Hamas submits 'positive' response to ceasefire deal
US President Donald Trump earlier announced a "final proposal" for a 60-day ceasefire in the nearly 21-month-old war between Israel and Hamas, stating he anticipated a reply from the parties in coming hours.
Hamas wrote on its official website: "The Hamas movement has completed its internal consultations as well as discussions with Palestinian factions and forces regarding the latest proposal by the mediators to halt the aggression against our people in Gaza.
"The movement has delivered its response to the brotherly mediators, which was characterized by a positive spirit. Hamas is fully prepared, with all seriousness, to immediately enter a new round of negotiations on the mechanism for implementing this framework," the statement said.
In a sign of potential challenges still facing the sides, a Palestinian official of a militant group allied with Hamas said concerns remained over humanitarian aid, passage through the Rafah crossing to Egypt and clarity over a timetable of Israeli troop withdrawals.
Trump said on Tuesday that Israel had agreed "to the necessary conditions to finalize" a 60-day ceasefire, during which efforts would be made to end the US ally's war in the Palestinian enclave.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is due to meet Trump in Washington on Monday, has yet to comment on Trump's announcement, and in their public statements the two sides remain far apart. Netanyahu has repeatedly said Hamas must be disarmed, a position the militant group, which is thought to be holding 20 living hostages, has so far refused to discuss.
Israeli media cited an Israeli official as saying that Israel had received and was looking into Hamas' response to the ceasefire proposal.
An Egyptian security official told Reuters that Egypt, which along with Qatar is mediating ceasefire efforts, had seen Hamas' response and said: "It includes positive signs that an agreement is near, but there are some demands from Hamas that need to be worked on."
Trump has said he would be "very firm" with Netanyahu on the need for a speedy Gaza ceasefire, while noting that the Israeli leader wants one as well.
"We hope it's going to happen. And we're looking forward to it happening sometime next week," he told reporters earlier this week. "We want to get the hostages out." ATTACKS OVERNIGHT
Israeli attacks have killed at least 138 Palestinians in Gaza over the past 24 hours, local health officials said.
Health officials at the Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis, southern Gaza, said the Israeli military had carried out an airstrike on a tent encampment west of the city around 2 a.m., killing 15 Palestinians displaced by nearly two years of war.
The Israeli military said troops operating in the Khan Younis area had eliminated militants, confiscated weapons and dismantled Hamas outposts in the last 24 hours, while striking 100 targets across Gaza, including military structures, weapons storage facilities and launchers.
Later on Friday, Palestinians gathered to perform funeral prayers before burying those killed overnight.
"There should have been a ceasefire long ago before I lost my brother," said 13-year-old Mayar Al Farr as she wept. Her brother, Mahmoud, was shot dead in another incident, she said.
"He went to get aid, so he can get a bag of flour for us to eat. He got a bullet in his neck," she said. 'MAKE THE DEAL'
In Tel Aviv, families and friends of hostages held in Gaza were among demonstrators who gathered outside a US Embassy building on US Independence Day, calling on Trump to secure a deal for all of the captives.
Demonstrators set up a symbolic Sabbath dinner table, placing 50 empty chairs to represent those who are still held in Gaza. Banners hung nearby displaying a post by Trump from his Truth Social platform that read, "MAKE THE DEAL IN GAZA. GET THE HOSTAGES BACK!!!"
"Only you can make the deal. We want one beautiful deal. One beautiful hostage deal," said Gideon Rosenberg, 48, from Tel Aviv.
Rosenberg was wearing a shirt with the image of hostage Avinatan Or, one of his employees who was abducted by Palestinian militants from the Nova musical festival on October 7, 2023. He is among the 20 hostages who are believed to be alive after more than 600 days of captivity.
An official familiar with the negotiations said on Thursday that the proposal envisages the return of 10 of the hostages during the 60 days, along with the bodies of 18 others who had died since being taken hostage.
Ruby Chen, 55, the father of 19-year-old American-Israeli Itay, who is believed to have been killed after being taken captive, urged Netanyahu to return from meeting with Trump with a deal that brings back all hostages.
Itay Chen, also a German national, was serving as an Israeli soldier when Hamas carried out its surprise attack on October 7, 2023, killing around 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and taking another 251 hostage.
