Trump admin slams UK, Canada, Australia and others who sanctioned Israeli officials
The Trump administration slammed the U.K., Norway, Canada, New Zealand and Australia after the five nations imposed sanctions and travel bans—along with other actions—against Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich.
"These sanctions do not advance U.S.-led efforts to achieve a ceasefire, bring all hostages home, and end the war," Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement. "We reject any notion of equivalence: Hamas is a terrorist organization that committed unspeakable atrocities, continues to hold innocent civilians hostage, and prevents the people of Gaza from living in peace. We remind our partners not to forget who the real enemy is. The United States urges the reversal of the sanctions and stands shoulder-to-shoulder with Israel."
Ben-Gvir praised Rubio for his statement, saying that "the American administration is a moral compass in the face of the confusion of some Western countries that choose to appease terrorist organizations like Hamas." He added that Israel would continue its fight against terrorism.
Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs Gideon Sa'ar also thanked Rubio for being "a clear moral voice" and said the U.S. official's statement "should be a compass to the international community, to all those preaching [to] Israel, ignoring realities."
Sa'ar condemned the U.K., Norway, Canada, New Zealand and Australia's "outrageous" actions against Ben-Gvir and Smotrich on Tuesday. He said the "actions and decisions against Israel also contribute to hardening Hamas' stance in the negotiations for the hostage deal—and distance it and the ceasefire."
In a joint statement issued by the foreign ministers of U.K., Norway, Canada, New Zealand and Australia, Ben-Gvir and Smotrich were accused of inciting "extremist violence and serious abuses of Palestinian human rights."
All five nations whose foreign ministers issued the joint statement have been critical of Israel as it pursued its post-Oct. 7 war against Hamas.
In May, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accused the U.K., France and Canada of "enabling Hamas" after the countries demanded that Jerusalem halt its military campaign in Gaza.
"I say to President Macron, Prime Minister Carney and Prime Minister Starmer: When mass murderers, rapists, baby killers and kidnappers thank you, you're on the wrong side of justice," Netanyahu said in a video statement. "You're on the wrong side of humanity and you're on the wrong side of history."
Australia and New Zealand also issued a joint statement on the Israel-Hamas war in December 2024 in which they called for a ceasefire in Gaza and scolded Israel over its treatment of U.N. agencies, such as the controversial United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).
In his Tuesday statement, Sa'ar said Israel will convene a government meeting early next week to discuss its response to the actions taken against the ministers.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
42 minutes ago
- New York Post
Greta Thunberg's a vapid leftist — and a useful idiot for terror
Professional leftist Greta Thunberg was brought to Israel this week after the 'selfie yacht' she was traveling on attempted to break through the naval blockade of Gaza. Her boat, the 'Madleen,' was part of a flotilla pretending to deliver aid to alleviate an imaginary famine. The 22-year-old was given food and shelter and sent home by the Israeli government, which she accused of 'kidnapping' her. All the usual suspects went along with this predictable framing. Advertisement If Thunberg really wanted to better understand the concept of an abduction, she might have asked Hamas to visit the Israelis still being tortured in a dank basement somewhere in Rafa. But the 'human rights activist,' which is how the legacy media unironically describes her, has never once called for the release of the hostages taken by Islamists. Advertisement Indeed, the flotilla effort was reportedly organized by a 'Hamas operative.' '[The Israelis] tried to make us watch all kinds of propaganda videos,' Thunberg told reporters after landing in Paris, 'but I didn't watch. This is nothing compared to what is happening in Gaza, which is in desperate need of humanitarian aid.' Referring to GoPro videos made by Palestinians that document the gleeful slaughter of women, children and the elderly as 'propaganda' is a bold accusation coming from a cosplay revolutionary whose biggest problem was getting a vegetarian meal from her hosts. Advertisement As this was all going on, incidentally, Israel has been sending hundreds of aid trucks into the Gaza Strip. Hamas opposes this effort, as it uses food and aid to control the Palestinian population. On the day Thunberg was whining to reporters in Europe, at least five aid workers were murdered by Hamas trying to bring food to the population. The real question is: Why is she in the news at all? Advertisement Thunberg was named Time's Person of the Year in 2019 after dropping out of high school and 'raising awareness for climate change.' It was quite a historic accomplishment: No one was talking about global warming before Greta came around, apparently. Me? I tend to think the kid who stays in school and learns a thing or two about biology before lecturing me about science is the real hero. But we live in a time where emotionalism and vapidity are often confused with decency and wisdom. Thunberg is the embodiment of this trend. Thunberg's most infamous moment was a frivolous emotional outburst at the United Nations, where she screamed at those who had bequeathed her with unprecedented wealth, safety, and freedom. 'You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words,' she claimed. Advertisement But really, her dream was to be famous. Or, maybe, it was first the dream of exploitative parents who persuaded their child that the world was on the precipice of Armageddon. Since her Time magazine cover, Thunberg has achieved nothing. Her native Sweden has turned back to fossil fuels. Europe, as well. The Earth, however, is still here. Advertisement Subsequently, Thunberg has moved on to champion other trendy leftist causes, such as Black Lives Matter and now 'Free Palestine.' The only thing she understands less about than climate science seems to be the Middle East. As far as I can tell, Thunberg has never once said anything remotely compelling or witty or smart. There are millions of young people far more worthy of attention. For years, youth shielded Thunberg from criticism. Even now, journalists fail to ask her any serious, in-depth questions about the issues she champions. Advertisement The chances she could answer one are incredibly slim. Well, Thunberg is now a young woman, and so we can freely point out that she's always been an extraordinary imbecile. But now, she's also a useful idiot for terrorists. For that, there is no excuse. David Harsanyi is a senior writer at the Washington Examiner.
