Hamas responds to US ambassador to 'Israel' controversial statement
Hamas issued a statement following the United States Ambassador to 'Israel' Mike Huckabee's remarks – where he suggested carving out a piece of the French Riviera to create a Palestinian state.
Huckabee's comments came in an attack against France after President Emmanuel Macron discussed a potential recognition of a Palestinian state. Huckabee described the move as 'revolting.'
Hamas condemned his statements, saying it is a 'blatant insult to the legitimate national rights of our people' and 'a flagrant violation of international law and United Nations resolutions.'
'The remarks reflect the United States' full alignment with the Zionist occupation and its expansion colonial agenda,' the statement read.
Huckabee called France's move 'incredibly inappropriate in the midst of a war that Israel is dealing with to go out and present something that I think increasingly Israelis are steadfast against.'
'October 7 changed a lot of things,' Huckabee told Fox News.
'If France is really so determined to see a Palestinian state, I have a suggestion for them — carve out a piece of the French Riviera and create a Palestinian state. They are welcome to do that, but they are not welcome to impose that kind of pressure on a sovereign nation.'
'And I find it revolting that they think they have the right to do such a thing,' Huckabee said, declaring that the United States will not participate in the June conference.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Roya News
an hour ago
- Roya News
Palestine's status upgraded to 'Observer State' at International Labor Org.
The International Labor Organization (ILO) has unanimously approved upgrading Palestine's status from a "national liberation movement" to a "non-member observer state," marking a significant milestone in Palestine's international recognition. The decision was reached during the General Affairs Committee of the 113th International Labour Conference in Geneva. The final resolution is expected to be formally adopted in plenary on Thursday. This move aligns the ILO's position with that of other UN agencies such as UNESCO and the World Health Organization, following the UN General Assembly's Resolution ES-10/23 in May 2024. Expanded Rights for Palestine With the upgrade, Palestine will now enjoy expanded rights within the ILO, including: Delivering statements under all agenda items. Submitting proposals. Participating in all meetings with tripartite delegations Nominating delegates to the Conference Bureau starting in 2026. Ambassador Ibrahim Khraishi welcomed the decision, calling it a "firm and unambiguous response to the 'Israeli' Knesset's rejection of a Palestinian state." He added, "Some continue to reject fairness and persist in applying double standards, undermining the very principles of international legitimacy and justice." International support, opposition The resolution was strongly supported by the Arab Group, the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, and countries including France, China, Spain, and Switzerland. Both the Employers' and Workers' Groups backed the resolution, emphasizing its humanitarian necessity and alignment with the ILO's values. Hungary was the only country opposing the resolution. Khraishi expressed surprise at Hungary's stance, noting that it had recognized the State of Palestine as far back as 1988. Significance of the Decision Khraishi emphasized that "this step is not merely symbolic," but "an integral part of the Palestinian people's legitimate national and political struggle for justice, sovereignty, and self-determination."
Roya News
an hour ago
- Roya News
Three 'Israeli' soldiers killed in clashes in northern Gaza, army confirms
The 'Israeli' military confirmed on Tuesday that three of its soldiers were killed during combat operations in the northern Gaza Strip. The announcement came hours after Hamas' armed wing reported engaging in 'fierce clashes' with Israeli Occupation Forces in the same area on Monday. Since 'Israel' launched its military campaign in Gaza in October 2023, more than 54,400 Palestinians, the majority women and children, have been killed.
