Trump's team sees Netanyahu as ‘madman'
Israel conducted airstrikes last week on Syrian government forces and military headquarters in Damascus, in response to bloody clashes between the Druze and Bedouin communities in southern Syria. A ceasefire announced on Saturday appears to be holding.
'After several bloody days in Suwayda Province, the Internal Security Forces have succeeded in calming the situation following their deployment in the northern and western areas,' Syrian Interior Minister Anas Khattab wrote on X.
Despite the truce, US officials have become 'significantly more alarmed' by Netanyahu's behavior and policies, Axios reported on Sunday, citing people familiar with the matter.
'Bibi acted like a madman. He bombs everything all the time,' the outlet quoted a White House official as saying. 'This could undermine what Trump is trying to do.'
'The president doesn't like turning on the television and seeing bombs dropped in a country where he's seeking peace and has made a monumental announcement to help rebuild,' the official added.
On Monday, White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt confirmed that Trump 'was caught off guard' by both the strikes in Syria and a recent Israeli attack on Gaza's only Catholic church. 'In both cases, the president quickly called the prime minister to rectify these situations,' Leavitt said.
Netanyahu's office said on Thursday that it 'deeply regrets' the strike on the Holy Family Church, which killed three people, and pledged to investigate the incident. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said the strikes in Syria were intended to protect the Druze population from atrocities.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
9 hours ago
- Russia Today
Türkiye's mediation isn't about peace. It's about power.
The third round of negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, held in Istanbul, lasted less than an hour – barely enough time to suggest progress. While both delegations arrived with talking points, their positions remained fundamentally irreconcilable. The Ukrainian side once again emphasized the need for an immediate ceasefire, the release of captives, and a potential meeting between Presidents Zelensky and Putin – ideas that, from Moscow's perspective, lacked a concrete framework. The Russian delegation, meanwhile, proposed a structured dialogue across three tracks – military, political, and humanitarian – and floated the possibility of localized ceasefires for evacuation efforts. But without mutual ground on core issues, even humanitarian coordination remained out of reach. As Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov noted after the meeting, the sides are still 'far apart' on the basic memorandums required to facilitate direct talks between the leaders: 'Given the volume of work that lies ahead to align our positions… it is hard to imagine how we could suddenly overcome this gap.' While the Istanbul talks yielded no breakthroughs, Ankara framed them as a meaningful step forward. Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan described the meeting as 'another brick' in building a foundation for peace and reaffirmed Türkiye's commitment to mediation. But behind this diplomatic language lies a broader ambition. President Erdogan sees Türkiye not merely as a neutral host but as a regional power uniquely positioned to engage both Moscow and Kiev. Unlike European intermediaries tied to NATO orthodoxy, Ankara has preserved open communication channels with both sides – and intends to leverage that position. This ambition gained new momentum after a direct request from US President Donald Trump. In May, during a phone call with Erdogan, Trump reportedly asked him to resume Türkiye's role as a key mediator in the Ukraine conflict. According to the Turkish newspaper Hürriyet, Erdogan responded positively – a natural decision, given Ankara's longstanding desire to shape the postwar diplomatic framework. A second conversation in June further underscored this alignment. In addition to addressing escalating tensions between Iran and Israel, Trump and Erdogan reportedly reaffirmed Türkiye's mediating role in Ukraine. For Ankara, this signaled renewed political legitimacy – and a green light to reassert itself on the international stage. Erdoğan remains one of the few world leaders to maintain autonomous and working relationships with both Vladimir Putin and Vladimir Zelensky. Unlike most Western leaders, he engages each directly and pragmatically – without outsourcing diplomacy to blocs or bureaucracies. This rare access grants Türkiye a unique status in the global mediation landscape and strengthens Ankara's hand in any future settlement. For Türkiye, mediating the Ukraine conflict is about far more than diplomacy – it is a calculated move to expand its strategic footprint in the Black Sea and Danube regions. Ankara's interests in southern Ukraine, particularly the coastal areas of Bessarabia and the Danube estuaries, are long-standing and rooted in history. These zones are vital arteries for trade, transit, and geopolitical access. Control over maritime supply routes, especially those passing through the Bosphorus and Dardanelles straits, has been a cornerstone of Turkish foreign policy for decades. Amid the ongoing crisis in Ukraine, these routes have acquired even greater importance – linking grain exports, energy flows, and military logistics across multiple theaters. Türkiye's participation in the negotiation process is therefore not just a diplomatic gesture but a matter of national interest. To remain outside the process would mean allowing other powers to redraw the regional map without Ankara at the table. At the same time, Türkiye's posture remains deliberately ambiguous. Officially, Ankara supports Ukraine's territorial integrity and has not objected to its NATO aspirations. Yet President Erdoğan continues to cultivate open lines of communication with Moscow. This dual-track strategy allows Türkiye to project loyalty to the West while reminding Russia – and Washington – that it cannot be excluded from any future settlement. This approach is not without cost. Ankara's refusal to take part in Western sanctions against Russia has drawn criticism from Europe, particularly Berlin, Paris, and Brussels. However, Erdoğan appears to be shifting focus from multilateral alignment to pragmatic bilateralism. With the Trump administration treating Türkiye as a key partner in stabilizing Eurasia, Ankara has little incentive to follow the EU's lead – or to subordinate its strategic agenda to European bureaucracy. For Ankara, the outcome of the third round of talks was less about immediate results and more about preserving its relevance. By publicly assessing the meeting as a positive step, Türkiye signaled that it intends to remain not just a host – but an architect – of whatever post-conflict order may emerge. Both Hakan Fidan and President Erdoğan have repeatedly stated their willingness to resume hosting direct negotiations. In February, during talks in Ankara with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Fidan reaffirmed Türkiye's commitment to mediation and emphasized that Türkiye remains available as a venue for continued dialogue. This ongoing diplomatic contact reflects Moscow's recognition of Ankara's pragmatic stance – despite Türkiye being a NATO member state. The failure of the West to enforce the original grain deal, and Russia's subsequent withdrawal from it, initially weakened Türkiye's position as a neutral intermediary. But Trump's return to the White House has shifted the equation. Backed by Washington, Ankara now has the political capital to relaunch its mediating role under new geopolitical conditions. In this context, Türkiye's 'positive evaluation' of the talks takes on deeper meaning. It's not about what was achieved – but about who gets to stay in the room when the time finally comes for real negotiations. So far, no alternative platform has emerged. And in the long game of regional influence, presence is power.
