Gideon Sa'ar welcomes Syria's participation in EU-Middle East Meeting
Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar said on Monday that Israel welcomes the participation of Syria in the EU-Middle East meeting in Brussels.
"We welcome the participation of the Syrian minister. We will be together in the same meeting. Let's see what will happen," Sa'ar told reporters ahead of Monday's meeting.
Sa'ar's announcement on Monday comes two weeks after he said that Israel was interested in establishing official diplomatic relations with Syria, as well as Lebanon. However, the foreign minister specified that regarding Syria, Israel will not negotiate the Golan Heights in any peace agreement.
Days before Sa'ar announced Israel's interest in diplomatic ties, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said that the Trump administration is expecting Syria to be one of the next countries to join the Abraham Accords.
"The president is certainly hopeful that more countries in the region will sign on to the Abraham Accords," she said.
In late May, EU ambassadors reportedly reached an agreement to lift sanctions on Syria.
Kaja Kallas, the high representative of the union for foreign affairs and security policy, had said earlier that she hoped EU foreign ministers would agree in Brussels to lift sanctions, adding that, "we want to ensure that the Syrian people have job opportunities and livelihoods so that the country becomes more stable.'
Seth J. Frantzman contributed to this report.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
AFP journalists sound alarm about dire conditions faced by hungry colleagues in Gaza
A group of journalists at the Agence France-Presse news agency is sounding the alarm about conditions faced by colleagues working in Gaza, saying that 'without immediate intervention, the last reporters in Gaza will die.' In a war-torn territory where Israel generally forbids outside journalists to enter, international news organizations like AFP, The Associated Press and Reuters rely on local teams to get out the news. They've been hampered by safety concerns and hunger in Gaza, where an estimated 59,000 people have died in the 21-month conflict, according to local health authorities. The Society of Journalists at AFP, an association of professionals at the news agency, detailed what their Gaza colleagues are facing. AFP's management said Tuesday that it shares concerns about the 'appalling' situation and is working to evacuate its freelancers and their families. 'For months, we have watched helplessly as their living conditions deteriorated dramatically,' AFP said in a statement. 'Their situation is now untenable, despite their exemplary courage, professional commitment, and resilience.' ADVERTISEMENT One of AFP's photographers, identified as Bashar, sent a message on social media over the weekend that 'I no longer have the strength to work for the media. My body is thin and I can't work anymore.' Bashar has been working for AFP since 2010. Since February, he's been living in the ruins of his home in Gaza City with his mother and other family members, and said one of his brothers had died of hunger, according to the journalists' group. The journalists receive a monthly salary from AFP, but exorbitant prices leave them unable to purchase much food. Another AFP worker, Ahlam, said that every time she leaves her shelter to cover an event or do an interview, 'I don't know if I'll come back alive.' Her biggest issue is the lack of food and water, she said. Since AFP was founded in 1944, the Society of Journalists said that 'we have lost journalists in conflicts, some have been injured, others taken prisoner. But none of us can ever remember seeing colleagues die of hunger.' ADVERTISEMENT 'We refuse to watch them die,' the society said. AFP has been working with one freelance writer, three photographers, and six freelance videographers in Gaza since its staff journalists left in 2024. Representatives for the AP and Reuters also expressed concern for their teams there, but would not say how many people are working for them. 'We are deeply concerned about our staff in Gaza and are doing everything in our power to support them,' said Lauren Easton, a spokeswoman for The Associated Press. 'We are very proud of the work our team continues to do under dire circumstances to keep the world informed about what is happening on the ground.' Reuters said that it is in daily contact with its freelance journalists, and that 'the extreme difficulty sourcing food is leading to their and all Gaza residents experiencing greater levels of hunger and illness.' The agency said it is providing extra money to help them. 'Should they with to leave the territory, we will provide any assistance to help get them out,' Reuters said. ___ David Bauder writes about media for the AP. Follow him at and
New York Times
19 minutes ago
- New York Times
No, Israel Is Not Committing Genocide in Gaza
