Israeli ex-security chiefs urge Trump to help end Gaza war
Photo:
AFP
Hundreds of retired Israeli security officials including former heads of intelligence agencies have urged US President Donald Trump to pressure their own government to end the war in Gaza.
"It is our professional judgement that Hamas no longer poses a strategic threat to Israel," the former officials wrote in an open letter shared with the media on Monday.
"At first this war was a just war, a defensive war, but when we achieved all military objectives, this war ceased to be a just war," said Ami Ayalon, former director of the Shin Bet security service.
The war, nearing its 23rd month, "is leading the State of Israel to lose its security and identity," Ayalon warned in a video released to accompany the letter.
Signed by 550 people, including former chiefs of Shin Bet and the Mossad spy agency, the letter called on Trump to "steer" Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu towards a ceasefire.
Israel launched its military operation in the Gaza Strip in response to the deadly 7 October, 2023 attack by Palestinian militant group Hamas.
In recent weeks Israel has come under increasing international pressure to agree a ceasefire that could Israeli hostages released from Gaza and UN agencies distribute humanitarian aid.
But some in Israel, including ministers in Netanyahu's coalition government, are instead pushing for Israeli forces to push on and for Gaza to be occupied in whole or in part.
The letter was signed by three former Mossad heads: Tamir Pardo, Efraim Halevy and Danny Yatom.
Others signatories include five former heads of Shin Bet -- Αyalon as well as Nadav Argaman, Yoram Cohen, Yaakov Peri and Carmi Gilon -- and three former military chiefs of staff, including former prime minister Ehud Barak, former defence minister Moshe Yaalon and Dan Halutz.
The letter argued that the Israeli military "has long accomplished the two objectives that could be achieved by force: dismantling Hamas's military formations and governance".
"The third, and most important, can only be achieved through a deal: bringing all the hostages home," it added.
"Chasing remaining senior Hamas operatives can be done later," the letter said.
In the letter, the former officials tell Trump that he has credibility with the majority of Israelis and can put pressure on Netanyahu to end the war and return the hostages.
After a ceasefire, the signatories argue, Trump could force a regional coalition to support a reformed Palestinian Authority to take charge of Gaza as an alternative to Hamas rule.
- AFP
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
1News
6 minutes ago
- 1News
Full video: Trump speaks on Apple investment, Russia moves
US President Donald Trump is speaking from the Oval Office after signing an executive order to place an additional 25% tariff on India for its purchases of Russian oil. That brings the combined tariffs imposed by the United States on its ally to 50%. He is also discussing a US$600 billion investment from tech company Apple in production within the US. The tariffs comes after Russian President Vladimir Putin held talks with Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff in Moscow this morning, days before the White House's deadline for Russia to reach a peace deal with Ukraine or potentially face severe economic penalties that could also hit countries buying its oil. The tariffs would go into effect 21 days after the signing of the order, meaning that both India and Russia might have time to negotiate with the administration on the import taxes. ADVERTISEMENT Trump's moves could scramble the economic trajectory of India, which until recently was seen as an alternative to China by American companies looking to relocate their manufacturing. China also buys oil from Russia, but it was not included in the order signed by the Republican president.
RNZ News
2 hours ago
- RNZ News
Trump's relentless tariff strategy finally crashes into delicate geopolitical reality
By Phil Mattingley , CNN US President Donald Trump delivers remarks on reciprocal tariffs during an event in the Rose Garden at the White House in Washington, DC, on April 2, 2025. Photo: AFP / Brendan Smialowski Analysis : President Donald Trump's relentless use of tariffs to coerce foreign counterparts into favourable deals is about to run headlong into the limits of geopolitical reality. Trump's willingness to dramatically escalate the long-running US economic warfare in response to Russia's war on Ukraine is real, advisors say. His threat to accelerate sweeping tariffs on India is certain to come to fruition, they insist. But he also faces the backdrop of a looming deadline to extend a trade truce with the world's second-largest economy that requires a degree of caution as White House deliberations come to a head. "He's pissed," one person close to Trump said of his rapidly deteriorating view of Russian President Vladimir Putin in recent weeks. "But he's also aware of the competing priorities here." Trump faces a unique challenge balancing all of his simultaneous demands: He is threatening punishing sanctions on the Russian energy production that serves as the financial linchpin of Putin's war machine at the same moment he is seeking leverage in trade talks with India while maintaining a fragile trade détente with China. The convergence of conflicting priorities has driven intensive discussions inside the West Wing about the range and scope of the options Trump could trigger as soon as today - and put a significant amount of weight on the meeting between Putin and Steve Witkoff, his trusted foreign envoy , underway in Moscow. Trump has threatened sweeping secondary sanctions on Russian energy that would primarily hit China and India, the two largest purchasers of Russian energy . But he's also considering more tailored options, including sanctions that target specific tankers - known inside the government as the "shadow fleet" - that are utilised to skirt the existing Western sanctions regime in the transport of Russian oil, two US officials with the knowledge of the matter said. Russia's President Vladimir Putin Photo: AFP The Biden administration's evolving sanctions actions found success in blacklisting the vessels critical to Putin's sanctions evasion efforts. Secondary sanctions tailored specifically to India in some form have also been discussed, the officials said. Trump feels empowered to trigger those secondary sanctions that were long weighed by his predecessor, but never deployed due to soaring inflation and concerns about a significant increase in domestic gas prices. That is a problem Trump simply doesn't have right now, as waning global demand and a steady increase in output by the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries and their allies have mitigated the concern about the energy price spikes that bedevilled the Biden administration. For the Trump administration, that has created leverage as frustration with Putin's refusal to come to the table has dashed Trump's envisioned quick end to the three-plus year conflict. Those dynamics also played directly into the recent breakdown in long running and intense trade negotiations between the US and India, advisors say. While there is obvious overlap between Trump's escalating threats targeting Russia and his explicit