7.4 magnitude earthquake strikes off Japanese coast, USGS says
Table indicating the escape route in the case of tsunamis. (Getty stock photo)
(TOKYO) — A 7.4 magnitude earthquake struck on Monday off Japan’s northeastern coast, the U.S. Geological Survey said, prompting authorities to issue tsunami warnings and advisories along parts of the coast that were later downgraded to advisories and then cancelled.
“Based on the preliminary earthquake parameters, hazardous tsunami waves are possible for coasts located within 300 km of the earthquake epicenter,” USGS said after the quake was detected.
The Japan Meteorological Agency initially said tsunami warnings were in place for some of the coast along the Pacific, along with lesser advisories and forecasts farther away from the quake’s center.
“Residents in areas where tsunami warnings have been issued should immediately evacuate to higher ground or evacuation buildings and other higher, safer locations,” Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi said.
The tsunami waves that were expected to have been the highest struck the coast within hours, with the largest one registering about 80 cm, or about 2.5 feet, but officials said they had not ruled out further waves. Official warnings were still in place, although the U.S. weather officials said in an update that, based on available data, “the tsunami threat from this earthquake has now passed.”
Preliminary U.S. data pinpointed the quake about 100 km, or about 62 miles, off the eastern coast of Miyako, USGS said. Light rumbling could be felt as far away as Tokyo. A 5.6 magnitude earthquake struck nearby about 40 minutes afterward, according to USGS data.
The Japanese agency held a press conference on Monday, during which it identified the quake as having been a 7.5 magnitude one. The depth was 10 km, or about 6.2 miles. It occurred at 4:53 p.m. local time, the agency said.
A tsunami warning was issued under twenty seconds after the initial earthquake, an official said. Officials warned people to stay on the alert for about week, as an equal or lesser than quake may occur. The risk was especially elevated for the next two or three days, officials said.
The U.S. Tsunami Warning System said a “destructive” Pacific-wide tsunami was not expected “and there is no threat to Hawaii.”
ABC News’ Joe Simonetti and Victoria Beaule contributed to this report.
King Charles III speaks on March 27, 2026 in Oxford, England. (Kate Green/Getty Images)
(LONDON) — King Charles III will address a joint meeting of Congress on April 28 as part of his upcoming state visit to the U.S., according to a joint statement issued by Congressional leaders on Tuesday.
The address, the statement said, “celebrates the 250th anniversary of American independence and the enduring special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom.”
The statement was issued by House Speaker Mike Johnson, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries.
“This year, the United States will mark the 250th anniversary of its independence. As we celebrate this historic milestone and recommit ourselves to the principles upon which our nation was founded, we also recognize that the American experiment endures in no small part because of the British tradition from which it sprang,” the statement said.
“We believe an address to Congress will provide a unique opportunity to share your vision for the future of our special relationship and reaffirm our alliance at this pivotal time in history,” it added.
Johnson posted about the invitation on X, noting the U.S. and U.K. “share one of the most consequential partnerships in history.”
President Donald Trump said that the state visit will take place from April 27 until April 30.
Preparations for the visit come at a tense moment between the Trump administration and NATO, of which Britain is a member, over the reluctance of allies in the intergovernmental military alliance to join the ongoing U.S.-Israeli war in Iran. On Wednesday, Trump said in an interview that he is considering pulling the U.S. out of NATO.
In a press conference on Wednesday, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the U.K. is fully committed to NATO and that he isn’t going to change his position on the war.
“I have to act in our national interests,” Starmer told reporters. “This is not our war,” he continued, noting “a good deal of pressure on me to change my position in relation to joining the war. I’m not going to change my position on the war.”
In 2023, Congress passed legislation requiring any presidential decision to leave NATO to have two-thirds approval in the Senate or be authorized through an act of Congress.
Greenland residents and political leaders have publicly rejected suggestions by U.S. President Donald Trump that the Arctic island could become part of the United States. Greenland, an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark, has emphasized that its future will be decided by its own people, with officials stating that the island is not for sale and does not wish to become American. (Lokman Vural Elibol/Anadolu via Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio were expected to meet Wednesday at the White House with top diplomats from the Kingdom of Denmark and Greenland, its semiautonomous territory, U.S. officials said, as tensions escalate amid President Donald Trump’s threats to “acquire” the island — possibly even by military force.
When asked about his strong personal interest in the world’s largest island, Trump repeatedly cites its rare earth minerals and other natural resources he says are critical to U.S. national security.