It may seem harsh to say, but there is a glaring dissonance to the charge that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. To wit: If the Israeli government's intentions and actions are truly genocidal — if it is so malevolent that it is committed to the annihilation of Gazans — why hasn't it been more methodical and vastly more deadly? Why not, say, hundreds of thousands of deaths, as opposed to the nearly 60,000 that Gaza's Hamas-run Health Ministry, which does not distinguish between combatant and civilian deaths, has cited so far in nearly two years of war? It's not that Israel lacks the capacity to have meted vastly greater destruction than what it has inflicted so far. It is the leading military power of its region, stronger now that it has decimated Hezbollah and humbled Iran. It could have bombed without prior notice, instead of routinely warning Gazans to evacuate areas it intended to strike. It could have bombed without putting its own soldiers, hundreds of whom have died in combat, at risk. It isn't that Israel has been deterred from striking harder by the presence of its hostages in Gaza. Israeli intelligence is said to have a fairly good idea of where those hostages are being held, which is one reason, with tragic exceptions, relatively few have died from Israeli fire. And it knows that, as brutal as the hostages' captivity has been, Hamas has an interest in keeping them alive. Nor is it that Israel lacks diplomatic cover. President Trump has openly envisaged requiring all Gazans to leave the territory, repeatedly warning that 'all hell' would break out in Gaza if Hamas didn't return the hostages. As for the threat of economic boycotts, the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange has been the world's best-performing major stock index since Oct. 7. 2023. With due respect to the risk of Irish boycotts, Israel is not a country facing a fundamental economic threat. If anything, it's the boycotters who stand to suffer. In short, the first question the anti-Israel genocide chorus needs to answer is: Why isn't the death count higher? The answer, of course, is that Israel is manifestly not committing genocide, a legally specific and morally freighted term that is defined by the United Nations convention on genocide as the 'intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such.' Note the words 'intent' and 'as such.' Genocide does not mean simply 'too many civilian deaths' — a heartbreaking fact of nearly every war, including the one in Gaza. It means seeking to exterminate a category of people for no other reason than that they belong to that category: the Nazis and their partners killing Jews in the Holocaust because they were Jews or the Hutus slaughtering the Tutsis in the Rwandan genocide because they were Tutsi. When Hamas invaded on Oct. 7, intentionally butchering families in their homes and young people at a music festival, they also murdered Israelis 'as such.' By contrast, the fact that over a million German civilians died in World War II — thousands of them in appalling bombings of cities like Hamburg and Dresden — made them victims of war but not of genocide. The aim of the Allies was to defeat the Nazis for leading Germany into war, not to wipe out Germans simply for being German. In response, Israel's inveterate critics note the scale of destruction in Gaza. They also point to a handful of remarks by a few Israeli politicians dehumanizing Gazans and promising brutal retaliation. But furious comments in the wake of Hamas's Oct. 7 atrocities hardly amount to a Wannsee conference, and I am aware of no evidence of an Israeli plan to deliberately target and kill Gazan civilians. As for the destruction in Gaza, it is indeed immense. There are important questions to be asked about the tactics Israel has used, most recently when it comes to the chaotic food distribution system it has attempted to set up as a way of depriving Hamas of control of the food supply. And hardly any military in history has gone to war without at least some of its soldiers committing war crimes. That includes Israel in this war — and America in nearly all of our wars, including World War II, when some of our greatest generation bombed schools accidentally or murdered P.O.W.s in cold blood. But bungled humanitarian schemes or trigger-happy soldiers or strikes that hit the wrong target or politicians reaching for vengeful sound bites do not come close to adding up to genocide. They are war in its usual tragic dimensions. What is unusual about Gaza is the cynical and criminal way Hamas has chosen to wage war. In Ukraine, when Russia attacks with missiles, drones or artillery, civilians go underground while the Ukrainian military stays aboveground to fight. In Gaza, it's the reverse: Hamas hides and feeds and preserves itself in its vast warren of tunnels rather than open them to civilians for protection. These tactics, which are war crimes in themselves, make it difficult for Israel to achieve its war aims: the return of its hostages and the elimination of Hamas as a military and political force so that Israel may never again be threatened with another Oct. 7. Those twin aims were and remain entirely justifiable — and would bring the killing in Gaza to an end if Hamas simply handed over the hostages and surrendered. Those are demands one almost never hears from Israel's supposedly evenhanded accusers. It's also worth asking how the United States would operate in similar circumstances. As it happens, we know. In 2016 and 2017, under Barack Obama and Trump, the United States aided the government of Iraq in retaking the city of Mosul, which was captured by the Islamic State three years earlier and turned into a