Trump to host Netanyahu amid push for Gaza ceasefire between Israel, Hamas
Indirect negotiations between Israel and Hamas began on Sunday evening in Doha, aiming to broker a ceasefire and reach an agreement on the release of hostages in exchange for Palestinian prisoners.
Trump said Sunday there was a 'good chance' of reaching an agreement.
'We've gotten a lot of the hostages out, but pertaining to the remaining hostages, quite a few of them will be coming out,' he told journalists.
Netanyahu, speaking before boarding his flight to Washington on Sunday, said his meeting with Trump could 'definitely help advance this' deal.
The US president is pushing for a truce in the Gaza Strip, plunged into a humanitarian crisis after nearly two years of war.
Netanyahu said he dispatched the team to Doha with 'clear instructions' to reach an agreement 'under the conditions that we have agreed to.'
He previously said Hamas's response to a draft US-backed ceasefire proposal, conveyed through Qatari and Egyptian mediators, contained 'unacceptable' demands.
'Important mission'
Two Palestinian sources close to the discussions told AFP the proposal included a 60-day truce, during which Hamas would release 10 living hostages and several bodies in exchange for Palestinians detained by Israel.
However, they said, the group was also demanding certain conditions for Israel's withdrawal, guarantees against a resumption of fighting during negotiations, and the return of the UN-led aid distribution system.
Netanyahu has an 'important mission' in Washington, 'advancing a deal to bring all our hostages home,' said Israeli President Isaac Herzog after meeting him Sunday.
Trump is not scheduled to meet the Israeli premier until 6:30 pm (2230 GMT) Monday, the White House said, without the usual presence of journalists.
Of the 251 hostages taken by Palestinian militants during the 2023 attack, 49 are still being held in Gaza, including 27 the Israeli military says are dead.
Since Hamas's October 2023 attack sparked the massive Israeli offensive in Gaza, mediators have brokered two temporary halts in the fighting. They have seen hostages freed in exchange for some of the thousands of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli custody.
Recent efforts to broker a new truce have repeatedly failed, with the primary point of contention being Israel's rejection of Hamas's demand for a lasting ceasefire.
'Enough blood'
In Gaza, the territory's civil defense agency reported 26 people killed by Israeli forces on Sunday, 10 of them in a strike in Gaza City's Sheikh Radwan neighborhood.
'We are losing young people, families and children every day, and this must stop now,' Sheikh Radwan resident Osama al-Hanawi told AFP.
'Enough blood has been shed.'
Contacted by AFP, the Israeli military said it could not comment on specific strikes without precise coordinates.
Hundreds killed seeking aid
The war has created dire humanitarian conditions for the more than two million people in the Gaza Strip.
A US- and Israel-backed group, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), took the lead in food distribution in the territory in late May, when Israel partially lifted a more than two-month blockade on aid deliveries.
But its operations have had a chaotic rollout, with repeated reports of aid seekers killed by Israeli forces near its facilities while awaiting rations.
UN agencies and major aid groups have refused to cooperate with the GHF over concerns it was designed to cater to Israeli military objectives.
The UN human rights office said last week that more than 500 people have been killed waiting to access food from GHF distribution points.
The Gaza health ministry on Sunday placed that toll even higher, at 751 killed.
