Israel faces backlash at home and abroad over Gaza war escalation plan
Photo:
AFP / Oliver Contreras
By
Alexander Cornwell
, Reuters
Israel's security cabinet approved a
plan to take control of Gaza City
, a move
expanding military operations in the shattered Palestinian territory
that drew strong fresh criticism at home and abroad on Friday over its pursuit of the almost two-year-old war.
Germany, a key European ally, announced it would halt exports of military equipment to Israel that could be used in Gaza. Britain urged Israel to reconsider its decision to escalate the Gaza military campaign.
However, United States President Donald Trump's ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, told Reuters that some countries appeared to be putting pressure on Israel rather than on the militant group Hamas, whose deadly attack on Israel in 2023 ignited the war.
In Israel, families of hostages held by militants in Gaza, and opposition leaders blasted Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for a decision that they said would put hostages' lives at risk.
Far-right allies in Netanyahu's coalition have been pushing for a total takeover of Gaza as part of his vow to eradicate Hamas militants, though the military has warned this could endanger the lives of remaining hostages held by militants.
Opposition leader Yair Lapid called the decision to send Israeli forces into Gaza City a disaster, saying it defied the advice of military and security officials.
He accused far-right ministers Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich of dragging Netanyahu into a prolonged campaign that would result in the deaths of hostages and soldiers.
Netanyahu told Fox News Channel's Bill Hemmer in an interview that aired on Thursday that the
military intended to take control of all of Gaza
.
The announcement from the prime minister's office early on Friday after Thursday's security cabinet meeting said the military would take Gaza City, but did not say if Israeli forces would take all of the enclave. Israel's cabinet is expected to endorse the Gaza City plan.
The military has said that it controls around 75 percent of Gaza. Amir Avivi, a retired Israeli brigadier general, estimated that if the military did take Gaza City, it would give Israel control of about 85 percent of the strip.
"Gaza City is the heart of Gaza. It's really the centre of government. It has always been the strongest and even in the eyes of Hamas, the fall of Gaza City is pretty much the fall of Hamas," said Avivi. "Taking over Gaza City is a game changer."
Israeli media have said 900,000 people now live in Gaza City, including many who have been displaced by the military.
Before the war, Hamas' most powerful fighting units were believed to operate in northern Gaza, including Gaza City.
In the Fox News interview, Netanyahu said Israel did not want to keep the Gaza Strip, but to establish a "security perimeter" and to hand over the territory to Arab forces.
There are 50 hostages still held in Gaza, of whom Israeli officials believe 20 are alive. Most of those freed so far emerged as a result of diplomatic negotiations. Talks toward a ceasefire that could have seen more hostages released collapsed in July.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen was among foreign leaders urging Israel to reconsider its decision to advance into Gaza City.
Regional power Saudi Arabia, which has said it could not normalise ties with Israel without the establishment of a Palestinian state, condemned any move to occupy Gaza.
Asked in an interview with Reuters about criticism of Israel's decision to escalate the war, US Ambassador Huckabee questioned why some nations were "once again" placing "all the pressure on Israel" instead of on Hamas.
Huckabee said Trump was frustrated that Hamas is unwilling to reach "any kind of reasonable settlement", adding the president insists that the militant group cannot remain in power and must disarm.
Israel had already come under mounting pressure at home and abroad over the war in Gaza, including over the humanitarian disaster in the enclave. In recent weeks, Britain, Canada and France said they could recognise a Palestinian state at the United Nations General Assembly next month.
United States President Donald Trump's ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee.
Photo:
AFP
Netanyahu has said there will be no end to the war until Hamas is disarmed. Opinion polls have shown that a majority of Israelis believe he should end the war immediately in a diplomatic agreement that would see the release of remaining hostages.
The Hostages Families Forum, which represents many families of captives in Gaza, said the pursuit of occupying Gaza means abandoning the hostages all while ignoring public support to immediately end the war in a deal that releases the hostages.
It said in a statement the security cabinet had chosen to "embark on another march of recklessness, on the backs of the hostages, the soldiers, and Israeli society as a whole".
"I think it's a death sentence to all the hostages that are still being held there. And it's the wrong decision to do it at this time," Danny Bukovsky, a hotelier in Tel Aviv, said of the announcement that Israeli forces would move into Gaza City.
A full occupation of Gaza would reverse a 2005 decision in which Israel withdrew thousands of Jewish settlers and its forces, while retaining control over its borders, airspace and utilities.
