Benjamin Netanyahu

Gaza Health Ministry says hospitals receive bodies of two Palestinians as Netanyahu rejects Trump plan to end war.

Israeli attacks on Gaza have killed at least one person as Palestinian health authorities have confirmed another death after a body was recovered from beneath the rubble in the war-shattered enclave.

Israeli forces shot and killed one Palestinian east of Deir el-Balah in central Gaza on Saturday, the Qatar News Agency (QNA) reported, quoting medical sources.

The Gaza Ministry of Health confirmed on Sunday that hospitals had received the bodies of two Palestinians killed in Israeli attacks, including one recovered from the rubble.

At least five people, including children, were wounded in Israeli attacks in the southern cities of Khan Younis and Rafah on Saturday, QNA reported.

Local sources said several people were wounded when an Israeli tank opened fire on tents sheltering displaced people in Khan Younis. Among them was a woman who was critically wounded. A girl was seriously wounded by Israeli army fire in the al-Mawasi coastal area of Rafah.

Israeli artillery also shelled areas east of Khan Younis, and Israeli fire wounded several more people in the al-Mahatta area of Gaza City’s Tuffah neighbourhood.

Gaza’s Health Ministry said the overall death toll since Israel launched its genocidal war against Palestinians in Gaza in October 2023 was 73,386 with 174,250 wounded.

The remains of many people killed in Israeli attacks are still buried under rubble, and those deaths are uncounted, the ministry added. Ambulance and Palestinian Civil Defence crews remain unable to reach them.

Since a “ceasefire” took effect in October, the Health Ministry has recorded 1,258 people killed by Israel, 4,139 wounded and 807 bodies recovered from the rubble of destroyed buildings.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday that Israel has rejected United States President Donald Trump’s 15-point plan for Gaza, telling a cabinet meeting that Israeli forces “will not carry out any withdrawal until Hamas is genuinely disarmed”.

The rejection follows a similar position taken last week by the US-led Board of Peace, which said an Israeli withdrawal would only proceed once Hamas’s disarmament is complete, leaving both the ceasefire’s terms and any timeline for Israel’s exit from Gaza unresolved even as casualties continue to mount.

‘We’re going backwards.’ Palestinians in Gaza say Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s rejection of the US-backed 15-point plan has deepened uncertainty over an end to the war. Hamas says it remains committed to the agreement.

Aug. 9 (UPI) — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel rejects a U.S.-backed 15-point plan to disarm Gaza.

Last month, President Donald Trump‘s Board of Peace created the plan for the gradual disarmament of Gaza and withdrawal of Israeli troops from the territory.

But in a cabinet meeting Sunday, a readout from Netanyahu’s office from a meeting of government ministers said, “I want to be clear here — Israel is ruling out the 15-point plan.”

He said he has told the Trump administration about his concerns.

The Israeli military “will not carry out any withdrawal until Hamas is genuinely disarmed and will continue to thwart threats against our forces and our citizens,” Netanyahu said.

“We are now discussing this with the Americans,” he said. “They have ideas, some of which are acceptable to us and some are not, and we know how to stand up to those things.”

He reiterated his opposition to a two-state solution.

“As long as I am prime minister, no Palestinian state will be established — not in Gaza and not in the West Bank,” Netanyahu said.

Netanyahu and his coalition are facing a difficult re-election vote in late October.

“Contrary to all those who preach to us, we do what must be done for Israel’s security and we can and will stand our ground even against our best friends when necessary,” Netanyahu added.

Hamas has said that handing over its heavy weapons was contingent on Israel ending “all forms of aggression” and withdrawing from Gaza.

“We expect the mediators and the American guarantor to pressure Netanyahu and his government to adhere to the roadmap and not obstruct the process for internal political and electoral reasons,” Bassem Naim, a member of Hamas’ politburo, said on X Sunday.

Since the cease-fire last October, Israel has continued to strike Gaza.

Israel’s military occupies more than half of Gaza, and Netanyahu’s far-right allies have implied that they want to expand the control. They lauded Netanyahu’s comments.

“The [Israeli military] cannot retreat one millimeter in the Gaza Strip,” Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – facing a crucial election later this year – has hinted that he may be considering taking unilateral action to prolong a costly war with Iran, even as Washington and Tehran appear to be close to an interim deal to open the Strait of Hormuz.

