Anger as far-right Israeli minister prays at flashpoint holy site in Jerusalem
The area, which Jews call the Temple Mount, is the holiest site in Judaism and was home to the ancient biblical temples. Muslims call the site the Noble Sanctuary, and today it is home to the Al Aqsa Mosque, the third-holiest site in Islam.
Visits are considered a provocation across the Muslim world and openly praying violates a longstanding status quo at the site.
Under the status quo, Jews have been allowed to tour the site but are barred from praying, with Israeli police and troops providing security.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office said after Mr Ben-Gvir's visit that Israel would not change the norms governing the holy site.
Mr Ben-Gvir made the stop after Hamas released videos showing two emaciated Israeli hostages. The videos caused in uproar in Israel and raised pressure on the government to reach a deal to bring home from Gaza the remaining hostages who were captured on October 7 2023, in the attack that triggered the war.
During his visit to the hilltop compound, Mr Ben-Gvir called for Israel to annex the Gaza Strip and encourage Palestinians to leave, reviving rhetoric that has complicated negotiations to end the war.
He condemned the video that Hamas released on Saturday of 24-year-old hostage Evyatar David, showing him looking skeletal and hollow-eyed in a dimly lit Gaza tunnel.
The minister called it an attempt to pressure Israel.
Mr Ben-Gvir's previous visits to the site have been explosive and prompted threats from Palestinian militant groups. Clashes between Israeli security forces and Palestinian demonstrators in and around the site fuelled an 11-day war with Hamas in 2021.
His Sunday visit was swiftly condemned as an incitement by Palestinian leaders as well as Jordan and Saudi Arabia.
Sufian Qudah, spokesman for the foreign ministry in neighboring Jordan, which serves as the custodian of the Al Aqsa Mosque, condemned what he called 'provocative incursions by the extremist minister' and implored Israel to prevent escalation.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
2 minutes ago
- Reuters
Israel considers full Gaza takeover as more die of hunger
TEL AVIV/CAIRO, Aug 5 (Reuters) - Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu favours a complete military takeover of Gaza for the first time in two decades, media reported, and was to meet senior security officials on Tuesday to finalise a new strategy in the 22-month war. Mediation between Israel and Palestinian militant group Hamas has collapsed despite intense international pressure for a ceasefire to ease hunger and appalling conditions in the besieged Palestinian enclave. Eight more people died of starvation or malnutrition in the past 24 hours, Gaza's health ministry said, while another 79 died in the latest Israeli fire. Netanyahu was to meet Defence Minister Israel Katz and military Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir to decide on a strategy to take to cabinet later this week, an Israeli official told Reuters. Strategic Affairs Minister Rob Dermer, a confidant of Netanyahu, would also be present. Israel's Channel 12, citing an official from Netanyahu's office, said the prime minister was leaning towards taking control of the entire territory. That would reverse a 2005 decision to pull settlers and military out of Gaza while retaining control over its borders, a move right-wing parties blame for Hamas gaining power there. It was unclear, however, whether Netanyahu was foreseeing a prolonged occupation or a short-term operation aimed at dismantling Hamas and freeing Israeli hostages. The prime minister's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the Channel 12 report. A Palestinian official said it may be a tactic to pressure Hamas into concessions, while the Palestinian Foreign Ministry urged foreign nations to take heed of the reports. "The ministry urges countries and the international community to treat these leaks with utmost seriousness and to intervene urgently to prevent their implementation, whether these leaks are meant to exert pressure, test international reactions, or are genuine and serious," it said. Israel's coalition government, the most right-wing and religiously conservative in its history, includes far-right politicians who advocate for the annexation of both Gaza and the West Bank and encourage Palestinians to leave their homeland. Nearly two years of fighting in Gaza has strained the military, which has a small standing army and has had to repeatedly mobilise reservists. It has throughout the war pushed back against the idea of Israel fully occupying Gaza and establishing military rule. In a sign of differences between some members of Israel's ruling coalition and the military, far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir on X challenged military head Zamir to state he would comply with government directives even if a decision was made to take all of Gaza. Foreign Minister Gideon Saar then said the military chief must give his professional opinion, while Defence Minister Katz weighed in to say the military would professionally implement whatever policy the government set. "Defeating Hamas in Gaza, while creating the conditions for the return of the hostages, are the central goals of the war in Gaza, and we must take all necessary actions to achieve them," Katz said. The war was triggered when Hamas-led militants on October 7, 2023, attacked Israel, killing around 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and capturing 251 hostages, taking them into Gaza. Israel's military response has devastated the tiny, crowded enclave, killing more than 61,000 people - mostly civilians - according to Palestinian health authorities. Israel's campaign has forced nearly all of Gaza's over 2 million people from their homes and caused what a global hunger monitor called last week an unfolding famine. Some 188 Palestinians, including 94 children, have died from hunger since the war began, according to Gaza authorities. An Israeli security official, in a briefing to reporters, acknowledged there may be hunger in some parts of Gaza but rejected reports of famine or starvation. International anger at the suffering in Gaza has prompted several countries to recognise or announce their intention to recognise Palestine as an independent state. On Tuesday, Israeli tanks pushed into central Gaza but it was not clear if the move was part of a larger ground offensive. Palestinians living in the last quarter of territory where Israel has not yet taken military control - via ground incursions or orders for civilians to leave - said any new push would be catastrophic. "If the tanks pushed through, where would we go, into the sea? This will be like a death sentence to the entire population," said Abu Jehad, a Gaza wood merchant. The failed mediation in Doha had aimed to clinch agreements on a U.S.-backed proposal for a 60-day truce, during which aid would be flown into Gaza and half of the hostages Hamas is holding would be freed in exchange for Palestinian prisoners in Israel.