“One way or the other, we are going to have Greenland,” Trump told reporters on Air Force One on Sunday. He told the New York Times last week that his desire to take over the territory is “what I feel is psychologically needed for success.”
At the same time, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen argues Trump using the U.S. military to seize Greenland would mark “the end of NATO” because Denmark, a NATO ally, like the U.S., is obligated to come to the island’s defense, as are other European NATO allies.
The European Union’s defense commissioner, Andrius Kubilius, echoed her grave hypothetical scenario, contending Europe would be forced to confront the U.S. if Greenland’s NATO allies had to protect it from an American takeover attempt.
NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte has downplayed the diplomatic alarms, saying the alliance is “not at all” in crisis and offered assurances it was focused on securing the Arctic from inroads by China and Russia, something Trump has said Greenland, and Denmark, have failed to do.
Denmark’s Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen said Wednesday’s meeting was aimed at understanding the U.S. position after weeks of heated rhetoric from Trump and his deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, who has said the U.S. has a “right” to Greenland and has notably declined to rule out military force to secure it.
“Our reason for seeking the meeting we have now been given,” Rasmussen said, “was to move this whole discussion, which has not become less tense since we last met, into a meeting room where we can look each other in the eye and talk about these things.”
But Greenland’s prime minister, Jens-Frederik Nielsen, was more direct ahead of the Washington meeting.
“We are now facing a geopolitical crisis,” he said. “If we have to choose between the U.S. and Denmark here and now, we choose Denmark, NATO, and the EU.”
On Tuesday, when was asked about the prime minister’s comments, Trump told reporters, “That’s their problem. I disagree with them. I don’t know who he is. Don’t know anything about him, but that’s going to be a big problem for him.”
Danes shocked by US rhetoric toward Greenland Danish and Greenlandic officials have said consistently that Greenland is not for sale, even as Rubio appeared to try to temper Trump’s strong rhetoric — and defuse congressional opposition to using force — by floating the idea of the U.S. buying the island, saying Trump has talked about doing so since his first term.
A source familiar with the emerging rift said the policy pronouncement came as a shock, and that the U.S. goal to buy the island was never communicated to Copenhagen — which the source said had never received an offer of any kind.
State Department officials under Rubio had never driven a Greenland policy aimed at acquiring it, the source said, and Copenhagen had been satisfied with bilateral relations through most of 2025.
That changed in December, when Trump appointed Louisiana GOP Gov. Jeff Landry to be his special envoy to Greenland, a move designed to steer policy from the White House instead of through the State Department, the source said.
Vance, who traveled to Greenland last March, said last Thursday, “I guess my advice to European leaders and anybody else would be to take the president of the United States seriously.”
Following some of Trump’s comments that he wanted Greenland to be part of the U.S., which came days after he ordered the American military to attack Venezuela, Danish and Greenlandic officials in Washington went to Capitol Hill to voice concerns to lawmakers.
A source familiar with those meetings said there was a tone shift among Republicans, who said they took the president’s threats seriously – not as a laughing matter.
The top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee emerged from his meeting with the Danish envoys foreclosing any suggestion the future of Greenland was in dispute.
“I think it has been made clear from our Danish friends and our friends in Greenland that that future does not include a negotiation,” Sen. Roger Wicker said.
Meanwhile, a bipartisan group of American lawmakers was crossing the Atlantic for meetings in Copenhagen at the end of this week.
Arctic security as a central argument Trump has said the U.S. would demand sovereignty over the island for its own national security purposes, suggesting China and Russia could pose a threat to America by taking the island themselves.
“Basically, their defense is two dog sleds,” Trump said of Greenland, where the U.S. has a military base and 150 troops stationed. “In the meantime, you have Russian destroyers and submarines and China destroyers and submarines all over the place.”
Danish officials have pointed to new investments there and a willingness to work with NATO and the U.S. on protecting the island. The kingdom announced a $6.5 billion Arctic defense package last year.
Denmark’s top lawmaker overseeing defense said the threat to the island did not come from the east, but instead from the U.S., its NATO ally across the Atlantic.
“It is my job to be on top of security in Greenland and I get all relevant information about it,” Rasmus Jarlov wrote in a post on X. “I can assure you that your fantasies about a big threat from China and Russia against Greenland are delusional. You are the threat,” he wrote of the U.S. “Not them.”
Provocations from China and Russia have been more concentrated near Alaska than Greenland, said Connor McPartland, who noted China has minimal commercial interests on the island and there’s been no uptick in Russian or Chinese naval activity near the island.
