
Rubio criticises UK over Gaza-related sanctions on Israeli ministers
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has criticised a decision by the UK and four other nations to impose sanctions on two far-right Israeli Cabinet ministers over their comments on Gaza.
"These sanctions do not advance US-led efforts to achieve a ceasefire, bring all hostages home, and end the war," Rubio said in a statement on Tuesday.
The UK, alongside Australia, Canada, New Zealand and Norway, imposed sanctions on Israel's Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir, claiming the pair had incited "violence against Palestinians in the West Bank".
"Extremist rhetoric advocating the forced displacement of Palestinians and the creation of new Israeli settlements is appalling and dangerous," the countries said in a joint statement.
Smotrich, Israel's finance minister, and Ben-Gvir, the country's national security minister, are senior members of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's cabinet.
They have long viewed any pause in fighting as a danger to Israeli deterrence and, as leaders of key far-right coalition parties, hold leverage over Netanyahu, whose political survival depends on their continued support.
As a result of the sanctions, both ministers could face travel bans and asset freezes.
Ben-Gvir was defiant in response to the UK government's decision to impose sanctions.
"We survived Pharaoh; we will also survive Keir Starmer," he said in a statement, comparing the sanctions to Britain's White Paper of 1939, which restricted Jewish immigration to the-then Mandatory Palestine. Ben-Gvir added that he would continue working for Israel and its people without fear or intimidation.
Smotrich said: "Britain has already tried once to prevent us from settling the cradle of our homeland, and we will not allow it to do so again. We are determined to continue building."
Rubio also called on allies to "not forget who the real enemy is". He urged a reversal of the sanctions and said that the US stood "shoulder-to-shoulder with Israel".
US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee called the sanctions "an incredible overreach".
Israel's government strongly condemned the announcement. Foreign Minister Gideon Saar called the move "outrageous" and said he would meet with Netanyahu next week to discuss a formal response. He warned the sanctions could harden Hamas' position in ongoing negotiations to end the war in Gaza.
Even centrist Israeli leaders criticised the sanctions. Benny Gantz, a political rival to Netanyahu, called the decision a "profound moral mistake" and said it sends "a dangerous message to terrorists around the world".
The sanctions come as traditional allies of Israel have stepped up their criticism of the country's prolonged war in Gaza and aid blockade, which human rights groups warn has pushed the enclave to the brink of famine.
South Korea's military said on Wednesday it had stopped broadcasting anti-North Korea propaganda through loudspeakers along the border, as part of the new liberal government's bid to ease tensions and "restore trust" between the rivals.
The move fulfilled a campaign promise from South Korea's new liberal president, Lee Jae-myung, who took office last week after winning an early election to replace ousted conservative Yoon Suk Yeol.
Lee has vowed to improve relations with Pyongyang, which reacted furiously to Yoon's hardline policies and shunned dialogue with Seoul as a result.
South Korea's defence ministry said suspending the broadcasts was part of efforts "to restore trust in inter-Korean relations and promote peace on the Korean Peninsula".
North Korea, which is extremely sensitive to any outside criticism of its authoritarian leadership and its ruler, Kim Jong-un, has not commented on the move by Seoul.
The broadcasts had previously been paused for six years, but they resumed in June last year in retaliation for North Korea flying rubbish-filled balloons over the border.
Between May and November last year, North Korea flew about 7,000 balloons toward South Korea in 32 separate events to drop substances such as wastepaper, cloth scraps, cigarette butts and even manure, according to Seoul.
Pyongyang said that its balloon campaign came after South Korean activists sent over balloons filled with anti-North Korean leaflets, as well as USB sticks filled with songs and dramas popular in the South.
The Cold War-style psychological warfare campaigns added to tensions fuelled by North Korea's growing nuclear ambitions and South Korean efforts to expand joint military exercises with the US and bolster three-way security cooperation with Japan.
During the recent South Korean election campaign, Lee promised to halt the broadcasts, arguing that they created unnecessary tensions and discomfort for residents in border towns in the South.
