the region. China has also announced plans to build a “Polar Silk Road” as part of its global Belt and Road Initiative, which has created economic links with countries around the world.

Then-U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo rejected China’s move, saying: “Do we want the Arctic Ocean to transform into a new South China Sea, fraught with militarization and competing territorial claims?” A Chinese-backed rare earth mining project in Greenland stalled after the local government banned uranium mining in 2021.

Independence

The legislation that extended self-government to Greenland in 2009 also recognized the country’s right to independence under international law. Opinion polls show a majority of Greenlanders favor independence, though they differ on exactly when that should occur. The potential for independence raises questions about outside interference in Greenland that could threaten U.S. interests in the country.

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — North Korea fired several ballistic missiles into the sea Monday, South Korea’s military said, hours after South Korean and U.S. troops kicked off their large annual combined drills, which the North views as an invasion rehearsal.

South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff said the missile firings, North Korea’s fifth missile launch event this year, were detected from the North’s southwestern Hwanghae province. It called the weapons close-range but didn’t say how far they flew. The military said South Korea bolstered its surveillance posture and is closely coordinating with the United States.

Earlier Monday, the South Korean and U.S. militaries began their annual Freedom Shield command post exercise, their first major combined training of President Donald Trump’s second term. The allies have already been engaging in diverse field training exercises in connection with the Freedom Shield training.

North Korea’s Foreign Ministry warned Monday the latest training risks triggering “physical conflict” on the Korean Peninsula. It called the drills an “aggressive and confrontational war rehearsal” and reiterated leader Kim Jong Un’s stated goals for a “radical growth” of his nuclear force to counter what he claims as growing threats posed by the U.S. and its Asian allies.

This year’s training came after the South Korean and U.S. militaries paused live-fire training while Seoul investigates how its fighter jets mistakenly bombed a civilian area during a warm-up drill last week.

About 30 people were injured, two of them seriously, when two South Korean KF-16 fighter jets mistakenly fired eight MK-82 bombs on a civilian area in Pocheon, a town near the North Korean border, on Thursday. The bombing occurred while South Korean and U.S. forces were engaging in a live-fire drill ahead of the Freedom Shield exercise.

The initial assessment from the South Korean air force was that one of the KF-16 pilots entered the wrong coordinates and failed to visually verify the target before proceeding with the bombing. The second pilot had the correct coordinates but focused only on maintaining flight formation and dropped the bombs on the first pilot’s instructions without recognizing the target was wrong, according to the content of the latest briefing provided to The Associated Press.

Gen. Lee Youngsu, chief of staff of the South Korean air force, bowed and apologized Monday over the injuries and property damage caused by the bombing, which he said “should have never happened and must never happen again.”

Both the South Korean and U.S. militaries have halted all live-fire exercises in South Korea following the mistake. South Korean military officials say live-fire training will resume after they complete the investigation of the bombing and form preventative steps.

The South Korean air force earlier suspended the training flights of all its planes too but lifted the steps on Monday, except aircraft affiliated with the unit the two KF-16s belong to.