Arab League backs call for Hamas to disarm for a two-state solution
The Arab League called on militant group Hamas to disarm and hand power in Gaza to the Western-backed Palestinian Authority as part of a broader call for a two-state solution in the Middle East.
France, which said last week it would recognize a Palestinian state in September, and Saudi Arabia together issued a declaration July 29, backed by Egypt, Qatar and the Arab League, outlining steps toward implementing a two-state solution.
As part of an end to the Gaza war, they said Hamas "must end its rule in Gaza and hand over its weapons to the Palestinian Authority." The declaration came at a two-day United Nations conference in New York.
More: Two Israeli rights groups say Israel is committing genocide in Gaza
The Arab call for Hamas to disarm came as Gaza is in the grip of starvation brought on by a near-complete Israeli blockade of food and medical supplies. More than 60,000 Palestinians have died in Gaza during Israel's retaliatory war on Hamas following the Oct. 7, 2023 attacks on southern Israel.
"Those children look very hungry," President Donald Trump said July 28, contradicting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's assertion that there was no starvation in Gaza. 'I want to make sure they get the food, every ounce of food.'
Hamas has consistently rejected calls to disarm or cede control of Gaza.
The Arab League has 22 members including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt, most of whom are aligned against Iran, Hamas' most important backer.
Contributing: Reuters
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Analysis-India-US spat over trade and oil threatens wider fallout
By Krishna N. Das, David Brunnstrom and Shivam Patel NEW DELHI/WASHINGTON (Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump's tirade against India over trade and Russian oil purchases threatens to undo two decades of diplomatic progress, analysts and officials say, and could derail other areas of cooperation as domestic political pressures drive both sides to harden their stances. India's opposition parties and the general public have urged Prime Minister Narendra Modi to stand up to what they call bullying by Trump, who on Wednesday signed an executive order subjecting Indian imports to an additional 25% in duties on top of an existing 25% tariff, due to its big purchases of Russian oil. While India has emerged in recent years as a key partner for Washington in its strategic rivalry with China, its large U.S. trade surplus and close relations with Russia - which Trump is seeking to pressure into agreeing to a peace agreement with Ukraine - have made it a prime target in the Republican president's global tariff offensive. Trump's taunt that India could buy oil from arch enemy Pakistan has also not gone down well in New Delhi, said two Indian government sources. India has also rejected repeated claims by Trump that he used trade as a lever to end a recent military conflict between India and Pakistan. In an unusually sharp statement this week, India accused the U.S. of double standards in singling it out for Russian oil imports while continuing to buy Russian uranium hexafluoride, palladium and fertiliser. On Wednesday, it called the tariffs "unfair, unjustified and unreasonable," vowing to "take all actions necessary to protect its national interests." But New Delhi knows that any further escalation will hurt it in matters beyond trade, said the sources. Unlike China, India does not have leverage like supplies of rare earths to force Trump's hand to improve the terms of any trade deal, they said. In recent years, successive U.S. administrations, including Trump's first, carefully cultivated relations with India with an eye on it as a vital partner in long-term efforts to counter the growing might of China. But analysts say Trump's recent moves have plunged the relationship back to possibly its worst phase since the U.S. imposed sanctions on India for nuclear tests in 1998. "India is now in a trap: because of Trump's pressure, Modi will reduce India's oil purchases from Russia, but he cannot publicly admit to doing so for fear of looking like he's surrendering to Trump's blackmail," said Ashley Tellis at Washington's Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. "We could be heading into a needless crisis that unravels a quarter century of hard-won gains with India." Indian state refiners have in recent days stopped buying Russian oil as discounts narrowed and pressure from Trump rose, Reuters has reported. NEW CHALLENGES FOR RELATIONS A more pressing challenge for India, analysts say, is the stark divergence between its priorities and Trump's political base on key issues such as work visas for tech professionals and offshoring of services. India has long been a major beneficiary of U.S. work visa programs and the outsourcing of software and business services, a sore point for Americans who have lost jobs to cheaper workers in India. Relations with India risk becoming a "football in American domestic politics," warned Evan Feigenbaum, a former senior State Department official under the Republican presidency of George W. Bush. "Issues that directly touch India are among the most partisan and explosive in Washington, including immigration and deportation, H1B visas for tech workers, offshoring and overseas manufacturing by U.S. companies, and technology sharing and co-innovation with foreigners," he wrote in a LinkedIn post. Since a 2008 deal to cooperate on civilian nuclear technology, the two countries have deepened intelligence sharing and defence cooperation and expanded interactions with Australia and Japan through the Quad grouping aimed at containing China's dominance in the Indo-Pacific. But fractures have appeared, despite Modi's rapport with Trump in his first term and then former President Joe Biden. Images in February of Indians deported by the U.S. on military planes, their hands and legs shackled, horrified the country just days before Modi went to see Trump seeking to stave off high tariffs. The relationship was also seriously tested in late 2023 when the U.S. said it had foiled a plot with Indian links to kill a Sikh separatist leader on U.S. soil. New Delhi has denied any official connection to the plot. "The Modi regime's credibility in the U.S. has gone down," said Sukh Deo Muni, a former Indian diplomat and a professor emeritus at New Delhi's Jawaharlal Nehru University. "And maybe there are people who think that India or Modi had to be brought