
Hamas says ‘ready' for a ceasefire but it must put an end to war in Gaza
Trump said Tuesday that Israel had agreed to a 60-day ceasefire and urged Hamas to accept the terms before the situation worsens. The US president has stepped up pressure on both Israel and Hamas to secure a ceasefire, facilitate hostage releases, and move toward ending the war.
'The 60-day period would be used to work toward ending the war,' Trump said, though Israel has maintained that the conflict won't end until Hamas is defeated. Trump suggested a deal might materialise as early as next week.
Hamas official Taher al-Nunu said the group is 'ready and serious regarding reaching an agreement' and is open to 'any initiative that clearly leads to the complete end to the war,' a report by AP reported.
A Hamas delegation is expected in Cairo on Wednesday for talks with Egyptian and Qatari mediators, according to an Egyptian official who spoke anonymously, the report added.
A major stumbling block throughout the 21-month war has been the opposing views on how the conflict should end. Hamas says it is willing to release the remaining 50 hostages, fewer than half of whom are believed to be alive, in exchange for a complete Israeli withdrawal and a formal end to hostilities.
Israel, however, insists that the war will only end with Hamas' surrender, disarmament, and exile, terms Hamas continues to reject.
It remains unclear how many hostages would be freed under this proposal, though earlier plans suggested the release of around 10 individuals.
Israel has not yet publicly responded to Trump's announcement. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is scheduled to visit the White House on Monday for talks, following a recent meeting between senior adviser Ron Dermer and top US officials.
On Tuesday, Trump posted on social media that Israel had 'agreed to the necessary conditions to finalize the 60 Day CEASEFIRE,' adding: 'I hope, for the good of the Middle East, that Hamas takes this Deal, because it will not get better — IT WILL ONLY GET WORSE.'
Even before the last ceasefire expired in March, the US president had issued multiple ultimatums, urging Hamas to accept extended pauses in the conflict in exchange for aid and hostage releases.
More than 56,000 people have died in the Palestinian territory, according to Gaza's Health Ministry, which reports that over half of the dead are women and children. The ministry does not distinguish between combatants and civilians. The war began on October 7, 2023, when Hamas-led militants launched a surprise attack on southern Israel, killing 1,200 people and taking approximately 250 hostages. Since then, much of Gaza has been reduced to rubble. Over 90% of the territory's 2.3 million people have been displaced, many multiple times, and the region is facing an escalating humanitarian crisis.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Hans India
25 minutes ago
- Hans India
Owning lands and the sentiments that go with it
Land is considered such a precious position that, in the Mahabharat, when the Pandavas ask for five villages, one for each of them, the Kaurava Crown Prince Duryodhana refuses to give them even so much of land as occupied by the point of a pin. There is, then, the other example of Lord Rama, who, after vanquishing Ravana, is requested by Vibhishana, brother of Ravana to rule Lanka. Rama famously replies that 'Mother and Motherland' are more important than even Heaven, and he would like to return to Ayodhya. The sense of deep attachment to Motherland and the long drawn, and frequently violent, conflicts that can arise when there is more than one claimant to the same land is best illustrated by today's Israel. The Israeli – Palestine dispute traces back to the late 19th century when Zionists sought to establish a homeland for the Jewish people in the Ottoman-controlled Palestine. After the Ottoman Empire lost the First World War, the British received a mandate to manage Palestine and promised the Jewish people a country. That country, today's Israel, declared independence in 1948. The creation of Israel remains a highly debated and sensitive issue, not susceptible straight answer. While there are those who maintain that it was necessary in order to facilitate self – determination by the Jews after centuries of prosecution, and the other contention is that it has led to displacement and disposition of Palestinians and a continuing conflict. Another significant example of how countries value ownership of land relates to the interesting history of Alaska, which began with the Russian colonisation in the 18th century, and culminated in its sale to the United States in 1867, following America's acceptance of Russia's offer for a $7.2 million settlement at that time. Coming to India, disputes regarding ownership of areas near the borders of states are quite common. Even after the lapse of close to seven decades after the event, a few hotspots of discontent and struggles continue to exist following the formation of states in 