Satellite images show Israel building up forces for a possible ground invasion of Gaza, sources say
The images show troop movements and formations that the four sources recognized as signs of an imminent major ground operation.
It is not clear whether the Israelis really intend to begin a new offensive in Gaza or whether the move is a negotiating or pressure tactic.
If there is a new military operation, it could include efforts to retrieve hostages held by Hamas and expand humanitarian assistance in areas outside the fighting, the three U.S. officials and a person briefed on Israeli discussions said. Israeli troops have been conducting ground operations in Gaza since Oct. 27, 2023, with pauses during two ceasefires.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Thursday on Fox News that Israel intended to take control of all of Gaza. "We intend to, in order to assure our security, remove Hamas there, enable the population to be free of Gaza and to pass it to civilian governance that is not Hamas and not anyone advocating the destruction of Israel. That's what we want to do."
Pressed again on that point, specifically on whether he meant Israel would "take control of the entire 26-mile Gaza Strip," Netanyahu said: "Well, we don't want to keep it. We want to have a security perimeter. We don't want to govern it."
The troop buildup comes during a tense time in relations between the United States and Israel. On July 28, Netanyahu and President Donald Trump had a private phone conversation that devolved into shouting amid White House concerns over how the Gaza Humanitarian Fund, a U.S.- and Israel-backed relief effort, is working, according to a senior U.S. official, two former U.S. officials and a Western official who were briefed on the matter.
The recent flare-up of tensions between Trump and Netanyahu began July 27. Appearing at an event in Jerusalem that day, Netanyahu said: "There is no policy of starvation in Gaza. And there is no starvation in Gaza."
When Trump was asked about those comments the next day during a trip to Scotland, he contradicted Netanyahu. He said that he had seen images of children in Gaza who "look very hungry," that there is "real starvation" there and that "you can't fake that."
Netanyahu then privately demanded a phone call with Trump, the senior U.S. official and the former U.S. official briefed on the call said. The two leaders were connected within hours, those two officials said.
Netanyahu told Trump on the phone that widespread starvation in Gaza is not real and that it had been fabricated by Hamas, said the senior U.S. official, two former U.S. officials and the Western official, all of whom were briefed on the call. Trump interrupted Netanyahu and began yelling, they said, saying that he did not want to hear that the starvation is fake and that his aides had shown him proof that children there are starving, they said.
White House officials declined to comment on the phone call. Israeli officials declined to comment.
One of the former U.S. officials briefed on the call described it as "a direct, mostly one-way conversation about the status of humanitarian aid" in which Trump "was doing most of the talking."
"The U.S. not only feels like the situation is dire, but they own it because of GHF," the former official said, referring to the Gaza Humanitarian Fund.
The phone call prompted a trip to the region last week by Steve Witkoff, the U.S. special envoy to the Middle East, to find a unified path forward in the war.
Israeli officials were pleased with Witkoff's visit, according to the Western official and the source briefed on Israeli discussions. The Israelis viewed everything from his body language to the questions he asked as indicators that they were able to effectively communicate the challenges Israel faces. The Israeli officials also addressed international criticism of GHF with Witkoff, explaining why, in their opinion, some critics want it to fail, the source briefed on Israeli discussions said.
GHF has been working in Gaza since May. It operates only in specific designated distribution sites that are far away from some Palestinians who need food, leading to large crowds that Israeli troops — who are stationed nearby — have at times fired upon. As of late July, more than 1,000 Palestinians had been killed while seeking food, according to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. GHF has been boycotted by the U.N., which has operated its own aid distribution network in Gaza.
Witkoff pressed officials about whether current relief efforts can meet ongoing need or should expand further, according to the source briefed on Israeli discussions.
Witkoff has since returned. He briefed Trump on his visit over dinner Monday night, according to a White House official. Their discussion included humanitarian aid in Gaza and Witkoff's meeting with Israeli officials and hostage families.
Asked by reporters Tuesday whether he would support Israel's occupying Gaza, Trump said he is focused on getting people there food. As for a military occupation, he said: "I really can't say. That's going to be pretty much up to Israel."
White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly told NBC News: "We do not comment on the President's private conversations. President Trump is focused on returning all the hostages and getting the people in Gaza fed."
A new Gaza ceasefire has proven elusive. Israel does not believe Hamas is motivated to negotiate the release of the remaining hostages, the source briefed on Israeli discussions and the Western official said, and it believes a military offensive is the likeliest option.
The international community has recently been heaping pressure on Israel, with the United Kingdom, France, Canada and others saying they may move to recognize a Palestinian state at the U.N. General Assembly in September.
"It seems like we are at a brick wall, with countries saying they are recognizing Palestine," said the person briefed on Israeli discussions. "Now all ideas are being exhausted."
The Western official said an offensive remains a very dangerous prospect for the Israeli military because Hamas is very dug in and there is "no chance they can kill every fighter."
The Western official added that there is concern that Hamas will kill hostages or put them in the way of fighting if it is threatened.
