In a tragic escalation of the Gaza conflict, an Israeli airstrike on Tuesday targeted a house in the Shati refugee camp, west of Gaza City, claiming the lives of 10 family members of Qatar-based Hamas political chief Ismail Haniyeh. This strike follows earlier attacks that had already claimed the lives of three of Haniyeh’s sons.

Israel’s military justified the airstrikes, citing their targeting of buildings in Shati and another area in northern Gaza allegedly used by Hamas militants involved in the recent Oct. 7 attack on Israel. The intensifying violence underscores the deepening animosity and deadly reprisals exchanged between the two sides.

Amidst the ongoing hostilities, Israel’s Supreme Court decision to compel ultra-Orthodox Jewish seminary students into military service has added political pressure on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition government. The decision, aimed at ending long-standing exemptions, comes amidst broader geopolitical tensions involving Hezbollah in Lebanon.

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has urged restraint, cautioning against further escalation that could involve Lebanon and Hezbollah. The international community, represented by European Union foreign policy chief Josep Borrell, emphasizes the urgent need for a ceasefire to facilitate humanitarian aid delivery to Gaza, where conditions are rapidly deteriorating.

The conflict has severely disrupted humanitarian efforts, with aid organizations highlighting the challenges in safely delivering essential supplies to Palestinians in Gaza. Despite efforts such as the U.S.-built aid pier facilitating substantial deliveries, logistical and safety concerns persist amid the ongoing violence.

Meanwhile, U.S. military assets, including the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower carrier strike group and the USS Theodore Roosevelt, are strategically deployed to the region to deter aggression and safeguard regional stability. These deployments underscore international efforts to mitigate the conflict’s broader regional implications.

As casualties mount and tensions escalate, the Israeli airstrike on Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh’s family members marks a critical escalation in the Gaza conflict. The international community’s calls for restraint and humanitarian assistance face mounting challenges amid the unfolding crisis, underscoring the urgent need for diplomatic solutions to end the violence and alleviate the suffering of civilians caught in the crossfire.

Thousands of Israelis staged a massive demonstration in Jerusalem on Monday, voicing strong opposition to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s handling of the ongoing war in Gaza. The protest, which began outside the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, eventually moved to Netanyahu’s personal residence, signaling widespread discontent.

The demonstrators demanded that the Israeli government negotiate with Hamas to secure the release of the remaining hostages taken by the Palestinian militant group during their deadly raid on southern Israel last October. Additionally, protesters called for early parliamentary elections, expressing frustration with the current leadership.

Tensions escalated as some protesters attempted to breach police barricades, prompting security forces to use water cannons to disperse the crowd. The unrest highlighted the deepening dissatisfaction with Netanyahu’s wartime strategies and the political instability plaguing the country.

The protests came shortly after Netanyahu disbanded his war cabinet, a move anticipated following the resignations of centrist ex-generals Benny Gantz and Gadi Eisenkot. Both had stepped down last week due to disagreements over the war’s direction. Gantz, who had joined Netanyahu’s unity government at the war’s outset, had been instrumental in forming the war cabinet.

The disbandment has raised concerns about the effectiveness and unity of Israel’s government during a critical period. However, the White House described the dissolution as an internal matter, with the State Department reiterating that the U.S. will continue its interactions with Netanyahu’s administration.

In a related development, the Israeli military announced an 11-hour “tactical pause” in operations in parts of the southern Gaza Strip to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian aid. This pause, which applies to about 12 kilometers of road in the Rafah area, is intended to allow aid trucks to safely reach the Kerem Shalom crossing and distribute essential supplies to other parts of Gaza.

Despite the tactical pause, the broader conflict continues unabated. The limited halt aims to address the dire humanitarian situation in Gaza, where more than a million displaced Palestinians are in desperate need of aid. The United Nations has welcomed the pause but stressed the need for more comprehensive measures to address the humanitarian crisis.

Internationally, there have been calls for a complete ceasefire, with proposals for a six-week halt in fighting to facilitate broader negotiations, including the release of more hostages by Hamas. However, no significant breakthroughs in ceasefire talks have been reported.

Domestically, Netanyahu’s government faces criticism from ultranationalists who oppose any cessation of military actions. The ongoing conflict, marked by high civilian casualties and widespread displacement, has further strained Israel’s internal political landscape.