1956 on a linguistic basis. The primary border dispute between Odisha and Andhra Pradesh, for instance, centres on the Kotia region, a group of 21 villages in the Eastern Ghats hills. Both states claim these villages, with Andhra Pradesh asserting their inclusion in Parvathipuram-Manyam district, and Odisha claiming them as part of Koraput district. The dispute has been ongoing for decades, particularly after Andhra Pradesh laid claim to Kotia in 1971. Interestingly enough, there are even villages with two sarpanchs in office each elected by the same villagers, but voting in elections separately, conducted by the two states. On somewhat similar lines is the Karnataka-Maharashtra border dispute, arising from the disagreement over the administration of the city of Belgaum and the surrounding areas of Maharashtra. The dispute stems from the States Reorganisation Act of 1956, which redrew state boundaries based on linguistic demographics, leading to the inclusion of the region in Karnataka. While Kannada speakers were the majority in the Marathi-speaking population also had a significant presence, leading to ongoing disagreements. Border disputes relating to ownership of land are not confined to internal issues between the states of the country. India has yet to resolve many such disputes of that nature with neighbouring countries such as Nepal, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka. As is well known, following partition, a portion of the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir was occupied by Pakistan leading to the establishment of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK). The region remains a source of conflict and continues to be a contentious issue between the two nations. As of June 12, no definitive resolution has been reached and it remains the bone of contention between the two nations. Likewise, the Sino–Indian border dispute is an ongoing territorial dispute over the sovereignty of two relatively large, and several smaller, separated pieces of territory between China and India. The India-Nepal border is yet another dispute primarily revolving around the Kalapani region, a 372 sq km area at the India-Nepal-China trijunction. Both countries claim this territory, with Nepal asserting it belongs to its Sudurpaschim province and India placing it within Uttarakhand Similarly, the India-Bangladesh border dispute, particularly regarding fencing and border demarcation, remains a contentious issue with ongoing challenges. While India has fenced a significant portion of the border, there remain many unfenced areas on account of objections from villagers, challenging terrain, and ongoing negotiations with Bangladesh. Belonging to the same category, is the highly vexatious issue of ownership of the Katchateevu Island, a matter of contention between Sri Lanka and India for over a century now, primarily on account of fishermen from both countries finding it a rich ground for their profession. I have great respect for the legal profession, members of both the bar and the bench. My father started off as a lawyer and retired as a judge of the High Court of the erstwhile composite Andhra Pradesh state. Many of my friends, relatives and professional acquaintances are all distinguished legal luminaries. All that notwithstanding, I simply could not pass up the temptation to end the article with this piece, which I came across the other day. God and the devil were in a dispute over a broken fence. God said you have to pay for half. The devil said 'not paying' God said 'you have to, or I'll sue!' The devil laughed and said 'where are you gonna get a lawyer?' (The writer was formerly Chief Secretary, Government of Andhra Pradesh)


Hans India
25 minutes ago
- Hans India
Cloud of uncertainty over Indo-US BTA seems to be lifting
After weeks of uncertainty and doubts over the US-India trade deal, it seems like it may finally be signed shortly. It may be recalled that the 90-day pause for the tariffs that US President Donald Trump imposed nears its end. He announced the pause on April 9. Washington imposed a 26 per cent tariff rate on Indian made goods. External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar is quoted as saying, 'We are in the middle—more than the middle—of a trade negotiation. I hope to bring it to a conclusion, but I can't guarantee it as there is another party involved.' He hinted that this could be done 'over the next few days.' Incidentally, the US has corroborated this. Saying that Trump shares a 'very good relationship' with Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed this much during a press briefing: 'Yes, the President said that last week [that the US and India are very close to a trade deal], and it remains true. I just spoke to our Secretary of Commerce about it. He was in the Oval Office with the President. They are finalising these agreements, and you'll hear from the President and his trade team very soon when it comes to India.' Hopefully, the optimism expressed by Delhi and