Fate of Bibas Family Recalls Trauma of Oct. 7, Renewing Fears for Gaza Truce
For 16 months, the smiling faces of Shiri Bibas and her two young sons, Ariel and Kfir, had been slowly receding into the background of Israeli life as their photographs — posted on walls and bus stops soon after the family's abduction to Gaza in October 2023 — began to fade, tear and peel.
On Friday, the Bibas's lives and disturbing deaths were swept back to the forefront of Israel's collective consciousness in such a startling and unsettling way that it set off fresh alarm about the fate of the fragile cease-fire in Gaza and the high-level diplomatic efforts, which had gathered momentum in recent days, to extend the truce and end the war.
Early on Friday morning, the Israeli military announced that the body of Ms. Bibas — nominally returned, along with those of her sons, by Hamas to Israel on Thursday — appeared to be that of someone else. And an autopsy of the two boys, aged 4 and 8 months at the time of their abduction, revealed that they were killed by terrorists in Gaza, the military said.
Hamas, which had previously said they were killed in an Israeli missile strike, said in a statement that it was investigating the claims and suggested that Ms. Bibas's body might have been mistakenly confused for that of a dead Palestinian in the chaotic aftermath of an Israeli attack. Neither side's account could be independently verified.
The news set off a paroxysm of fury and agony in Israel rarely seen since the tumultuous days that followed Hamas's attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, when up to 1,200 people were killed and 251 were abducted, including Ms. Bibas and her sons, on the deadliest day in Israeli history.
Responding to the military's announcement, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel returned to the language of vengeance that defined his speeches in the aftermath of that attack.
'May God avenge their blood,' Mr. Netanyahu said in a recorded speech to the nation on Friday morning. 'And we will also have our vengeance.'
The seething tenor of Mr. Netanyahu's response was maintained across much of the Israeli political spectrum. Naftali Bennett, a former prime minister, said in a broadcast interview that the Bibas's treatment showed how 'the majority of Gazans want to murder all of the Israelis.' (Polling last fall suggested that less than 40 percent of Gazan Palestinians supported the Oct. 7 attack, down from more than 70 percent early last year.)
For some Israelis, the horror underlined the need to restart the war to defeat Hamas once and for all. The current truce is set to elapse in early March unless Hamas and Israel can agree to an extension. 'The only solution is the destruction of Hamas, and this must not be postponed,' said Bezalel Smotrich, the far-right finance minister, in a post on social media.
But others called for calm, arguing that the fate of the Bibas family exemplified why the truce needed to be extended to bring home roughly 70 hostages still held, both dead and alive, in Gaza.
'We must remember our highest duty — to do everything in our power to bring every one of our kidnapped sisters and brothers home,' Israel's mainly ceremonial president, Isaac Herzog, said in a statement. 'All of them. Until the very last.'
Six living Israeli hostages are set to be released on Saturday, and analysts said it was unlikely that Israel would do anything to jeopardize their freedom.
The long-term future of the truce seemed less clear. Arab leaders were set to meet in Saudi Arabia on Friday to try to thrash out a proposal for Gaza's postwar reconstruction that would allow for the peaceful transfer of power from Hamas to an alternative Palestinian administration.
But in Israel, analysts speculated that the government would rather expel Hamas by force.
'If it were up to Netanyahu and his far-right partners, then next week — upon the completion of the first phase of the deal, with the return of four more bodies of fallen hostages — the path would be paved for the resumption of the war in Gaza,' wrote Amos Harel, a commentator on military affairs for Haaretz, a left-leaning newspaper. 'This time, they promise, without restraints.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Head of Germany's Greens urges country to sanction Israeli minister
The head of Germany's Green Party has called for Berlin to join other countries in sanctioning Israeli far-right ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir over accusations of inciting violence against Palestinians. Franziska Brantner, who co-leads Germany's second-largest opposition party, accused the two ministers of "openly calling for violence against the Palestinian population and long having propagated a policy of annexation and displacement." "This costs human lives, displaces entire communities and poses enormous hurdles on the path to a peace process," Brantner told dpa. Her comments came after the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Norway on Tuesday announced they have sanctioned Ben-Givr, the security minister in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government, and Smotrich, the finance minister. Ben-Gvir and Smotrich actively support the expansion of Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank and condone violence by militant settlers against the Palestinian population. Smotrich recently threatened the "total destruction" of the Gaza Strip, while Ben-Gvir has spoken out strongly against resuming humanitarian aid deliveries to the embattled Palestinian territory. In a joint statement, the foreign ministers of the five countries accused Smotrich and Ben-Gvir of inciting "extremist violence and serious abuses of Palestinian human rights." The British government said that the UK sanctions involve a travel ban as well as the freezing of assets. Norway also imposed a travel ban. Brantner said if the German government was serious about its proclaimed responsibility for the security of the State of Israel - a policy known in Germany as "reason of state" - as well as for international law, Berlin needed to act in lockstep with its European partners. "This is the only way a two-state solution can ever have a chance – as a way to ensure a life in security and dignity for Israelis and Palestinians."