Spectator
21 minutes ago
- Spectator
Israel's plan to occupy Gaza is a last resort
Reports last night from Israeli Channel 12 quoting a senior official in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office have confirmed what has long been rumoured, feared, and for some, awaited: the decision has been made to occupy the Gaza Strip. This is not yet formal policy, pending cabinet approval, but the trajectory is now unmistakable. The prelude has ended. The war is entering a new, graver phase. Western commentary will, as usual, rush to treat this as a moral failure of Israeli restraint, or as the inevitable result of hawkish ideology. Yet that interpretation is not only false, it is profoundly dishonest and the opposite of the truth. The occupation of Gaza is not a first resort. It is, tragically, the last. And it is an outcome born of many missteps by many international actors, including the UK. For 22 months, Israel has pursued every conceivable alternative. When the United States and international community demanded a surge in humanitarian aid, Israel complied. When ceasefire negotiations gained momentum, Israel displayed unprecedented flexibility, including territorial compromises around the Morag axis. When Hamas rejected yet another comprehensive offer mediated by Egypt, Qatar and the US, it was not for lack of effort by Jerusalem or Washington. It was the result of a calculated decision by Hamas to extract political and material gain by prolonging conflict. For a while, it looked like it might all go the other way. The timeline speaks for itself: Israeli envoys travelled to Doha in early July; by mid-month, a new draft agreement was on the table. The US special envoy, Steve Witkoff, was scheduled to fly to Doha on 23 July to finalise the deal. But by then, Hamas had already sabotaged the process, following a Western joint statement led by Britain's Foreign Secretary David Lammy, calling for an unconditional end to the war and an unrestricted flow of aid. From the UK, Hamas recognised that it could secure its objectives without giving up the hostages. It raised new demands, withdrew consent on earlier terms, and collapsed the negotiations entirely. The hostages remain starving underground. The war grinds on unrelentingly. And the challenging humanitarian situation will not end yet. To this, some Western governments have responded with gestures of abstract symbolism. In September, the UK, France, Canada and others are set to recognise a Palestinian state, ostensibly to reinvigorate the peace process. But as Shany Mor, lecturer in political thought at Reichman University, has noted, symbolic actions which incentivise maximalist violence do not break cycles of war, they perpetuate them. The 21 July statement did not bolster diplomacy. It destroyed it. Israel is now faced with the consequences of that destruction. The IDF, reportedly reluctant to engage in renewed full-scale combat, has nonetheless been preparing a range of military scenarios, including encirclement strategies and targeted incursions. Yet none offer a quick resolution. The reality is that without a decisive shift on the ground, the hostages will starve to death in captivity, Hamas will not be deterred, and Gaza will remain a base for Palestinian jihadist aggression. Some argue that occupation will not bring peace. Perhaps not. But what the critics fail to answer is: what will? Not diplomacy – that has been exhausted. Not incentives – those have been lavished. Not restraint – that has only emboldened the most violent actors. Hamas has not surrendered, moderated, or compromised. It has neither proposed a viable end-state nor shown any interest in the norms of conflict expected by civilised states. Instead, it has starved its captives and its own civilians for propaganda, hoarded aid, and continued to fire into Israeli towns. The decision to occupy Gaza is not born of ideology but necessity. It is not an act of vengeance but of grim strategic calculation. And it has been made only after every alternative was tried, and each was thwarted by an opponent committed to endless war. Internally, those who pushed for this outcome all along will now be inclined to argue that they were the realists 20 months ago, and even 20 years ago when they opposed Israeli disengagement from Gaza in the first place. It will bring new criticism, especially from the Western press and political class, which has grown adept at condemning outcomes without tracing their causes. But this condemnation cannot erase the facts. As much as Israel is choosing this path, it has also been chosen for it, by a jihadist movement that values leverage over lives, spectacle over peace, and whose only reliable negotiating tactic is to demand the rewards of surrender while offering none. And by a coalition of international actors determined to scupper every diplomatic or military step Israel had towards victory over ruthless Palestinian jihadism and maximalism. All of this signposting could be performative distraction from a different but no less decisive Israel-American action about to unfold. This would be similar to the elaborate pre-12 Day War playbook used when Netanyahu and Trump put out misleading signals before their coordinated joint actions. If the occupation proceeds, it may be long, costly, and fraught with danger. But it may also be the only remaining way to establish the minimal conditions of security and order. The problem of Gaza, tragically, has not left Israel with a choice. It has left it with a burden.
