An Israeli minister announces plan that will effectively split West Bank into two
The Palestinian govt, allies and campaign groups condemned the scheme.
The construction on a tract of land east of Jerusalem named E1 has been has been under consideration for more than two decades, and is especially controversial because it is one of the last geographic links between the major West Bank cities of Ramallah and Bethlehem. The two cities are 22 kilometres apart by air. But once an Israeli settlement is completed, it would require Palestinians travelling between cities to drive several kilometres out of their way and pass through multiple checkpoints.
Standing at the site of the planned settlement in Maale Adumim on Thursday, Smotrich, a settler himself, said PM Netanyahu and US President Trump had agreed to the revival of the E1 development, though there was no immediate confirmation from either.
"This reality finally buries the idea of a Palestinian state, because there is nothing to recognise and no one to recognise," Smotrich said on Thursday. "Whoever in the world is trying to recognise a Palestinian state today will receive our answer on the ground.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Many Filipinos don't know about this!
Allthebestloans.ph
Read More
Undo
Not with documents nor with decisions or statements, but with facts. Facts of houses, facts of neighbourhoods," he said.
Israel froze construction plans at Maale Adumim in 2012, and again after a revival in 2020, because of objections from the US, European allies and other powers who considered the project a threat to any peace deal with the Palestinians.
Palestinians fear the settlement building in the West Bank will rob them of any chance to build a state of their own in the area.
Smotrich's spokesperson said the minister had approved the plan to build 3,401 houses for Israeli settlers between an existing settlement in the West Bank and Jerusalem.
Nabil Abu Rudeineh, the Palestinian president's spokesperson, called on the US to pressure Israel to stop settlement building.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
27 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
How to win at foreign policy
WHEN DONALD TRUMP meets Vladimir Putin in Alaska it will be the seventh time the two have talked in person. This time is different, though. Since their last sit-down, Mr Putin has launched an unprovoked war, lost perhaps a million Russian soldiers (dead and wounded) and inflicted ceaseless misery on Ukrainians in pursuit of an imperial dream. Undaunted, Mr Trump hopes to get in a room with a wily dictator, feel him out and forge a deal. It is the biggest test yet of his uniquely personal style of diplomacy. It is also a reminder of how unpredictable American foreign policy has become. Will Mr Trump be firm, making clear that America and its allies will do what it takes to guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty? Or will he be in such a rush to reopen business with Russia that he rewards its aggression and leaves Ukraine vulnerable to future attacks? As everyone clamours for the president's ear, no one knows what he will do. At the beginning of Mr Trump's second term his supporters had a theory about how he would wield American power. Rather than relying on deep relationships and expertise, he would rely on his gut. As a master negotiator with a knack for sensing what others want and fear, he would cut through the waffle and apply pressure ruthlessly. Everyone wants access to American markets. By threatening to shut them out, he would force recalcitrant foreigners to end wars and reset the terms of trade to America's advantage. Career diplomats and experts would be replaced by rainmakers. Yes, his transactional approach might foster a bit of corruption. But if it brought peace in Ukraine or Gaza, who cared? Alas, there are drawbacks to this approach. Using tariffs as a weapon hurts America, too. More fundamentally, junking universal principles for might-makes-right repels friends without necessarily cowing foes. And the substitution of presidential whim for any coherent theory of international relations makes geopolitics less predictable and more dangerous. Mr Trump is not a globalist, obviously. Nor is he an isolationist, or a believer in regional spheres of influence. He simply does what he wants, which changes frequently. One way to make sense of Trumpism is that he divides his efforts at dealmaking into three categories: high, medium and low stakes. In the first category are America's relations with unfriendly great powers, principally China and Russia. Israel is here, too, because of its importance in American domestic politics. Iran makes an appearance, because of the way it threatens its neighbours. All these relationships are complex, difficult and matter a lot to Mr Trump. If he scores a win here—if he ends the war in Ukraine, or brings peace between Israel and the Palestinians, or finds a formula for co-operating with China without endangering national security—then the pay-off is potentially staggering. In the medium-stakes category Mr Trump puts Brazil, South Africa and, oddly, giant India. These are important countries that both America and China want in their camp. In most cases, their values are far closer to America's than to China's. Ties with them ought to be win-win. But they are