Israel's war on Gaza has killed at least 57,418 people in Gaza, mostly women and children, according to the territory's health ministry. The United Nations considers the figures reliable.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
an hour ago
- Arab News
Syria at a crossroads
Syria today stands on the cusp of a transformative chapter in its modern history. More than seven months after the ousting of Bashar Assad, the country has sworn in a new transitional government led by President Ahmad Al-Sharaa, marking a significant departure from decades of autocratic rule. The new leadership has promised inclusivity and reform, appointing a diverse Cabinet that, for the first time, includes women and representatives of minority groups. One such appointment, Hind Kabawat as minister of social affairs, signals a break from past patterns of exclusion. The regional response has been swift and, in many ways, optimistic. Arab capitals, once divided over how to deal with Damascus, are now reengaging with renewed purpose. Saudi Arabia and the UAE have announced debt relief and economic assistance packages. Tunisia, Egypt and Jordan have exchanged high-level visits, while Qatar has signaled conditional openness pending progress on political inclusivity and refugee return. Meanwhile, the UK has reestablished full diplomatic ties with Damascus and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio in May met his Syrian counterpart in Antalya, Turkiye. These moves reflect a broader recalibration in regional politics. Rather than isolating Syria indefinitely, Arab states are now betting that constructive engagement may offer a more effective route to stability. But this raises a crucial question: Will normalization catalyze real reform or simply entrench the status quo under a new name? There are reasons for cautious optimism. The new Syrian government, backed by a coalition of opposition groups and civil society figures, has laid out a transitional roadmap that includes constitutional reform, the decentralization of power and the phased return of refugees in cooperation with UN agencies. Local reconciliation efforts are underway in formerly besieged areas like Deraa and Eastern Ghouta, while independent media outlets have cautiously resumed operations under a new press law passed in March. Internationally, Syria's foreign policy posture is also shifting. Damascus has signaled openness to rejoining global institutions and has expressed an interest in negotiating a framework for peace with Israel — though talks remain in their infancy. Meanwhile, the Syrian Democratic Forces have agreed to a partial integration with the Syrian army under a unified military command, part of a broader security sector reform process that is seen as key to long-term stability. Despite these steps, deep skepticism remains. Critics argue that without meaningful accountability for past atrocities, normalization could whitewash systemic abuses and undermine the pursuit of justice. Families of detainees and victims of war crimes have voiced concerns that the Arab League's embrace of Damascus may have come too soon — before meaningful progress on human rights is achieved. Arab states are betting that constructive engagement may offer a more effective route to stability. Hani Hazaimeh Moreover, the country's economic recovery remains fragile. Syria's infrastructure is shattered, unemployment is high and inflation has driven much of the population into poverty. Billions of dollars in reconstruction aid are needed, but many Western governments are conditioning support on further political liberalization and the protection of civil liberties. There is also concern that regional powers may prioritize stability over reform — engaging with Damascus to curb foreign influence or to stem refugee flows, while turning a blind eye to domestic stagnation. The challenge, therefore, is to ensure that normalization is not an end in itself, but a lever to drive real change. The future of Syria is not just a Syrian question — it is a regional imperative. A stable, sovereign and inclusive Syria could help contain cross-border militancy, revitalize trade corridors and restore a degree of political coherence to the Levant. But if normalization merely restores a rebranded autocracy, it risks perpetuating the conditions that led to Syria's implosion in the first place. Arab states now face a delicate balancing act: how to engage constructively with Damascus while insisting on measurable progress toward political transition, the rule of law and reconciliation. The international community, for its part, must continue to support Syrian civil society, empower local governance and advocate for the rights of refugees and displaced persons. Syria's return to the Arab fold presents both an opportunity and a test. If managed responsibly, normalization could offer a lifeline to a country ravaged by war, helping it rebuild institutions and reclaim its place in the region. But if approached with complacency or driven by narrow geopolitical interests, it risks legitimizing stagnation and silencing the voices of those who demand dignity, justice and freedom. Syria is at a crossroads. What happens next will determine whether it finally steps onto the path of national healing or remains trapped in a cycle of broken promises.
Arab News
an hour ago
- Arab News
Can Mamdani become the next New York City mayor?