Israeli forces know the general area where all the hostages are, said the person briefed on Israeli discussions and the Western official, one of whom added that the belief is that area is in central Gaza.
"Looking at the condition of hostages, it's clear that they don't have much more time," one of the sources added in reference to a recent video of an emaciated Israeli hostage inside a cramped Gaza tunnel digging his own grave.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
28 minutes ago
- New York Post
America's openness leaves Mahmoud Khalil free — to abuse our freedoms
It's a shame we're still debating whether Mahmoud Khalil should be kicked out of the United States, because this hateful zealot should never have been allowed to step foot on American soil in the first place. Khalil, the former Columbia University graduate student who became a poster boy for critics of President Donald Trump's deportation policies, is back in the headlines this week for all the wrong reasons. In a high-profile interview with The New York Times' Ezra Klein, Khalil made a mockery of those who have insisted he's a well-intentioned humanitarian without animus toward anyone. 'It felt frightening that we had to reach this moment in the Palestinian struggle,' he said of Hamas' barbaric Oct. 7 attack on innocent Israeli civilians. Klein asked the gentlest possible follow-up: 'What do you mean we had to reach this moment?' 'Unfortunately, we couldn't avoid such a moment,' Khalil repeated. In a manner that would have been comical were it not for the horrific subject matter, Klein — ever so eager to vindicate his vile guest — afforded Khalil one more chance to describe the largest mass murder of Jews since the Holocaust in a way that didn't make it out to be a vital but tedious chore. But Khalil tripled down. It was, he said, a necessary evil to 'break the cycle' and 'tell the world that Palestinians are here,' you see. This came just weeks after Khalil refused not once, not twice, but three times to condemn Hamas when he appeared on CNN. 'I simply asked and protested the war in Palestine,' he said of the antisemitic uprising he helped lead on Columbia's campus. 'That's my duty as a Palestinian, as a human being right now, is to ask for the stop of the killing in my home country.' Critics exploded with righteous anger. 'Mahmoud Khalil has not been shy about his support for Hamas — a brutal terrorist organization that violently attacks innocent men, women, and children,' observed White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson. 'Calling the massacre of Israeli civilians a 'desperate attempt' is not political speech — it's moral depravity,' submitted NY state Assemblyman Ari Brown of Nassau County. 'Mahmoud Khalil must be immediately deported,' Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) declared. 'He is a chief pro-Hamas terrorist agitator.' The Trump administration has already tried. When Secretary of State Marco Rubio launched deportation proceedings against Khalil in March, he did so by claiming the then-student's anti-Israel protests on Columbia's campus 'undermine US policy to combat antisemitism around the world and in the United States.' Yet even many of Khalil's critics chafed at the federal government targeting a legal resident and green card holder for offensive speech — and a New Jersey court forced his release. The First Amendment is, after all, among Americans' most cherished inheritances. Many free-speech champions expressed reasonable concern that removing Khalil might open the door to a slippery slope of censorship. That concern, though, elides the all-important threshold question: Why was Khalil ever allowed into the United States at all? There are legal, prudential and philosophical arguments for granting all legal residents the powerful protections of the First Amendment. But there's nothing in the Constitution — nor embedded in our longstanding American values — that compels this country to admit hateful ideologues. Khalil is a 30-year-old man harboring palpable bigotries ('Having lived in the Middle East most of my life, unfortunately, the only Jew you hear about is the one who's trying to kill you,' he explained to Klein), and a tribal loyalty that blinds him to the basic moral principles underpinning American life. Not to mention his unfriendly feelings toward the United States itself. 'I had my own reservations about the impact of America on me,' he told Klein smugly. 'As a Palestinian or as a Syrian refugee in Lebanon, America's influence in the Middle East was very negative.' The United States is an open-minded, benevolent nation predisposed to accepting people of myriad cultures from across the globe. That's an honorable instinct, and most of the time it's the right one. But a line has to be drawn to protect the national interest. And if that line is so weak and vague as to permit the entry of someone unable to condemn kidnapping, torture, murder and rape for political purposes, it's no line at all. It's 'Give me your tired, your poor / Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,' as Emma Lazarus put it. Not 'Give me your bigots, your knaves / Your privileged yearning to drive Jews into the sea.' Now that he's here, Khalil has the right to promote his hateful, anti-American worldview in as many 'progressive' media outlets as are willing to amplify it. But he does so as a living testament to both the virtues of America — and the failures of its immigration system. Isaac Schorr is a staff writer at Mediaite.