Those residents had complained about North Korea's retaliatory broadcasts, which included howling animals, pounding gongs and other irritating sounds.
In a briefing on Monday, South Korea's unification ministry also called for civilian activists in the country to stop flying anti-North propaganda leaflets across the border.
Such activities "could heighten tensions on the Korean Peninsula and threaten the lives and safety of residents in border areas," a spokesperson for the ministry said.
Despite Lee's vow to reopen communication channels with Pyongyang, the likelihood of an early resumption of dialogue between the rivals remains low.
North Korea has consistently rejected such offers from the South and the US since 2019, when nuclear talks between Washington and Pyongyang collapsed over sanctions-related disputes.
Pyongyang's foreign policy priority is now with Russia, which has received thousands of North Korean troops and large amounts of military equipment in recent months for its war with Ukraine.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


France 24
an hour ago
- France 24
Trump says Israel should not strike Iran, as nuclear deal 'close'
Trump acknowledged that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was considering a strike, which he said could spark a "massive conflict" -- leading to a US decision to draw down embassy staff in the region. "We are fairly close to a pretty good agreement," Trump told reporters. Asked about his discussions with Netanyahu, Trump said: "I don't want them going in, because I think it would blow it." Trump quickly added: "Might help it actually, but it also could blow it." Trump's Middle East pointman Steve Witkoff is set to hold a sixth round of talks on Sunday in Oman with Iran, which defiantly said it would raise levels of uranium enrichment -- the key sticking point in talks. Trump again described himself as a man of peace and said he would prefer a negotiated settlement with Iran. "I'd love to avoid the conflict. Iran's going to have to negotiate a little bit tougher -- meaning they're going to have to give us some things that they're not willing to give us right now," he said.


Euronews
an hour ago
- Euronews
Irish government rejects motion to stop sale of Israeli bonds
The Irish government on Wednesday defeated a cross-party motion that called on it to stop the Central Bank of Ireland from facilitating the sale of Israeli bonds. The motion, presented by the Social Democrats and supported by Sinn Féin, Labour, and People Before Profit, was intended to block what many refer to as 'Israeli war bonds'. The instruments provide economic support to Israel while it conducts military operations in Gaza, and Ireland's Central Bank currently approves the sale of these bonds in EU markets. Bonds issued by non-EU countries must be approved by the financial regulator in one member state before they can be sold within the single market. The bill failed with 85 votes against and 71 in favour, upholding the government's position. Several TDs, Irish members of parliament, argued that Ireland should not be involved in financial instruments that fund destruction in Gaza. The Central Bank estimated that Israel has raised between €100mn and €130mn from their sale. Taoiseach Micheál Martin nonetheless rejected claims that the Irish government is complicit in genocide by allowing the facilitation of the bond sales. Despite publicly acknowledging the severity of Israel's attacks in Gaza, he maintained that Ireland must oppose the military action within legal and diplomatic channels. As such, the government argued that it cannot legally direct the Central Bank due to its independence under Irish and EU law. When the same objection arose last month in response to a similar motion from Sinn Féin, party leader Mary Lou McDonald argued: 'We have over 20 pages of independent, robust legal opinion clearly stating that the bill is compliant with Irish law, European law and international law.' As per the EU's Prospectus Regulation, non-EU countries like Israel must meet disclosure and legal standards to issue bonds in the bloc. If those standards are met, the Central Bank doesn't have the authority to reject bond applications. 