US-led international authority to govern Gaza if Hamas meets ceasefire demands, release hostages: Report
The proposed deal would require Hamas to immediately release all hostages and disarm. If the group agrees, the United States would lead an international administration to govern the Gaza Strip, the report said.
'We have a very, very good plan that we're working on collectively with the Israeli government, with Prime Minister Netanyahu … for the reconstruction of Gaza. That effectively means the end of the war,' said Trump's Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, during a meeting with the families of Israeli hostages, according to a recording reviewed by Reuters.
As part of the proposed deal, Trump would authorise Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to act with full force in Gaza should Hamas reject the terms.
According to N12, the ultimatum makes clear that failure by Hamas to meet the conditions would result in intensified Israeli military operations in the enclave, with US backing.
The reported breakthrough in negotiations comes as Gaza terror groups released disturbing footage of hostages Evyatar David and Rom Braslavski, both appearing severely malnourished. The videos, widely circulated on Saturday, have sparked renewed outrage in Israel.
'We know from testimonies of freed hostages and from the information we have today that the hostages' captors do not appear this way,' a senior Israeli official was quoted as saying.
'This is deliberate starvation not only to abuse the hostages themselves but to torment their families and the public,' the official added.
Trump previously indicated a willingness to take a more assertive role in Gaza. During a state visit to Qatar in May, he suggested the United States should "take control of the Gaza Strip, deal with Hamas, and turn it into a freedom zone."
The President has made the resolution of the Gaza conflict a high-profile diplomatic priority as he returns to international negotiations during his second term.
Indirect negotiations between Israel and Hamas recently collapsed. Talks had aimed at achieving a 60-day ceasefire and the release of half of the remaining Israeli hostages but ended in deadlock last week.
Meanwhile, pressure continues to mount on the Israeli government over deteriorating humanitarian conditions in Gaza and the fate of remaining hostages.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
20 minutes ago
- Indian Express
US to initially impose ‘small tariff' on pharma imports, Trump says
President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that the United States would initially place a 'small tariff' on pharmaceutical imports before hiking it to 150% within 18 months and eventually to 250% in an effort to boost domestic production. 'In one year, one and a half years maximum, it's going to go to 150% and then it's going to go to 250% because we want pharmaceuticals made in our country,' Trump told CNBC in an interview. He did not specify the initial tariff rate on pharmaceuticals. Trump said last month that pharmaceutical tariffs could reach as high as 200%. He said in February that sectoral tariffs on pharmaceuticals and semiconductor chips would start at '25% or higher,' rising substantially over the course of a year. Trump said on Tuesday that he plans to announce tariffs on semiconductors and chips in the 'next week or so,' but gave no further details. The United States has been conducting a national security review of the pharmaceutical sector, and the industry has been preparing for possible sector-specific tariffs. The administration has not announced when the results of that probe will be released. Several drugmakers have pledged multibillion-dollar investments in U.S. manufacturing as Trump threatens import tariffs, with AstraZeneca recently committing $50 billion to expand its American operations. PhRMA, the main lobbying group for the industry, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A framework agreement between the United States and the EU sets out that tariffs on pharmaceuticals and semiconductors are currently zero, but if the United States raises tariffs following its import investigation, they will be capped at 15%.
Indian Express
20 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Trump says banks discriminate against his supporters while White House prepares order
US President Donald Trump on Tuesday said he believes that banks discriminate against him and his supporters, adding that Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase had previously refused to accept his deposits. 'They totally discriminate against, I think, me maybe even more, but they discriminate against many conservatives,' he told CNBC in an interview. 'I think the word might be Trump supporters more than conservatives.' Trump made the comments when asked about a report by the Wall Street Journal that said he planned to punish banks that discriminated against conservatives, but did not address the order specifically. The order instructs regulators to review banks for 'politicized or unlawful debanking' practices, according to a draft reviewed by Reuters. 'Well, they did discriminate,' Trump said of actions taken by JPMorgan Chase after his first term in office. 'I had hundreds of millions, I had many, many accounts loaded up with cash … and they told me, 'I'm sorry sir, we can't have you. You have 20 days to get out.'' Trump said, without providing evidence, that he believed that the banks' refusal to take his deposits indicated that the administration of former President Joe Biden had encouraged banking regulators to 'destroy Trump.' Trump said he subsequently tried to deposit funds with Bank of America and was also refused, and eventually split the cash among a number of smaller banks. 'The banks discriminated against me very badly,' he said. In a statement, JPMorgan did not address the president's specific claim that it had discriminated against him. 'We don't close accounts for political reasons, and we agree with President Trump that regulatory change is desperately needed,' JPMorgan said. 'We commend the White House for addressing this issue and look forward to working with them to get this right.' Bank of America also did not address Trump's specific claims in the CNBC interview. 'REPUTATIONAL RISK' ISSUE During President Joe Biden's administration, regulators could have asked the banks why they were providing banking services to Trump because of the 'reputational risk' issue, a source familiar with the matter said. Another source said that banks were under intense scrutiny and pressure with regards to what qualified as a reputational risk for banks and they needed to be careful due to Trump's legal entanglements. The source also added that at present JPMorgan continues to have a banking relationship with members of the Trump family that dates back to years ago and that they also bank a number of campaign accounts related to Trump. After President Trump took power, the Federal Reserve announced in June it was directing its supervisors to no longer consider 'reputational risk' when examining banks, scrapping a metric that had been a focus of industry complaints. The Wall Street Journal reported late Monday that the expected executive order would instruct regulators to investigate whether any financial institutions breach the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, antitrust laws or consumer financial protection laws by dropping customers for political reasons. It said the order could be signed as early as this week, authorizing monetary penalties, consent decrees or other disciplinary measures against violators. The White House had no immediate comment on the reported order. 'What the White House is doing is telling the banks not to hide behind regulations to deny loans or banking relationships,' said Wells Fargo bank analyst Mike Mayo. 'The banks can use their normal underwriting standards and deny services, but not blame regulators or use reputational risk as a justification.' Bank of America said it welcomed the Trump administration's efforts to provide regulatory clarity to banks. 'We've provided detailed proposals and will continue to work with the administration and Congress to improve the regulatory framework,' the bank said. Trump in January said the CEOs of JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America denied services to conservatives. At the time, the two banks denied making banking decisions based on politics. 'This seems to be rhetoric that will likely be forgotten by lunchtime,' said David Wagner, head of equities at Aptus Capital Advisors. 'I don't see any material impact on banks, as there are many other drivers that will ultimately presage performance for banks, such as deregulation.' JPMorgan and Bank of America shares both fell over 1%, in line with a decline for the broader S&P Bank index. Banks have consistently argued that any complaints about 'debanking' should be aimed at regulators, as they argue onerous rules and bank supervisors policing firms can discourage them from engaging in certain activities. 'The heart of the problem is regulatory overreach and supervisory discretion,' the Bank Policy Institute, an industry group, said in a statement. 'The banking agencies have already taken steps to address issues like reputational risk, and we're hopeful that any forthcoming executive order will reinforce this progress by directing regulators to confront the flawed regulatory framework that gave rise to these concerns in the first place.'
