Trump 'Caught Off Guard' By Israeli Strikes In Syria As His Allies Call Netanyahu A 'Madman'
Israel had launched strikes on the Syrian capital of Damascus and the southern city of Sweida to protect the Druze community after they clashed with government troops last week.
The White House on Monday said that US President Donald Trump was unhappy with the Israeli airstrikes in Syria last week and called on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to 'rectify" the situation, as his allies are becoming increasingly concerned with Israel's policies in the region.
Israel had launched strikes on the Syrian capital of Damascus and the southern city of Sweida, citing the need to protect Druze civilians after sectarian clashes broke out between the Druze fighters, Bedouin tribes and government troops. The Israeli Air Force targeted regime troops, armoured vehicles, and even hit Syria's Ministry of Defence in Damascus.
Speaking to reporters, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Trump was 'caught off guard" with the bombing in Syria and a Catholic church in Gaza. 'The president enjoys a good working relationship with Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu and stays in frequent communication with him.
'Trump Caught Off Guard'
'He was caught off guard by the bombing in Syria and the bombing of the Catholic church in Gaza … and in both cases the president quickly called the Prime Minister to rectify these situations," she said.
Israel and Syria on Friday entered a US-brokered ceasefire, as Netanyahu asserted that he will not allow Syrian forces to move south of the capital or threaten the Druze community in the region.
'The regime sent troops south of Damascus, into the region that has to be demilitarised, and began slaughtering the Druze. That we could not accept in any way, and I therefore directed the IDF to take action — and take powerful action," he said in an address to the nation on July 17. 'As a result of that powerful action, a ceasefire came into force, and the Syrian forces retreated back to Damascus… This is a ceasefire that was reached through strength."
Netanyahu also called Pope Leo on Friday to express regret at the strike on the Catholic church in Gaza, blaming a 'stray missile." He said Israel 'deeply regrets that a stray ammunition hit Gaza's Holy Family Church. Every innocent life lost is a tragedy. We share the grief of the families and the faithful."
The White House has also raised concern with the murder of Palestinian American Saif Musallet by a mob of Israeli settlers in the West Bank last weekend.
'Netanyahu Is A Madman'
The White House's remarks came as the Israeli strikes are believed to have alarmed senior US officials, who are growing increasingly concerned with Israel's policies across the region. Axios quoted one US official as saying that Netanyahu was ' acting like a madman ', while another likened him to a 'child who just won't behave."
Another US official also said Trump called Netanyahu to demand an explanation over the shelling of the Gaza church. 'The feeling is that every day there is something new. What the f***?"
Trump has so far refrained from public criticism of Netanyahu, but the White House gave an indication that he shares some of his advisers' frustrations. 'The president doesn't like turning on the television and seeing bombs dropped in a country he is seeking peace in and made a monumental announcement to help rebuild," an official said.
Israel is already facing global criticism for its relentless offensive in Gaza, which has killed over 58,000 Palestinians, and its strikes in Syria angered Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
First Published:
July 22, 2025, 07:11 IST
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
18 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Sanctions, exemptions and assurances: A cautionary note on India's trade deal strategy
Casinos and betting companies around the world might as well start offering odds on US tariff rates across goods for different countries and for how long the rates will stick. If one were lulled into complacency about understanding the current state of affairs, the Trump administration is sure to throw a few wildcards into the mix to keep everyone on their toes – and this includes analysts as well as trade negotiators. A few other countries, including Europe, have agreed on a trade deal with the US, and analysing its structure and form can give a strong indication of how the Indian deal might play out. Finally, a free trade agreement with the UK that was recently signed and one with Australia that was signed a few months ago give India a minor edge in the proceedings. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte recently threatened India, along with China, Brazil and others with 100 per cent secondary sanctions if they continue doing business with Russia, including buying Russian oil. Simultaneously, US Senator Lindsey Graham is pushing for the Sanctioning Russia Act of 2025, a bipartisan legislative proposal. The bill, backed by Trump and 170 other lawmakers, threatens an unprecedented 500 per cent tariff on all goods exported to the US by countries that buy Russian oil, gas, petrochemicals or uranium. This is part of an overall strategy to choke the Kremlin's war bank and economic lifelines. Trump has warned that if Russia does not stop its military offensive within 50 days, nations trading with Russia will receive trade penalties. India imports 90 per cent of its crude oil needs, of which 35-40 per cent comes from Russia. Recall that in 2020, the share of Russia in India's crude oil imports was less than 1 per cent. The response by the Indian administration has been mixed. India's foreign secretary hit back at NATO's double standards for both buying Russian gas and for buying refined oil from India, which uses Russian crude as inputs. He has also indicated that India might not readily fall in line, as securing India's energy needs is the top priority for this government. Elsewhere, there's a tacit acknowledgement of the cost-benefit analysis. India's Petroleum Minister Hardeep Singh Puri has implicitly acknowledged that India is prepared to 'deal with these sanctions' when they are passed. What helps is that India now has diversified its import sources to 40 countries, as opposed to 27 in the past, which means that India can reduce its imports from Russia, should the sanctions be passed. While diversifying imports to other countries can turn out to be slightly more expensive, a 500 per cent (or even 100 per cent) tariff rate would kill India's competitiveness with the only major trading partner with which India has a trade surplus. India will have to assess the probability of Trump keeping his word on the secondary tariffs. The oil spot markets called his bluff, as the price for Brent crude barely moved from $69 per barrel. If the secondary sanctions stick and Russian oil (which accounts for 10 per cent of the total global oil supply) is shut out of the global markets, the price could shoot up to $120 per barrel. This would derail Trump's domestic low-energy prices agenda. Moreover, if secondary tariffs on Chinese (mainly) and Indian goods stick, it would result in a significant increase in prices of imported goods and cause runaway inflation in the US. Will the acronym TACO (Trump Always Chickens Out) be validated again? Along with the threat of secondary tariffs, Trump has also separately imposed tariffs on auto and auto parts. He is also threatening tariffs on pharmaceutical imports and a 10 per cent additional tariff on all products from BRICS countries for attempting to 'destroy' the US Dollar. These additional tariffs would make the Indian side wary of signing a deal with the US, given that it may be superseded at any time by such ad hoc measures. A trade deal would mean very little if there's a new threat of tariffs every other day. To mitigate this, the Indian side would want explicit assurances that no new tariffs will be imposed once a Bilateral Trade Agreement is finalised. India should now insist on the agreement including renegotiation clauses, or compensation from its trading partner in case of a tariff increase. It could even insist on a clawback clause, which allows India to withdraw benefits if the US reneges on the deal. Though it would be rather foolhardy to speculate, it can be instructive to look at some of the other trade deals that the US has recently signed to get an idea of what may lie in store for India. Though some of these details are yet to be publicly confirmed, what we know so far is that trade deals with the UK, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines, Japan and the EU have been finalised. The big takeaway is that a 10 per cent tariff rate is the new zero or the base rate. In addition, each country faces different additional tariffs. The UK pays no extra charges, while Vietnam faces an additional 10 per cent (bringing their total to 20 per cent, down from the originally threatened 46 per cent). Indonesia and the Philippines each pay an additional 9 per cent, resulting in total rates of 19 per cent (compared to threatened rates of 32 per cent and 20 per cent, respectively). Japan and the EU receive the most favourable treatment with only an additional 5 per cent, for a total rate of 15 per cent. In exchange for these negotiated rates, most of these countries have eliminated all tariffs on US products and opened their markets to American companies. Note that sectoral tariffs are exempted from the reciprocal tariffs. Thus, auto and auto parts tariffs of 25 per cent will apply on top of the base 10 per cent, but these countries have negotiated on some of these sectoral tariffs. Japan was able to reduce auto tariffs to 15 per cent, reduced from the threatened 25 per cent, and the UK got it reduced to 10 per cent. India should pay attention to this and negotiate on pharma and auto products to get exemptions. The writer is an Economics Professor at the Takshashila Institution, an independent and non-partisan think tank and school of public policy
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
18 minutes ago
- Business Standard
US DOJ files misconduct complaint against judge handling deportation case