Israel's retaliatory war against Hamas has devastated Gaza, which the militant group has ruled for almost two decades but now only controls in parts, displacing most of the population of more than 2 million and triggering widespread hunger.
More than 57,000 Palestinians have been killed in nearly two years of fighting, most of them civilians, according to local health officials.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
an hour ago
- Scoop
The Fanatic's Gaze: Louis Theroux And The West Bank Settlers
He has made it his bread and butter for years: finding society's kooky representatives, the marginal, the crazed and the touched. But what makes Louis Theroux's The Settlers troubling is its examination of a seemingly inexorable process in the West Bank, one that has, at its core, a religious, nationalist goal of cleansing and violent purification. The documentary captures Israel's modern colonial project in real time, and it is one most ugly. The target of the cleansing and eradication – the Palestinians in the West Bank – is awesomely horrific, rationalised by suffocating checkpoints, brooding military posts and endless harassing points of invigilation. Having already made The Ultra Zionists, a documentary on the same subject in 2011, Theroux finds, notably after the attacks by Hamas on Israel on October 7, 2023, a missionary project of hardened purpose. The edge on the 'ultra' has been taken off. The fringe has moved to the centre. Sanitised areas (the language of ethnic scrubbing) pullulate with armed settlers holding forth with pious defiance in outposts of a land seen as promised to them. One figure interviewed, the gun-toting Texas-born settler Ari Abramowitz, sees the Bible as supplying Jews 'a land deed to the West Bank.' Palestinian shopfronts remain closed for security reasons, and Palestinians barred from visiting designated areas without appropriate approval. Theroux's guide and local peace activist Issa Amro is unable to accompany him to areas in Hebron where settlers are offered continuous military protection. When Theroux and his guides visit a ruined Palestinian home in Tuwuni in the night, an IDF patrol with laser sights is not far behind. At one checkpoint, Theroux is accosted by a balaclava-wearing Israeli soldier, provoking him to bark 'Don't touch me'. They are solid reminders to Palestinians living in the West Bank that they are living on borrowed time, a measure that diminishes with each day. Daniella Weiss emerges as a central character, a figure who has led the Israeli settler movement for half a century. She reveals being clandestinely escorted by the sympathetic soldiers of the Israeli Defense Forces into Gaza to scout for possible future settlements. (800 families, goes the proud claim, await moving into them.) She grins, mocks and scorns, but does, at some point, demonstrate to Theroux her view about settler violence. For her, it does not exist. In that familiar pattern, even if it did exist, it would be justifiable because of Palestinian violence. When Theroux says he had seen a video of a Palestinian being shot, Weiss retorts that the Israel shooter was merely retaliating. She proceeds to shove him, hoping he returns the serve. He considers the display sociopathic. Yet sociopathy and the limitless well of self-defence are firm friends for Weiss and any number of IDF personnel and lawyers who see their cause as worthy. All are incapable of violence, incapable of genocide. Critics have taken issue with the lens of the documentary, suggesting that the camera can deceive because of its sharp focus. The sampling of settlers shows them as almost comically villainous, their fanaticism icy and cruelty assured. The British-Palestinian writer and activist John Aziz was frustrated by the 'selection of nasty extremists who lurched between denying the existence of Palestinians and expressing the desire to conquer more land and drive out the Arab inhabitants.' He even takes issue with the keen interest in Weiss, curious given that any program about Israeli settlements would look bare without her starring role. Aziz misses the point in his demand for an elusive nuance. People once seen as marginalised pioneers seeking land in the West Bank have become the spear of the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. After October 7, 2023, it has become modish to entertain notions of expulsion, dispossession and seizure, to finally bury Palestinian notions of self-determination. National security minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, leader of the far-right Otzma Yehudit party and follower of the teachings of Meir Kahane, a Brooklyn rabbi who, after moving to Israel, declared 'the idea of a democratic Jewish state [a] nonsense', is symptomatic of this shift. Convicted on eight charges, among them supporting a terrorist organisation and incitement to racism, Ben-Gvir regularly advocates ethnic cleansing of both the West Bank and Gaza. In May this year, the Israeli Security Cabinet initiated the land registration process in Area C in the West Bank, a process which determines final ownership of land and extinguishes other claims. The Ministry of Defense was unequivocal about the goal of this move in a statement: 'to strengthen, consolidate, and expand Jewish settlement in Judea and Samaria.' While the Israeli settlers seem to fail to see the Palestinians as human beings with valid territorial claims, international law has little time for the legality of the settlements. They are structures of a colonising project, and one regarded as unlawful. In its advisory opinion from July 2024, the International Court of Justice found that Israel's continued presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory was 'a wrongful act of a continuing character which has been brought about by Israel's violations, through its policies and practices, of the prohibition on the acquisition of territory by force and the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people.' The settler project can also count on abundant support from the private sector. In her report to the UN Human Rights Council From economy of occupation to economy of genocide Francesca Albanese, the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, lashes 'corporate entities' international and local who have been enriched by 'the Israeli economy of illegal occupation, apartheid and now genocide.' This includes heavy investments in the West Bank colonising enterprise, be it through supplying logistics, construction equipment and building materials. With the Israeli settlers being the shock troops of the Israeli State, Weiss's boast captured by Theroux is being realised: 'We do for governments what they can't do for themselves.'