back on track, if not taught a lesson. And if that trend continues, I'm quite worried that the challenge is quite powerful and strong for India to navigate." STRENGTHENING TIES WITH U.S. RIVALS One Indian government source said India needs to gradually repair ties with the U.S. while engaging more with other nations that have faced the brunt of Trump tariffs and aid cuts, including the African Union and the BRICS bloc that includes Brazil, Russia, China and South Africa. India is already making some moves with Russia and China. Russian President Vladimir Putin is expected to visit New Delhi this year and on Tuesday, Russia said the two countries had discussed further strengthening defence cooperation "in the form of a particularly privileged strategic partnership." India has also boosted engagement with China, a change after years of tensions following a deadly border clash in 2020. Modi is set to visit China soon for the first time since 2018. "Russia will attempt to exploit the rift between the U.S. and India by proposing the restoration of the Russia-India-China trilateral and new projects in defence," said analyst Aleksei Zakharov at the Observer Research Foundation in New Delhi. "India will undoubtedly be mindful of structural factors such as sanctions against Russia and will seek to find a compromise with the Trump administration." Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Boston Globe
23 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Stanford newspaper challenges legal basis for student deportations
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The lawsuit says that the newspaper, which is open to all students and has more than 150 members, according to the complaint, has weathered resignations and withdrawn stories by noncitizens who were concerned that publishing content about Israel or the conditions in the Gaza Strip could leave them vulnerable to deportation. Advertisement The climate of fear the lawsuit cites at Stanford follows a spate of arrests earlier this year, when the Trump administration began targeting prominent student activists in March, including Mahmoud Khalil and Rumeysa Ozturk, over their activism in speaking out against the Israeli government and the mounting death toll in Gaza. Advertisement 'They are going after lawfully present noncitizens for bedrock speech, like authoring an op-ed and going to protest,' said Conor Fitzpatrick, the supervising senior attorney at the foundation. 'And unless you have a blue passport with an eagle on it that says United States of America, they think they can throw you out of the country for it.' In those and other cases, immigration agents arrested the students after Secretary of State Marco Rubio invoked the provision, deeming the students a threat to U.S. foreign policy interests. In each case, Rubio personally signed off on the decision to revoke a student visa or render a lawful permanent resident deportable after determining that those interests were at stake. 'Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the Trump administration are trying to turn the inalienable human right of free speech into a privilege contingent upon the whims of a federal bureaucrat, triggering deportation proceedings against noncitizens residing lawfully in this country for their protected political speech regarding American and Israeli foreign policy,' the lawsuit says. The new lawsuit mirrored many elements of a case brought by another group, the American Association of University Professors, which is seeking to block the Trump administration from pursuing what it describes as a policy of 'ideological deportations' -- using the law to target activists based on their shared criticism of Israel and its conduct in the war. That case was argued before a federal judge during a two-week trial in Boston in July, and he is expected to decide this month whether to block the deportations on First Amendment grounds. The case raised similar concerns about chilled speech on college campuses, with testimony from faculty at several universities about how dramatically noncitizen academics had withdrawn from public life. Advertisement But lawyers in that case explicitly stopped short of arguing that using the foreign policy provision to target student demonstrators was unconstitutional, sidestepping a risky gambit in court over whether Rubio had abused the authority. That caution came as William G. Young, the judge in the case, expressed skepticism throughout the trial about whether he could rule against Rubio or others in the Trump administration given that they were exercising powers given to them by Congress. 'It seems to me we have a new administration who has, you know, absolutely the primary authority over the foreign policy of the United States,' Young said during closing arguments last month. But other judges have already contemplated the same questions the new lawsuit raises, concluding that using the foreign policy provision in the student activist cases was vague and probably violated the First Amendment. In the case involving Khalil, Judge Michael E. Farbiarz of the U.S. District Court in New Jersey wrote that using the foreign policy provision to detain him was probably unconstitutional, even though that did not factor into his decisions to order Khalil's release in June. Since the Supreme Court limited federal judges' ability to issue nationwide injunctions in June, any ruling in the case would likely apply only to the plaintiffs at Stanford. But the lawsuit aims to set a legal precedent that the organization hopes could be used more broadly. (STORY CAN END HERE. OPTIONAL MATERIAL FOLLOWS.) Fitzpatrick, the foundation lawyer, said there were narrow but conceivable situations in which the use of the foreign policy law would be appropriate, such as if pro-Kremlin Ukrainian politicians who fled the country after Russia's invasion sought refuge in the United States and continued to work to undermine Kyiv from abroad. Advertisement 'That has an arguable constitutional basis,' he said. 'What does not have an arguable constitutional basis is someone going up to a podium, whether it's at a city council meeting or a local park, at a protest, voicing an opinion that would be completely protected if you or I said it, and the secretary of state saying, 'We don't like the ideas you're spreading -- get out.' 'That's un-American,' he said. This article originally appeared in
USA Today
23 minutes ago
- USA Today
Phones, jewelry, linens: Which products could cost more due to Trump's India tariffs?