The mass protests in Jerusalem underscore the growing public frustration with Netanyahu’s leadership and the ongoing war in Gaza. As the political and humanitarian crises deepen, the calls for change and negotiations grow louder, challenging the government’s current approach and pushing for a reevaluation of strategies to address the conflict and its repercussions.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu dissolved his war cabinet following the departure of former General Benny Gantz, who had joined the unity government at the war’s outset in October. Gantz’s exit left Netanyahu to dismantle the war cabinet, as it had been formed at his insistence.

Israel announced a tactical pause in its military operations in southern Gaza, allowing for an 11-hour window each day for humanitarian aid to enter. This pause aims to address the severe humanitarian crisis, although sporadic fighting continues.

The pause facilitates aid delivery through the Kerem Shalom crossing to southern and central Gaza, including Khan Younis and makeshift camps. Despite this, the international community continues to push for a comprehensive cease-fire, which remains elusive.

The limited cease-fire is a response to urgent humanitarian needs but has faced criticism from ultranationalist factions within Netanyahu’s government. The U.N. welcomed the move, hoping it leads to more substantial measures to alleviate the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

The fighting in Gaza has resulted in significant casualties on both sides. Israel has reported over 300 soldier fatalities since the ground invasion began, while Hamas’s October 7 attack killed 1,200 Israelis and took 250 hostages. Gaza’s health officials report over 37,000 Palestinian deaths, including civilians and combatants.

Netanyahu’s decision to dissolve the war cabinet reflects ongoing political dynamics within Israel amidst the prolonged conflict with Hamas.

The tactical pause, although limited, aims to provide much-needed relief to the beleaguered population of Gaza, highlighting the complex interplay of military, humanitarian, and political factors in the region.

U.S. President Joe Biden, increasingly critical of Israel’s conduct of its war against Hamas militants in Gaza and a mounting Palestinian death toll, said in an interview published Tuesday that there is “every reason” to believe Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has dragged out the conflict to save himself politically.

But when asked later Tuesday whether Netanyahu was playing politics with the war, Biden seemed to backtrack, telling reporters, “I don’t think so. He’s trying to work out a serious problem he has.”

Last week, Biden announced an Israeli proposal for a Gaza cease-fire and pushed for global support of it. Hamas has yet to agree to it, and Netanyahu has been reserved in his comments about it, prompting Biden’s remark to Time magazine about Israel’s prime minister dragging out the war.

Netanyahu on Monday downplayed the immediate prospects for a cease-fire in the war with Hamas in Gaza, saying that a deal was a partial outline.

As the war nears the eight-month mark, the Israeli leader faces conflicting demands: Biden and other world leaders urge him to end the conflict, while right-wing lawmakers in the Israeli parliament say they will upend Netanyahu’s government if he agrees to a cease-fire without first erasing the last vestiges of Hamas control in Gaza.

Hamas said Tuesday it cannot agree to any deal unless Israel makes a “clear” commitment to a permanent cease-fire and a complete withdrawal of troops from Gaza. Netanyahu has often said Israeli forces will not leave Gaza without eliminating all Hamas elements from the territory.

Qatar, which alongside the United States and Egypt has been mediating Hamas-Israel talks in Cairo, has also urged Israel to provide a clear position on its intentions, one that has the backing of its entire government to reach a deal.

Biden acknowledged that he and Netanyahu have had tense relations as the death toll in Gaza has soared past the 36,000 mark — a figure that includes both civilians and combatants.

They are particularly at odds over whether a revitalized Palestinian Authority should govern Gaza after the war, which the United States favors, and Netanyahu rejects without offering a detailed plan of his own.

“My major disagreement with Netanyahu is, what happens after … Gaza’s over? What, what does it go back to? Do Israeli forces go back in?” Biden asked rhetorically.

“The answer is, if that’s the case, it can’t work,” he said.

White House national security spokesman John Kirby said Biden, in the Time interview, “was referencing what many critics have said” about Netanyahu’s actions, but that the U.S. will “let the prime minister speak to his own politics and to what his critics are saying.”

