WASHINGTON (CP) — Lachlan Murdoch will maintain control of the Murdoch media empire following his father Rupert’s passing, as part of a $3.3 billion settlement with his three adult siblings. The future ownership of the vast Murdoch media empire has finally been settled. Rupert Murdoch and his son Lachlan have reached a deal with the patriarch’s other children to end a bitter legal dispute over who will lead the empire after the 94-year-old mogul’s death.

Announced Monday, the agreement confirms that Lachlan will retain control of the media empire for decades to come. Under the settlement, Lachlan’s three eldest siblings—Prudence MacLeod, Elisabeth Murdoch, and James Murdoch—will no longer be beneficiaries of any trust holding shares in Fox News parent company Fox Corporation or News Corp.

Previously, control of the company would have been divided equally among the four siblings under the existing trust. Rupert and Lachlan sought to amend the trust to ensure Lachlan, who currently serves as CEO of Fox Corp, remains in charge. However, Prudence, Elisabeth, and James strongly opposed the change, resulting in a protracted legal battle in a Nevada court.

As part of the settlement, the siblings will receive compensation from the sale of 14.2 million shares of News Corp Class B stock and 16.9 million shares of Fox Corp Class B stock. The total value of the deal is $3.3 billion, with each sibling receiving $1.1 billion, according to an anonymous source familiar with the terms. Meanwhile, Rupert Murdoch’s younger daughters, Grace and Chloe, will be placed in a new trust. The trust will operate until 2050, during which Lachlan will have control of the entity, with Rupert Murdoch serving as chairman emeritus.

Rupert and Lachlan, who share aligned political views, pushed to amend the trust out of concern that Lachlan’s siblings might steer the company, including the flagship Fox News, in a different political direction. This settlement prevents that possibility. Late last year, a Nevada probate commissioner rejected Rupert and Lachlan’s bid to change the trust terms. The decision was appealed, prolonging a process that has been kept largely confidential.

In a statement, News Corp’s board expressed support for the settlement, emphasizing the importance of Lachlan Murdoch’s leadership and vision in guiding the company’s future strategy and success. The intense family tensions, reminiscent of the fictionalized drama portrayed in HBO’s hit series “Succession,” have persisted for years. This deal resolves longstanding uncertainty over the Murdoch family inheritance and the political trajectory of the media empire.

Additionally, the settlement offers Lachlan’s siblings a more favorable financial arrangement than previous buyout proposals, according to sources close to the family.

The original trust terms were established decades ago as part of Rupert Murdoch’s divorce settlement with his second wife, Anna Mann. These terms granted equal control to his then four children, but left the question of succession unresolved, leading to years of family rivalry and tension. While all six Murdoch children are entitled to equal shares of the trust’s value, leadership control was a major point of contention.

As the media landscape became more challenging and American politics grew increasingly polarized, the family tensions escalated. Rupert initially attempted a power-sharing arrangement between his two sons, but their strategic differences led him to sell much of his empire to Disney in a $71.3 billion deal.

Since then, Lachlan Murdoch has been the sole Murdoch child holding an executive role within the companies. This settlement cements his control over the media empire well beyond his father’s eventual passing.

Washington (CP) - Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. says anyone can get a COVID-19 vaccine, but many Americans face challenges accessing updated shots. Pharmacies and doctors struggle with new rules as vaccines are no longer broadly recommended, leading to confusion over prescriptions, availability, and cost. State regulations vary, with some easing access while others require prescriptions. The FDA limits updated vaccines to people 65+ or with health risks, and the CDC advisory panel has yet to issue new guidance after recent changes. Political divides and inconsistent information add to difficulties. Vaccination rates remain low, especially among younger people. Experts say making access easier would boost uptake. Despite assurances, many Americans find it hard to get the latest COVID-19 vaccines due to regulatory and logistical hurdles.

Washington (CP) — International attention is intensifying on Kamal Hassan, the former head of Syria’s Military Intelligence Directorate, amid growing evidence of his suspected involvement in illicit trafficking networks. Recent developments, including the arrest of a close associate in Turkey, have prompted increased scrutiny from global security entities such as Interpol and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. Although no formal charges have been filed, Hassan's name has resurfaced in security reports and policy discussions across Washington, Brussels, and other international capitals. Analysts suggest that Hassan, once a powerful figure within Syria’s security apparatus, may have played a significant role in facilitating the movement of narcotics like Captagon and weapons through the region, potentially funding pro-Assad militias during the conflict’s most volatile phases.