“We heard today the commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Ahmad Vahidi, declare that Iran intends to continue developing a nuclear weapon,” Netanyahu claimed in an assertion, even though no official statement from Vahidi on the matter has been released by the Iranian government or official media.

Still, Netanyahu saw the opportunity to once again frame Iran’s nuclear threat as existential.

“As Israel’s prime minister, I am determined to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon,” Netanyahu told attendees at a state ceremony in West Jerusalem.

Describing the United States as “Israel’s greatest ally”, Netanyahu nevertheless added that he was prepared to do “whatever is necessary” to guarantee Israel’s security.

Israel has officially struck Iran only once since April’s initial ceasefire between the US and Iran took effect, even after it later broke down and the two sides resumed hostilities in the US-Israel war on Iran.

But observers – including US President Donald Trump – believe that Netanyahu wants to keep the US engaged in the fight against Iran, which began in late February with a joint US-Israeli attack that killed Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

Addressing reports that Netanyahu planned to bring fresh intelligence to Washington alleging that Iran was stockpiling uranium at its Pickaxe Mountain facility near Natanz in central Iran, Trump told reporters: “I don’t need Bibi to tell me that. Bibi is telling me that because he wants me to stay involved.”

He then sharpened his criticism of the Israeli prime minister, adding: “Why don’t you just tell it to me? Why do you have to announce it to the world?”

Fight alone

With the US and Israel unable so far to topple the Iranian state or force concessions on the Strait of Hormuz, many analysts believe that the war has been unsuccessful.

Iran’s blockade of the Strait of Hormuz – formerly a free waterway – has paralysed much of the world’s economy.

Global oil prices have increased, with shortages in the supplies of liquified gas, fertiliser exports, sulphur supplies, and petrochemical feedstocks all threatening to ripple through international supply lines.

“The war against Iran is a strategic catastrophe,” said Ahron Bregman, an Israeli security analyst and senior teaching fellow in the Department for War Studies at King’s College London. “None of the original aims has been achieved… Trump is desperate for an exit. Almost at any price. He only cares about opening the [strait].”

But in Israel, the focus is less on the world’s economy, and more on the perceived danger posed by Iran and its allied groups across the region.

Netanyahu has consistently pursued a hawkish line on Iran, a power he has repeatedly claimed is on the brink of crossing the threshold to nuclear weapons capability.

He is also thought to have been among the loudest voices that pushed for Trump to withdraw in 2018 from a nuclear deal agreed to by previous US President Barack Obama.

“Israel’s strategy is clear,” said Kobi Michael, a senior researcher at Israel’s Misgav Institute for National Security. “Iran remains close to achieving nuclear capacity and has shown it’s able to continue producing ballistic missiles and supplying its proxy forces in the region.”

The war on Iran was currently a fiasco from Israel’s perspective, Michael added, with both the US and Iran insisting that they had won.

Michael, however, framed the current negotiations as “useless”, and unlikely to produce lasting security in the region, reflecting the sentiment in the Israeli security establishment.

Israel, Michael said, was prepared to fight alone if necessary.

“Israel can only have one strategy,” Michael said, “to strike directly at the head of the octopus that threatens global civilisation and to do that alone, if necessary.”

That might inflame tensions with the US, Michael added, concluding, “I can’t see any other option.”

Inconceivable

However, while some in Israel were confident of the country’s ability to strike unilaterally at Iran in defiance of US wishes, others expressed caution, suggesting that Netanyahu’s talk of preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon might simply be little more than rhetoric ahead of an election that could conceivably jeopardise both his legacy and, as a result of his long-running corruption trial, his personal freedom.

The US relationship is important to the Israeli electorate, but relations between Netanyahu and Trump appear to be frostier than normal.

Beyond friction over Israel’s reluctance to accept terms apparently imposed on it in Gaza by the Trump-sponsored Board of Peace, there have also been widespread reports of tensions over Israeli strikes in Lebanon that have repeatedly threatened to derail US negotiations with Iran. Those attacks, however, have stopped far short of the unilateral strikes on Iran hinted at by Netanyahu on Wednesday.

“Israel launching unilateral action against Iran is inconceivable,” the US author and former diplomat Aaron David Miller said. “Something like that might be possible if Iran or Hezbollah struck Israel directly, but talk of Israel striking Iran now, when US negotiations are so close to a conclusion, is impossible.”

Relations between the two allies were entering a unique phase, he said. While the US had never cooperated so closely with an ally militarily since its relationship with the United Kingdom during World War II, diplomatic ties had rarely been so fraught.

