‘Chance to have a deal with Hamas': Donald Trump says, ‘close to a deal on Gaza' ahead of Netanyahu's US visit
Trump noted that he believed a hostage release and ceasefire deal could be reached this week, which could lead to the release of 'quite a few hostages.'
"I think there's a good chance we have a deal with Hamas during the week," Trump told reporters before flying back to Washington after a weekend golfing in New Jersey.
Donald Trump added, 'We are working on a lot of things with Israel, and one of the things is probably a permanent deal with Iran...We are close to a deal on Gaza. We could have it this week.'
Public pressure is mounting on Netanyahu to secure a permanent ceasefire and end the war in Gaza, a move opposed by some hardline members of his right-wing coalition. Others, including Foreign Minister Gideon Saar, have expressed support.
Netanyahu expressed optimism that his meeting with US President Donald Trump on Monday would contribute to progress in negotiations for a Gaza hostage release and a ceasefire deal, as reported by Reuters.
Ahead of his departure for Washington, Netanyahu stated on Sunday that Israeli negotiators participating in the renewed ceasefire talks in Doha had been given clear directives to secure a deal based on terms already accepted by Israel.
'I believe the discussion with President Trump can certainly help advance these results,' Netanyahu said, adding his determination to ensure the return of hostages held in Gaza and to remove the threat of the Palestinian militant group Hamas to Israel.
It will be Netanyahu's third visit to the White House since Trump returned to power nearly six months ago.
Palestinian group Hamas said on Friday it had responded to a U.S.-backed Gaza ceasefire proposal in a 'positive spirit', a few days after Trump said Israel had agreed 'to the necessary conditions to finalise' a 60-day truce, Reuters reported.
But in a sign of the potential challenges still facing the two sides, a Palestinian official from a militant group allied with Hamas said concerns remained over humanitarian aid, passage through the Rafah crossing in southern Israel to Egypt and clarity over a timetable for Israeli troop withdrawals.
The initial round of indirect ceasefire talks between Hamas and Israel in Qatar concluded without a breakthrough, two Palestinian sources familiar with the negotiations said early Monday.
They noted that the Israeli delegation lacked the necessary mandate to finalise an agreement with Hamas.
Netanyahu's office said in a statement that changes sought by Hamas to the ceasefire proposal were 'not acceptable to Israel'.
However, his office said the delegation would still fly to Qatar to "continue efforts to secure the return of our hostages based on the Qatari proposal that Israel agreed to."
Netanyahu has repeatedly said Hamas must be disarmed, a demand the militant group has so far refused to discuss.
Netanyahu said he believed he and Trump would also build on the outcome of the 12-day air war with Iran last month and seek to further ensure that Tehran never has a nuclear weapon. He said recent Middle East developments had created an opportunity to widen the circle of peace.
(With inputs from Reuters)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
9 minutes ago
- Mint
Arun Maira: Dedication to the state's purpose is the key lesson we must learn from China
India is at a crossroads. Both the political Left and Right agree that the economy needs substantial reform, but disagree on the direction. The progressive Left wants more socialism with more liberal democracy; the conservative Right wants more free-market capitalism and seems willing to tolerate curbs on liberty. The Middle seems muddled. The 20th century was a test of competing economic ideologies—socialism versus capitalism; and competing forms of governance—liberal democracy versus authoritarianism. When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, victory was declared for the Washington Consensus of free market capitalism and liberal democracy. India's reformers adopted the Washington formula in 1991. By and large, they gave up on socialism, abandoned industrial policies aimed at growing domestic industries and opened the Indian market for foreign companies without technology-transfer requirements. China did not yield. It stayed its socialist course with single-party governance and continued to build domestic industries. Also Read: Ajit Ranade: The success of 'Made in China 2025' alarmed the West The growth of China's economy is a miracle, economists say. In the 1980s, China and India's economies were comparable in size and per capita income. Now, China's per capita income and GDP are about five times India's. China's high-tech manufacturing sector has grown 48 times larger. The US, meanwhile, has grown alarmed with China's remarkable economic growth and industrial strength despite Beijing not following Washington's economic formula. That consensus has ended even in Washington, where ideological cracks have appeared with increasing inequality and unrest among workers in the US. The US is pressing India to come closer to it. India is wary. China shares a border with India that has seen the two armies skirmish. India must become self-reliant and stronger much faster than it has so far. Reforms must result in faster income growth among the Indian masses and stronger domestic industries. India's leaders should study China for lessons before pushing harder with economic reforms based on the West's failing model. Also Read: China began de-risking its economy well before Trump's trade fury US capitalism and Chinese socialism: Three recent books offer insights into how socialism and capitalism have been combined to achieve China's inclusive and fast growth. China's leaders are good learners, says German political economist Isabella M. Weber in How China Escaped Shock Therapy: The Market Reform Debate. Like Mahatma Gandhi, they kept their minds open, allowing ideas to come in from all directions without being blown off their feet. They listened to Western economists but applied only what suited China. Weber says, 'The famous Harvard development economist Dani Rodrik represents the economics profession more broadly when he answers his own question of whether 'anyone (can) name the (Western) economists or the piece of research that played an instrumental role in China's reforms" by claiming that 'economic research, at least as conventionally understood" did not play 'a significant role." Chinese economist Keyu Jin, a professor at the London School of Economics who grew up in China and experienced the Chinese system from within, explains how the Chinese socio-economic-political system works in