logo
‘A marker of luxury and arrogance': why gravity-defying boobs are back – and what they say about the state of the world

‘A marker of luxury and arrogance': why gravity-defying boobs are back – and what they say about the state of the world

The Guardian5 hours ago

It was, almost, a proud feminist moment. On inauguration day in January, the unthinkable happened. President Trump, the biggest ego on the planet, was upstaged by a woman in a white trouser suit – the proud uniform of Washington feminists, worn by Kamala Harris, Hillary Clinton and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in solidarity with the traditional colour of the suffragettes. In the event, the white trouser suit barely got a mention. The show was stolen by what was underneath: Lauren Sánchez's cleavage, cantilevered under a wisp of white lace. The breasts of the soon-to-be Mrs Jeff Bezos were the ceremony's breakout stars. The only talking point that came close was Mark Zuckerberg's inability to keep his eyes off them.
Call it a curtain raiser for a year in which breasts have been – how to put this? – in your face. Sydney Sweeney's pair have upstaged her acting career to the point that she wears a sweatshirt that says 'Sorry for Having Great Tits and Correct Opinions'. Bullet bras are making a sudden comeback, in sugar-pink silk on Dua Lipa on the cover of British Vogue and nosing keen as shark fins under fine cashmere sweaters at the Miu Miu show at Paris fashion week. Perhaps most tellingly, Kim Kardashian, whose body is her business empire, has made a 180-degree pivot from monetising her famous backside to selling, in her Skims lingerie brand, push-up bras featuring a pert latex nipple – with or without a fake piercing – that make an unmissable point under your T-shirt. Not since Eva Herzigova was in her Wonderbra in 1994 – Hello Boys – have boobs been so, well, big.
It is oddly tricky to discuss boobs without sounding as if you are in a doctor's surgery or a fraternity house. The word breasts is rather formal. Boobs is fond and familiar, which feels right, but sniggery, which doesn't. Bosoms are what you see in period dramas. Knockers, jugs, melons, hooters, fun bags? Whatever we call them, they are full of contradictions. Men see them and think of sex; babies see them and think of food. They contain a liquid without which the human race could not until recently have survived, but they are also one of the most tumour-prone parts of the body. You can admire them in the Uffizi, the Louvre and the National Gallery, but they are banned on Instagram (Free the nipple!). They are nursing Madonnas, and they are Madonna in a conical bra. They are topless goddesses and top shelf; entirely natural yet extremely rude; and they are, right now, absolutely everywhere.
There is a whole lot going on here. In America, the impact of the Trump administration is going way beyond policy, reshaping culture at a granular level. The Maga ruling class has a thirst for busty women in tight clothes, which fuses something new – what Zuckerberg has called 'masculine energy' – with nostalgia for 1950s America. (The 'again' in Make America Great Again may not have a date stamp, but it comes with a white picket fence.) As a symbol of fertility, full breasts are catnip to a regime obsessed with breeding and keen to limit reproductive freedoms.
Boobs are in the eye of the storm of the current gender fluidity rollback, too. Nothing says boys will be boys and women should look like women more than Bezos's Popeye biceps next to Sánchez's lace-edged curves. They used to say that a picture was worth a thousand words; in today's ultra-visual culture, that rate of exchange has steepened. The fact that a culture that was, until a few years ago, sensitively exploring gender as a complex issue has now regressed to the level of teenage boys watching American Pie for the first time says everything about how things have changed.
Since 1962, when Timmie Jean Lindsey, a mother of six from Texas, became the first woman in the world to have silicone implants, breasts have been a lightning rod for the battleground between what is real and what is fake. The debate that catapulted Pamela Anderson to fame in the 1990s has become one of the defining issues of our time. It turns out that breasts, and beauty, were just the start. Artificial intelligence has jumped the conversation on. From Mountainhead to Black Mirror, we are now talking not just about real boobs v fake ones but about real brains v fake ones. In the battle between old-school flesh and blood and the prospect of a new, possibly improved, version of the human race, breasts have been leading the culture for 63 years.