'The Central Bank cannot decide to impose sanctions for breaches or alleged breaches of international law. It is for international bodies such as the UN or the EU to determine how to respond to breaches or alleged breaches of international law,' said Central Bank Governor Gabriel Makhlouf. He added that the Genocide Convention applies to the Irish State, not regulatory bodies like the Central Bank. The reason why the Irish Central Bank is at the core of this issue — despite Ireland being one of the EU countries that has been the most vocally pro-Palestine — is Brexit. When the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union in 2016, Israel chose Ireland to be the home member state to approve its bonds. Prior to 2021, this responsibility fell to the UK. The current prospectus for Israeli bonds is set to expire in September, but Central Bank officials believe that Israeli authorities will likely initiate the renewal process several weeks beforehand. In the absence of new EU sanctions or changes to existing legislation, the Central Bank will remain legally bound to approve the bond prospectus, regardless of the political fallout. Meanwhile, protesters have been gathering for months outside the seat of the parliament, Leinster House, and the Central Bank, demanding that the government block Israeli bond sales. Britain's economic recovery suffered a setback in April, with gross domestic product (GDP) shrinking by 0.3% on a monthly basis, marking the steepest contraction since October 2023, according to data released by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) on Thursday. The contraction, which exceeded market expectations of a 0.1% fall, has renewed concerns over the UK economy's resilience and intensified pressure on both Downing Street and the Bank of England (BoE)'s policy stance. The April downturn followed a modest 0.2% expansion in March and comes amid a broader backdrop of weakening labour market data and fading consumer momentum. The services sector, which accounts for around 80% of UK economic output, was the primary drag in April, declining by 0.4%. Within services, the professional, scientific and technical activities subsector posted a significant fall of 2.4%. This contraction was driven mainly by a 10.2% plunge in legal activities, attributed in part to the impact of changes to Stamp Duty Land Tax thresholds in England and Northern Ireland. The tax change prompted homebuyers to bring forward purchases to March, resulting in a sharp drop in related services, such as conveyancing and estate agency work, in April. Advertising and market research also contributed negatively to GDP, with output down 3.4%, while growth in scientific research and development (up 6.7%) provided a partial offset. The wholesale and retail trade and repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles subsector also weighed on GDP, declining by 1.2% in April after a 0.9% expansion in March. Production output fell by 0.6% in April, with manufacturing production sliding 0.9% — adding to a 0.8% fall in the previous month. Overall industrial production contracted by 0.6%, coming in weaker than the 0.5% decline expected by analysts. Despite a rebound in construction output, which rose 0.9% month-on-month, it was not enough to counterbalance the broader economic dip. The downturn in GDP comes on the heels of deteriorating labour market data released earlier this week. The number of payrolled employees fell by 109,000 in May, the seventh consecutive monthly decline and the sharpest drop since May 2020. The total stood at 30.2 million, a 0.4% monthly fall. The unemployment rate ticked up to 4.6% in the three months to April, in line with expectations, while wage growth softened. Regular pay excluding bonuses increased by 5.2% year-on-year — the slowest pace in seven months and below the 5.4% forecast. Despite the mounting economic headwinds, the BoE is widely expected to leave interest rates unchanged at 4.25% at its upcoming meeting next week. However, traders have increased their bets on a rate cut in August, anticipating a 0.25 percentage point reduction as the economy shows further signs of cooling. Overall, money markets are currently pricing two interest rate cuts of cumulative 50 basis points by the BoE this year. Sterling came under pressure following the GDP release, with the euro rising to 0.85 pounds — the highest level in over a month during morning trading. UK government bond yields extended their weekly declines. The yield on the two-year gilt fell to 3.90%, the lowest since early May, while the ten-year yield slipped to 4.53%. Equity markets, however, remained broadly resilient. The FTSE 100 held steady around 8,860 points, just shy of Wednesday's all-time high of 8,885. Among the notable movers, Halma plc surged over 8% on the back of strong corporate results. BP also gained 1.8%, buoyed by higher oil prices following the announcement of a trade agreement between the United States and China. On the downside, Intermediate Capital Group and EasyJet dropped 4.1% and 2.6%, respectively.


Euronews
2 hours ago
- Euronews
Strikes against Iran: A political manoeuvre or all-out war?