The Justice Department on Monday filed a misconduct complaint against the federal judge who has clashed with President Donald Trump 's administration over deportations to a notorious prison in El Salvador. Escalating the administration's conflict with US District Judge James E Boasberg, Attorney General Pam Bondi said on social media that she directed the filing of the complaint against Boasberg for making improper public comments about President Trump and his administration. The complaint stems from remarks Boasberg allegedly made in March to Chief Justice John Roberts and other federal judges saying the administration would trigger a constitutional crisis by disregarding federal court rulings, according to a copy of the complaint obtained by The Associated Press. The comments have undermined the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary, the complaint says, adding that the administration has always complied with all court orders. Boasberg is among several judges who have questioned whether the administration has complied with their orders. The meeting took place days before Boasberg issued an order blocking deportation flights that Trump was carrying out by invoking wartime authorities from an 18th century law. The judge's verbal order to turn around planes that were on the way to El Salvador was ignored. Boasberg has since found probable cause that the administration committed contempt of court. The comments were supposedly made during a meeting of the Judicial Conference, the federal judiciary's governing body. The remarks were first reported by the conservative website The Federalist, which said it obtained a memo summarizing the meeting. Boasberg, the chief judge in the district court in the nation's capital, is a member of the Judicial Conference. Its meetings are not public. The complaint calls for an investigation, the reassignment of the deportations case to another judge while the inquiry is ongoing and sanctions, including the possible recommendation of impeachment, if the investigation substantiates the allegations. Trump himself already has called for Boasberg's impeachment, which in turn prompted a rare response from Roberts rejecting the call. The complaint was filed with Judge Sri Srinivasan, chief judge of the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. More than 250 Venezuelans who were deported to a Salvadoran mega-prison known as the Terrorism Confinement Center, or CECOT, were sent home to Venezuela earlier this month in a deal that also free 10 US citizens and permanent residents who had been held by Venezuela. But the lawsuit over the deportations and the administration's response to Boasberg's order remains in his court.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
an hour ago
- First Post
Watch: Starmer looking on, Trump calls London mayor Sadiq Khan ‘nasty'; UK leader defends him as...
Trump took a fresh swipe at London Mayor Sadiq Khan during a press conference in Scotland, calling him 'a nasty person' and criticising his leadership. British PM Keir Starmer, standing beside Trump, quickly defended Khan, calling him 'a friend of mine.' read more US President Donald Trump and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer attend a family photo during the Group of Seven (G7) Summit at the Kananaskis Country Golf Course in Kananaskis, Alberta, Canada. AFP US President Donald Trump reignited his feud with London Mayor Sadiq Khan during a press conference in Scotland alongside British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who stepped in and defended Khan as 'a friend of mine.' When asked if he planned to visit London during his upcoming state visit in September, Trump replied, 'I'm not a fan of your mayor. I think he's done a terrible job.' He went on to call Khan 'a nasty person,' prompting Starmer's brief response: 'He's a friend of mine, actually.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Unfazed, Trump further went back and forth saying, 'I think he's done a terrible job. But I would certainly visit London.' 'I am not a fan of the London mayor. I think he has done a terrible job. He's a nasty person.' US President Donald Trump launches into attack on Sadiq Khan during his UK visit Follow our live blog for more🔗 📺 Sky 501, Virgin 602 and YouTube — Sky News (@SkyNews) July 28, 2025 The animosity between Trump and Khan—both of whom have clashed repeatedly since 2016—is long-standing. Khan, a Labour politician like Starmer, has often criticised Trump, particularly over his stance on immigration and his travel ban targeting several Muslim-majority nations. In return, Trump has lashed out at Khan on multiple occasions, calling him a 'stone cold loser,' 'very dumb,' and accusing him of doing a 'very bad job on terrorism.' Khan, who is the first Muslim to lead a Western capital, has said Trump's attacks are rooted in bias. 'He's come for me because of, let's be frank, my ethnicity and my religion,' Khan said in a podcast prior to Trump's 2024 re-election. However, following Trump's win, Khan told AFP that 'the American people have spoken loudly and clearly' and that the election result must be respected. Responding to Trump's latest remarks, a spokesperson for Khan issued a statement Monday saying the mayor was 'delighted that President Trump wants to come to the greatest city in the world,' adding: 'He'd see how our diversity makes us stronger not weaker; richer, not poorer.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