In a nutshell, the world is losing its mind over the girls. 'The State of the Union is … boobs' was the New York Post's succinct verdict on the charms of Sweeney, while Amy Hamm wrote in the National Post that they were 'double-D harbingers of the death of woke'. On inauguration day, onlookers were divided between outrage at an inappropriate level of nudity and admiration for how Sánchez's 'Latina auntie' energy showed her, um, balls.
All of which makes it a weird time to have breasts. When writer Emma Forrest saw the author portrait taken for the jacket of her new novel, Father Figure, her first thought was, 'Oh wow, my boobs look huge.' She is wearing a plain black T-shirt, 'so that must be OK, right? It's not like I'm wearing a corset. I feel I should be allowed to have people review my books without having an issue with my boobs. But who knows.'
Breasts have always had the power to undermine women. After a double mastectomy and reconstructive surgery, Sarah Thornton found herself with much bigger breasts than she had wanted – having asked for 'lesbian yoga boobs', she woke up with D cups – and wrote her book, Tits Up, to make peace with her 'silicone impostors' by investigating their cultural history. Breasts, she writes, are 'visible obstacles to equality, associated with nature and nurture rather than reason and power'. Since she was a teenager, Forrest has lived with 'the assumption that having big breasts means being messy, being sexually wild, having no emotional volume control. I have had to learn to separate my own identity from what other people read on to my body.' It's Messy: On Boys, Boobs and Badass Women is the title of Amanda de Cadenet's memoir, in which she writes about developing into 'the teenage girl whose body made grown women uncomfortable and men salivate', recalling the destabilising experience of having a body that brought her overnight success – she was a presenter on The Word at 18 – while simultaneously somehow making her the butt of every joke.
If the length of our skirts speaks to the stock market – short hemlines in boom times, long when things are bad – breasts are political. Thirty years after the French Revolution, Eugène Delacroix painted Liberty Leading the People with a lifesize, bare-breasted Liberty hoisting the French flag, leading her people to freedom. A century and a half later, women burning their bras at the 1968 protest against the Miss America pageant became one of the defining images of the feminist movement – never mind the fact that it never happened. (Protesters threw copies of Playboy, and some bras, in a trash can, but starting a fire on a sidewalk was illegal.) Intriguingly, decades when big breasts are in fashion seem to coincide with times of regression for women. Think about it. The 1920s: flat-chested flapper dresses and emancipation. The 1950s: Jayne Mansfield and women being pushed away from the workplace and back into the home. The 1970s: lean torsos under T-shirts, and the women's liberation movement.
Sarah Shotton started out as an assistant in Agent Provocateur's raunchy flagship store in Soho, London, in 1999, when she was 24, and rose to become creative director of the lingerie brand in 2010. Her 15 years in charge have seen Agent Provocateur rocked by the changing tides of sexual politics. In 2017, the year #MeToo hit the headlines, the company went into administration, before finding a new distributor. Shotton says, 'I have always loved sexy bras, and it's what we are known for. But there was a time when it felt like that wasn't OK. Soon after #MeToo, we had a campaign lined up to shoot and the phone started ringing with all the agents of the women who were supposed to be in it, pulling their clients out, saying they didn't want to be seen in that way.'
But the brand's revenues have doubled in the past three years. 'Last year we shot a film with Abbey Clancy and Peter Crouch, where she's in really sexy lingerie and he's playing pool. I remember saying, 'This is either going to go down like a ton of bricks or people are going to love it.'' It seems as if they loved it: the company's sales are expected to hit £50m this year. 'I think a younger generation now want what we had in the 1990s and 2000s,' Shotton says, 'because it looks like we had more fun. My generation of women had childhood on our BMX bikes, then when we were in our 20s, your job finished when you left the office and you could go out drinking all night if you wanted to. I think we really did have more fun. Life just didn't feel as complicated as it does now.' The bestselling bras, she says, are currently 'anything plunging and push-up. Racy stuff. Our Nikita satin bra, which is like a shelf for your boobs and only just covers your nipples.'