booby-trapped, underground fortress. Here's a description in The Times of the way the war was waged to eliminate ISIS. As Iraqi forces have advanced, American airstrikes have at times leveled entire blocks — including the one in Mosul Jidideh this month that residents said left as many as 200 civilians dead. At the same time, the Islamic State fighters have used masses of civilians as human shields, and have been indiscriminate about sniper and mortar fire. This fight, carried out over nine months, had broad bipartisan and international support. By some estimates, it left as many as 11,000 civilians dead. I don't recall any campus protests. Some readers may say that even if the war in Gaza isn't genocide, it has gone on too long and needs to end. That's a fair point of view, shared by a majority of Israelis. So why does the argument over the word 'genocide' matter? Two reasons. First, while some pundits and scholars may sincerely believe the genocide charge, it is also used by anti-Zionists and antisemites to equate modern Israel with Nazi Germany. The effect is to license a new wave of Jew hatred, stirring enmity not only for the Israeli government but also for any Jew who supports Israel as a genocide supporter. It's a tactic Israel haters have pursued for years with inflated or bogus charges of Israeli massacres or war crimes that, on close inspection, weren't. The genocide charge is more of the same but with deadlier effects. Second, if genocide — a word that was coined only in the 1940s — is to retain its status as a uniquely horrific crime, then the term can't be promiscuously applied to any military situation we don't like. Wars are awful enough. But the abuse of the term 'genocide' runs the risk of ultimately blinding us to real ones when they unfold. The war in Gaza should be brought to an end in a way that ensures it is never repeated. To call it a genocide does nothing to advance that aim, except to dilute the meaning of a word we cannot afford to cheapen. The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We'd like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here's our email: letters@ Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Bluesky, WhatsApp and Threads.
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Reworked F-35 Pitched As ‘Bridging Fighter' Ahead Of F-47
Taiclet then moved on to the company's proposal to provide the F-35 with a range of potential modifications to create what was previously referred to as a 'Ferrari' or 'NASCAR upgrade' to the F-35's core 'chassis.' The company is now increasingly describing this initiative as a 'fifth-generation-plus' development of the basic F-35. As to what comes next for the F-35, Taiclet said he was 'very, very confident that the F-35 is here to stay and here to stay for a long time,' recalling that fact that it is the 'only fifth-generation fighter aircraft in production today in the free world.' Taiclet noted that, as well as air-to-ground, the F-35 has, in recent campaigns in the Middle East, excelled in terms of its 'orchestration of numerous other platforms.' Those other platforms have included assets at sea, in space, as well as other aircraft, including fourth-generation ones. Talking about the F-35, Taiclet pointed to the aircraft's success in the U.S. attacks on nuclear facilities in Iran last month, Operation Midnight Hammer . The CEO describes that particular mission as being 'led by the F-22 and F-35.' Between them, the stealth fighters 'provided the air dominance and defense suppression required for the bombers to reach Iran's hardened nuclear sites,' Taiclet said. 'Our platforms operated essentially undetected in highly defended and contested airspace, underscoring the value of advanced stealth, superior electronic warfare, and broadband communications capability.' In the second quarter, Lockheed Martin delivered 50 F-35s, bringing the company's total deliveries for the year to 97. More significantly, the manufacturer has now handed over 207 F-35s since it resumed deliveries last year , having paused them for around a year due to problems with the vital Tech Refresh 3 suite, or TR-3. The company says it is now on track to deliver between 170 and 190 F-35s this year. These details and more were provided in a second-quarter earnings call earlier today that involved Taiclet as well as Lockheed Martin Chief Financial Officer Evan Scott, and Maria Ricciardone, the company's Vice-President, Treasurer and Investor Relations. Lockheed Martin envisages its F-35 stealth jet as the 'bridging fighter' that will allow the U.S. Air Force to transition to the sixth-generation F-47, from rival Boeing. Speaking today, Lockheed Martin CEO Jim Taiclet reiterated the goal of inserting technologies developed under the company's unsuccessful Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) bid into a future version of the F-35. At the same time, the company discussed 'a highly classified program' in the aeronautical sector on which it admits it has so far suffered significant financial losses. La historia continúa 'We did bid on NGAD, and we weren't selected,' Taiclet reflected, referring to Lockheed Martin's loss to Boeing, which is now building the F-47 crewed sixth-generation fighter to meet that requirement. An artist rendering of Boeing's F-47. U.S. Air Force 'But the pivot that we made is one we're taking very seriously, which is how we create a bridge from today's fifth generation to the sixth-generation NGAD, which might not be fielded for a lot of years,' Taiclet said. 