RNZ News
6 hours ago
- RNZ News
Elon Musk says he has created a new US political party
Eloin Musk. Photo: AFP / Angela Weiss Elon Musk, an ex-ally of US President Donald Trump, said Saturday (US time) he has launched a new political party in the United States to challenge what the tech billionaire described as the country's "one-party system". Musk, the world's richest person and Trump's biggest political donor in the 2024 election, had a [ bitter falling out[ with the president after leading the Republican's effort to slash spending and cut federal jobs as head of the so-called Department of government Efficiency. "When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste & graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy," the Space X and Tesla boss posted on X, the social media platform that he owns. "Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom." Musk cited a poll - posted on X on Friday, US Independence Day - in which he asked whether respondents "want independence from the two-party (some would say uniparty) system" that has dominated US politics for some two centuries. The yes-or-no survey earned more than 1.2 million responses. "By a factor of 2 to 1, you want a new political party and you shall have it!" he posted on Saturday. The Trump-Musk feud reignited in dramatic fashion late last month as Trump pushed Republicans in Congress to ram through his massive domestic agenda in the form of the One Big Beautiful Bill . Musk expressed fierce opposition to the legislation, and ruthlessly attacked its Republican backers for supporting "debt slavery". File photo. US President Donald Trump speaks during a news conference with Elon Musk in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, on 30 May, 2025. Photo: AFP / Allison Robbert He quickly vowed to launch a new political party to challenge lawmakers who campaigned on reduced federal spending only to vote for the bill, which experts say will pile an extra US$3.4 trillion over a decade onto the US deficit. After Musk heavily criticized the flagship spending bill - which eventually passed Congress and was signed into law - Trump threatened to deport the tech tycoon and strip federal funds from his businesses. "We'll have to take a look," the president told reporters when asked if he would consider deporting Musk, who was born in South Africa and has held US citizenship since 2002. - AFP
1News
6 hours ago
- 1News
Trump branded, browbeat and prevailed — but his big bill may come at a cost
Barack Obama had the Affordable Care Act. Joe Biden had the Inflation Reduction Act. President Donald Trump will have the tax cuts. All were hailed in the moment and became ripe political targets in campaigns that followed. In Trump's case, the tax cuts may almost become lost in the debates over other parts of the multitrillion-dollar bill that Democrats say will force poor Americans off their health care and overturn a decade or more of energy policy. Through persuasion and browbeating, Trump forced nearly all congressional Republicans to line up behind his marquee legislation despite some of its unpalatable pieces. He followed the playbook that had marked his life in business before politics. He focused on branding — labelling the legislation the 'One Big, Beautiful Bill' — then relentlessly pushed to strong-arm it through Congress, solely on the votes of Republicans. ADVERTISEMENT But Trump's victory will soon be tested during the 2026 midterm elections where Democrats plan to run on a durable theme: that the Republican president favours the rich on tax cuts over poorer people who will lose their health care. Republican members of Congress reach to shake hands with Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., centre bottom, after Johnson signed President Donald Trump's signature bill of tax breaks and spending cuts (Source: Associated Press) Trump and Republicans argue that those who deserve coverage will retain it. Nonpartisan analysts, however, project significant increases to the number of uninsured. Meanwhile, the GOP's promise that the bill will turbocharge the economy will be tested at a time of uncertainty and trade turmoil. Trump has tried to counter the notion of favouring the rich with provisions that would reduce the taxes for people paid in tips and receiving overtime pay, two kinds of earners who represent a small share of the workforce. Extending the tax cuts from Trump's first term that were set to expire if Congress failed to act meant he could also argue that millions of people would avoid a tax increase. House Speaker Mike Johnson of La., points to President Donald Trump after he signed his signature bill of tax breaks and spending cuts at the White House, Friday, July 4, 2025, in Washington, surrounded by members of Congress (Source: Associated Press) ADVERTISEMENT To enact that and other expensive priorities, Republicans made steep cuts to Medicaid that ultimately belied Trump's promise that those on government entitlement programs 'won't be affected.' 