- Reuters
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
26 minutes ago
- RNZ News
Mediawatch: Palestinian statehood push vexes media
Pro Palestinian protesters gather in Wellington on 16 August 2025 as part of nationwide demonstrations. Photo: RNZ / Mark Papalii "New Zealand is fast becoming one of the last Western democracies to recognise Palestine as a state," Corin Dann told Morning Report listeners on RNZ National last Tuesday. While there was a bit of cognitive dissonance in fast becoming one of the last, the roll call of those who have been more decisive was comprehensive. "Australia, Canada, the UK, France, and 147 other countries have made similar declarations as the world responds to the ongoing destruction and famine in Gaza," he added. Just a couple of weeks ago, news organisations were prevaricating over whether they could say 'famine' was happening in Gaza or not, but not so much now. The previous evening, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Winston Peters, put out a statement that said the government would "carefully weigh up its position ... over the next month". Prime Minister Christopher Luxon told reporters recognition was "not a race". But back on Morning Report on Tuesday, former prime minister Helen Clark told Dann she thought it really was urgent. "I've seen victims of the war in the hospital in a nearby town. I've seen the trucks turned around carrying food and medicines which were unable to enter Gaza. This is a catastrophic situation. And here we are in New Zealand somehow arguing some fine point about whether we should be adding our voice," she said, after a trip to the Rafah border crossing. But in the media here, party political tensions were overshadowing debate about New Zealand's official response. When Green Party co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick condemned what she saw as government's spinelessness in the House, it led the ZB news soon after - followed by points of order about MPs accessories from ACT leader David Seymour. And Swarbrick's eventual expulsion led TVNZ's 1News at Six soon after that. But on Newstalk ZB, the hosts overwhelmingly declared that declaring Palestinian statehood was just a gesture. "Two groups determined to wipe each other off the face of the earth will never stop until one wins. Definitively recognising one as a state will not make a jot of difference," Mike Hosking insisted on his breakfast show on Tuesday. Later on her ZB Drive show, Heather du Plessis-Allen reckoned it was just a distraction - one that had already distracted the media. "For every minute and every column inch that we dedicate to talking about whether we should or should not support the state of Palestine in September, we are not spending ... talking about getting aid into kids who need food," she said. "I'm sorry, but recognising Palestine right now while this war between Hamas and Israel is ongoing is rewarding Hamas for what they did on October 7th," she added. Half an hour later, du Plessis-Allen's partner Barry Soper backed her up. "Is that going to stop the war? Is Hamas going to finally put down the arms. They can see it as a badge of honour if they did do that." Neither of them were convinced by Child Fund chief executive and politics pundit Josie Pagani. "The only way that we're going to get any movement forward on this is to recognise a two state solution," she said on the same show 24 hours earlier. "The purpose of recognising Palestinian statehood is not to instantly magic up a happy ending to the misery in Gaza. It's to preserve the viability of a two-state solution," The Herald's senior political correspondent Audrey Young wrote in response. Clark had also told Morning Report that she'd just been talking to Egypt's foreign minister about plans. "There's elaborate plans which don't include Hamas. So I think it's all a bit of a red herring now to be talking about Hamas. There are credible plans for moving forward," Clark said The same day University of Auckland international relations professor Maria Amoudian - on Jesse Mulligan's Afternoons show on RNZ National - said Palestinian statehood would not just be symbolic. "It would mean they would get a seat at the United Nations. A better voice in UNESCO, diplomatic relations among countries which could evolve into economic support and trade. Also legal rights over territorial waters, airspace and sovereignty over their own territory," she said. On RNZ's Midday Report the same day, Otago University professor Robert Patman said that our government's current position not only "lacked moral clarity," it was actually inconsistent with our own recent actions and statements. International law was being "trashed on a daily basis by Israel," Patman said. "In Gaza, cameramen and journalists from Al Jazeera were assassinated by the Netanyahu government. It raises issues which go right to the heart of our identity as a country. I think most Kiwis are very clear. They want to see a world based on rules." Meanwhile, political reporters here sensed that we were international laggards on this because partner parties in the Coalition were putting the handbrake on. In his online newsletter Politik, Richard Harman pointed out ACT MP Simon Court had said in Parliament there cannot be progress towards a Palestinian state until all Israeli hostages are returned and Hamas is dismantled. He said it was also the position of the foreign minister, though Peters himself had not actually said that. And Luxon had said on Monday Hamas held hostages that should be released. "We are thinking carefully about all of the different sides ... rather than trying to prove our own moral superiority over each other, which the likes of Chlöe Swarbrick have just been doing," ACT's David Seymour told ZB when asked if ACT was holding up Cabinet support for recognition of Palestine. Seymour