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
Are Americans worried about Russia using nuclear weapons? What a new poll found
As the war in Ukraine rages on, there is widespread concern among Americans that Russia could resort to using nuclear weapons, according to the latest Quinnipiac University poll. The survey — which sampled 1,265 registered voters June 5-9 — also found that Americans are pessimistic about the likelihood that a ceasefire will be achieved soon. Further, most respondents said they disapprove of President Donald Trump's handling of the conflict, making it the issue the president performed the most poorly on. 'As the Russia-Ukraine war grinds through its third year, Americans make it clear they have little appetite for the way the Trump administration is handling the situation,' polling analyst Tim Malloy said in a news release about the poll. Here is a breakdown of the findings. Trump approval on the war A majority of voters, 57%, said they disapprove of the way Trump has handled the war thus far, while 34% said they approve. Ten percent said they weren't sure. These figures have largely held steady over time. In a March Quinnipiac poll, 55% said they disapproved of the president's stance on the conflict, and 38% said they approved. Opinions on the issue tracked closely with partisan affiliation. Most Republicans, 70%, said they favor the president's approach, while 94% of Democrats and 57% of independents oppose it. Trump's 34% approval rating on the Ukraine war also stands out as the lowest rating among seven issues respondents were asked about, including the Israel-Hamas war, the economy and immigration. On the campaign trail, Trump repeatedly said he could end the European war in 24 hours, but now — four months into his term — the conflict has only escalated. As of early June, there have been an estimated over 1.3 million combined casualties, according to a June study from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a think tank. Though lacking success, Trump has made continual efforts to negotiate a ceasefire, including by organizing diplomatic summits and speaking directly with both Presidents Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Cease-fire, nuclear weapons and escalation The poll — which has a margin of error of 2.8 percentage points — also asked respondents about the likelihood that a lasting cease-fire will be achieved soon. Less than one-third, 27%, said they are confident that a permanent ceasefire will be reached in the near future. Meanwhile, 69% said they are not confident. While 45% of Republicans expressed optimism, just 14% of Democrats and 24% of independents shared this sentiment. On the other hand, a majority of Americans are worried about the chances of nuclear escalation — a feeling that nuclear experts share, according to previous reporting from McClatchy News. About two-thirds of voters, 64%, said they are concerned about the possibility of Russia using nuclear weapons, while 35% said they are not concerned. Here, there was agreement across the political spectrum, with 75% of Democrats, 61% of independents and 53% of Republicans expressing concern. Further, most respondents said the U.S. military should put boots on the ground if Russia expands the war into a NATO country. Sixty-two percent said 'American troops should get involved' if Russia attacks a NATO nation. Meanwhile, 29% disagreed. Here, again, there was consensus among partisans, with 70% of Democrats, 64% of independents and 54% of Republicans saying America should get involved in this scenario.
