Egypt's President Sisi urges Trump to end Gaza war
In a televised address, Sisi said Trump "is the one capable of stopping the war, bringing in aid and ending this suffering" after more than 21 months, with Gazans grappling with dire humanitarian conditions.
"Therefore, I am making a special appeal to His Excellency President Trump: please make every effort to stop the war and bring in aid," the Egyptian leader said.
"The time has come to end the war," said Sisi, whose government has been involved in mediation efforts aimed at securing an elusive truce as well as in sending aid into Gaza, which border Egypt's Sinai Peninsula.
Trump said on Monday that a ceasefire between America's close ally Israel and Hamas was still "possible", after talks in Doha with US, Qatari and Egyptian mediation had ended with no breakthrough.
Gaza's population of more than two million people face a deepening humanitarian crisis, with UN agencies and aid groups warning of worsening starvation and malnutrition.
As international pressure grew, Israel has said in recent days it would allow more aid into the devastated territory, which was under a complete blockade for two months ending in late May.
Sisi said Egypt has a large number of aid trucks waiting at the Rafah border crossing, but "for aid to enter, coordination is necessary".
"The other party that is inside the Rafah crossing on the Palestinian side must open for this aid to enter," he added, referring to Israel's military.
Formerly a vital conduit for life-saving aid, the Rafah crossing between Egypt and Gaza has been effectively closed since Israeli forces seized its Palestinian side more than a year ago.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Deccan Herald
8 minutes ago
- Deccan Herald
PM Modi can't say 'Trump is lying' over ceasefire as US President will lay bare truth: Rahul Gandhi
Gandhi said Trump is making the remarks to put pressure on the Indian government for the trade deal.
The Print
8 minutes ago
- The Print
China is enjoying the strain in India-US ties and Trump cosying up to Pakistan
For years, India and the US appeared united in their efforts to counterbalance China. Today, that unity seems more transactional than strategic, according to Chinese analysts . They point to Donald Trump's renewed interest in mediating India-Pakistan tensions, high-level US engagements with Pakistan's military leadership, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio's outreach to Islamabad as signs of a shift . As one Chinese commentator put it, 'Trump's erratic policies have not hurt China; they have hurt India.' Chinese media are rife with headlines such as 'US pursues 'mineral diplomacy' with Pakistan while sidelining India' and 'By backing Pakistan, the US has effectively joined China in cornering India.' Once hailed as a counterbalance to Chinese influence in Asia, the India-US partnership is now showing signs of strain. As the Trump administration renews and deepens its ties with Pakistan, Beijing is pushing the narrative that Washington is gradually sidelining New Delhi. India sidelined, Pakistan revived Chinese commentators underscore Washington's abrupt pivot. Barely a month after imposing tariffs on Pakistan, the US was discussing an $8 trillion mineral venture in Balochistan. For Beijing, this is a clear signal of Pakistan's strategic value being restored, while India's diplomatic space continues to shrink. According to Chinese discourse, India misread US signals and launched a military operation against Pakistan, a move that allegedly backfired. With Pakistan's defence bolstered by Chinese arms, India suffered substantial losses. Meanwhile, delivery of US weapons to India is delayed. From Beijing's vantage point, the US treated India not as an equal partner, but as a regional actor to be mediated. The result, Chinese commentators argue, was military embarrassment, diplomatic isolation, and a weakened regional posture. One Weibo post declared: 'Modi's lies are exposed, and Trump's comments are a slap in the face as he openly sides with Pakistan.' Another user wrote: 'The United States is trying to balance both sides to protect its regional interests.' For Beijing, this underscores a core message that Washington prioritises its own interests over siding firmly with India. The result is a strategic dilemma, where Indian expectations diverge from US strategic calculations. India's diplomatic challenges in Beijing's narrative Chinese analysts consistently characterise India's diplomacy as brittle and ineffective. Despite New Delhi's longstanding labelling of Pakistan as a terrorist state, they argue India has failed to secure unequivocal backing from Washington. Instead, US engagement with and praise for Pakistan have further complicated India's regional standing and credibility. 