gave a similar response to the Parliamentary Press Gallery reporters. It was later posted to ACT's YouTube channel as "David versus the media. David Seymour WARNS against rushing Palestine". He repeated his worry that Hamas might benefit. But when a reporter pointed out a Palestinian state means more than just Gaza, and that Hamas doesn't control the West Bank, that episode of 'David versus the Media' came to an end. "Right now everyone is focused on Gaza. And no one, if you recognise any kind of state - is going to think that this is about the West Bank. That's where the image of every country is going to be judged," he said. "Talk to you about domestic politics tomorrow," Seymour said in closing. On TVNZ's 1News , Simon Mercep highlighted another practical problem. "All five permanent members of the UN Security Council. - America, Russia, China, France and the UK - have to agree on statehood. "Israel's major ally, the US, does not agree. It used its veto as recently as last year." It wasn't much mentioned in the media this past week, but the veto right is something that New Zealand has long opposed. Back in 2012, foreign minister Murray McCully called on the five permanent members to give up their veto rights issues involving atrocities. He said the inability to act in Syria had "cost the UN credibility in the eyes of fair-minded people around the world". Three years later, he said that the Security Council was failing to prevent conflict - and during a stint chairing the Security Council later that year (when New Zealand was a non permanent member for two years) McCully criticised it again. The government paid for New Zealand journalists to travel to the UN at the time to watch sessions chaired by New Zealand. In late 2016, New Zealand co-sponsored a UN resolution that said Israeli settlements in the occupied territories had no legal validity - and were dangerously imperilling the viability of the two-state solution." The resolution passed, Israel withdrew its ambassador here - and the incoming President Trump said "things will be different in the UN" after his first inauguration. "The position we adopted is totally in line with our long established policy on the Palestinian question," McCully said at the time, stuck to his guns. Back then he also said he hoped the attitude of Israel would eventually soften. Eight years later, it's the attitude of New Zealand's government - and its clarity on two-state solution - that seems to have diluted. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Israeli military prepares to relocate residents to southern Gaza, spokesperson says
A view of the destruction in the Gaza Strip, from a Jordanian military aircraft before the airdrop operation of aid over Gaza on 14 August, 2025. Photo: AFP/ Middle East Images - Faiz Abu Rmeleh The Israeli military will provide Gaza residents with tents and other equipment starting from Sunday ahead of relocating them from combat zones to "safe" ones in the south of the enclave, military spokesperson Avichay Adraee says. This comes days after Israel said it intended to launch a new offensive to seize control of northern Gaza City, the enclave's largest urban centre, in a plan that raised international alarm over the fate of the demolished strip, home to about 2.2 million people. The equipment will be transferred via the Israeli crossing of Kerem Shalom by the United Nations and other international relief organisations after being thoroughly inspected by defence ministry personnel, Adraee added in a post on X. Israel's COGAT, the military agency that coordinates aid, did not immediately respond to a request for comment on whether the preparations were part of the new plan. Taking over the city of about 1 million Palestinians complicates ceasefire efforts to end the nearly two-year war, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu follows through with his plan to take on Hamas' two remaining strongholds. Netanyahu said Israel had no choice but to complete the job and defeat Hamas as the Palestinian militant group has refused to lay down its arms. Hamas said it would not disarm unless an independent Palestinian state was established. Israel already controls about 75 percent of Gaza. Protesters against Israel's war in Wellington, 16 August 2025. Photo: RNZ / Mark Papalii The war began when Hamas attacked southern Israel in October 2023 , killing 1200 and taking about 250 hostages, according to Israeli tallies. Israeli authorities say 20 of the remaining 50 hostages in Gaza are alive. Israel's subsequent military assault has killed over 61,000 Palestinians, Gaza's health ministry says. It has also caused a hunger crisis, internally displaced Gaza's entire population and prompted accusations of genocide at the International Court of Justice and of war crimes at the International Criminal Court. Israel denies the accusations. - Reuters
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Donald Trump tells Volodymyr Zelensky Russia is 'very big power' and Ukraine isn't
