White House Complicity: Bloody Days Return to Gaza

The Israeli army said early Tuesday that it has conducted airstrikes in the Gaza Strip, the largest since a ceasefire with the Palestinian group Hamas took effect on Jan. 19.

“Based on directives from the political echelon, IDF and Shin Bet forces are launching a large-scale attack on Hamas terrorist targets throughout the Gaza Strip,” military spokesman Avichay Adraee said on X.

Local media, citing the Palestinian civil emergency service, said at least 200 people have been killed, including women and children.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Israel Katz have instructed the army to take “strong action” against Hamas in Gaza, the Prime Ministry’s Office said.

“This follows Hamas’s repeated refusal to release our hostages, as well as its rejection of all of the proposals it has received from US Presidential Envoy Steve Witkoff and from the mediators,” it said in a statement.

The army is attacking Hamas targets in the Strip “to achieve the objectives of the war as they have been determined by the political echelon, including the release of all of our hostages, the living and the deceased.”

“Israel will, from now on, act against Hamas with increasing military strength. The operational plan was presented by the IDF over the weekend and approved by the political leadership,” it added.

Hamas said the Israeli government has declared war on Gaza by breaking the ceasefire agreement.

“We demand that the mediators hold Netanyahu and the Zionist occupation fully responsible for violating and overturning the agreement,” it said in a statement.

Israel consulted with US: White House

A White House spokesperson confirmed Monday that Israel consulted with the US on its airstrikes in Gaza.

“As President (Donald) Trump has made it clear: Hamas, the Houthis, Iran, all those who seek to terrorize not just Israel, but also the United States of America, will see a price to pay. All hell will break loose,” Karoline Leavitt told Fox News.

Ahead of a meeting Tuesday of the UN Security Council on Gaza, Israeli ambassador to the UN Danny Danon said the country will show “no mercy” against its enemies.

“Let me be very clear: Israel will not stop until all of our hostages are back home. We will make it very clear to the Security Council that if they want to stop the war in Gaza, they have to ensure that the hostages are coming back to Israel,” Danon said.

The UN did not immediately react to the strikes, but deputy spokesman Farhan Haq said the UN has consistently warned against a return to fighting in Gaza.

Despite the ceasefire, local authorities in Gaza had reported almost daily violations by the Israeli army.

Israeli attacks have killed more than 48,500 Palestinians since October 2023, most of them women and children, and left Gaza in ruins.

The International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants in November last year for Netanyahu and his former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza.

Israel also faces a genocide case at the International Court of Justice for its war on the enclave.

Continue reading
Trump: ‘Nobody is Expelling Any Palestinians,’ From Gaza

U.S. President Donald Trump appeared to reverse his controversial plan to forcibly expel Palestinians from Gaza, following widespread rejection, stating, “nobody is expelling any Palestinians” from the war-torn enclave.

During an Oval Office meeting with Irish Prime Minister Micheál Martin on Wednesday, a reporter asked about Trumps plans to expel Palestinians from Gaza and whether he had discussed the matter with the Irish leader. Trump responded, “Nobody is expelling any Palestinians,” according to the Quds News Network.

Trump had previously proposed permanently and forcibly displacing Palestinians from Gaza and transforming the area into what he called the “Riviera of the Middle East.” His plan envisioned a developed, Palestinian-free zone under US control and ownership, where “the world’s people” could reside.

He also suggested that Jordan and Egypt take in displaced Palestinians, a proposal that both countries firmly rejected. Legal experts, along with Palestinians, condemned the plan, calling it “ethnic cleansing.”

Hamas has welcomed Trump’s Wednesday remarks. Hazem Qassem, spokesperson for Hamas, said, “If President Trump’s statements represent a reversal of the plan of displacing the people of Gaza, they are welcomed. We call for this stance to be followed by holding the occupation accountable for implementing all ceasefire agreements,” urging Trump not to “align with the extremist right-wing Zionist agenda.”

Meanwhile Jordan, Thursday welcomed President Trump’s remarks made on Wednesday, which affirmed that the residents of Gaza would not be required to leave the war-torn Strip, according to a Foreign Ministry statement.

Sufyan Qudah, the ministry’s spokesperson, reiterated Jordan’s support for efforts aimed at achieving a peace that is acceptable to all parties, highlighting that both Jordan and the United States are partners in these efforts according to The Jordan Times.

Qudah also underscored the importance of securing a just and lasting peace, one that leads to the establishment of an independent and sovereign Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital. He reaffirmed that the two-state solution remains the only viable pathway to ensuring long-term security, stability, and peace in the region.

Trump said on Wednesday that “nobody is expelling any Palestinians from Gaza,” in response to a question during a meeting in the White House with Irish Prime Minister Micheál Martin.