President Donald Trump announced the United States will impose an additional 25% tariff on Indian goods, bringing import levies on some items as high as 50%. The Wednesday, Aug. 6, order from the president comes less than a week after the first round of 25% tariff hikes were announced for the South Asian nation and significant U.S. trading partner. Trump cited New Delhi's continued imports of Russian oil as the reason behind this newest measure, sharply escalating tensions between the two countries after months of negotiations over a possible limited trade agreement fell through. The new tariffs on some Indian goods would be among the steepest faced by any U.S. trading partner. Trade analysts warned the tariffs could severely disrupt Indian exports, according to Reuters. The president's order says the additional 25% tariff will go into effect 21 days after the previously-announced 25% tariff, which was set to take hold Aug. 7. Trump announced the initial 25% tariff in a post on his social media app Truth Social on July 30, two days before a bevy of increased reciprocal tariffs went into effect for dozens of nations on Aug. 1. India, the world's fifth largest economy in 2024, relies significantly on the U.S., counting it as its top trading partner last year. Indian goods exported to the U.S. totaled $87 billion in 2024, according to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, with pharmaceuticals and jewelry among its top product types, followed by petrochemicals and textiles. Separately, services exports, mainly IT and professional services, were worth $33 billion last year. The U.S. is India's third-largest investor, and has a $45.7 billion trade deficit with the South Asian nation. Here are some of the products the U.S. relies on most from India, as previously reported by USA TODAY. Pharmaceuticals The U.S. accounts for nearly a third of India's pharmaceutical exports, mainly cheaper versions of popular drugs, Reuters reports, with sales jumping 16% to about $9 billion last fiscal year. Among the dozens of types of medications and supplies the U.S. imports from India, a few classifications make up a significant share. They are items like wadding, gauze and bandages; antineoplastic and immunosuppressive medications, including those used to treat cancers; and analgesics, antipyretics and nonhormonal anti-inflammatory agents, such as pain relievers and medications used to reduce fevers. Smartphones Though China and Vietnam were responsible for more than half of phones sent to the U.S. last year, India also produces a significant share, and looks to be gaining a firmer foothold in the market. According to a new report, India has overtaken China in the last few months as the top exporter of smartphones to the U.S., following Apple's pivot to center manufacturing in New Delhi amid tariff concerns. The share of U.S. smartphone shipments assembled in China fell from 61% to 25% over the past year, the research firm Canalys said, with India picking up most of the decline and increasing its smartphone volume by 240% roughly within the same time frame. More: Trump's trade talks intensify with tariff deadline fast approaching Jewelry and precious stones Next to pharmaceuticals, jewelry and precious stones are among India's top products exported to American consumers. About 30% of India's gems and jewelry exports go to the U.S., accounting for about $10 billion in annual trade, said Kirit Bhansali, chairman of the Gem and Jewellery Export Promotion Council of India, per Reuters. These goods include unmounted or unset diamonds, precious metal jewelry and jewelry clad with precious metal − such as pieces plated with gold or silver. Home linens India is among the top countries responsible for imported home linens in the U.S., representing 36% of nearly $6 billion in imports, according to a New York Times analysis of government data. These products include bathroom and kitchen linen made of terrycloth or cotton, along with bed and table linens. India is also a leader in some types of imported clothing, such as activewear, shirts, baby clothes and suits. According to the Yale Budget Lab, the tariff hikes so far have disproportionately affected clothing and textiles, with consumers facing up to 39% higher shoe prices and 37% higher apparel prices in the short run. Other products The U.S. also relies on Indian imports of frozen shrimp and prawns, petroleum oils such as transformer oil and motor fuel, semiconductor technologies like solar panels and certain types of electrical machinery and parts. Contributing: Reuters; Joey Garrison, USA TODAY. Kathryn Palmer is a national trending news reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach her at kapalmer@ and on X @KathrynPlmr.