Sign up to Inside Saturday
The only way to get a look behind the scenes of the Saturday magazine. Sign up to get the inside story from our top writers as well as all the must-read articles and columns, delivered to your inbox every weekend.
after newsletter promotion
The legacy of the 1990s, when feminism and raunch became bedfellows, has left the world confused about breasts. Before that, the lines were pretty simple – the flappers throwing off their corsets, the feminists protesting over Page 3. But Liz Goldwyn, film-maker and sociologist (and granddaughter of Samuel Goldwyn Jr), whose first job was in a Planned Parenthood clinic and who collects vintage lingerie, doesn't fit neatly into any of the old categories. 'Third-wave feminists like myself grew up in the riot grrrl and burlesque days, where we embraced corsets and kink along with liberation and protest,' she says. Goldwyn collects, loves and wears vintage lingerie, while abhorring Spanx. 'I would rather go to the dentist than wear shapewear, but I find nothing more satisfying than to colour-coordinate my lingerie drawers.' Wearing a corset, she says, 'makes me breathe with more presence'.
Breasts have always been about money and class as well as sex and gender. The Tudor gentlewomen who wore dresses cut to expose their small, pert breasts were proudly indicating they had the means to afford a wet nurse. Sánchez's inauguration outfit – tiny white Alexander McQueen trouser suit, lots of gravity-defying cleavage – 'taps into the fact that people who are that wealthy can have the impossible,' Forrest says. 'It is pretty difficult to have a super-slim body and big breasts. Her body is a physical manifestation of something much bigger, which is the hyper-wealthy living in a different reality to the rest of us. The planet might be doomed, but they can go to space. It's a 'fuck you' marker of luxury and arrogance.' The vibe, Goldwyn agrees, 'is very dystopian 1980s Dynasty meets 'let them eat cake'. I would never disparage another woman's body, but I have no problem disparaging her principles … in claiming to stand for women's empowerment, yet attending an inauguration for an administration that has rolled back reproductive freedoms.'
Surgery – the blunt fact of boobs being a thing you can buy – has crystallised the idea of breasts as femininity's biggest commercial hit. (They are at times referred to, after all, as prize assets.) The primitive – survival of the fittest, in the thirsty sense of the word – is now turbocharged by capitalism.Breast enlargement is the most popular cosmetic surgery in the UK, with 5,202 procedures carried out in 2024, according to the British Association of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons.
When Jacqueline Sanchez Taylor interviewed women in 2010 about their experiences of breast augmentation for her research into the sociology of cosmetic surgery, 'a lot of young women told me they were doing it for status'. Not to show off, but to show 'they had made it. They felt they were being good citizens: going out there and making money, but also wanting to play the part of being feminine.' Breasts, Sanchez Taylor says, 'say everything about who a woman is: about femininity and fertility, class and age.' They are at the centre of the industrial complex that has grown up around female beauty. 'I remember sitting in a consultation with a woman and her surgeon, and him saying cheerfully, 'Oh yes, you've got fried egg breasts. But we can fix that.''
Fake is no longer scandalous or transgressive. The vocabulary of plastic surgery has been gentled and mainstreamed to become the more palatable cosmetic surgery. The older women of the Kardashian family have been coy about having had work, but 27-year-old Kylie Jenner recently shared on social media the details of her breast surgery – down to the implant size, placement and name of surgeon. Unreal is here to stay, and the new battle line is between perfection and imperfection. The generation growing up now, who have never seen a celebrity portrait that wasn't retouched, have never used a camera that doesn't have filters, take 20 selfies and delete 19 of them, have an intolerance of imperfection. To put it bluntly: normal looks weird to them.