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump-Harvard clash heats up. Here's what to know.
WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump's feud with Harvard University has reached a fever pitch – and it's only getting more heated. Days after he attempted to ban the Ivy League school from enrolling international students – a move that a federal judge immediately blocked – the General Services Administration directed all federal agencies on May 27 to explore ways to cut remaining contracts with the university, according to a senior administration official. The order is the latest in a series of direct swipes the White House has taken in recent weeks with the aim of punishing the Harvard community. The feud has escalated on a near-daily basis, halting major research trials, freezing billions of dollars in federal funding and prompting multiple high-stakes lawsuits. Trump's motives for targeting Harvard are complicated. He and members of his administration have roundly criticized the school and its Jewish president for creating a campus environment that the White House has characterized as rife with antisemitism, since protests broke out in response to the Israel-Hamas war. However, the Ivy League institution has long been a punching bag for conservatives, many of whom view it as a ground zero for liberal ideology and activism. More recently, Trump has complained in an increasingly forceful way about Harvard enrolling too many students from other countries. Read more: A new phase begins in Trump's battle with higher education Here's where things stand in Trump's crusade against Harvard. Harvard's foreign students spent the final days of their spring semester mired in fear and uncertainty. The Trump administration told them a week ago they'd need to transfer to another institution or risk losing their ability to remain in the United States. The only thing keeping that threat at bay is a federal court order. On May 22, the Department of Homeland Security revoked Harvard's certification to participate in the Student and Exchange Visitor Program, functionally barring the university from enrolling any international students. The change went into effect immediately, just a week before many foreign students would graduate, leaving them scrambling to determine whether their degrees would be jeopardized. Read more: International college students bring billions to the US. Here's why that may change. Harvard sued the following morning, accusing federal officials of violating multiple laws. Hours after the university filed its lawsuit, a federal judge in Massachusetts issued a temporary restraining order. The president also ordered Harvard on May 25 to turn over the "names and countries" of every international student enrolled at the university. The federal government already has access to that information through a database called the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System. Read more: Trump has been defunding university research. Does China benefit from it? The other major front in the Trump administration's battle with Harvard is over federal funding. Since mid-April, the White House has frozen billions of dollars in federal research grants for the school while characterizing the punitive actions as a response to Trump's concerns about campus antisemitism. Pausing that money has upended the university's research apparatus. Nearly every direct federal grant for Harvard's school of public health was terminated in May, according to the university. Among the dozens of defunded research projects were studies related to cancer screenings and lung disease. The first major threat to Harvard's funding came on March 31, when a task force of multiple federal agencies announced a review of roughly $9 billion in contracts and grants to the school. Harvard's leaders refused to comply with what they saw as a list of unprecedented demands by the task force to overhaul hiring and teaching. In response, the Trump administration froze $2.2 billion of the school's federal funding on April 14. Despite multiple requests, the administration still has not clarified to USA TODAY how that money breaks down. The university filed an initial suit against the White House on April 21 to restore its federal funding. In the weeks since, federal agencies have deemed Harvard ineligible for new federal research grants, yanked an additional $450 million in funding and considered cutting off even more government support for the school. In an interview with NPR on May 27, Harvard's president, Alan Garber, said his university isn't the only one whose scholars' scientific research has been hamstrung. "Everybody benefits from the research work of universities like ours. And it is not only about Harvard," he said. "The kinds of changes that the administration has begun and is contemplating, which include deep cuts to the National Institutes of Health and to the National Science Foundation, will affect all research universities and will have a real impact on the ability of the United States to remain at the forefront of science and technology." On May 2, Trump said the Internal Revenue Service was "going to be taking away" Harvard's tax-exempt status. That unprecedented threat has become a major area of concern for the school and a point of contention in one of its lawsuits against the White House. Unless a judge deems the effort unlawful, the university could lose hundreds of millions of dollars, according to some estimates. Typically, there's an apolitical process the IRS follows to strip nonprofits of their tax-exempt status. The executive branch is prohibited, by federal law, from influencing IRS audits and investigations. "There is no legal basis to rescind Harvard's tax-exempt status," Harvard spokesman Jason Newton said in a statement on May 2. 'Such an unprecedented action would endanger our ability to carry out our educational mission." While many of Harvard's students and faculty are on break this summer, the school's lawyers will still be battling the White House in court. The next major court hearing is set for May 29, when a judge will consider extending her hold on Trump's attempt to ban Harvard from enrolling foreign students. Court proceedings in Harvard's other lawsuit, challenging the funding freezes and review of its tax-exempt status, are scheduled throughout June. The judge in that case is the same. She was appointed by President Barack Obama. Zachary Schermele is an education reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach him by email at zschermele@ Follow him on X at @ZachSchermele and Bluesky at @ This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump-Harvard clash heats up. Here's what to know.