'The deterioration in US–India relations is two-sided and visible,' read a widely circulated Weibo post. Guancha editor Yang Rong noted that while the Biden administration once promoted India as a regional alternative to China, Trump-era policy has become more cautious, unwilling to fully integrate security and trade interests. Analyst Liu Chenghui warns that any US–China détente would also leave India further exposed. Beijing's narrative casts India as squeezed between assertive Chinese pressure and American ambivalence. Pakistan, by contrast, is depicted as deftly maintaining good relations with both powers. The US tilt towards Pakistan, in this context, signals that India's much-vaunted strategic autonomy is reactive and vulnerable in an evolving world order. Shen Yi, assistant dean at Fudan University's School of International Relations and Public Affairs, argues that the US is not a genuine strategic partner for India. Instead, it is a power willing to undermine New Delhi's standing to maintain regional fluidity, fuelling instability and hastening the collapse of the so-called 'second island chain' strategy. In this telling, India's strategic posture is increasingly precarious. Surrounded by adversarial neighbours and lacking dependable partners, Chinese commentators suggest India must focus on stabilising ties at home and with key regional players, particularly Pakistan and China, before it can project broader influence. China is a clear winner The US offers of mediation, including military and economic aid to Pakistan, sparked outrage in India, where Kashmir remains deeply sensitive. Chinese commentators argue that Washington continues to underestimate South Asian nationalist sentiments. India's rejection of these overtures, in their view, reflects not just diminished trust but growing strategic insecurity. 'The more India caters to Washington, the more it 'cuts its own flesh',' said Liu Zongyi, senior research fellow at the Shanghai Institutes for International Studies, a government think tank. Once touted as a cornerstone of Indo-Pacific strategy, the India-US relationship now appears weakened following Washington's engagement with Pakistan and its perceived failure to support India in times of need. From Beijing's perspective, this indifference by Washington is driving India closer to China. In Chinese discourse, the US is framed as a power driven by expediency, quick to pivot, slow to commit, and increasingly withdrawing support for India. India, in turn, is portrayed as playing both sides, indecisive, and lacking strategic coherence, a 'fence-sitter' unable to secure the confidence of either Washington or Beijing. It further declares India as overestimating its strategic value to Washington while underestimating the risks of aligning too closely with the US and drifting away from China. In contrast, China's self-image is one of strategic constancy, a steady hand in a volatile region, comfortable with long-term positioning. It presents itself as the only consistent beneficiary of the evolving regional realignment. With Pakistan firmly within its orbit and the US rekindling ties with Islamabad, the regional dynamics is, in Beijing's telling, tilting decisively in China's favour while India scrambles to recalibrate. Sana Hashmi is a fellow at the Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation. She tweets @sanahashmi1. Views are personal. (Edited by Prashant)
Mint
8 minutes ago
- Mint
Who is Vinay Prasad? US FDA's top regulator exits agency after controversy over Sarepta gene therapy
Dr. Vinay Prasad, a top regulator at the US Food and Drug Administration, has resigned in less than three months in the job following a controversy over the handling of Sarepta Therapeutics Inc.'s gene therapy. 'Dr. Prasad did not want to be a distraction to the great work of the FDA in the Trump administration and has decided to return to California and spend more time with his family,' a report by CNN quoted a spokesperson for the US Department of Health and Human Services. In May, Prasad, a hematologist and oncologist was appointed head of the FDA's Centre for Biologics Evaluation and Research, granting him authority over vaccines and biological medicines. Subsequently, he was also appointed the FDA's chief medical and scientific officer. Similar to several Trump administration health appointees, Prasad had been a vocal critic of the government's response and vaccine policies during the COVID-19 pandemic. The report, citing people aware of the development, said Prasad resigned amid pressure from the White House. Additionally, Laura Loomer, a right-wing activist known to have close ties with Donald Trump, consistently criticised Prasad. She publicly criticised him for days on her website and social media, calling him a 'progressive leftist saboteur' who was 'undermining President Trump's FDA.' Loomer called out Prasad's previous social media posts and podcast episodes, where she claimed that he supported liberal politicians and expressed 'disdain' for Trump. However, FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary defended Prasad just days ago. In an interview with Politico, Makary said Prasad is an 'impeccable scientist … one of the greatest scientific minds of our generation.' 'We thank him for his service and the many important reforms he was able to achieve in his time at FDA,' the spokesperson for HHS said. Prasad took on his role at the FDA following years of outspoken criticism of certain drug approvals by the agency. Notably, he condemned the approval of Sarepta's Duchenne muscular dystrophy drug, Elevidys, asserting that there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate it effectively slowed or reversed symptoms of this rare and deadly genetic condition. This month, the FDA asked Sarepta to stop shipments of the drug after a reported death of a young patient in Brazil. Just one day before Prasad's departure, the agency unexpectedly reversed its decision and allowed Sarepta to continue shipments for certain patients. Prasad faced criticism from former officials and vaccine experts after May's internal memos showed he overruled FDA scientists on two new Covid-19 vaccine versions. The then-CDER director criticised the broad use of these vaccines; ultimately, the FDA approved them for older and immunocompromised individuals but did not recommend them for younger Americans without underlying health conditions.