When you land in New York these days, all the talk is about Zohran Mamdani, the young immigrant politician who last month won the Democratic Party's nomination to be its candidate for mayor of New York City, winning easily against more powerful candidates. His challenge now is to win the mayoral election in November despite a national campaign, led by President Donald Trump, to discredit him, including threats to arrest or deport him. At a highly polarized time in American politics, in which conservatives have the upper hand, Mamdani's stunning success is an anomaly. He is not only a member of the Democratic Party, but also of the Democratic Socialists of America, a leftist political organization and the largest socialist grouping in the country. He has taken on New York's dominant landlords, real estate developers and Wall Street tycoons. At a time of nativist revolt against immigrants, Mamdani bucks that trend as an immigrant who was born in Uganda 33 years ago and who became a naturalized US citizen just seven years ago. More astonishingly, in a city long known for its politicians' blind support of Israel and with the largest Jewish population outside Israel, Mamdani has been a strong supporter of Palestinian rights and has criticized Israel's Gaza campaign, vowing that as mayor he would seek to arrest Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on the outstanding International Criminal Court warrant. Nevertheless, he has gained the respect and votes of many Jewish New Yorkers, especially those who oppose Israel's policies and those who prioritize local issues such as eldercare, paid family leave, rising prices and affordable housing. Mamdani's appeal to New Yorkers, regardless of race, ethnicity or religion, appears to be a function of his focus on economic issues and improving living conditions and housing affordability, in addition to his direct and open communication style. He addresses their everyday struggles and offers concrete, easily understood solutions, including free public transport, rent freezes and tax increases on the wealthy to fund social programs. In a city long plagued by corrupt politicians, nothing incriminating has surfaced about his political career as an assemblyman. In the murky style of New York politics, corruption has been the norm for decades, chronicled in numerous books, movies and TV series. As such, Mamdani stands out as a rare honest politician. Mandani's status as a naturalized citizen and recent immigrant appeals to many in New York, where more than 35 percent are foreign born, hailing from more than 150 countries. Historically, when candidates win the Democratic nomination for New York mayor, they are assured of winning the election because it is primarily a one-party city. In 2024, 56 percent of registered voters identified as Democrats, 26 percent as Republicans and 18 percent as neither. As such, Mamdani has a very good chance of winning in November, except for the fact that he is now facing a storm of opposition, not only from his New York rivals and big business, but also from across the country. Andrew Cuomo, who lost the Democratic primary to Mamdani, may now run as an independent. Cuomo has a large following among Democrats, but he is weakened by the fact that he is a disgraced former governor who was forced to resign in 2021 in the face of numerous allegations of sexual misconduct. Current Mayor Eric Adams may also run against Mamdani, but he too comes with baggage. In September 2024, he was indicted on federal charges of bribery, fraud and soliciting illegal foreign campaign donations. He was saved only by the Trump administration, which instructed federal prosecutors to drop the charges against him. Conservative businessmen and anti-Palestinian politicians are supporting the rivals running against Mamdani in the November election. Led by billionaire hedge fund manager Bill Ackman, they are trying to raise astronomical funds to oppose him, despite the fact the millions they previously raised for Cuomo were not enough to stop him being well beaten by Mamdani in the primary. However, the biggest obstacle Mamdani is facing is the campaign led by the White House, which could sink his candidacy if it persists. After he won the primary, controversy over Mamdani's immigration status intensified, with calls to strip him of his US citizenship. Rep. Andy Ogles, a Republican, wrote to Attorney General Pam Bondi calling for an investigation into Mamdani, saying that 'he may have procured US citizenship through willful misrepresentation or concealment of material support for terrorism.' In a post on X, Ogles went further: 'Mamdani is an antisemitic, socialist, communist who will destroy the great city of New York. He needs to be deported.' Similarly unhinged comments were made by Rudy Giuliani, the controversial former New York mayor. At a highly polarized time in US politics, in which conservatives have the upper hand, Mamdani's success is an anomaly. Dr. Abdel Aziz Aluwaisheg When Trump was asked about Mamdani's pledge to stop masked Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents 'from deporting our neighbors,' he said: 'Well, then, we'll have to arrest him.' Calling him a 'pure communist,' Trump threatened to cut off funds to New York if Mamdani becomes mayor and 'doesn't behave himself.' 'We don't need a communist in this country, but if we have one, I'm going to be watching over him very carefully on behalf of the nation,' said the president. Trump later doubled down on the 'communist' label and referred to the claims that Mamdani may have obtained his citizenship illegally. 'We're going to be watching that very carefully. A lot of people are saying he's here illegally. We're going to look at everything, but ideally, he's going to turn out to be much less than a communist. Right now, he's a communist, that's not a socialist,' Trump said. Trump's distinction between communism and socialism is an acknowledgement of the fact that Mamdani would not be the first 'socialist' to be elected mayor of New York, and that scores of American cities have had socialist mayors in the past without them being destroyed. Last Thursday, Trump described Mamdani as a 'communist at the highest level,' saying that he wants to 'destroy' New York City, but 'we're not gonna let him do that.' If Trump's relentless campaign continues, it could make it difficult for Mamdani to win the mayoralty in November. In response to the White House's attacks, Democratic politicians have come to Mamdani's defense. Sen. Chris Murphy denounced calls to denaturalize Mamdani, saying that 'Trump will stop at nothing to protect billionaires and price-gouging corporations.' He added: 'Zohran won because he ran a campaign laser-focused on putting power back in the hands of working people.' Others have come to Mamdani's defense, but nothing can match the White House's influence in these matters. If he were to win in November, it would be one of the most stunning upsets in American political history.
