Trump Says Gaza Ceasefire May Be ‘Close,' Possibly Within Week
President Donald Trump said he thought a ceasefire in Gaza could be 'close,' perhaps in the next week.
'I just spoke with some of the people involved. It's a terrible situation that's going,' the president told reporters at the White House on Friday afternoon. 'And we think within the next week, we're going to get a ceasefire, and we're supplying, as you know, a lot of money and a lot of food to that area.'
He did not provide further details on how an agreement might unfold or say to whom he spoke about a possible halt in the war that began with the Hamas assault on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
'We're involved because people are dying,' Trump added.
The Israeli Embassy in Washington didn't immediately respond to a request for comment on Friday evening.
Earlier: Meloni Pushes for Gaza Ceasefire at G-7 Amid Israel-Iran Crisis
Earlier this week, French President Emmanuel Macron said Trump was assiduously pursuing a truce. 'On Gaza, I felt that President Trump was very determined, very resolute, aware of the importance of a ceasefire, and I think his commitment is essential on this issue,' Macron told reporters in Brussels. 'I know that his team is engaged in ongoing discussions.'
Separately, Israel has estimated that the cost of damages incurred during its 12-day war with Iran at 10 billion shekels , with funds needed both to repair buildings struck by missiles and pay compensation to local businesses.
The calculations shared by the Israeli finance ministry and tax body this week indicate the extent to which Iran broke through Israel's defenses during nearly two weeks of rocket fire.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Gazette
19 minutes ago
- India Gazette
Indian contingent demonstrates tactical proficiency, joint synergy in France in SHAKTI-VIII exercise
Paris [France], June 28 (ANI): The Indo-French Joint Military Exercise SHAKTI-VIII continues to strengthen operational interoperability and mutual cooperation between the Indian and French armies. Held at Camp Larzac, La Cavalerie in southern France, the exercise features the participation of 90 personnel, primarily troops from a Jammu and Kashmir Rifles battalion, alongside the French Army's 13e Demi-Brigade de Legion Etrangre. The joint training encompasses a wide spectrum of mission-specific drills tailored to sub-conventional warfare. These include combat shooting in semi-developed terrain, obstacle crossings, urban combat drills, joint patrols, and troop insertion techniques--all conducted under realistic operational conditions to sharpen tactical adaptability. Specialist detachments from both sides have engaged in Electronic Warfare (EW) and Counter-Unmanned Aerial System (C-UAS) training, incorporating signal interception, jamming, spectrum control, and drone-neutralisation exercises. These modules have enhanced both contingents' ability to operate effectively in contested electromagnetic environments, significantly augmenting modern battlefield readiness. A key highlight of the engagement was the successful conduct of a high-intensity 96-hour joint field exercise, simulating multi-domain operations under sustained, high-pressure conditions. This phase tested endurance, decision-making, and coordination across command levels, yielding critical insights into joint mission execution, tactical flexibility, and cross-functional integration. Following this phase, the Indian contingent was visited by Sanjeev Singla, Ambassador of India to France and Monaco, who interacted with the troops, lauded their professionalism, and acknowledged their contribution to strengthening India-France defence cooperation. His visit provided a significant morale boost and reaffirmed India's commitment to its enduring strategic partnership with France. Exercise SHAKTI-VIII has reaffirmed itself as a vital platform for the exchange of best practices, the development of integrated operational capabilities, and the deepening of military-to-military trust. It continues to enhance tactical and technical synergy while contributing to broader regional security and strategic alignment. (ANI)
Mint
37 minutes ago
- Mint
Trump has struck trade deals with 2 countries ahead of July 9; what about the others? What is India's position?
As the July 9 deadline set by the Donald Trump administration approaches soon, officials have struggled to strike trade deals with a lot of countries. In almost three months, the US has been able to sign trade agreements with just two countries, with Trump and his officials hinting that a long pipeline is in place. Countries failing to strike deals with the US within the July 9 deadline will face tariffs as was announced by Trump in April. The President however on Friday indicated that the deadline could be moved forward. 'We can do whatever we want. We could extend it. We could make it shorter. I'd like to make it shorter. I'd like to just send letters out to everybody: Congratulations, you're paying 25 per cent,' he told reporters at the White House. Here's what you need to know about Donald Trump's trade deals. As of now, only two countries — China and UK — have signed trade deals with the US. 'The [Trump] administration and China agreed to an additional understanding for a framework to implement the Geneva agreement,' a White House official said on Thursday. That followed the talks in Geneva in May, where the US and China had agreed to reduce mutual tariffs. US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told Bloomberg TV on Thursday that 'they [China] are going to deliver rare earths to us', and once Beijing does that 'we'll take down our countermeasures'. Trump signed an agreement on June 16, formally lowering some tariffs on imports from Britain as the countries continue working toward a formal trade deal. The deal, announced by Trump and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer on the sidelines of the G7 Summit in Canada, reaffirmed quotas and tariff rates on British automobiles and eliminated tariffs on the U.K. aerospace sector, but the issue of steel and aluminum remains unresolved. While UK and China are the only countries that have signed trade deals with the US, Trump on Friday called off discussions with China, calling it a 'difficult country'. Trump abruptly ended the negotiations over its tax targeting US technology firms, saying that it was a "blatant attack" and that he would set a new tariff rate on Canadian goods within the next week. Majority of the trade partners of US, including South Korea, Vietnam and EU countries, are struggling to sign deals with America. Countries like France have rejected the notion of striking a deal that favours the US, and have proposed removal of tariffs altogether. Some EU member states have also rejected the idea of a tit-for-tat tarif, and are preferring a quick deal to a perfect one. India and Japan are considered to be the next countries that could strike trade deals with the US. 'But some of the bigger countries, India, I think we're going to reach a deal where we have the right to go in and trade. Right now, it's restricted. You can't walk in there. You can't even think about it,' Trump told reporters on Friday.