Washington materialises. For, quite apart from the knotty bilateral issues, there is the matter of Trump taking credit for stopping the hostilities between India and Pakistan in May. The Indian government didn't like that; this also apparently resulted in the hardened stance by our negotiators. Besides, many Sangh Parivar-affiliated bodies like the Bharatiya Kisan Sangh (BKS) and Swadeshi Jagran Manch (SJM) were opposed to certain aspects of the India-United States bilateral trade agreement (BTA). These aspects are related to genetically modified (GM) crops, dairy products, relaxed regulations on medical devices, and data localisation. It looks like the government, while addressing the genuine concerns of the BKS-SJM types, has ignored their ideologically motivated demands. This is quite appropriate for policy formulation. The proposed US-India BTA holds significant potential to transform the economic and strategic landscape between the two nations. Beyond the immediate goal of boosting bilateral trade volumes, the BTA can catalyse deepening economic integration and fostering long-term cooperation in key sectors. Increased market access and reduced trade barriers under the agreement would likely encourage higher US investments in India, particularly in areas like manufacturing, infrastructure, energy and services. Furthermore, the BTA could facilitate the transfer of advanced technologies, especially in critical domains like defence, information technology, renewable energy, and pharmaceuticals. This technology sharing would not only strengthen India's domestic capabilities but also enhance its global competitiveness. Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in both countries could particularly benefit from easier market entry and reduced regulatory hurdles, thereby promoting inclusive economic growth. On a strategic level, the BTA can consolidate the growing US-India partnership, which is increasingly seen as vital for maintaining balance and stability in the Indo-Pacific region. Moreover, enhanced economic ties will complement the existing defence and security cooperation, reinforcing the shared commitment to a free, open, and rules-based international order. Ultimately, the BTA has the potential to evolve from a mere trade pact into a cornerstone of a robust, multifaceted US-India alliance that spans commerce, technology, investment, and geopolitics.


India Today
27 minutes ago
- India Today
There will not be a Hamastan: Netanyahu calls for end to Hamas
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel would completely eliminate Hamas in his first public remark since US President Donald Trump claimed that Israel agreed to a 60-day ceasefire plan in Gaza. "There will not be a Hamas. There will not be a 'Hamastan'. We're not going back to that. It's over," Netanyahu said during a meeting at the Trans-Israel pipeline. He added that Israel would destroy Hamas "down to their very foundation."advertisementNetanyahu's stern statement came as Hamas said it was considering a new proposal for a ceasefire. The group noted it had received suggestions from mediators Egypt and Qatar and was reviewing them. In a statement, Hamas said its aim was to reach an agreement that would stop the war and lead to Israel withdrawing its forces from PUSHES FOR TRUCE US President Trump said on Tuesday that Israel had agreed to the key points required for a 60-day ceasefire after a meeting between his representatives and Israeli officials. He described the proposal as a "final" offer aimed at stopping the fighting in the people of Gaza have mixed feelings about Trump's proposal. Kamal, a Gaza City resident, said, "I hope it would work this time, even if for two months, it would save thousands of innocent lives." Another resident, Adnan Al-Assar from Khan Younis, was more cautious. "We hope he is serious, like he was during the Israeli-Iranian war when he said the war should stop, and it stopped," he has been rising pressure on Netanyahu to bring an end to the conflict. However, several members of his right-wing coalition remain firmly against any lasting truce with CALLS AND REGIONAL PRESSURE ADD TO TENSIONSWhile ceasefire efforts continue, several ministers from Israel's Likud party pushed for Israel to annex the West Bank before the Knesset's summer recess. A petition, signed by 15 cabinet ministers and Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana, was sent to the Prime Minister's Office ahead of his planned visit to Washington next trip to the US will likely include further discussions with Trump on a possible Gaza ceasefire and a deal to release hostages held by Hamas. The Prime Minister's Office has not yet commented on the petition, and Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer -- considered close to Netanyahu -- did not sign it. Dermer is currently in Washington, holding talks on both Iran and latest push for a ceasefire follows last month's 12-day conflict between Israel and Iran.- EndsWith inputs from ReutersTune InMust Watch