Arab News
2 hours ago
- Arab News
How Western governments avoid confronting Israel
Flying in the teeth of mass public opinion, governments allergic to getting tough with Israel have deployed a host of tactics to put off implementing any measures that might hold it to account. In doing so, they have been prepared to smash much-cherished ethical principles and norms, as well as international law. Keeping the US administration happy is a cornerstone of the approach of many leaders, no matter how many atrocities or crimes against humanity Israel perpetrates. This has contaminated the entire international system. The most egregious failing is not just to ignore the crimes, but to be complicit with Israel's genocide in Gaza and its regime of apartheid. But the complicity brings additional side effects — notably the trivialization of values most of us hold dear. Above all, this has meant hollowing out the international legal system. The international Court of Justice and International Criminal Court are only respected when ruling against the foes of Western powers. When the latter issued an arrest warrant for Israeli leaders, the US sanctioned the court's key actors. The UK has been an alarming exemplar of this. The actions of the government have trivialized terrorism, racism and antisemitism, while belittling genocide, war crimes and rape. Last week, the British government decided to proscribe as terrorist a pro-Palestine protest group that engages in direct action. It is now a criminal offence to join or to express support for Palestine Action, punishable by up to 14 years in prison. This move came as part of a bill that lumped it together with two genuinely violent neo-Nazi organizations, helping to ensure the legislation passed through Parliament. This came after four members of Palestine Action, protesting against Israel's genocide, broke into a British military base and spray painted aircraft red. Vandalism, yes; criminal, certainly; but hardly terrorism. The farcical nature of the legislation was exposed when police arrested 27 protesters on the day it came into effect. One of them was an 83-year-old female priest. Terrorism should always be treated as a serious offence. Yet those who spray paint buildings and aircraft are now in the same category as those who blow themselves up at pop concerts, for example. Police resources risk being diverted away from genuinely violent groups. This will, by design, have massive implications for the right to protest and the right to free speech. The chilling effect on the movement for Palestinian rights will be Arctic. It echoes the way in which ministers in the previous government described pro-Palestinian protests as 'hate marches.' Racism and antisemitism have also been trivialized and for similar reasons. The weaponization of antisemitism by anti-Palestinian groups has often been echoed in government statements. The weaponization of antisemitism by anti-Palestinian groups has often been echoed in government statements. Chris Doyle A once pretty obscure rap act has become known globally owing to one of its member's chant at the Glastonbury Festival of 'death, death to the IDF.' All death chants are vile, but this soon mutated in headlines into being an antisemitic chant calling for the killing of Israelis, which it was not. The Israeli army has been conducting genocide and war crimes, livestreamed to the world. The British government has voiced more criticism of the BBC for not cutting its live feed of this show than it has of the incitement to genocide by Israeli leaders. Serious acts of antisemitism are all too frequent, such as the arson attack on the oldest synagogue in Melbourne last week. So, when government ministers pitch in to this weaponization, it jeopardizes the fight against real antisemitism. It blurs the line between legitimate political speech and prohibited speech. As for anti-Arab racism, this remains the least discussed and researched form of racism imaginable. This is quite something when the people of Gaza are the victims of genocide and all Palestinians under Israeli control suffer from varying degrees of institutionalized discrimination as part of its regime of apartheid. All this threatens freedom of speech. Add to that the way in which many states or cities have banned pro-Palestinian demonstrations or even the flying of the Palestinian flag. Israel has destroyed every single university in Gaza, but in the US the issue has been reduced to alleged antisemitism on college campuses. It is a deliberate exercise in distraction and diversion. Get the debate on to antisemitism or the nature of protests and the media focus switches away from the real crimes on the ground — every single day, the Israeli military's killing and starvation machine is at work in Gaza. The distraction allows governments to avoid having to answer why they are doing so little to stop Israel. The combination of trivialization and distraction is part of the complicity of these governments. They treat the public as fools, but people are not blind to their leaders' abject moral failure on Palestine.