By Steve Holland, Andrew Osborn and Tom Balmforth , Reuters President Donald Trump's deadline for Russia to end its war in Ukraine or suffer severe economic punishment expires 8 August, but it's unclear how he plans to proceed amid new efforts toward a summit with Vladimir Putin and delicate trade negotiations with China. Photo: Reuters/Getty Images via CNN Newsource US President Donald Trump said on Saturday (local time) Ukraine should make a deal to end the war with Russia because "Russia is a very big power, and "they're not", after hosting a summit where Vladimir Putin was reported to have demanded more Ukrainian land. In a subsequent briefing with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, a source familiar with the discussion cited Trump as saying the Russian leader had offered to freeze most front lines if Kyiv's forces ceded all of Donetsk, the industrial region that is one of Moscow's main targets. Zelensky rejected the demand, the source said. Russia already controls a fifth of Ukraine, including about three-quarters of Donetsk province, which it first entered in 2014. Trump also said he had agreed with Putin that a peace deal should be sought without the prior ceasefire that Ukraine and its European allies, until now with US support, have demanded. Zelensky said he would meet Trump in Washington on Monday, while Kyiv's European allies welcomed Trump's efforts but vowed to back Ukraine and tighten sanctions on Russia. The source said European leaders had also been invited to attend those talks. Trump's meeting with Putin in Alaska on Friday (local time), the first US-Russia summit since Moscow launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, lasted just three hours. "It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up," Trump posted on Truth Social. His various comments on the meeting mostly aligned with the public positions of Moscow, which says it wants a full settlement - not a pause - but that this will be complex because positions are "diametrically opposed". Russia has been gradually advancing for months. The war - the deadliest in Europe for 80 years - has killed or wounded well over a million people from both sides, including thousands of mostly Ukrainian civilians, according to analysts. Before the summit, Trump had said he would not be happy unless a ceasefire was agreed on. But afterwards he said that, after Monday's talks with Zelensky, "if all works out, we will then schedule a meeting with President Putin". Those talks will evoke memories of a meeting in the White House Oval Office in February, where Trump and Vice President JD Vance gave Zelensky a brutal public dressing-down . Zelensky said he was willing to meet Putin. But Putin signalled no movement in Russia's long-held demands, which also include a veto on membership of the NATO alliance, and made no mention in public of meeting Zelensky. His aide Yuri Ushakov said a three-way summit had not been discussed. In an interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity, Trump signalled that he and Putin had discussed land transfers and security guarantees for Ukraine, and had "largely agreed". "I think we're pretty close to a deal," he said, adding: "Ukraine has to agree to it. Maybe they'll say 'no'." Asked what he would advise Zelensky to do, Trump said: "Gotta make a deal." "Look, Russia is a very big power, and they're not," he added. Zelensky has consistently said he cannot concede territory without changes to Ukraine's constitution, and Kyiv sees Donetsk's "fortress cities" such as Sloviansk and Kramatorsk as a bulwark against Russian advances into even more regions. Zelensky has also insisted on security guarantees, to deter Russia from invading again in the future. He said he and Trump had discussed "positive signals from the American side" on taking part, and that Ukraine needed a lasting peace, not "just another pause" between Russian invasions. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said the most interesting developments concerned security guarantees - inspired by NATO's Article 5. "The starting point of the proposal is the definition of a collective security clause that would allow Ukraine to benefit from the support of all its partners, including the US, ready to take action in case it is attacked again," she said. Putin, who has hitherto opposed involving foreign ground forces, said he agreed with Trump that Ukraine's security must be "ensured". "I would like to hope that the understanding we have reached will allow us to get closer to that goal and open the way to peace in Ukraine," Putin told a briefing where neither leader took questions. "We expect that Kyiv and the European capitals... will not attempt to disrupt the emerging progress..." For Putin, the very fact of sitting down with Trump represented a victory. He had been ostracised by Western leaders since the start of the war, and just a week earlier had faced a threat of new sanctions from Trump . Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer (L) walks with Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky in the garden of 10 Downing Street in central London, on 14 August, 2025. Photo: BEN STANSALL / POOL / AFP Trump also spoke to European leaders after returning to Washington. Several stressed the need to keep pressure on Russia. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said an end to the war was closer than ever, thanks to Trump, but added: "... until [Putin] stops his barbaric assault, we will keep tightening the screws on his war machine with even more sanctions." A statement from European leaders said "Ukraine must have ironclad security guarantees" and that no limits should be placed on its armed forces or right to seek NATO membership - key Russian demands. Some European politicians and commentators were scathing. "Putin got his red carpet treatment with Trump, while Trump got nothing. As feared: no ceasefire, no peace," Wolfgang Ischinger, former German ambassador to Washington, posted on X. "No real progress ' a clear 1-0 for Putin ' no new sanctions. For the Ukrainians: nothing. For Europe: deeply disappointing." Both Russia and Ukraine carried out overnight air attacks, a daily occurrence, while fighting raged on the front. Trump told Fox he would postpone imposing tariffs on China for buying Russian oil, but that he might have to "think about it" in two or three weeks. He ended his remarks after the summit by telling Putin: "We'll speak to you very soon and probably see you again very soon." "Next time in Moscow," a smiling Putin responded in English. Trump said he might "get a little heat on that one" but that he could "possibly see it happening". - Reuters