So it seems natural – even if it isn't really natural – that celebrity boobs are getting bigger even as celebrity bodies are getting smaller. 'We are in a really weird place with the body, particularly in America,' says Emma McClendon, assistant professor of fashion studies at St John's University in New York, who in 2017 curated the New York exhibition The Body: Fashion and Physique. 'What we are seeing now is definitely not about the bigger body. It is a very controlled mode of curviness, which emphasises a tiny waist.' (Very 1950s coded, again.) 'GLP-1 weight-loss drugs are having a cultural impact on all of us, whether or not you or people you know are on them,' McClendon says. 'The incredible shrinking of the celebrity body that is happening in America is creating this idea that your body is endlessly fixable and tweakable.' Hairlines can be regrown, fat melted, wrinkles erased.
For most of the past half-century, fashion has held out against boobs. With a few notable exceptions – Vivienne Westwood, rest her soul, adored a corset-hoisted embonpoint – modern designers have mostly ignored them. Karl Lagerfeld insisted his models should glissade, ballerina style, and disliked any curves that veered from his clean, elongated lines. And yet in the past 12 months, the bullet bra has come back. A star turn on the Miu Miu catwalk was presaged last year by a cameo in the video for Charli xcx's 360, worn by photographer and model Richie Shazam, and by influencer and singer Addison Rae, whose lilac velvet corset creamed into two striking Mr Whippy peaks at a Young Hollywood party last summer. To seal the revival, none other than the queen of fashion – Kate Moss – wore a bullet bra under her Donna Karan dress in a viral fashion shoot with Ray Winstone for a recent issue of Perfect magazine.
Perhaps the bullet bra, which can be seen as weaponising the breast, is perfect for now. 'Fashion is the body, and clothes turn the body into a language,' McClendon says. The bullet bra is steeped in a time when 'domestic femininity was repackaged as glamour', Forrest says. 'A postwar era, coming back from scarcity and lack and hunger, when Sophia Loren was sold as a kind of delicious luxury truffle.'
Goldwyn is a fan. 'A perfectly seamed bullet bra lifts my spirits (and my breasts) if I am in a foul mood,' she says. 'I hope we can reclaim it as symbolic of resistance, defiance and armour.' In the backstage scrum with reporters after she had made bullet bras the centrepiece of her Miu Miu catwalk show, Miuccia Prada said the collection was about 'femininity', then she corrected herself: 'No – femininities.' Prada has been using her clothes to articulate the complexities of living and performing femininity for decades, and this season it led her to the bullet bra. 'What do we need, in this difficult moment for women – to lift us up?' she laughed, gesturing upwards with her hands, surrounded by pointy-chested models. 'It's like a new fashion. I think the girls are excited.'
Half a millennium after Leonardo da Vinci painted the Madonna Litta, his 1490 painting of the Virgin Mary baring her right breast to feed Christ, which now hangs in the State Hermitage Museum in St Petersburg, Russia, another Madonna found her breasts in the spotlight. In the late 1980s, Jean Paul Gaultier was experimenting with conical bras in his Paris shows. 'He took inspiration from his grandmother's structured undergarments,' says fashion historian Amber Butchart, 'and used them to herald self-liberation. I don't generally like the word empowering – it doesn't tend to mean much – but that was very much the idea.' In 1989, while Madonna was preparing for her 1990 Blond Ambition world tour, she phoned Gaultier and asked him to design the wardrobe. On the opening night, in Japan, Madonna tore off her black blazer to reveal that iconic baby-pink satin corset with conical cups. 'Do you believe in love? Well, I've got something to say about it,' she declared, before launching into Express Yourself. The silhouette, which could be seen all the way from the cheap seats, would end up scandalising the pope and costing the world's biggest female pop star a lucrative Pepsi deal. Boobs have always been good at capturing our attention, and they have it right now. Hello again, boys.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Adorable moment unlikely friendship forms between bear and coyote
Adorable moment unlikely friendship forms between bear and coyote