Continue reading
Talking to Hamas: What is Trump up to?

There are not enough leaks about the “backchannel” that began late last month in Doha between Trump’s envoy for hostage affairs, Adam Boehler, and leaders of Hamas’ political bureau (reports indicate that the Hamas delegation was led by Khalil al-Hayya). However, what is striking is that these talks coincided with an escalation in threats from both Trump and Netanyahu toward Hamas, warning of a resumption of war and a more severe course of action. Moreover, Israeli security sources indicate that there is a plan to begin the practical implementation of the displacement scheme announced by Trump!

The key question here is what lies behind the Trump administration’s decision to open a secret channel with Hamas at this specific time, especially when negotiations between Hamas and Israel regarding the second phase are stalling. This is particularly intriguing given that the Trump administration has shown a tougher stance toward Hamas than his predecessor, Joe Biden. Moreover, the Doha meetings coincided with Trump receiving a number of former detainees held by Hamas and issuing a strongly worded message, what he described as a serious threat. What is the significance of these parallel and simultaneous steps taken by the Trump administration toward Hamas?

Those close to the Trump administration suggest that this move is nothing more than a “tactical shift” in the US approach without any fundamental changes. The goal is to ensure that Hamas receives the message directly and forcefully, without intermediaries or misinterpretation. This explanation is logical and, in fact, the most likely scenario, as there are no real initiatives or substantial shifts in the US administration’s position. This is especially evident in the fact that the only stance issued by the U.S. National Security Council rejected the Egyptian-Arab proposal, reaffirming President Trump’s commitment to his plan.

So what message did Boehler convey to Hamas leaders? Or, in other words, what is the deal being offered to them? It is clear that the U.S. offer revolves around extending the first phase, or even calling it the second phase, in exchange for the release of all prisoners held by Hamas, including Americans, as well as the safe exit of Hamas and Qassam Brigades leaders from Gaza and the establishment of a long-term ceasefire in the Strip. However, does this include details about the day after the war? It remains unclear whether the U.S. message addressed that issue. 

Nevertheless, the American stance remains unchanged, ending Hamas’ rule, disarming the movement, or effectively abandoning its military wing. It is also unknown whether the US has a specific policy if Hamas decides to transition into a political party that adopts peaceful resistance, for example.

Of course, the alternative Trump offers Hamas, should they reject these conditions, is the resumption of war, greater destruction in Gaza, and a forced displacement campaign against Palestinians. But the question that Hamas leaders are likely posing to Trump’s envoy is: What is the value of this threat if, in the end, what you are offering is nothing but the displacement of Palestinians? Why should we accept your terms, release the prisoners, lay down our arms, and leave Gaza if the outcome in both cases is the same? It is unclear whether Boehler had an answer to this question, or perhaps why Trump refuses the Arab plan, which is the most realistic and logical proposal presented so far.

On the other side, an important question arises: Is Hamas’ position unified between Doha and Gaza? There is significant room for interpretation and differences in the language coming from the Qassam Brigades on one hand and Hamas’ political bureau, particularly from one of the movement’s senior politicians, Mousa Abu Marzouk, on the other. It is also unclear whether Khalil al-Hayya is truly authorized to make such a crucial decision for the movement or what the limits of his mandate are. Is there any acceptance of the idea of a safe passage for the movement’s leaders in Gaza or laying down arms and transitioning into a peaceful movement? Or does Hamas still insist on maintaining both political and military strategies despite the severe imbalance of power and the massive destruction inflicted on Gaza and its people? All the choices are harsh and difficult.

Mohammad Abu Rumman is a columnist in the Jordan Times

Continue reading
Litmus Test: Israel-USA Ties Dive as Trump Officials Talk to Hamas

Relations between Tel Aviv and Washington is it is becoming clear that White House officials are talking to Hamas. The US-based Axios website quoted an Israeli informed official as saying that Israeli envoy to the United States Ron Dermer, who is close to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, had a tense call with American hostage envoy Adam Boehler about the matter.

Axios political correspondent and Middle East expert Barak Ravid explained Israel’s concerns about the Trump administration’s secret negotiations with Hamas erupted in a controversial phone call last Tuesday between Dermer and Boehler.

He revealed that the aids of US President Donald Trump informed Israeli officials early last month of the possibility of dealing directly with Hamas, and the Israelis then advised the American side against doing so, especially without preconditions. However, Israel discovered through other channels that the United States was moving forward in that direction nevertheless.

No direct criticism of Trump

Netanyahu avoided criticizing Trump publicly since Axios revealed the unprecedented talks between the United States and Hamas last Wednesday, and has only said that Israel has made its opinion clear to the United States.