'The biggest thing is, he's answering the call of the forgotten people. That's why his No. 1 request was the no tax on tips, the no tax on overtime, tax relief for seniors,' said Rep. Jason Smith, R-Mo., chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee. 'I think that's going to be the big impact.' Hard to reap the rewards Presidents have seen their signature legislative accomplishments unravelled by their successors or become a significant political liability for their party in subsequent elections. A central case for Biden's reelection was that the public would reward the Democrat for his legislative accomplishments. That never bore fruit as he struggled to improve his poll numbers driven down by concerns about his age and stubborn inflation. Since taking office in January, Trump has acted to gut tax breaks meant to boost clean energy initiatives that were part of Biden's landmark health care and climate bill. Obama's health overhaul, which the Democrat signed into law in March 2010, led to a political bloodbath in the midterms that fall. ADVERTISEMENT Its popularity only became potent when Republicans tried to repeal it in 2017. Whatever political boost Trump may have gotten from his first-term tax cuts in 2017 did not help him in the 2018 midterms, when Democrats regained control of the House, or in 2020 when he lost to Biden. 'I don't think there's much if any evidence from recent or even not-so-recent history of the president's party passing a big one-party bill and getting rewarded for it,' said Kyle Kondik, an elections analyst with the nonpartisan University of Virginia's Center for Politics. Social net setbacks Democrats hope they can translate their policy losses into political gains. During an Oval Office appearance in January, Trump pledged he would 'love and cherish Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid.' 'We're not going to do anything with that, other than if we can find some abuse or waste, we'll do something,' Trump said. 'But the people won't be affected. It will only be more effective and better.' ADVERTISEMENT That promise is far removed from what Trump and the Republican Party ultimately chose to do, paring back not only Medicaid but also food assistance for the poor to make the math work on their sweeping bill. It would force 11.8 million more people to become uninsured by 2034, according to the Congressional Budget Office, whose estimates the GOP has dismissed. 'In Trump's first term, Democrats in Congress prevented bad outcomes. They didn't repeal the (Affordable Care Act), and we did Covid relief together. This time is different,' said Senator Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii. 'Hospitals will close, people will die, the cost of electricity will go up, and people will go without food.' Some unhappy Republicans Senator Thom Tillis, R-N.C., repeatedly argued the legislation would lead to drastic coverage losses in his home state and others, leaving them vulnerable to political attacks similar to what Democrats faced after they enacted 'Obamacare.' With his warnings unheeded, Tillis announced he would not run for reelection, after he opposed advancing the bill and enduring Trump's criticism. ADVERTISEMENT 'If there is a political dimension to this, it is the extraordinary impact that you're going to have in states like California, blue states with red districts,' Tillis said. "The narrative is going to be overwhelmingly negative in states like California, New York, Illinois, and New Jersey.' Even Senator Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, who eventually became the decisive vote in the Senate that ensured the bill's passage, said the legislation needed more work and she urged the House to revise it. Lawmakers there did not. Early polling suggests that Trump's bill is deeply unpopular, including among independents and a healthy share of Republicans. White House officials said their own research does not reflect that. So far, it's only Republicans celebrating the victory. That seems OK with the president. In a speech in Iowa after the bill passed, he said Democrats only opposed it because they 'hated Trump.' That didn't bother him, he said, 'because I hate them, too.'