The Independent

time14 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Adorable moment unlikely friendship forms between bear and coyote

Footage released by Altadena Sheriff's Station in Los Angeles captured an unexpected encounter between a bear and a coyote. The two animals met under a bush at night, initially staring at each other. They then appeared to interact in a friendly manner, nuzzling noses and standing side-by-side. The police station shared the sweet interaction online with a humorous caption. Watch the video in full above.

I lived on baby food for a WEEK - what it did to my body shocked me
I lived on baby food for a WEEK - what it did to my body shocked me

Daily Mail​

time17 minutes ago

  • Daily Mail​

I lived on baby food for a WEEK - what it did to my body shocked me

A YouTuber has gone viral after claiming he lost a dramatic amount of weight in just five days—by eating nothing but food and drinks designed for babies. San Diego-based Michael Alves, a former college football player, tried the so-called 'baby food diet' in a self-imposed challenge posted to his YouTube channel, Killdozer. The video has racked up more than 820,000 views and documents the 26-year-old surviving on pouches, purees and formula drinks for the best part of a week. Before starting, Alves lays out strict ground rules: everything he eats must be made for babies or toddlers. Drinks must come in child-sized bottles, and all meals must be consumed using baby utensils—including a novelty cow-shaped 'spork'. By the end of the experiment, Alves claims he dropped from 18st 2lb (254lbs) to 17st 10lb (248lbs)—almost half a stone—adding that the experience made him feel constantly hungry, demoralised, and at times physically unwell. 'This challenge sucks,' he says in the video at one point. 'I really don't want to eat any more baby food.' Alves, who has gained more than 500,000 subscribers for his humorous gaming and lifestyle content, appears shirtless at the start of the video for a weigh in and 'physique check'. He is optimistic, claiming baby food 'must have loads of protein because children need protein... I think.' But his enthusiasm quickly dissipates. 'There's no protein in anything here,' he says in disbelief while shopping the baby aisle at Target. 'Do babies not need protein?' Over five days, Alves samples everything from toddler snacks to infant formula and squeezable meat purées—with mixed and mostly negative results. Many of the meals left him visibly recoiling. The mashed carrots, he said, were 'diabolical,' adding: 'Zero flavour at all. And they almost melt immediately in your mouth.' The macaroni and cheese fared little better: 'The noodles immediately disintegrate... and the cheese? Not very flavourful.' Even the infant formula drink he chose proved unbarable. After one sip, he grimaced: 'What the hell are we giving our kids? This tastes like poison.' Only one dish—mashed potatoes with beef and gravy—earned faint praise. 'It still tastes like baby food, but it also does taste like beef. So it's a double whammy.' He adds: 'These meals taste like they were made by aliens.' Alves did, however, enjoy toddler crisps, including a packet of garden salsa puffs which he awarded 9.2 out of 10, calling them the best thing he ate all week. To supplement the low-calorie meals, he also added regular exercise—taking part in hikes wearing a weighted vest, gym sessions and long walks, often with his wife Jessica, 27. Although the final weigh-in confirms he's 6lb lighter, Alves says he suspects much of the weight loss may be water rather than fat. With barely any salt or carbs, the baby food diet left his body flushing out water and burning through its energy reserves. He adds that the sheer lack of flavour in most of the products he consumed made it impossible to overeat. 'I'm starving,' he says at the end of day five. He gives the overall experience a score of 3/10, noting: 'If I didn't have the snacks or Pedialyte [baby formula rehydration drinks], it would've been a one.' Nutrition experts would be unlikely to recommend the plan. Baby food is designed for small children with developing digestive systems and contains limited salt, spices and fibre—not to mention little in the way of protein, unless fortified. Alves notes that even the baby yoghurts he tried were labelled as 'not containing live cultures,' meaning they were shelf-stable and lacked the gut-friendly bacteria found in regular yoghurt. 'I really thought this would be better,' he says. 'Even the formula tastes like poison. What are we giving our kids?' The challenge ends with Alves rewarding himself with a burrito, saying: 'We've got to start giving these to babies.' Alves has seen a rapid rise in fame over the past year, transitioning from sport to streaming. As a former offensive lineman for UCLA, he began posting gaming content and challenge videos under the name Killdozer in early 2025. His fanbase – known affectionately as 'Dozer Purists' – have praised the video's humour, but even die-hard supporters seem unlikely to replicate the diet themselves. 'Please do not do the baby food diet,' he says. 'I'm so glad I only did five days and not seven.' The baby‑food stunt follows another extreme diet challenge that made waves earlier this year. Alves himself has previously gone viral, after consuming nothing but protein shakes for a week. And Oklahoma City based YouTuber Joshua Allard, 25, gained attention after attempting to eat 150 eggs in five days. Allard said the egg-only diet left him bloated, tired and eating up to 30 eggs a day, but also noted unexpected benefits such as improved sleep and reduced appetite. The challenge sparked huge interest online, along with warnings from nutritionists who said such restrictive eating plans are unsustainable and lack essential nutrients. Like Alves's baby food challenge, it showed how extreme diets can lead to short-term weight loss—but may come with side effects and should not be taken as health advice.

What next for Gaza as Israel's shaky truce with Iran holds?
What next for Gaza as Israel's shaky truce with Iran holds?

The Independent

time19 minutes ago

  • The Independent

What next for Gaza as Israel's shaky truce with Iran holds?