The US ordered the evacuation of non-essential embassy staff and their families from several countries across the Middle East on Wednesday night as tensions in the region continue to escalate. The decision comes amid an apparent impasse in US-Iran nuclear talks, with US President Donald Trump saying he was "less confident" the two countries would reach a deal to reign in Tehran's nuclear ambitions. The US State Department announced it would be partially evacuating personnel from the US embassy in Baghdad to "keep Americans safe, both home and abroad." That comes after US officials told CBS that they had been told that Israel was ready to launch a military operation in Iran and that US military positions in neighbouring Iraq could be the target of a retaliation by Tehran. But is what is happening now just manoeuvres by Iran to protect its nuclear programme, or is the region really facing a scenario of a surprise military strike that could ignite a comprehensive regional war? Euronews takes a look at the complexity of the situation and the possible repercussions on several different fronts; from Gaza to the Red Sea, from Lebanon to Syria. Israel has long warned that Iran's nuclear programme is not peaceful in nature and that if the country were to develop nuclear weapons, Israel could conceivably be the target of a nuclear strike. However, US President Donald Trump issued a direct warning to Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu not to strike Iran, saying unilateral military action was off limits and diplomacy needed a chance to succeed. On the other hand, some of Netanyahu's critics see a military escalation in Iran as securing his political future and having similar impact to the fronts he opened up in Lebanon and Syria. Any war with Iran would not come without a substantial cost to the United States. US bases in Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates would all be vulnerable to Iranian missile attacks in the event of a conflict. Commander of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps, Hossein Salami, said bluntly: "We monitor the depth of the enemy's targets and are prepared for any scenario." Iranian Defence Minister Aziz Nasserzadeh has also warned that any strikes would not go unanswered, vowing to bomb US bases in the region. But is this just rhetoric or would Iran carry out its threats? And it's debatable whether the United States would want to get mired in another long-running conflict in the Middle East so soon after it withdrew its last troops from Iraq after almost eight years in the country. The presence of the US Navy's Sixth Fleet in the Mediterranean also raises questions about its role in the event of war. At a time when threats are escalating, the deployment of this fleet seems to enhance Washington's ability to act quickly, but it also makes it a direct target for any Iranian response. Amidst the regional sabre rattling, Palestinians in the Gaza Strip fear that their cause will be relegated to the sidelines. This could turn Gaza into a "forgotten issue" in the outbreak of a major regional confrontation, with all the humanitarian costs that this would imply. The Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen, who have supported Gaza since the start of the war in October 2023 by targeting what they believed to be Israel-linked shopping in the Red Sea, recently reached an agreement with Washington to stop attacking freight vessels. But there is a strong possibility that if Iran is attacked and launches counterstrikes, that agreement will be forgotten and the Houthis will rearm and start fighting in support of its main financial backer. Another escalation in and around the key Red Sea shopping lanes threatens again to drive up commodity and oil prices and disrupt the flow of goods between countries. Another issue is Lebanon. Despite Israel reaching a ceasefire deal with the Lebanon-based militant group Hezbollah in November last year, Israeli strikes on Lebanon haven't really stopped, with the IDF allegedly targeting Hezbollah members and facilities. So far, Hezbollah has remained silent on the escalating tensions but, like the Houthis, its main financial backer is Iran. The expectation is Hezbollah will launch solidarity strikes on Israel and while the group was militarily weakened after a year of almost daily cross-border exchanges of fire with Israel, the indications are that Hezbollah maintains a significant offensive capacity which could translate into pressure on Israel's northern front. Iraq stands at a very sensitive point. Armed factions loyal to Tehran, led by the Iraqi Hezbollah Brigades, maintain their readiness in anticipation of any military development against Iran, raising urgent questions about whether these factions will be the spearhead in targeting US bases or interests associated with Israel from within Iraqi territory. However, the biggest challenge facing Baghdad is not only taking a decisive stance on the potential crisis, but how to strike a balance between avoiding a destructive confrontation on the one hand, and maintaining fragile security stability on the other. Security reports indicate serious fears that the so-called Islamic State (IS) terror group could resurface, taking advantage of a regional conflict and the potential security vacuum. In this context, Iraq seems at risk of being drawn into a conflict to which it was not a party, but may suddenly find itself at the centre of a battle that exceeds its ability to endure or control its course. Since the assumption of power by interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa, Syria has been witnessing a gradual shift in its approach to regional and international relations, amid an openness towards the West and hints of an unprecedented rapprochement with Israel. This shift, while still in the process of taking shape, raises a central question: In light of the new understandings, could Syrian territory become a corridor or a platform for any military operations in the event of a conflict? On the other hand, this scenario is not without internal challenges. Remnants of the former regime will seek to exploit the new situation to regain their influence, while the renewed threat of IS poses a real threat to stability. As for al-Sharaa, he faces a fateful test. If regional war breaks out, will he remain on the sidelines or attempt to determine his position in a complex regional equation by picking a side? An alliance with Iran seems unlikely in light of the new political trajectory, as does an alignment against Israel. Between these two "impossibilities," the region is waiting to see how Damascus will position itself in the next phase. Any military strike against Iran would not be a quick or easy operation, but rather a step fraught with enormous strategic and security complications. The outbreak of a confrontation would mean the expansion of its scope to include multiple fronts, widespread disruption of regional balances, and the exposure of vital interests in the Middle East to painful blows. On the Israeli side, Netanyahu may see the battle as an opportunity to escape his internal political and judicial crises - he is facing charges in three separate corruption cases - and achieve personal gains at the expense of the region's stability. As for the US, despite its enormous military power, it is facing a decisive moment, between adopting a deliberate policy of deterrence or being drawn into an open conflict that could cost it dearly, especially in light of the deployment of its military bases in the region surrounding Iran. Iran, already exhausted by Western sanctions and accumulated economic pressures, will be the first to be affected by any war, which threatens to explode the internal situation and widen the circle of popular anger at a time when the country's leadership is facing a double test; maintaining internal cohesion and responding to external threats. A far-right Turkish politician accused of inciting public hatred and hostility went on trial on Wednesday in a case critics view as an effort to suppress opposition to the president. Ümit Özdağ, the leader of the Victory Party, was detained in January over accusations he insulted President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in comments at a party meeting in Antalya. Özdağ was then formally arrested and charged with inciting hatred against migrants. He was blamed for last year's anti-Syrian refugee riots in the central Turkish province of Kayseri, during which hundreds of homes and businesses were attacked. Prosecutors have presented a series of posts from Özdağ's social media as evidence against him. He faces up to four years in prison if found guilty. Meanwhile, the court in Silivri ruled that Özdağ should remain in detention until his next hearing on 17 June. Özdağ, a 64-year-old former academic, is an outspoken critic of Turkey's refugee policies and has previously called for the repatriation of millions of Syrian refugees. Özdağ acknowledged advocating the return of refugees at the opening hearing of his trial at a prison complex on the outskirts of Istanbul. He denied he had incited violence against them and told the court he had worked to calm tensions in Kayseri. In his defence statement, Özdağ maintained that his imprisonment was politically motivated and aimed at silencing him over his criticism of the government's recent effort to end a decades-long conflict with the militant Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK). "The reason why I am here ... is because I criticised the talks held with the PKK terrorist organisation's chief," Özdağ said. The Victory Party strongly opposes any concessions to the PKK which Turkey, along with many Western states including the European Union, the United Kingdom and the United States, considers a terrorist organisation. The conflict with the PKK has resulted in tens of thousands of deaths since the 1980s. When the trial opened on Wednesday, Özdağ's lawyers requested more time to prepare and the proceedings were adjourned until next Tuesday. The politician's trial comes amid a widespread crackdown on the opposition to Erdoğan's Justice and Development or AK party. Officials from municipalities controlled by the main opposition, the Republican People's Party (CHP), have faced waves of arrests this year. Istanbul Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu was detained in March over allegations of corruption. İmamoğlu was due in court on Thursday morning to face charges of attempting to influence a witness and attempting to interfere with a trial, but neither he nor his lawyers attended the session. The court rescheduled the trial date for 26 September. Many people in Turkey consider those cases to be politically motivated, according to opinion polls. However, Erdoğan's government insists the courts are impartial and free from political involvement. İmamoğlu is widely viewed as the main challenger to Erdoğan's two-decade rule and is the CHP's candidate for the next presidential election. The election is due in 2028 but could be held earlier.