McPartland, who was the deputy director of the Pentagon’s Office for Arctic and Global Security until September, said Trump’s attention to Arctic security comes as a needed focus on an overlooked region.
“Caring about the Arctic is not just caring about the Arctic,” he said. “It has ramifications for our global security, not just in this one little sliver of at the top of the world.”
“In my office, we’d like to say that the Arctic is the front door to the homeland, because most of the really existential threats to the United States that we think about [like a] nuclear missile … are going to fly over the pole to get to the continental United States,” said McPartland, who is now an an assistant director with the Atlantic Council’s Transatlantic Security Initiative.
“It’s the fastest way to get to the United States, from Russia, from North Korea, from Iran, from China.”
A 1951 treaty between the U.S. and Greenland allows the American military, which has downsized its presence to only one base in Greenland, to upscale its footprint as it wants. During the Cold War, the U.S. had 17 military installations there.
“There aren’t really problems to be solved by the United States controlling Greenland,” said McPartland. “We can build infrastructure, we can station troops, we can operate from Greenland almost at will, as long as we recognize the sovereignty of Denmark and Greenland.”
People take shelter as Iran launched missiles and drones towards Israel following the US-Israeli attacks, in Jerusalem on February 28, 2026. (Photo by Mostafa Alkharouf/Anadolu via Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — In announcing the U.S. military strike on Iran, President Donald Trump went significantly beyond his previous justification of destroying the country’s nuclear program.
He’s now also calling for regime change — and encouraging the Iranian people to rise up and overthrow their government.
Three sources briefed on the attack told ABC News that Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and President Masoud Pezeshkian were both targeted during the strikes.
But whether American bombing could help make regime change happen — without also deploying U.S. forces on the ground — was unclear, as was who might replace Iran’s current leaders.
“Our objective is to defend the American people by eliminating imminent threats from the Iranian regime, a vicious group of very hard, terrible people,” Trump announced in a video posted to his social media account early Saturday morning.
Speaking to what he called “the great, proud people of Iran,” he added, “I say tonight that the hour of your freedom is at hand.”
“When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take. This will be probably your only chance for generations,” he said.
“For many years, you have asked for America’s help, but you never got it. No president was willing to do what I am willing to do tonight. Now you have a president who is giving you what you want, so let’s see how you respond.” he said.
“America is backing you with overwhelming strength and devastating force. Now is the time to seize control of your destiny and to unleash the prosperous and glorious future that is close within your reach,” he said.
Shortly after, in a brief phone call with a Washington Post reporter, the president said that all he wants is “freedom for the people” of Iran.
In January, during widespread protests in Iran when thousands of Iranians were reported killed, Trump posted on social media, “Iranian Patriots, KEEP PROTESTING — TAKE OVER YOUR INSTITUTIONS!!! Save the names of the killers and abusers. They will pay a big price.”
“HELP IS ON ITS WAY,” Trump added at the time, though he faced criticism for taking no further action at that point.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in his own video statement Saturday echoed Trump’s call, saying the attack’s goal was “to remove the existential threat posed by the terrorist regime in Iran.”
Iran has claimed it is not pursuing a nuclear weapon and has the sovereign right to pursue a peaceful nuclear program for civilian purposes.
Imminent threat? Up to now, Trump has said he preferred a diplomatic solution and has not presented a clear justification for why strikes are needed now, since he has repeatedly insisted Iran’s nuclear program was “obliterated” in U.S. strikes he ordered last June — a claim he repeated at last week’s State of the Union address.
In making his new case for the strikes, the president is arguing attacks are warranted to “defend the American people by eliminating imminent threats from the Iranian regime” without providing clear evidence of that.
Trump also argued Iranian missiles could “soon” reach the U.S — but the president has provided no details.
Iran is “developing long range missiles that can now threaten our very good friends and allies in Europe, our troops stationed overseas and could soon reach the American homeland,” he said.
Yet, according to a one-page document released by the Defense Intelligence Agency earlier this year, Iran is looking to develop an intercontinental ballistic missile by 2035.
Just a few days ago, after the president’s State of the Union address, Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters Iranian missiles could reach the United States “one day.”
“Clearly, they are headed in a pathway to one day being able to develop weapons that can reach the continental U.S. They already possess weapons that can reach much of Europe already now as we speak, and the ranges continue to grow every single year exponentially,” Rubio said.
Whether the Iranian missile threat was “imminent” — and whether Congress should vote on committing American troops to an extensive military operation — aimed at pursuing such a broad goal of regime change in Iran — will likely dominate the debate when lawmakers return to Washington this week.