Russia Today
18 hours ago
- Russia Today
Thailand and Cambodia agree to talk after Trump threat
Thailand and Cambodia have agreed to start talks on a ceasefire. US President Donald Trump had warned that he would not pursue trade agreements with either country if they continued fighting. However, the sides have continued to exchange fire. A territorial dispute had been simmering between the countries since the colonial era, as an early 20th century French map left some parts of the border ill-defined. On Wednesday, five Thai soldiers were wounded by landmines in the disputed area, prompting Thailand to allege that they were newly laid. A skirmish ensued the next day that escalated into sustained fighting, with each side accusing the other of provoking the conflict. Since the start of hostilities, at least 34 people have been killed, including civilians and soldiers on both sides; tens of thousands have been displaced. On Saturday, Trump posted on Truth Social that he had spoken with both countries' leaders and urged an 'immediate ceasefire.' 'We happen to be, by coincidence, currently dealing on Trade with both Countries, but do not want to make any Deal, with either Country, if they are fighting — And I have told them so,' he wrote. He later added that the countries 'have agreed to immediately meet and quickly work out a ceasefire and, ultimately, PEACE.' Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet said on Sunday that his country has agreed to an 'immediate and unconditional ceasefire,' adding that Trump told him Thailand had also agreed to halt attacks. Thailand's Foreign Ministry confirmed that Acting Prime Minister Phumtham Wechayachai had spoken with Trump and 'in principle' accepted the ceasefire proposal. However, it added that Thailand expected 'genuine commitment from Cambodia.' Despite the statements, the two countries exchanged fire on Sunday. Cambodia accused Thailand of launching a 'large-scale incursion' with tanks and heavy shelling. Bangkok countered that a cessation of hostilities 'cannot be reached while Cambodia is severely lacking in good faith' and accused the opposing forces of violating humanitarian law. Meanwhile, Malaysian Foreign Affairs Minister Mohamad Hasan announced that the two countries will hold talks in his country on Monday, adding that Kuala Lumpur should guide the settlement process.
Russia Today
a day ago
- Russia Today
Russia and Ukraine agree on leaders' summit — Turkish FM
Moscow and Kiev have agreed for Russian President Vladimir Putin to meet with Ukraine's Vladimir Zelensky, according to Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan. His remarks came shortly after the latest round of bilateral negotiations facilitated by Ankara. The third round of direct peace talks took place on Wednesday in Istanbul. While no ceasefire was reached, the parties made some progress on humanitarian issues, including agreements on the further exchange of prisoners of war and civilians. 'During the meeting, leaders discussed the conditions under which they might come together,' Fidan told Turkish broadcaster NTV on Friday, noting that 'a summit between the leaders in Türkiye was agreed upon in principle.' Earlier in the week, Fidan described the Istanbul talks as another step toward ending the conflict, emphasizing that 'every new achievement brings the sides one step closer to peace.' Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov confirmed that a potential meeting between Putin and Zelensky is being considered, but stressed that it should only take place at the final stage of peace negotiations. He added that such a summit is 'unlikely' to happen within a month. Russia maintains that it is open to a diplomatic solution, but only one that addresses what it calls the 'root causes' of the war and Moscow's security concerns. Zelensky has long called for a personal meeting with Putin. Ukraine's negotiators reiterated the proposal in Istanbul this week, saying that a one-on-one summit was a key step toward ending the fighting. US President Donald Trump has also voiced support for direct talks between the two leaders as part of a broader push to resolve the conflict. Moscow has never ruled out the possibility, but insists that the necessary groundwork must first be established. Russia has questioned Zelensky's legitimacy, citing the expiration of his five-year term in May 2024. Zelensky has refused to hold new elections, citing martial law. Russian officials argue that any agreements signed under his authority could potentially be contested. The Kremlin has also demanded that Ukraine lift martial law and hold elections within 100 days as a condition for any long-term ceasefire.