Ammon
6 hours ago
- Ammon
The thin line between explosion and détente in Gaza
The Witkoff Plan is one of the most prominent international initiatives proposed to halt the devastating war on the Gaza Strip, which has entered its final months amid profound political, military, and humanitarian complications. While the plan came in response to mounting international pressure, particularly from the Trump administration, the positions of both Israel and Hamas have ranged from conditional acceptance to cautious rejection. This makes the future of this plan contingent on a set of complex internal, regional, and international equations, and makes studying possible scenarios a matter of strategic importance. The Witkoff Plan, proposed under US sponsorship and led by President Donald Trump and his special envoy, Steve Witkoff, aims for a temporary ceasefire in Gaza for 60 days, with US guarantees, as a prelude to reaching a permanent agreement. It stipulates the release of 10 living Israeli hostages and 18 bodies from a list of hostages, in exchange for the release of 125 Palestinian prisoners serving life sentences and 1,111 detainees from Gaza, in addition to the handover of 180 Palestinian bodies. The plan includes a cessation of Israeli military operations, a restriction of military air traffic, and the redeployment of Israeli forces northward and then southward, according to agreed-upon maps. It also stipulates the entry of humanitarian aid under the supervision of the United Nations and the Red Crescent. Negotiations on a permanent ceasefire will begin on the first day of the truce, and will address the exchange of the remaining hostages, redeployment, security arrangements, and the "day after" for Gaza. If an agreement is not reached within the deadline, the truce can be extended under agreed-upon terms. The plan includes mediation and guarantees from the United States, Qatar, and Egypt, with direct oversight from President Trump, who will officially announce the agreement. The Israeli scene is suffering from a sharp internal division between a security faction that favors accepting the plan as a political solution that saves Israel's face, and a hard-line right-wing faction that rejects any truce before the complete elimination of the "military threat from Hamas." Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu finds himself between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand, he fears that accepting the plan will lead to the collapse of his government under pressure from the extreme right, which threatens to withdraw. On the other hand, he faces increasing American pressure, in addition to internal demonstrations by the families of the hostages, who accuse his government of stalling and sacrificing their sons for narrow political calculations. Israel, in its strategic depth, fears that accepting the plan will be perceived as a political and military defeat against a beleaguered resistance movement, and that the scenario following the 2006 Lebanon War will be repeated, when Hezbollah emerged with increasing political and popular influence despite human and material losses. In contrast, Hamas, despite the severe blows it has suffered, retains a negotiating position based on its remaining Israeli hostages and its ability to withstand the war machine. Hamas expressed initial acceptance of the plan, but stipulated that it include a permanent ceasefire, a complete withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Gaza Strip, the release of all Palestinian prisoners, and a rejection of any Israeli military or security presence inside the Strip. It also stipulated the need for Gaza's reconstruction under Arab and international supervision. These demands reflect the movement's desire to transform the results of the war into political gains that will enable it to maintain its role in the Palestinian arena, especially in light of talk of future arrangements that may include the return of the Palestinian Authority to Gaza or the formation of a new administration for the Strip with regional participation. In light of these facts, three main scenarios for the future of the Witkoff plan can be envisioned. The first scenario involves conditional mutual acceptance of the plan, whereby some of its provisions are modified to bring the positions closer together, and a gradual implementation phase begins under international supervision, with American and regional guarantees. This scenario is possible, but it requires internal consensus within Israel and effective pressure from Washington on the Netanyahu government. It also requires Hamas's tacit acceptance of the phased solution without compromising its basic conditions. The second scenario is that Israel refuses to implement the second phase of the plan after the release of some hostages, leading to the collapse of the agreement and the resumption of fighting. This scenario reflects the nature of the divisions within the Israeli government and could lead to a domestic political crisis and increased public pressure. However, it could also serve Netanyahu in gaining more time and avoiding the collapse of his coalition. The third, and most bleak, scenario is the complete failure of the plan, either due to the refusal of one party or the collapse of international understandings, leading to the continuation of the war and its transformation into a protracted war of attrition. In this scenario, the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza would worsen, and Arab and international popular anger against Israel would expand. Other regional parties might also become more involved, threatening to escalate the situation on other fronts, such as southern Lebanon or the West Bank. In this scenario, the United States would find itself in an extremely difficult position before the world. The Witkoff Plan, despite its political ambition and humanitarian dimensions, collides with an extremely complex reality, rendering its chances of success limited without comprehensive agreements and painful concessions from both sides. This seems unlikely given each side's adherence to its own narrative and objectives. At the same time, however, the plan could constitute a preliminary framework upon which to build to reduce the intensity of the conflict and open a window for negotiations, should genuine international support and political will transcend narrow calculations be available. Between rejection and acceptance, Gaza's future remains suspended on a thin line between explosion and détente.