'How do we bridge capability there?' Taiclet continued. 'We're going to port a lot of our own NGAD R&D over to the F-35 and potentially over to the F-22 as well.' The CEO again stated the aspiration to develop modifications to the F-35 that mean the company can offer 80 percent of the effectiveness of a sixth-generation fighter, at 50 percent of the cost per unit. Taiclet added that, in terms of matching capabilities, the 80 percent figure also referred to the degree of stealth, as well as 'other aspects.' The fifth-generation-plus version of the F-35 is, Taiclet contended, 'the best-value option for the U.S. government going forward; it will be only one I'm aware of that will make that bridge, for maybe 10 years.' Not immediately clear is whether Taiclet expects a major delay on the F-47 program that will make an interim fighter a more urgent priority, although that would be one interpretation of this. As it stands, the Air Force has not said when it expects the F-47 to achieve initial operating capability. An Air Force graphic that states the F-47 would become operational between 2025 and 2029 very likely refers to the planned first flight of the F-47 and some of its developmental testing, as you can read about here. U.S. Air Force Although not discussed today in the course of the earnings call, in the past, Lockheed Martin has raised the possibility of a pilot-optional F-35, as well as new infrared and radar coatings. This latter modification corresponds with secretive U.S. military testing in recent years of new mirror-like coatings on F-35s, as well as F-22 Raptor and F-117 Nighthawk stealth jets. A U.S. Navy F-35C test jet with a mirror-like coating. U.S. Navy Other F-35 modifications discussed by the company include electronic warfare improvements, networking improvements, and autonomy. Lockheed Martin has also previously discussed potential changes to the F-35's outer mold line, especially with regard to the engine inlets and exhaust nozzle. Meanwhile, the feasibility of the fifth-generation-plus proposal, as well as the huge claims around the capability/cost match of such an aircraft compared to a sixth-generation design, remains very much open to question. However, the company is confident that such advances are not only possible but can also be achieved rapidly, if required. Earlier this year, Taiclet said he thought that, in the space of two to three years, it would be possible to port enough of the NGAD technologies over into the F-35 to provide 'a meaningful increase in capability for the F-35.' That two-to-three-year timeline related to 'first flight and integration,' Taiclet added. A U.S. Air Force KC-135 Stratotanker refuels a U.S. Air Force F-35A off the coast of Greece in October 2024. U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Edgar Grimaldo Senior Airman Edgar Grimaldo It's also worth noting that, earlier this year, U.S. President Donald Trump mentioned the so-called F-55, a purported development of the F-35. Trump described the F-55 as a twin-engined F-35 and also discussed an 'F-22 Super' that would be an upgraded version of the Raptor. The exact status of the F-55 remains unclear, if it ever existed. Taiclet also discussed a separate 'highly classified' aeronautical program being run by Lockheed Martin Skunk Works, as a part of that division's efforts to 'push the boundaries of science and technology to deliver highly advanced solutions that provide our customers a step-function advantage over potential adversaries.' It's notable that such a project would even be mentioned, although its discussion within the context of the earnings call was limited to the losses that it has accumulated for the company. There was no indication whether the platform is crewed or uncrewed, or what kind of mission it will fulfil, although there have been other reports of secretive Skunk Works projects going over budget. F-35s under construction. Lockheed Martin 'This particular program discovered new insights in the quarter that required us to adjust our expected future costs on that program and then recognized the charge for doing so,' Taiclet added. 'I acknowledge the losses on this classified program are significant. Again, we are taking these charges very seriously.' In response to the losses, Lockheed Martin has made changes to the program team management and assigned experts across the company to improve the performance and oversight of this program under what Taiclet said was 'a comprehensive risk-identification and corrective action plan.' 'This is a highly classified program that can only be described as a game-changing capability for our joint U.S. and international customers,' Taiclet added, 'and therefore it is critical that it be successfully fielded.' With the classified program now at least being publicly acknowledged for the benefit of company shareholders, it's possible that more information about it might begin to emerge. Clearly, however, Lockheed Martin's efforts to develop advanced new aerospace technologies encompass programs above and beyond its ongoing efforts to rework the F-35. Contact the author: thomas@