Hindustan Times
42 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Immigrants scramble for clarity after Supreme Court birthright ruling
* Immigrants scramble for clarity after Supreme Court birthright ruling Supreme Court ruling causes confusion over birthright citizenship * Lawyers and advocates field calls from anxious clients * Uncertainty remains on policy across different states By Ted Hesson and Kristina Cooke WASHINGTON, - The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling tied to birthright citizenship prompted confusion and phone calls to lawyers as people who could be affected tried to process a convoluted legal decision with major humanitarian implications. The court's conservative majority on Friday granted President Donald Trump his request to curb federal judges' power but did not decide the legality of his bid to restrict birthright citizenship. That outcome has raised more questions than answers about a right long understood to be guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution: that anyone born in the United States is considered a citizen at birth, regardless of their parents' citizenship or legal status. Lorena, a 24-year-old Colombian asylum seeker who lives in Houston and is due to give birth in September, pored over media reports on Friday morning. She was looking for details about how her baby might be affected, but said she was left confused and worried. "There are not many specifics," said Lorena, who like others interviewed by Reuters asked to be identified by her first name out of fear for her safety. "I don't understand it well." She is concerned that her baby could end up with no nationality. "I don't know if I can give her mine," she said. "I also don't know how it would work, if I can add her to my asylum case. I don't want her to be adrift with no nationality." Trump, a Republican, issued an order after taking office in January that directed U.S. agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of children born in the U.S. who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident. The order was blocked by three separate U.S. district court judges, sending the case on a path to the Supreme Court. The resulting decision said Trump's policy could go into effect in 30 days but appeared to leave open the possibility of further proceedings in the lower courts that could keep the policy blocked. On Friday afternoon, plaintiffs filed an amended lawsuit in federal court in Maryland seeking to establish a nationwide class of people whose children could be denied citizenship. If they are not blocked nationwide, the restrictions could be applied in the 28 states that did not contest them in court, creating "an extremely confusing patchwork" across the country, according to Kathleen Bush-Joseph, a policy analyst for the non-partisan Migration Policy Institute. "Would individual doctors, individual hospitals be having to try to figure out how to determine the citizenship of babies and their parents?" she said. The drive to restrict birthright citizenship is part of Trump's broader immigration crackdown, and he has framed automatic citizenship as a magnet for people to come to give birth. "Hundreds of thousands of people are pouring into our country under birthright citizenship, and it wasn't meant for that reason," he said during a White House press briefing on Friday. WORRIED CALLS Immigration advocates and lawyers in some Republican-led states said they received calls from a wide range of pregnant immigrants and their partners following the ruling. They were grappling with how to explain it to clients who could be dramatically affected, given all the unknowns of how future litigation would play out or how the executive order would be implemented state by state. Lynn Tramonte, director of the Ohio Immigrant Alliance said she got a call on Friday from an East Asian temporary visa holder with a pregnant wife. He was anxious because Ohio is not one of the plaintiff states and wanted to know how he could protect his child's rights. "He kept stressing that he was very interested in the rights included in the Constitution," she said. Advocates underscored the gravity of Trump's restrictions, which would block an estimated 150,000 children born in the U.S. annually from receiving automatic citizenship. "It really creates different classes of people in the country with different types of rights," said Juliana Macedo do Nascimento, a spokesperson for the immigrant rights organization United We Dream. "That is really chaotic." Adding uncertainty, the Supreme Court ruled that members of two plaintiff groups in the litigation - CASA, an immigrant advocacy service in Maryland, and the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project - would still be covered by lower court blocks on the policy. Whether someone in a state where Trump's policy could go into effect could join one of the organizations to avoid the restrictions or how state or federal officials would check for membership remained unclear. Betsy, a U.S. citizen who recently graduated from high school in Virginia and a CASA member, said both of her parents came to the U.S. from El Salvador two decades ago and lacked legal status when she was born. "I feel like it targets these innocent kids who haven't even been born," she said, declining to give her last name for concerns over her family's safety. Nivida, a Honduran asylum seeker in Louisiana, is a member of the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project and recently gave birth. She heard on Friday from a friend without legal status who is pregnant and wonders about the situation under Louisiana's Republican governor, since the state is not one of those fighting Trump's order. "She called me very worried and asked what's going to happen," she said. "If her child is born in Louisiana … is the baby going to be a citizen?" This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