“For our part though, he and Prime Minister Netanyahu do not agree on everything, and he talked in that interview about some of the things they don’t agree on, such as on a two-state solution,” a newly formed Palestinian state living alongside Israel.

The fate of a proposal to halt fighting in Gaza remained uncertain Tuesday. Hamas has yet to give a definitive response to the proposal, Israeli officials are questioning some of the details, and the United States is seeking U.N. Security Council support for the deal’s acceptance and implementation.

A draft U.S. resolution seen by VOA calls on Hamas to fully accept and implement the cease-fire proposal “without delay and without condition.”

The basic outline of the deal includes a six-week halt in fighting, the release of some hostages from Gaza, daily deliveries of 600 trucks of aid for Palestinians, and further negotiations aimed at securing a permanent end to the conflict.

U.S. officials reiterated Monday that the cease-fire proposal, though presented publicly by Biden last week, is an Israeli proposal.

Kirby told reporters that making public negotiations that officials had declined to reveal in the past for fear of disrupting the negotiation process was not about putting pressure on Israeli officials, but rather, if anything, publicly pressuring Hamas and its leaders to accept the deal.

“The president felt that where we are in this war, where we are in the negotiations to get the hostages out, that it was time for a different approach and a time to make the proposal public, to try to energize the process here, catalyze a different outcome,” Kirby said.

Kirby said in earlier comments to reporters that if Hamas were to accept the proposal, Israel would, as well.

Netanyahu told a parliamentary committee Monday that “claims that we have agreed to a cease-fire without our conditions being met are incorrect,” according to a statement from his office.

Hamas launched the October 7 terror attack on Israel, killing about 1,200 people according to Israeli tallies, and taking roughly 250 hostages. About 120 of the hostages remain in Gaza, although the Israeli military says 37 of them are dead.

Israel’s retaliatory bombardments and ground offensive have killed at least 36,400 people in Gaza, mostly civilians, according to the Gaza Health Ministry.

On Tuesday, at least 11 Palestinians were killed in an Israeli airstrike in central Gaza, local hospitals said. Elsewhere, two policemen were killed while helping to protect humanitarian aid deliveries in Rafah, Palestinian medics told Reuters.

Some information for this report was provided by The Associated Press, Reuters and Agence France-Presse.

Ophir Falk, Netanyahu’s Chief Foreign Policy Adviser, Reveals Israel’s Reluctant Agreement to U.S. President Biden’s Framework for Ending the Gaza War

Jerusalem — In a notable yet contentious decision, an aide to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu confirmed on Sunday that Israel has accepted a framework deal proposed by U.S. President Joe Biden to de-escalate the Gaza conflict. Despite the agreement, the aide described the deal as deeply flawed, requiring substantial amendments.

In an interview with Britain’s Sunday Times, Ophir Falk, Netanyahu’s chief foreign policy adviser, revealed, “It’s a deal we agreed to — it’s not a good deal but we dearly want the hostages released, all of them.” He emphasized that significant details remain unresolved, particularly regarding Israel’s core demands: the release of hostages and the complete dismantling of Hamas as a genocidal terrorist organization.

Biden’s proposal marks a shift from his initial unconditional support for Israel’s offensive, which has drawn global criticism due to its high civilian toll. On Friday, Biden outlined a three-phase plan devised by the Netanyahu government aimed at ending the war. The first phase involves a truce and the return of some hostages held by Hamas. This would be followed by negotiations on an open-ended cessation of hostilities during which remaining captives would be freed.

However, this sequence suggests that Hamas might continue to have a role in mediated arrangements by Egypt and Qatar, potentially conflicting with Israel’s goal of eliminating the Iranian-backed group.

Biden has previously endorsed several ceasefire initiatives with similar frameworks, all of which have faltered. In February, he announced that Israel had agreed to halt fighting by Ramadan, yet no such truce emerged. The primary obstacle has been Israel’s stance on only agreeing to temporary pauses until Hamas is eradicated. Hamas, conversely, demands a path to a permanent end to the conflict as a condition for releasing hostages.

In his speech, Biden claimed that his latest plan “creates a better ‘day after’ in Gaza without Hamas in power,” though he admitted the need for further negotiations to transition from phase one to phase two. Falk reaffirmed that “there will not be a permanent ceasefire until all our objectives are met.”