As international efforts to combat illicit trade and regional instability in Syria continue, Hassan’s alleged role in these networks has become a focal point for investigations aimed at dismantling the conflict economy that continues to destabilize neighboring countries and hinder Syria’s rebuilding process. The involvement of global security forces signals a shift toward a more coordinated and systemic approach to addressing the lingering effects of Syria's war economy, with Hassan’s suspected role becoming increasingly critical.

Within Syria, Hassan remains a deeply divisive figure, especially in the coastal regions traditionally loyal to the Assad regime. These areas, home to many in the Alawite community, are beginning to reassess their support for figures like Hassan, now increasingly seen as symbols of corruption within the regime’s security apparatus. This shift reflects broader changes within Syria, as war fatigue and disillusionment grow even among former regime strongholds, leading to heightened awareness of the corruption and abuses tied to military and security institutions.

Despite the absence of formal legal actions, Kamal Hassan continues to be a polarizing figure both inside Syria and abroad. His case highlights the challenges faced by international actors engaged in Syria’s reconstruction, as unresolved issues of accountability and the complex legacy of the country’s security institutions complicate efforts to promote stability. Syria’s Military Intelligence Directorate, which Hassan once led, remains one of the country’s most influential and powerful security bodies, credited with helping to sustain the Assad regime throughout the conflict but also accused of human rights abuses, corruption, and repression. These concerns continue to shape international perceptions of Syria’s security landscape as the nation navigates its post-conflict future.

Washington (CP) — Pentagon officials faced significant challenges Friday as they began implementing President Donald Trump’s executive order to rename the Department of Defense as the Department of War. Many officials expressed frustration, anger, and confusion over what they see as a costly, largely symbolic change that would do little to address the military’s pressing issues, such as countering increasingly aggressive authoritarian alliances.

The order’s specifics remain unclear, but officials may need to replace Defense Department seals on more than 700,000 facilities across 40 countries and all 50 states. This includes everything from official letterhead for the six military branches and numerous agencies to embossed napkins in chow halls, embroidered jackets for Senate-confirmed officials, and merchandise in the Pentagon store.

“This is purely for domestic political audiences,” said a former defense official. “It will cost millions and have no impact on China or Russia’s calculations. Worse, it may portray the U.S. as warmongering and threaten international stability.”

The report is based on interviews with more than six current and former defense officials, who spoke anonymously due to the sensitivity of the issue. POLITICO reported Thursday that the Trump administration planned to rename the Defense Department to project a more aggressive military image globally.

At a press conference in the Oval Office Friday, Trump said, “We won World War I, we won World War II, we won everything before that and in between, and then we decided to go woke and changed the name to DOD. So, we’re going Department of War.”

A formal name change would likely require congressional approval, but sources say the White House is seeking ways to bypass that process. According to a White House fact sheet, Trump’s executive order allows Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to refer to himself as “Secretary of War” in official communications and recommend measures to ensure the new name is adopted department-wide. The Department of War may also serve as a secondary name to help avoid legal hurdles.

A Defense Department official, who preferred to be called a “War Department” official, said costs would vary as the change is rolled out. Still, some employees remain unconvinced. “I see a million small headaches and annoyances if this happens,” one official said. “It will consume time and effort.”

The War Department existed from U.S. independence until 1947, when the Truman administration reorganized the military, creating the Department of Defense two years later through congressional action. Trump dismissed concerns about cost, saying, “We know how to rebrand without going crazy,” though he admitted uncertainty about needing congressional approval but vowed to proceed regardless.

Several Republicans, including Senators Rick Scott and Mike Lee, have introduced legislation to support the name change. However, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell criticized the move and Trump’s 2026 Pentagon budget request, arguing it fails to meet inflation and investment needs.

“If we call it the Department of War, we’d better equip the military to actually prevent and win wars,” McConnell said on X. “We can’t maintain American primacy without substantially increasing military spending. ‘Peace through strength’ requires real investment, not just a rebrand.”