Washington Post
an hour ago
- Washington Post
Trump warns Israel could strike Iran; U.S. officials say no military support
An Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear facilities 'could well happen,' President Donald Trump said on Thursday as his administration maneuvered to avoid a costly new Middle East conflict that could threaten U.S. military forces in the region. Trump administration officials have informed Israel that the United States will not militarily support potential attacks on Iran in the coming days, according to two knowledgeable U.S. officials who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the subject's sensitivity. Without such American support, particularly deep-penetrating bombs and refueling for Israeli jets, an Israeli attack is likely to do limited damage to Iran's nuclear sites, some of which are buried deep underground, former officials and analysts say. With tensions again rising in the region, Trump said, 'I would love to avoid a conflict.' But he added, referring to U.S. nuclear talks with Iran that have hit a roadblock over Tehran's insistence on preserving a uranium enrichment capability and Washington's demand that there be none, 'They're going to have to be willing to give us some things that they're not willing to give us right now.' U.S. intelligence agencies have assessed that Israel could strike Iran at any time, the two U.S. officials said. Trump, at a bill-signing ceremony, said, 'I don't want to say it's imminent but it looks like something that could well happen.' Tehran has threatened to respond to an Israeli attack with counterstrikes targeting both Israel as well as U.S. forces and facilities scattered throughout the Middle East. The U.S. moved on Wednesday to shrink its presence in the region, with the State Department authorizing the evacuation of some personnel in Iraq and the Pentagon green-lighting the departure of military family members across the region. The U.S. is committed to defending Israel, including with assistance in repelling the retaliatory attack that Iran has promised if Israel strikes first. Trump has pinned his hopes of avoiding war on a diplomatic deal with Iran that would limit its nuclear activities in return for easing the harsh economic sanctions squeezing Iran's economy. U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff plans to travel to Oman's capital, Muscat, on Sunday for a sixth round of talks with Iran, a person familiar with the matter said. Both Israel and the U.S. say that the only way to ensure Iran will never have a nuclear weapon is to dismantle or destroy its enrichment capabilities. Iran denies it is seeking such a weapon and says it has the right, as a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, to enrich low-grade uranium for civilian purposes. U.S. intelligence agencies continue to assess in recent weeks that Iran is not moving to construct an actual nuclear weapon, one of the U.S. officials said. The prospect of a fresh military confrontation in the Middle East has alarmed MAGA advocates inside and outside of Trump's inner circle, many of whom rallied behind the president due to his anti-war message. 'A direct strike on Iran right now would disastrously split the Trump coalition,' warned MAGA podcaster Jack Posobiec on X. 'Trump smartly ran against starting new wars, this is what the swing states voted for - the midterms are not far and Congress' majority is already razor-thin. America First!' But advocates of military intervention, including News Corp. chairman emeritus Rupert Murdoch and former Marvel Entertainment chairman Isaac 'Ike' Perlmutter, have tried to push Trump toward backing a strike on Iran in private phone calls with president, said people familiar with the matter. Netanyahu is deeply skeptical the negotiations will halt the nuclear threat from Iran. He has also insisted that any new agreement with Iran eliminate its ballistic missile capabilities and support for regional proxies such as Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis in Yemen. That is something the United States also seeks, but so far the U.S.-Iran talks have focused only on eliminating its nuclear enrichment program. In exchange, Iran wants all sanctions against it lifted, but the administration has said only those related to the nuclear issue would be affected. Israel has been making extensive preparations for months for a potential strike with Iran, which would include using munitions it has received from the U.S., said two Israelis briefed on the matter. 'Everything is laid out, everything is ready,' said one of the Israelis. 'Unless there's significant progress for some kind of breakthrough on Sunday at the talks in Muscat, I think it's very likely that we're heading toward an Israeli strike,' said Raz Zimmt, director of the Iran program at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv. There is also a highly unlikely but small chance of Israel launching an unilateral strike before the weekend talks if Israel discovered that Iran was preparing ballistic missiles for a preemptive attack on Israel, Zimmt said. The U.S. officials did not divulge the precise nature of the intelligence that led spy agencies to conclude that Israel could launch a strike at any time. The fallout from an Israeli attack could pose profound dangers to U.S. military forces in the Middle East, including in Iraq, which neighbors Iran. The State Department established a new Middle East task force on Thursday designed to be instrumental in the event of a potential mass evacuation of American personnel from the Middle East should Israel move ahead with a military assault, said two U.S. officials familiar with the matter. The creation of the task force is the latest indication that the Trump administration anticipates a potential major military escalation in the region that could threaten Americans. The State Department has established similar task forces for seminal geopolitical events in the past, including following the Taliban's lightning takeover of Afghanistan in 2021, when thousands of U.S. government officials and civilians were airlifted out of the region. Witkoff, the White House envoy, warned Republican senators last week that Iran could respond to an Israeli strike on its nuclear facilities with unprecedented force, said a congressional aide familiar with the matter, confirming a report in Axios. The Witkoff warning came in the form of a closed-door meeting on Capitol Hill with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina), Sen. James E. Risch (R-Idaho) and others. Witkoff said that the United States is concerned that Iran's ballistic missile capabilities could break through Israel's missile defense systems resulting in significant casualties and damage to Israeli infrastructure, the aide said. Iran has also said that if attacked by Israel it would retaliate against the United States. On Wednesday, amid increasing reports that Israel was preparing to strike, Defense Minister Brig. Gen. Aziz Nasirzadeh said that 'in case of any conflict, the U.S. must leave the region, because all its bases are within … our range and we will target all of them in the host countries regardless.' Nasirzadeh expressed hope that the negotiations would succeed. 'But if it does not come to an end and a conflict is imposed on us,' he said, 'the casualties of the other party will definitely [be] much heavier than ours.' Former U.S. military and intelligence officials have said that without military support from Washington, Israel could inflict significant, but limited, damage on Iran's nuclear sites, which include the Fordow uranium enrichment plant buried deep underground. Israeli strikes might only set back Iran's program for a period of months, or at most a year, the officials said. Israel is believed to have limited air-to-air refueling capability, compared to the U.S., to support its attack aircraft, which would likely have to overfly Jordan and Iraq to reach Iran. In an attack last October, in retaliation for an Iranian ballistic missile strike on Israel, the Israeli Air Force is believed to have significantly degraded Iran's air defenses and ballistic missile production sites. Israel and its supporters have argued that the strike has opened a finite window to attack Iran's nuclear sites with less risk for Israeli pilots.