“Trump’s leaked, expletive-laden criticism of Netanyahu; his direct negotiations with Hamas over Gaza; his lifting of sanctions on Syria despite Israel’s objections; and his negotiations with Iran without Israel’s involvement all point to a changing relationship,” Miller said. “What that might mean for future US military assistance to Israel – including defence cooperation, intelligence sharing, research and development, and diplomatic support in international forums – remains to be seen.”

However, he added: “Let me be clear. Netanyahu had a hell of a role in how this war started. He’s not going to have a role in how it shifts to its next phase.”

As Israel gears up to hold elections in October, a dramatic surge in settlement activity has heightened concerns that the settler movement is stepping up efforts to cement its grip on the occupied West Bank, in stark defiance of international law.

Last week, the United Nations warned that attacks by Israeli settlers – often carried out alongside Israeli forces – and the creation of illegal settlements and outposts had hit “an all-time high”.

The uptick comes as members of Israel’s hard right seek to ratchet up the political temperature ahead of the crucial polls. It also follows a parliamentary term during which Israel moved to entrench control over the West Bank deeper within the machinery of the state, shifting authority from military administration to civilian institutions, accelerating settlement planning and expanding infrastructure.

However, the Religious Zionist Party of Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich – the man widely credited as pushing the settler project to the forefront of Israeli political debate – is suggested by numerous opinion polls to be far from certain to even meet the electoral threshold for the post-election Knesset.

This has prompted what analysts describe as a desperate scramble to promote the settlement mission while consolidating the support of the settler minority that Smotrich grew up within.

Speaking at a meeting of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s right-wing Likud Party in late July, Israel’s Defence Minister Israel Katz boasted that, under the governing coalition and Smotrich’s supervision, Israel had approved the establishment of 104 illegal settlements and some 160 settlement farms in the West Bank since coming to power in 2022, according to Israeli media.

In August of last year, Smotrich announced the creation of the E1 settlement project, linking occupied East Jerusalem with the existing settlement of Maale Adumim, located several kilometres to the east – a proposal which, Smotrich bragged, “buries the idea of a Palestinian state”.

The race to settle

Smotrich, who made increased administrative control over the West Bank a condition for supporting Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition in 2022, has undertaken a series of measures to expand the influence of settlers within policymaking.

In 2023, he established his influential Settlements Administration agency within the Ministry of Defence – which oversees the West Bank’s occupation. And last month, he legally embedded the agency within the ministry, making it harder to reverse any of the decisions taken under its watch.

Israeli political analyst Nimrod Flaschenberg said it is “hard to imagine” that Netanyahu “won’t come up with some kind of imaginative ploy to keep him and the far right on the ticket”, referring to Smotrich.

“He has very strong support within the settlements and the ideological far-right,” Flaschenberg added, “but that might not be enough in and of itself to get him securely past the threshold. He’s being squeezed between the populism of [far-right Israeli National Security Minister Itamar] Ben-Gvir and what many people in the lower middle class see as the security of Netanyahu.”

Keeping the hard right

Allied to Smotrich is a prime minister who observers describe as facing not simply an electoral battle, but an existential battle for both his freedom – as a consequence of his long-running corruption trial – and legacy, should the independent inquiry into his failings ahead of the Hamas-led attack of 2023 go ahead.

Given the stakes, some analysts have suggested the incumbent was far from ready to gamble on losing the support of Israel’s hard right and settler movement by condemning the increasing levels of violence in the West Bank.

“We saw him come out on US TV and concede that there may have been a few incidents in the West Bank, but nothing serious,” Chatham House’s Yossi Mekelberg said of Netanyahu’s response to the widespread violence that has swept the West Bank in recent weeks.

“He needs the hard right and settlers’ support, if not for him individually, then at least for his bloc.”

While Netanyahu may feel he has room to manoeuvre over the hugely controversial issue of ultra-Orthodox conscription, no such margin existed within the hard right and settlers. Ultra-Orthodox parties, a key component in the 2022 coalition government, have made the exemption of their constituents from the draft – which almost all Israeli adults are eligible for – a pillar of their political campaigning in recent years.

“Netanyahu knows that the ultra-Orthodox will likely stay with him,” added Mekelberg. “The settlers are more binary. You’re either for them or against,” he said.