unwilling to be bossed around, and take offence when Mr Trump insults or tries to bully them. The small stakes, for Mr Trump, are in small or poor countries. A superpower can wield great influence over such places, sometimes to good ends. Mr Trump helped cement a peace deal between Azerbaijan and Armenia, for example, and brokered a truce between the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda. These are welcome achievements. Azerbaijan and Armenia had been fighting for 35 years. Mr Trump mediated a reopening of trade and transport links. The fruits may include a weakening of Russian influence in the area. The Congo-Rwanda deal is much shakier—Rwandan-backed rebels have violated it repeatedly—but not nothing. And there may be an upside for America, in the form of mineral deals. When it comes to medium-size stakes, Mr Trump's method works less well. He has started needless feuds with the leaders of Brazil (because it is prosecuting a Trumpy ex-president for allegedly attempting a coup), with South Africa (because he believes, wrongly, that it is persecuting whites) and with India (infuriating its prime minister with painful tariffs and undiplomatic boasting). The result? India will draw closer to Russia again, and be less inclined to act as a counterweight against China. Brazil and South Africa see China as a more reliable partner than America. Mr Trump has won headlines that play well with his most ardent supporters. But America has lost out. And when it comes to the highest stakes, the president is floundering. He has tried to coerce China with tariffs, but it is fighting back. This week Mr Trump blinked and extended another deadline. He also undermined his own national-security policy by lifting a ban on exports of Nvidia chips to China, while insisting that Uncle Sam gets a 15% cut. On Ukraine, he has been wildly inconsistent, one day blaming it for having been invaded and threatening to cut military aid, then accusing Mr Putin of bad faith and threatening stiffer sanctions on Russia. On Israel, he has consistently given Binyamin Netanyahu everything he wants and extracted nothing in return. If Mr Trump's bombing of Iran's nuclear sites made Israel safer, well and good. But he has failed to use his leverage to restrain Israel's unending war in Gaza. The world is flattery Other countries are learning how to play Mr Trump. A crypto deal and a nomination for a Nobel peace prize worked for Pakistan. A plane helped Qatar. The corruption is turning out to be as bad as almost anyone feared; the great deals have yet to materialise. Those who say Mr Trump is looking out for his own interests, not America's, have plenty of ammunition. All this is only a preliminary judgment. If Mr Trump stands up to Mr Putin this week, perhaps he can make his greatest-ever deal, ending Europe's worst war since 1945. Sadly, the odds are against it. For subscribers only: to see how we design each week's cover, sign up to our weekly Cover Story newsletter.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
27 minutes ago
- First Post
Trump departs to Alaska for high-stakes meeting with Putin on Ukraine
President Donald Trump 's face-to-face high-stakes summit with President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday could determine the fate of European security as well as the trajectory of the war in Ukraine. US President Donald Trump waves as he boards Air Force One as he departs Joint Base Andrews in Maryland on August 15, 2025, en route to Anchorage. Image- AFP US President Donald Trump departed for Alaska on Thursday ahead of a closely watched meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, a high-stakes encounter that could shape the future of European security and influence the course of the war in Ukraine. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Secretary of State Marco Rubio are among the Trump administration officials joining the president for his flight to Alaska. Trump will also be accompanied on Air Force One by CIA Director John Ratcliffe and top White House aides, including Chief of Staff Susie Wiles. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff and Monica Crowley, a former Fox News commentator serving as Trump's chief of protocol, also are making the trip. Trump and Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin will meet on Friday in Alaska in a high-risk summit that could prove decisive for the future of Ukraine. Putin will step onto Western soil for the first time since he ordered the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, a relentless war that has killed tens of thousands of people and has seen Russia make rapid gains just before the summit. Trump extended the invitation at the Russian leader's suggestion, but the US president has since been defensive and warned that the meeting could be over within minutes if Putin does not compromise. 'HIGH STAKES,' he posted on his Truth Social platform shortly before boarding Air Force One and taking off for the near seven-hour flight to Anchorage. With inputs from agencies
Time of India
27 minutes ago
- Time of India
Mission Alaska: As Trump and Putin meet, Ukraine's redlines are clear and unmoving