In the wake of Donald Trump 's extraordinary outburst of profanity outside the White House, a fragile US-brokered truce between Israel and Iran appears to be tentatively holding. In recent days, this has been accompanied by a flurry of messaging from Israel that this cessation of hostilities is just the start. Benjamin Netanyahu, in a brief but emphatic video on Thursday, insisted that after Israel achieved 'a great victory' over its staunchest foe, a new opportunity had opened up for a 'dramatic expansion of peace agreements'. 'There is a window of opportunity here that must not be wasted. We must not waste even a single day,' he said with emphasis. For the two million Palestinians in Gaza facing starvation and slaughter, the hope is that this new climate of negotiations might herald the end of 20 months of Israel's unprecedented bombardment, which has reduced the 25-mile-long strip to ashen rubble and claimed over 56,000 lives, according to local officials. Senior Palestinian health workers told The Independent that without a ceasefire and the immediate delivery of desperately needed aid, they were 'scared we are teetering on the very edge'. 'We are so tired—we can't keep going,' said Yosef Abureesh, Gaza's deputy health minister, outlining how half of the essential drugs list is missing and that none of the 38 hospitals in Gaza are fully functioning. 'Don't rely on our resilience. We are no longer able to continue as health staff,' he added. But what would this peace actually look like - and at what cost? Over the weekend, Netanyahu proclaimed a 'tectonic shift' in the Middle East with Iran weakened, claiming it could herald many more regional states signing the Abraham Accords and thereby recognising and normalising relations with Israel. 'We have broken the axis,' he told reporters triumphantly. 'This is a huge change, and Israel's status is rising—not just in the Middle East but across the world.' Netanyahu's comments on Thursday, though still animated, were more vague. The entire statement lasted just 28 seconds, during which he referred to a 'window of opportunity' alongside 'the defeat of Hamas' and 'the release of the hostages'. There are thought to be around 50 Israelis seized by Hamas during its bloody 7 October 2023 assault in southern Israel who remain in Gaza. Of those, only 20 are believed to still be alive. Netanyahu has faced mounting pressure from the families of the captives and the deceased to sign any truce that could bring the hostages home. According to leaks in Israeli media, the US is also piling on pressure for a rapid peace deal in Gaza that could include broader regional implications . The left-leaning Israeli daily Haaretz reported on Friday that senior Trump administration officials have urged Israel to send its negotiating team to Cairo next week to advance talks with Hamas. Israel Hayom reported a four-way call involving Trump, secretary of state Marco Rubio, Netanyahu, and Israel's minister of strategic affairs, in which they discussed the possibility of a rapid end to the war in Gaza—possibly within just two weeks. The newspaper said the deal discussed could lead to an expansion of the Abraham Accords to include Saudi Arabia and a post-Assad Syria. The Accords, announced in 2020, saw diplomatic normalisation and trade deals signed between Israel and Arab states including the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. The deal would allegedly be conditional on Hamas being replaced by an 'Arab coalition' to administer Gaza, with multiple nations accepting large numbers of Gaza residents 'seeking emigration'—a potentially alarming indication of transfer of the population. In exchange, the leaks said, the US would recognise 'limited Israeli sovereignty' in the occupied West Bank —likely meaning Trump is preparing to acknowledge Israel's de facto annexation of parts of territory that Palestinians hope to include in a future state. This includes settlements considered illegal under international law and a major obstacle to peace. In return, Israel would have to declare a willingness for a future resolution to conflict based on a 'two-state concept'—a notable watering down of the long-held and widely accepted belief that the creation of two sovereign states - Israel and Palestine - is the best solution to the conflict. But even these conditions will likely face push back from Netanyahu's extreme-right cabinet. Extreme-right ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich have repeatedly called for the permanent conquest of Gaza and the re-establishment of Jewish settlements in Gaza that were dismantled in 2005. Without their support, Netanyahu risks the collapse of his razor-thin governing coalition. In a statement on Thursday, Smotrich declared: 'Mr prime minister, let it be clear: you do not have a mandate - not even a hint of one, or a lip-service one. If there are countries that want peace in exchange for peace - welcome. If they want a Palestinian state - they can forget it. It won't happen.' Secondly, these are conditions that the Palestinian leadership is unlikely to accept - especially if the proposal excludes the full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza and involves annexation of parts of the occupied West Bank. The Independent reached out to Hamas for comment on the reported leaks but has yet to receive a reply. Hamas badly needs a ceasefire. It is struggling to survive in Gaza, short of commanders - many of whom have been eliminated by Israel - deprived of much of its tunnel network , and now unsure of continued support from Iran (whose own military leadership has been battered). Yet, according to Gershon Baskin - a veteran Israeli hostage negotiator and peace activist - even under extreme conditions Hamas is still unlikely to accept the proposed terms. 'Hamas is ready to release all of the hostages and give up control over Gaza, but not as a surrender to Israel or to Trump - it must be part of a wider plan, which includes the reconstruction of Gaza,' he told The Independent. 'The idea of expanding the pie and adding extra components is good, but it must include ending the war and Israel withdrawing from Gaza. 'If it includes annexation of parts of the West Bank, Hamas - and all Palestinians - will never agree.' In the interim, time is running out for civilians in Gaza. On Friday, the World Health Organization warned that their first delivery of medical supplies to Gaza since March - when Israel imposed a full blockade on the strip - was merely a 'drop in the ocean' compared to what is needed. 'Open the routes and make sure that we can get our supplies in,' said WHO's Dr Rik Peeperkorn from Jerusalem, adding that Israel had denied entry to nearly 45 percent of the organisation's aid teams. From inside Gaza, Dr Abureesh warned that the population simply cannot continue in these conditions. 'Even someone working in Hollywood preparing a horror movie would not be able to invent the scenario that people in Gaza are living through right now,' he told The Independent. 'All the ways to kill people are being used together.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store