Indian Express
20 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Netanyahu meets security officials as Israel considers full Gaza takeover
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met senior security officials to finalise a new strategy for the 22-month war in Gaza, his office said on Tuesday, with media reporting he favoured a complete military takeover of the Strip. Despite intense international pressure for a ceasefire to ease hunger and appalling conditions in the besieged Palestinian enclave, efforts to mediate a truce between Israel and Palestinian militant group Hamas have collapsed. Eight more people died of starvation or malnutrition in the past 24 hours, Gaza's health ministry said, while another 79 died in the latest Israeli firing. The prime minister's office said in statement that Netanyahu had held a 'limited security discussion' lasting about three hours during which military Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir 'presented the options for continuing the campaign in Gaza'. An Israeli official had earlier told Reuters that Defence Minister Israel Katz and Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer, a confidant of Netanyahu, would also attend the meeting to decide on a strategy to take to cabinet this week. Israel's Channel 12, citing an official from Netanyahu's office, had said the prime minister was leaning towards taking control of the entire territory. That would reverse a 2005 decision to withdraw from Gaza, while retaining control over its borders, a move right-wing parties blame for Hamas gaining power there. It was unclear, however, whether Netanyahu was foreseeing a prolonged occupation or a short-term operation aimed at dismantling Hamas and freeing Israeli hostages. The prime minister's office declined to comment on the Channel 12 report. 'It is still necessary to complete the defeat of the enemy in Gaza, release our hostages and ensure that Gaza never again constitutes a threat to Israel,' Netanyahu told new recruits at a military base. 'We are not giving up on any of these missions.' On Saturday, Hamas released a video of Evyatar David, one of 50 hostages still held in Gaza, appearing emaciated in what seemed to be an underground tunnel. The images shocked Israelis and sparked international condemnation. Throughout the war, there has been sustained international pressure on Hamas to release the remaining hostages, of whom Israeli officials estimate 20 are still alive. Most hostages have been released during ceasefires following diplomatic negotiations. Israel broke the last ceasefire. PRESSURE TACTIC? A Palestinian official said the suggestion of a full takeover of Gaza may be a tactic to pressure Hamas into concessions, while the Palestinian Foreign Ministry urged foreign nations to take heed of the reports. 'The ministry urges countries and the international community to treat these leaks with utmost seriousness and to intervene urgently to prevent their implementation, whether these leaks are meant to exert pressure, test international reactions, or are genuine and serious,' it said. Israel's coalition government, the most right-wing and religiously conservative in its history, includes far-right politicians who advocate the annexation of both Gaza and the West Bank and encourage Palestinians to leave their homeland. Nearly two years of fighting in Gaza has strained the military, which has a small standing army and has had to repeatedly mobilise reservists. It has throughout the war pushed back against the idea of Israel fully occupying Gaza. In a sign of differences between some members of Israel's ruling coalition and the military, far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir on X challenged military head Zamir to state he would comply with government directives even if a decision was made to take all of Gaza. The statement from Netanyahu's office said the Israeli Defence Forces were 'prepared to implement any decision that will be made by the Political-Security Cabinet'. HUNGER The war was triggered when Hamas-led militants attacked Israel on October 7, 2023, killing around 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and capturing 251 hostages. Israel's military response has devastated the tiny, crowded enclave, killing more than 61,000 people – mostly civilians – according to Palestinian health authorities. Israel's campaign has forced nearly all of Gaza's more than 2 million people from their homes and caused what a global hunger monitor called last week an unfolding famine. Some 188 Palestinians, including 94 children, have died from hunger since the war began, according to Gaza authorities. An Israeli security official, in a briefing to reporters, acknowledged there may be hunger in some parts of Gaza but rejected reports of famine or starvation. On Tuesday, Israeli tanks pushed into central Gaza but it was not clear if the move was part of a larger ground offensive. Palestinians living in the last quarter of territory where Israel has not yet taken military control – via ground incursions or orders for civilians to leave – said any new push would be catastrophic. 'If the tanks pushed through, where would we go, into the sea? This will be like a death sentence to the entire population,' said Abu Jehad, a Gaza wood merchant.