Trump's and Putin's summit in Alaska today is being keenly watched around the globe. But the first face-to-face meeting between the two since 2021 is already mired in uncertainty. From the moment it was announced, disagreements emerged over who initiated the talks. While the White House insists the proposal came from Moscow, the Kremlin has denied this, and Putin himself has downplayed the dispute by claiming both sides are 'equally interested'. This minor diplomatic manoeuvre highlights a bigger truth: the Kremlin was eager for the meeting but also intent on portraying Trump as the one who needed it more. The talks come amid growing US frustration with Russia. After months of outreach through Trump's envoy Steve Witkoff, Trump had publicly condemned Moscow's continued strikes on Ukrainian civilians and warned of secondary sanctions on buyers of Russian oil. Washington has already imposed new tariffs on India over its purchases of Russian energy. The White House officials expect the agenda to touch on a possible ceasefire in Ukraine and the parameters of a future peace agreement. They have described the meeting as a chance for Trump to hear Moscow's position on ending the war. Yet the danger is that the meeting would resemble the Cold War-era Great-Power deals – decisions made over smaller nations without their participation. For Ukraine, this is a big issue. In fact, Kyiv and European partners have agreed on red lines ahead of Trump-Putin talks in Alaska. At the initiative of German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, on Aug 13 negotiations were held on the eve of the Trump-Putin summit. In those negotiations, for the first time in recent weeks, the West delivered a comprehensive joint message with clear conditions for the peace process. Any talks on ending the war must start with an immediate ceasefire along with new prisoner exchanges and the release of kidnapped childrenUkraine must be a direct participant in further negotiations after the Alaska talks Broader dialogue must be part of a single transatlantic strategy based on strong military and financial support for Ukraine and pressure on Russia Occupied territories cannot be a subject of discussion at the Anchorage summit Kyiv must receive reliable security guarantees with no demilitarisation envisioned. Although Trump has made it clear that Nato should not be part of those security guarantees, US and all willing allies should be involved in security assurances. If no progress is to be made, sanctions and other pressure on Moscow would intensify. Merz acknowledged that Ukraine is ready to discuss territorial issues, but only starting from the current line of contact, without legal recognition of the occupation. Zelenskyy, meanwhile, has stressed that a withdrawal of Ukrainian armed forces from Donbas 'in exchange for silence' is not under consideration. He also conveyed to Trump that Putin is bluffing – both regarding his military plans and on sanctions. French President Macron confirmed that no discussion of territorial issues is possible without Ukraine. And Trump promised to call Zelenskyy after his meeting with Putin to determine the next steps. According to some American reports, US is already looking for a venue for a potential trilateral meeting at the end of next week. These statements are important, as the principle of 'nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine' must remain key. European countries also agreed to work to arrange a future trilateral meeting with Trump and Zelenskyy. It should happen in Europe in a neutral country acceptable to all parties. Notably, Zelenskyy also held a constructive call with Indian PM Modi this week. He briefed Modi on ongoing Russian strikes, including a recent attack on a Zaporizhzhia bus station that injured dozens of civilians. Zelenskyy stressed that Ukraine's participation in all talks is essential – 'other formats will not deliver results' – while welcoming India's engagement in peace efforts. Sanctions were also discussed. Zelenskyy urged reducing Russia's revenues from oil to weaken Moscow's war financing. 'Every leader with tangible leverage over Russia should send the right signals to Moscow,' he said. The two leaders also agreed to meet in person during Sept's UN General Assembly. The coming days will be decisive in shaping the positions of the parties at the negotiations. Worryingly for Ukraine, the likelihood that Putin will be able to persuade Trump to make excessive concessions remains quite high. India, with its global influence and growing partnership with Ukraine, can play a vital role in ensuring that international law is the foundation for negotiations. The UN Charter cannot be bent for political convenience without undermining all nations' sovereignty. Ukraine expects the summit to deliver real progress towards a stable, just peace that fully respects its sovereignty and territorial integrity. Any proposal that demands giving up Ukrainian land is off the table. And if US military aid slows or stops, Kyiv will waste no time locking in deeper defence ties with European partners — securing weapons, air defences, intelligence, and training to keep its defences strong and its territory protected. For Ukraine, and for the international community, the message ahead of Alaska is clear: nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine. Ukraine will not accept peace made without it – and neither should the world. A peace that compromises Ukrainians is not a peace that will last. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.