warnings about India's energy purchases , the dispute with the world's fifth-largest economy is specific to the trade talks, the officials say. "We consider a wide range of options, but this is a situation more of convenient coincidence than overarching strategic long-game," one of the officials said. Donald Trump and India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi has soured compared with this warm embrace in February 2020. Photo: Mandel Ngan / AFP Trump has acknowledged as much. "The sticking point with India is that tariffs are too high," Trump said in an interview on Tuesday with CNBC. Peter Navarro, Trump's senior counselor for trade and manufacturing, has called India as "the Maharaja of tariffs," underscoring a long-running view that India's expansive protection of its domestic markets has been a significant frustration for Trump and his trade team. As the clock ticked toward Trump's 1 August "reciprocal" tariff deadline and foreign partners offered significant concessions on US market access, India was a notable exception, officials said. "The president wanted deals that substantially opened markets - everything or near everything," a senior administration official said. "They were interested in opening some of their markets, but not nearly ambitious enough to meet the president's view of what would constitute a good deal." So while India's purchases of Russian energy and Russian military equipment was well known on the periphery, Trump elevated those friction points to the forefront as he sought to pressure Indian negotiators, the official said. Any large-scale effort to trigger secondary sanctions, however, would crash directly into the delicate maintenance of US-China trade talks which have seen both countries utilise economic statecraft, sanctions and export controls to exert or ease pressure on the bilateral relationship over the course of months. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent warned his Chinese counterparts directly, during the third round of face-to-face talks last week, that Trump was serious about secondary sanctions and it was something Chinese officials needed to prepare for in the weeks ahead. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent at the White House. Photo: MANDEL NGAN/AFP But as US and Chinese officials have quietly continued discussions over the technical details of an agreement to extend their existing trade truce, the concern about the impact secondary sanctions would have on those dynamics has been a factor inside the administration, officials say. Trump has yet to officially sign off on an extension, even as his top advisors made clear it was only a matter of time before Trump blesses it. For Trump, who has operated throughout his second term in a perpetual state of running deadlines, that clock is ticking concurrently with his deadline for Putin. The decision on the latter now weighs heavily on the status of the former. -CNN
NZ Herald
2 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Eighty years after Hiroshima, Japan debates military expansion and pacifism
The destruction of the two cities was followed by Japan's submission days later, ending its decades of brutal conquest. However, the bombings also announced a more terrifying age in which human innovation could spark death and destruction on a previously unimaginable scale. As the flattened city of Hiroshima was rebuilt, it dedicated itself to promoting peace. Survivors of the atomic bombing have campaigned for a world free of nuclear weapons. But 80 years on, that dream is fading. Three of Japan's neighbours – Russia, China and North Korea – are nuclear powers, and Tokyo depends on the American nuclear umbrella to protect it. With tensions in the Pacific heightening and firsthand memories of nuclear devastation waning, more Japanese are questioning the national commitment to peace at all costs. Why did Japan go all-in on pacifism after World War II? The Americans forced it to. The Imperial Japanese Armed Forces' harsh invasion of much of Asia, its shock attack on Pearl Harbour and its willingness to sacrifice a generation of young soldiers for the empire, made the victorious Americans adamant that the country should never again wage war. Japan's so-called 'peace constitution', drafted by the Americans who occupied the country for nearly seven years, forever renounced war. Its Article 9 has been interpreted to mean that Japan should never possess a military with offensive capabilities. In return, the US promised to defend Japan should it come under attack. The security treaty made Japan a beneficiary of the theory of nuclear deterrence, in which the fear of nuclear retaliation is thought to deter a first-strike attack. So why does Japan have a military? To take into account these constitutional limitations, Japan's military is called the Self-Defence Forces. It cannot take on combat roles in international conflicts. That hasn't stopped Japan from expanding its arsenal to counter potential threats from Asian neighbours such as China that, in turn, worry about Japan's rearmament, given its wartime record. If budget hikes continue, Japan will soon be among the world's top military spenders. All of this modern hardware is supposed to be only for defensive purposes, although a debate in Japan about its global military profile has been getting louder. What do Japanese think of their country's rearming? While many in the older generations worry about Japan's waning commitment to pacifism, younger Japanese tend to be more sanguine. Supporters of a military expansion say Japan shouldn't be forced into a defensive crouch forever, especially with security threats ratcheting up in the Pacific. In addition to superpower jousting, Japan has territorial disputes with China, Russia and the two Koreas. They worry that the US may not always be a constant security guarantor for Japan, especially under President Donald Trump, who has criticised Japan for relying too heavily on the presence of US military bases. And with first-hand memories of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki disappearing, most Japanese are now removed from the kind of searing testimony that underwrote the country's pacifist, non-nuclear stance. Nippon Kaigi, an ultra-nationalist political bloc that aims to revise Article 9 of the constitution, has significant support among lawmakers from the governing Liberal Democratic Party. Amending the constitution was once unthinkable; it's now a political talking point. What about nukes? Nihon Hidankyo, a group representing atomic bomb survivors, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize last year for its campaign to rid the world of nuclear weapons. However, Japan has never signed the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. In 2023, Fumio Kishida, then the Prime Minister of Japan, whose family is from Hiroshima, supported a statement at a Group of Seven summit he hosted in the city that implied nuclear deterrence might bring its own kind of peace. Kishida's stance reflects a growing feeling in Japan that while nuclear weapons are dangerous and their eradication is a noble ideal, the real world also requires deterrence and robust defence. This article originally appeared in The New York Times. Written by: Hannah Beech Photograph by: Chang W. Lee ©2025 THE NEW YORK TIMES