Chicago Tribune
28 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
A look at colleges with federal money targeted by the Trump administration
Several elite U.S. colleges have made deals with President Donald Trump's administration, offering concessions to his political agenda and financial payments to restore federal money that had been withheld. Ivy League schools Columbia, Brown and the University of Pennsylvania reached agreements to resolve federal investigations. The Republican administration is pressing for more, citing the deal it negotiated with Columbia as a 'road map' for other colleges. There is a freeze on billions of dollars of research money for other colleges including Harvard, which has been negotiating with the White House even as it fights in court over the lost grants. And on Friday, a White House official said the Trump administration is seeking a $1 billion settlement from the the University of California, Los Angeles. Like no other president, Trump has used the government's control over federal research funding to push for changes in higher education, decrying elite colleges as places of extreme liberal ideology and antisemitism. Here's a look at universities pressured by the administration's funding cuts. Columbia said on July 23 that it had agreed to a $200 million fine to restore federal funding. The school was threatened with the potential loss of billions of dollars in government support, including more than $400 million in grants canceled earlier this year. The administration pulled the money because of what it described as Columbia's failure to address antisemitism on campus during the Israel-Hamas war. Columbia agreed to administration demands such as overhauling its student disciplinary process and applying a federally backed definition of antisemitism to teaching and a disciplinary committee investigating students critical of Israel. Federal officials said the fine will go to the Treasury Department and cannot be spent until Congress appropriates it. Columbia also agreed to pay $21 million into a compensation fund for employees who may have faced antisemitism. The deal includes a clause that Columbia says preserves its independence, putting in writing that the government does not have the authority to dictate 'hiring, admission decisions, or the content of academic speech.' An agreement last month calls for Brown to pay $50 million to Rhode Island workforce development organizations. That would restore dozens of lost federal research grants and end investigations into allegations of antisemitism and racial bias in Brown admissions. Among other concessions, Brown agreed to adopt the government's definition of 'male' and 'female' and remove any consideration of race from the admissions process. Like the settlement with Columbia, Brown's does not include a finding of wrongdoing. It includes a provision saying the government does not have authority to dictate Brown's curriculum or 'the content of academic speech.' The Trump administration suspended $584 million in federal grants to UCLA, the university said this week, after the Department of Justice said the college had violated civil rights 'by acting with deliberate indifference in creating a hostile educational environment for Jewish and Israeli students.' On Friday, a White House official said the Trump administration was seeking a $1 billion settlement from the university. The official was not authorized to speak publicly about the request and spoke on the condition of anonymity. UCLA is the first public university to have its federal grants targeted by the administration over alleged civil rights violations. Under a July agreement resolving a federal civil rights case, Penn modified three school records set by transgender swimmer Lia Thomas and said it would apologize to female athletes 'disadvantaged' by Thomas' participation on the women's swimming team. The Education Department investigated Penn as part of the administration's broader attempt to remove transgender athletes from girls and women's sports. As part of the case, the administration had suspended $175 million in funding to Penn. The administration has frozen more than $2.6 billion in research grants to Harvard, accusing the nation's oldest and wealthiest university of allowing antisemitism to flourish. Harvard has pushed back with several lawsuits. In negotiations for a possible settlement, the administration is seeking for Harvard to pay an amount far higher than Columbia. The White House announced in April that it froze more than $1 billion of Cornell's federal funding as it investigated allegations of civil rights violations. The Ivy League school was among a group of more than 60 universities that received a letter from the Education Department on March 10 urging them to take steps to protect Jewish students or else face 'potential enforcement actions.' Like Cornell, Northwestern saw a halt in some of its federal funding in April. The amount was about $790 million, according to the administration. The administration this week froze $108 million in federal money for Duke. The hold on funding from the National Institutes of Health came days after the departments of Health and Human Services and Education sent a joint letter alleging racial preferences in Duke's hiring and admissions. Dozens of research grants were suspended at Princeton without a clear rationale, according to an April 1 campus message from the university's president, Christopher Eisgruber. The grants came from federal agencies such as the Department of Energy, NASA and the Pentagon.
The Hill
28 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump wages war on renewables
The moves are expected to create issues for the renewable energy industry, ones critics argue could raise power prices. President Trump's tax and spending megabill slashed incentives for wind and solar energy that were part of the Democrats' 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, which is expected to significantly stifle the build-out of the growing industry. And in recent weeks, his administration has taken further actions to hamper wind and solar power. To catch you up: Shortly after the bill passed, Trump directed the Treasury Department to take a strict approach in limiting which projects are eligible for the remaining tax credits. The Interior Department also recently announced it would subject wind and solar projects to an elevated review process — a move that was expected to slow down their approvals. Last week, Interior said it would try to block projects that take up a lot of room, which is expected to primarily hurt solar and wind projects. The department said last week that it would weigh 'whether to stop onshore wind development on some federal lands and halting future offshore wind lease sales.' It also moved this week to try to cancel an already approved wind project in Idaho. The Environmental Protection Agency separately announced Thursday it would move to claw back funds under a $7 billion rooftop solar program. The Interior Department's elevated review processes are expected to pertain not only to wind and solar farm approvals but also include a wide range of activities such as grants and assessments of endangered species impacts. Ben Norris, vice president of regulatory affairs with the Solar Energy Industry Association, said he expects some of these reviews would not only delay projects on public lands but could have similar effects on projects on private lands. 'We are hearing about dozens, if not hundreds of projects in the aggregate that otherwise are totally sited on private lands, totally permitted by state and local authorities, but that the Interior Department seems to have found a way to put into limbo, at least for a time,' Norris told The Hill.