But hours after Boehler met in Doha with Hamas leader and head of the negotiating team, Khalil al-Hayya, Dermer did not hold back in expressing Israel’s concerns about the talks.

The American message was such a deal would go a long way with Trump, who would then push for a broader deal that could include a long-term truce, safe passage for Hamas leaders out of Gaza, release of all remaining prisoners, and an end to the war. The alternative would be a renewed Israeli military campaign to destroy Hamas.

Trump and his advisers had hoped for a breakthrough before his address to Congress the previous Tuesday, but found Hamas’s response inadequate.

Israeli Concern

The reporter said that while Netanyahu was initially averse to the idea of ​​the United States sitting down with Hamas, he and his advisers became increasingly concerned as the idea became a reality.

Ravid quoted his sources as saying that Dermer objected to Boehler making proposals without Israel’s consent, and Boehler responded that the talks did not come close to a deal with Hamas, and that he understood Israel’s parameters.

An Israeli official claimed that Dermer’s tense call with Boehler prompted the White House to reassess its approach.

The site explained that when Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff joined the efforts to reach a deal on Gaza in the final days of the administration of former US President Joe Biden, he suggested holding a direct meeting with Hamas to accelerate the talks, but that ultimately did not happen then, an Israeli official and a former US official said.

Pressure on Hamas

Trump and his advisers held a long meeting last Wednesday about the talks with Hamas, and decided that they needed to send a strong public message.

A US official said the idea was to pressure Hamas to make concessions and make clear that the US position on the movement had not changed.

On Wednesday evening, shortly after meeting with a group of the released hostages, Trump issued a new public ultimatum to Hamas to release all remaining hostages, describing it as a final warning.

On Thursday, Trump defended the talks with Hamas, describing them as beneficial to Israel “because we are talking about Israeli hostages.”

Luring Political Capital

Steve Witkoff, who is scheduled to travel to the region early next week, said the release of American hostage Alexander is the administration’s “top priority,” noting that he is wounded.

He said “good humanitarian action by Hamas” regarding Alexander “will get them a lot of political capital,” and stressed that there is a “deadline” for Hamas to agree to a deal.

Trump’s envoy said that if Hamas does not take a more “reasonable” approach, “there will be some action by Israel.”

Al Jazeera

Continue reading
Stranger Than Fiction: Hamas in Trump’s World

By Dr Khairi Janbek

We often use George Orwell’s 1984 novel as a metaphor for similar circumstances which we feel we are living in contemporary times. In fairness, many a time, the novel provides an apt description of these circumstances. But a novel which is forgotten or overlooked, is the trilogy of Isaac Asimov –  the Foundation – written in the early 1960s. Now, if he meant it to be a prophetic prediction of the future, one is likely to say he has come close to describing our epoch and circumstances.

In Asimov’s trilogy, and in a scientific fictitious world, a mathematical genius creates a world based on laws, order, and controlled emotions, in a sense, a world built on rationality. But suddenly, a mutant emerges, gathering a large following and support, and bent on destroying the existing norms, abolishing order, and breaking all laws. The author, calls it the mutant: The mule. Of course, one is talking here science fiction.

However, if we extrapolate from science fiction into real life, US President Donald Trump can be understood only by shedding the veil of absurdity that surrounds him, as, for all intents and purposes purposes, he is here here to break all the existing norms and order to the extent of firing even those whom have elected him.

As he projects his image on the domestic and international scenes, he comes out not as a president of a reality show but rather as a president of a “parallel” reality show. And what does that essentially mean? To the discerning observer it means that Trump is flip flopping between the two realities.

It was always known that president Trump dislikes multilateral and/or rather negotiations with blocs, whilst maintaining a preference for bilateral negotiations. So in carrying out his style of negotiations, he tends to pick the strongest or the wealthiest potential partners in any bloc to negotiate with. After all he is the one whom coined the dictum, if your rich and powerful then you must be right, but if you are rich but poor and weak, well, it’s your fault.

Consequently, this style of presidency, throws his allies and detractors into total confusion, and even close observers are finding it difficult to grapple with the US presidency bent on striking deals than reaching agreements.

He has no qualms about trying to reach a deal with Iran regarding its nuclear project, when in effect he was the one who tore up the nuclear agreement in the first place, but take note, it was an agreement not a deal.

He came out to negotiate directly with Hamas, though what’s the deal he is proposing, is not really known, but he doesn’t seem to have any qualms about breaking taboos and norms here.

So where does this leave his friends and allies? No man’s land really, in which you just go half way with him.

Dr Janbek is Jordanian writer based in Paris, France.

Continue reading