The New China Playbook: Beyond Socialism and Capitalism. She explains why Western economic models, which strip out cultural and social forces from economics, cannot comprehend how China works—or even how Western economies work. She makes visible the 'invisible hand' that free-market economists cannot explain. She explains why the Chinese government keeps financial markets and the private sector reined in to ensure the market produces welfare for all, especially poorer and least powerful citizens. She says, 'The number of financial crises in China is exactly zero. It is also an oddity (from a Western perspective) that despite the nation's preternatural economic growth, its stock market has been one of the worst performing in the world." Also Read: Chinese history shows how a closed economy could squander a nation's greatness The Chinese government has added citizen satisfaction and environmental sustainability to GDP as a measure of its own performance (and of local governments). Though private firms grew nine-fold in China from 2000 to 2019 (their number now exceeds the US's by far), 'A more striking fact," says Lin, 'is that private owners with state connections owned about a third of the capital registered by these companies, showing how pervasive equity linkages between state and private businesses have become in China's corporate sector." While the government has reduced the number of state-owned enterprises and pushed the remainder to add profits to their social objectives, it also demands that private firms comply with societal needs. Large, private, property and tech firms that strayed from the socialist path have been cut down. Three distinctive features of China's governance: The purpose of the state, throughout China's long history from imperial times to the Communist era, has been the welfare of citizens. The best emperor was seen as one who provides the most welfare to all citizens, not one who wins the most wars. The leadership of the Communist Party has continued this role, says Chinese political scientist Zheng Yongnian in The Chinese Communist Party as Organizational Emperor: Culture, Reproduction, and Transformation. Jin explains further (in The New China Playbook) how the ruling party's commitment to this role has shaped Beijing's socio-economic policies, resulting in widespread support for the party even among the young. Also Read: Rahul Jacob: Manufacturing is crying out for a reality check The governance of China is highly decentralized. Local communities are given freedom to craft solutions suited to their needs; the performance of local party officials is measured by the satisfaction of their communities with progress. Chinese leaders and economists are 'systems thinkers.' They see the economy as only a component of a complex social system. For them, the purpose of economic growth is the production of societal well-being, especially for less powerful people. Whenever the economy begins to fail this purpose, reforms are made to bring it back to its socialist moorings. India must not slavishly follow Western models. Nor can India be China. India must find its own way to create a more equitable society. The author is a former member of the erstwhile Planning Commission and the author of 'Reimagining India's Economy: The Road to a More Equitable Society'.
Time of India
17 minutes ago
- Time of India
Reuters account on Twitter restored in India, email from the company says ‘At this time, we are no longer…'
Elon Musk-owned X has restored access to Reuters' official account in India, a day after it had been blocked due to a legal request. The main @Reuters account, followed by over 25 million users globally, was withheld in India on Saturday night. Indian users who tried to access it saw a message saying the account had been withheld 'in response to a legal demand.' However, a spokesperson for the Indian government's Press Information Bureau told Reuters that no government agency had requested the block. The official said they were working with X to resolve the issue. Another account, @ReutersWorld, which was also blocked in India, was restored later Sunday night. Announcing that the ban has now been lifted, Reuters quoted an email from X which said 'At this time, we are no longer withholding access in INDIA to your account'. Why Reuters account was banned in India Official sources told news agency PTI that a request to block Reuters' account was made during Operation Sindoor . The microblogging platform seems to have now acted on that request and blocking Reuters' account in the country. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Serbia: New Container Houses (Prices May Surprise You) Container House Search Now Undo In an earlier email dated May 16, X had told Reuters: 'It is our policy to notify account holders if we receive a legal request from an authorized entity (such as law enforcement or a government agency) to remove content from their account.' 'In order to comply with X obligations under India's local laws, we have withheld your X account in India under the country's Information Technology Act, 2000; the content remains available elsewhere,' the platform added. X did not specify which content triggered the action, who filed the request, or why it was made. The company noted that users can contact the secretary of India's Information and Broadcasting Ministry for further action. iOS 26 Beta 2 Hands-On: Apple Finally Does It
The Hindu
18 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Tesla shares fall as Musk's 'America Party' riles investors
Tesla shares fell over 3% on Monday, under pressure from investor concerns about the focus of boss Elon Musk after he announced he would form a new U.S. political party, marking a new escalation in his feud with President Donald Trump. Tesla stock fell over 3% in Frankfurt, pointing to another decline once premarket trading gets underway following the three-day weekend for Independence Day. Veteran tech analyst Dan Ives of Wedbush said Musk was Tesla's "biggest asset" and his decision to dive deeper into politics would likely put the company's shares under pressure. "Tesla needs Musk as CEO and its biggest asset and not heading down the political route yet at the same time getting on Trump's bad side," Ives said in a note on Sunday. "It would also not shock us if the Tesla board gets involved at some point given the political nature of this endeavour depending on how far Musk takes it." Trump on Sunday called Musk's plans to form the "America Party" "ridiculous," launching new barbs at the tech billionaire and saying the Musk ally he once named to lead NASA would have presented a conflict of interest given Musk's business interests in space.