Netanyahu faces internal political pressure to maintain his coalition government. Far-right partners have threatened to withdraw support if any agreement appears to spare Hamas, while centrist ally and former general Benny Gantz supports considering Biden’s plan.

Hamas has tentatively welcomed the Biden initiative. Senior Hamas official Osama Hamdan told Al Jazeera, “Biden’s speech included positive ideas, but we want this to materialize within the framework of a comprehensive agreement that meets our demands.” Hamas’s conditions include an end to the Gaza offensive, withdrawal of invading forces, unrestricted movement for Palestinians, and reconstruction aid.

Israeli officials, however, reject these conditions, viewing them as a return to the pre-October 7 status quo. On that date, Hamas militants initiated the war by breaching the border fence, killing 1,200 people, and taking over 250 hostages, according to Israeli reports.

The ensuing Israeli military response has devastated Gaza, with more than 36,000 Palestinians killed, as reported by Gaza medical officials. Israel has also suffered significant casualties, with 290 troops reported dead.

As negotiations and political maneuvers continue, the path to a durable peace in Gaza remains fraught with complexities and mutual distrust, making Biden’s proposal a pivotal yet controversial step in the ongoing conflict.

Summary of Latest Developments:

• Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu says Israel had not intended to harm civilians
• ‘Something went tragically wrong’, Netanyahu says
• US urges Israel to take more care to protect civilians
• Hamas official says no plans for further ceasefire talks

CAIRO/JERUSALEM, May 27 (WARYATV) – An Israeli airstrike triggered a fire that killed 45 people in a tent camp in the Gazan city of Rafah, officials said on Monday, prompting an outcry from global leaders who urged the implementation of a World Court order to halt Israel’s assault.

The tragic incident occurred as tensions continue to escalate in the region, drawing widespread condemnation and calls for increased measures to protect civilians. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu expressed regret over the incident, stating that the strike was not intended to target civilians. “Something went tragically wrong,” Netanyahu said in a public address, acknowledging the grave consequences of the attack.

In response to the incident, the United States has called on Israel to exercise greater caution to avoid civilian casualties. U.S. officials have emphasized the importance of protecting non-combatants and adhering to international humanitarian law in ongoing military operations.

Meanwhile, Hamas, the governing authority in Gaza, has indicated that there are no current plans to engage in further ceasefire talks. A Hamas official dismissed the possibility of negotiations, citing ongoing hostilities and the recent escalation of violence.

The international community has reacted strongly to the Rafah attack, with leaders and organizations urging Israel to comply with a World Court order that calls for an immediate cessation of military actions. The order underscores the necessity of prioritizing the safety and well-being of civilians amid the conflict.

A grassroots movement pressures celebrities to take a stand on the humanitarian crisis in Gaza by blocking their social media content.

By Kasim Abdulkadir:

What is the Celebrity ‘Blockout’ Over the War in Gaza?

Social media users have initiated a “blockout” campaign to pressure celebrities into taking a stand on the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. The blockout involves users blocking the social media accounts of celebrities who they believe are not speaking out or doing enough against Israel’s actions in Gaza amidst its war with Hamas.

How Does the Blockout Work?

On platforms like X (formerly Twitter), TikTok, and Instagram, users can mute or block specific accounts. By blocking celebrities, users stop seeing their posts, photos, videos, and sponsored content. This action reduces the celebrities’ engagement metrics and potentially affects their income from social media activities. The goal is to divert attention away from these celebrities’ brands, thereby pressuring them to address the crisis.

Who is Being Blocked?

There isn’t a centralized list of celebrities to be blocked. Participants of the blockout choose whom to block based on personal criteria or suggestions from others. Celebrities from the U.S. and other countries are being targeted. Each social media user must block celebrities individually on each platform they use.

Origins of the Blockout

The blockout gained momentum following the recent Met Gala, a high-profile event known for its extravagant fashion displays. As images from the gala circulated online, they were juxtaposed with distressing images from Gaza, highlighting the stark contrast between the opulence of the event and the ongoing humanitarian crisis. This led to increased scrutiny of celebrities’ responses, or lack thereof, to the situation in Gaza.

Will the Blockout Be Effective?