The Guardian
32 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Israeli cabinet meeting postponed as tensions rise over Netanyahu's occupation plan
An Israeli security cabinet meeting, which had been expected to discuss prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu's call for the 'full occupation' of Gaza, has been postponed amid mounting tensions over whether the plan is feasible. Amid a stalling of ceasefire negotiations with Hamas, Israeli officials had briefed local and international media that Netanyahu was considering an expansive offensive, aimed at taking full control of the Palestinian territory after 22 months of war against militant group Hamas. However, senior Israeli military officers and former senior commanders warned that the plan would endanger the lives of remaining Israeli hostages held by Hamas, risk further international isolation of Israel and require Israeli soldiers to administer a population in which Hamas fighters were still present. Any move towards full occupation is likely to be strongly resisted by large parts of the international community, already horrified by the conduct of Israel's military campaign. Israel's scorched-earth campaign has already obliterated large parts of Gaza, killing more than 60,000 people, the majority of them civilians, forcing nearly all of Gaza's over 2 million people from their homes and causing what a global hunger monitor last week called an unfolding famine. That has caused widespread international anger and prompted several European countries to say they would recognise a Palestinian state next month if there was no ceasefire, amid mounting calls for sanctions on Israel. The disquiet follows briefings to Israeli journalists on Monday saying that Netanyahu had decided the expanded offensive was a foregone conclusion. 'The die has been cast. We're going for the full conquest of the Gaza Strip – and defeating Hamas,' the unnamed sources said, quoting Netanyahu. By Tuesday, however, evidence had emerged of deep splits between Netanyahu and senior military officials, including chief of staff Eyal Zamir, who reportedly voiced opposition to the plan, prompting calls for his dismissal. Military analysts in the Israeli media, channelling some defence officials, were also sceptical. Writing in Yedioth Ahronoth, military affairs commentator Yossi Yehoshua described the risks of the proposal. 'Hostages … will die, large numbers of IDF [Israel Defense Forces] soldiers who will be killed as well as a serious logistical problem – where to house the roughly 1 million civilians who are now in Gaza City. 'Currently, Israel simply doesn't have legitimacy either to continue to fight in Gaza or to establish a city of refugees on its ruins.' Israeli officials have said Netanyahu discussed a plan with the White House as it attempted to portray Hamas as having walked away from ceasefire negotiations, a claim denied by Hamas, which blamed Israel for the protracted impasse. While the Trump administration has not commented on the Netanyahu proposal, it has been given some credence by leaked comments made by US envoy Steve Witkoff to Israeli hostage families at the weekend, suggesting his proposal for a ceasefire in exchange for the release of half of the remaining living hostages had failed. Witkoff added that Donald Trump 'now believes that everybody should come home at once. No piecemeal deals,' adding they were now pursuing an 'all or nothing' plan. At the centre of the Netanyahu plan is the notion that, by surrounding areas where hostages are believed to be held, Israeli forces can raid those areas and rescue the captives, a policy that has broadly failed during the past two years of war. Amid questions over the practicality of a wider offensive, some have speculated that Netanyahu's call may be more rhetorical than real in substance, aimed at keeping on board far right ministers who have demanded they be allowed to build settlements in Gaza. A Palestinian official close to the talks and mediation said Israeli threats could be a way to pressure Hamas to make concessions at the negotiation table. 'It will only complicate the negotiation further, at the end, the resistance factions will not accept less than an end to the war, and a full withdrawal from Gaza,' the official told Reuters, requesting not to be named. Practically, too, it is unclear whether Israel has the capacity for the kind of expanded operation described. The IDF has struggled with manpower issues as the war drags on, with reservists being repeatedly called up amid concerns over a mental health crisis that has seen a number of suicides. On Tuesday, during a visit to Gaza, Israel's defence minister, Israel Katz, suggested a less comprehensive long-term Israeli occupation, insisting that Israel would maintain a permanent IDF presence in a 'security buffer zone' in strategic areas of Gaza to prevent future attacks on Israeli communities and arms smuggling into the strip. 'This is the main lesson of October 7,' said Katz. 'As in other sectors, here too the IDF must stand between the enemy and our communities – not only to fight the enemy, but to separate it from our civilians.' Inside Gaza on Tuesday, Israeli gunfire and strikes killed at least 13 Palestinians, local health authorities said, including five people in a tent in Khan Younis and three aid seekers near Rafah in the south. Israeli tanks pushed into central Gaza earlier on Tuesday, but it was not clear if the move was part of a larger ground offensive. Agencies contributed to this article