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Iran Threatens Israel's Nuclear Sites as Trump Blocks Strike Plan
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Iran has threatened to strike Israel's nuclear facilities if attacked, claiming it has gathered extensive intelligence on them. The warning comes as U.S. President Donald Trump told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in a 40-minute call that a military strike on Iran "must be taken off the table for now," according to Israeli state media. The exchange highlights widening tensions between the U.S. and Israel, with Netanyahu pushing for a tougher stance while Trump presses for diplomacy—even as he acknowledged Iran's "much more aggressive" behavior. Newsweek has reached out to the State Department as well as the foreign ministries of Iran and Israel for comment. Why It Matters Iran's warning signals a heightened risk of regional conflict involving nuclear infrastructure. For the U.S., which is engaged in delicate nuclear talks with Tehran, the threat complicates its effort to balance deterrence with diplomacy. Israel's concern over Iranian intentions—driven by Tehran's expanding nuclear activity—puts added pressure on the Trump administration's strategy. As Iran moves to leverage intelligence gathered on Israeli facilities, and the U.S. refrains from endorsing military escalation, the situation threatens to widen the gulf between allies and embolden hardliners in both countries. Military personnel parade on National Army Day in Tehran, Iran, on April 18, 2025. Military personnel parade on National Army Day in Tehran, Iran, on April 18, To Know Iran's Supreme National Security Council said that Iranian intelligence services had obtained "a vast quantity of strategic and sensitive information and documents" related to Israel's nuclear infrastructure. The council claimed this intelligence had completed an "operational cycle" enabling Iran's armed forces to target Israeli nuclear sites in response to any Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities. The council warned that "any act of evil against [Iran's] economic and military infrastructure" would result in a "precise and proportionate response." Diplomacy With Tehran On Tuesday, during a call with Netanyahu, Trump emphasized his preference for diplomacy, saying the U.S. had submitted a "reasonable proposal" to Iran and was expecting a response soon. He noted that Iran had become more aggressive in recent negotiations, but talks were ongoing. Netanyahu countered by calling the negotiations futile, accusing Iran of playing for time and urging that a "credible military threat" remain on the table. Trump rejected this stance, insisting that a military strike on Iran "must be taken off the table for now." When Netanyahu sought clarity on whether the U.S. would approve Israeli action if necessary, Trump did not provide a definitive answer. The conversation ended without any breakthrough on Israel's demands, according to Israel's Channel 12 and public broadcaster Kan. President Donald Trump is seen in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, D.C., on June 10, 2025. President Donald Trump is seen in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, D.C., on June 10, Progress Meanwhile, U.S. State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce said the talks with Iran were making some progress despite recent setbacks. She emphasized that negotiations are dynamic, adding that "it would appear that things are moving forward," though not dramatically. She confirmed that another round of talks is expected soon. What People Are Saying Iran's Supreme National Security Council: "These sites would be attacked in response to any Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear infrastructure." U.S. State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce: "It is a dynamic, as it would be with any diplomatic consideration, that negotiations are meant to move things forward and the good news is, is that, in fact, it would appear that things are moving forward, and that's what we all want." What Happens Next Iran is expected to respond to a new U.S. proposal at an upcoming sixth round of nuclear talks, with the location still unconfirmed after earlier sessions in Oman and Italy. Despite mediation efforts, Washington and Tehran remain divided over uranium enrichment—Trump demanding a full halt, while Iran insists on its right to peaceful nuclear energy. With tensions rising and a counterproposal pending from Tehran, the gap between diplomacy and confrontation appears increasingly difficult to bridge.