The long-term effectiveness of the blockout remains uncertain. According to Beth Fossen, an assistant professor of marketing at Indiana University, the impact may vary depending on the celebrity’s brand and public persona. Celebrities known for their humanitarian efforts may face more significant backlash for their silence compared to those whose fame is primarily based on their talent or other attributes.

Blockout Backlash

The blockout has faced criticism from some quarters. Detractors argue that focusing on celebrities detracts from the real issues on the ground in Gaza. There are also debates about what constitutes adequate action or statements from celebrities, adding complexity to the movement’s goals.

In conclusion, the celebrity blockout is a digital protest aimed at leveraging social media dynamics to push celebrities into taking a public stand on the Gaza conflict. While its long-term effectiveness is yet to be determined, the movement highlights the growing expectation for public figures to engage with pressing global issues. The blockout also reflects broader tensions about how social media influences activism and accountability in the digital age.

Analyzing the Implications of Gallant’s Threats and the Future of Israeli Politics

By Kasim Abdulkadir:

In a dramatic escalation of internal discord within the Israeli government, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant issued an ultimatum to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Gallant threatened to resign if Netanyahu does not agree to a new plan for governing Gaza post-war by June 8. This threat underscores the widening rift within Netanyahu’s coalition and raises questions about the government’s stability.

Growing Divisions Within the Government

The tensions within Netanyahu’s government are not new, but Gallant’s ultimatum brings them to the forefront. The core of the conflict lies in the government’s handling of the Gaza situation, particularly the strategy for post-war governance. Gallant’s call for a comprehensive plan reflects broader frustrations with the current administration’s approach and its lack of progress, particularly concerning the retrieval of prisoners detained in Gaza since October 7.

The Gaza Dilemma

Gallant’s proposed plan includes establishing a temporary US-European-Palestinian system for civil administration in Gaza while Israel maintains security control. This suggestion highlights the complexities of the Gaza situation—balancing security concerns with administrative governance in a densely populated and conflict-prone region. Defense Minister Yoav Galant’s resistance to the idea of a Palestinian state further complicates the matter, emphasizing the deep-seated ideological divides within the government.

Ministerial Discord and Public Discontent

The discord extends beyond Gallant and Netanyahu, permeating the entire ministerial landscape. Galant has faced fierce criticism from his colleagues, who blame him for the ongoing failures in Gaza. Galant’s stark opposition to Palestinian statehood and his pragmatic concerns about the cost of military rule in Gaza illustrate the ideological and strategic divides that hamper cohesive policy-making.

Netanyahu, meanwhile, is under immense pressure both domestically and internationally. The prolonged war with Hamas, now stretching beyond seven months, has eroded public confidence. Daily demonstrations and calls for Netanyahu’s resignation, especially from families of prisoners still held in Gaza, underscore the widespread discontent.

The Coalition’s Fragility

Despite Gallant’s ultimatum and the severe criticisms within the government, Netanyahu’s coalition remains intact—at least for now. Gallant’s potential withdrawal would not immediately collapse the government, as the remaining parties still provide Netanyahu with a majority in the Knesset. However, Gallant’s statements and the underlying tensions reveal significant fractures within the coalition.

Future Scenarios and Implications

The immediate future of Netanyahu’s government hinges on several key factors:

1. Resolution of the Gaza Plan: Whether Netanyahu can forge a consensus on the post-war governance of Gaza will be crucial. A failure to address Gallant’s concerns may lead to further fragmentation.
2. Public and Political Pressure: Continued public protests and political pressure from within his coalition could force Netanyahu to make significant concessions or risk further destabilization.
3. International Dynamics: The involvement of international actors, particularly in Gallant’s proposed governance plan, could influence internal politics and provide a pathway for compromise.

In conclusion, the Israeli government’s current predicament underscores the inherent volatility of its coalition politics. Gallant’s threats and the broader discontent highlight the challenges facing Netanyahu’s leadership. While the immediate collapse of the government is not imminent, the pressures from within and beyond are mounting, necessitating a careful and strategic response from Netanyahu. The coming weeks will be pivotal in determining whether the government can navigate these internal and external challenges or succumb to the growing rifts within its ranks.

Stay tuned as the political drama in Israel unfolds, with significant implications for the region’s stability and future governance.