Cresting the wave

Irrespective of electoral tactics, the consequences for people living in the occupied West Bank have been catastrophic. In July alone, according to the Palestinian Authority’s Colonization and Wall Resistance Commission, there were 2,256 attacks against Palestinians and their property: 1,458 by the Israeli army and 798 by settlers.

After Yair Golan, leader of the opposition Democrats party, offered a rare criticism of the settler “extremism” which triggered the latest round of violence, Katz accused him of spreading a “blood libel”.

According to leaks of the same meeting in Hebrew-language media, other ministers present called for a harsher response to any resistance from Palestinians, and for the military to be given even greater freedom to shoot at them.

“As the election gets closer, we’re seeing an even greater increase in the violence that’s been escalating ever since October 2023,” said Yair Dvir, of the Israeli rights group B’Tselem.

“It’s important to add this isn’t just the scale of the violence, but also its brutality and the participation of the Israeli state – both the soldiers and the political support they’re receiving.”

Israelis head to the polls in October for the country’s first election since the war on Gaza began. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faces mounting pressure over the October 7 attacks, corruption charges, international isolation, and divisions within his coalition.

United States President Donald Trump has been triumphal since the announcement that Palestinian group Hamas had agreed to hand over its weaponry in Gaza.

But the terms of Thursday’s disarmament agreement also stipulate that Israel should withdraw from the Palestinian enclave, and gradually transfer power to a Palestinian administration – conditions that have been met with a frosty reception by Israeli politicians and in the Israeli press.

The Israeli government has yet to officially comment, but one unnamed senior Israeli official told reporters on Friday that, despite “various publications” reporting “diplomatic progress in the Gaza Strip”, there would be no withdrawal from Israel’s current positions within Gaza before what it determines to be “the genuine disarmament of Hamas”.

Trump, for his part, has said that Israel was “very happy” with the deal.

Electoral suicide

Many Israelis continue to espouse a hard line towards Palestinians in Gaza after the October 7, 2023, Hamas-led attack on Israel, which was launched from the territory. That is despite Israel subsequently conducting a genocidal war on Gaza, killing more than 73,000 Palestinians and destroying the enclave.

A May poll found that 82 percent of Jewish Israeli respondents supported the forcible expulsion of Palestinians from their homes in Gaza – the same poll found that 56 percent of respondents supported the expulsion of Palestinian citizens of Israel from their homes too.

Another poll, a month later, found that 64 percent of those surveyed believed there were “no innocents” among the Palestinians in Gaza.

And many Israeli politicians – including government ministers – have said that illegal Jewish settlements, akin to the ones dividing the occupied West Bank, will soon come to Gaza.

The prospect, therefore, of an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and steps towards the enclave’s reconstruction are unpalatable to many Israelis, with politicians quick to condemn the disarmament agreement.

Israel’s far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir denounced it as “unacceptable”.

“A commitment to stop the assassinations of [Hamas’s] murderers is tantamount to agreeing to Hamas organising for the next massacre,” Ben-Gvir wrote on social media. “The assassinations in Gaza must continue, the encouragement of emigration must happen. Israel must win.”

The term “encouragement of emigration” is widely regarded as referring to ethnic cleansing.

Politicians regarded as centrists, such as former chief of staff and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s leading rival in the coming election, Gadi Eisenkot, were equally sceptical. He said that any deal that stopped short of the war’s objectives – the destruction of Hamas’s military-political power – was a total failure.

“Nearly three years have passed since the morning of October 7,” Eisenkot wrote, “and Hamas has renewed its strength with a number of terrorists similar to the evening of October 6.”

Politics of peace

Netanyahu has yet to comment, but US-Israeli pollster and consultant Dahlia Scheindlin suggested the stakes are high for the prime minister with an election only a few months away.

Netanyahu’s likely best chance of avoiding a jail sentence if he is found guilty of numerous corruption charges rests on him winning the October elections.

But the opposition are currently leading in many polls, and may be able to gain enough seats to form a government.

“Netanyahu’s considerations have nothing to do with public trauma [from the October 7 attack],” Scheindlin said, and everything to do with politics. “He will care primarily – probably exclusively – about what his current coalition partners think.”

Withdrawing from Gaza was out of the question, Scheindlin said, adding that whatever gambit Netanyahu undertook to maintain his coalition and encourage right-wing voters to support him had to be accomplished without further alienating his allies in the US, who appear to have grown increasingly frustrated with him.

“[Netanyahu] will not want to be seen by Trump and the Americans as undermining any possible moves towards implementing this agreement. And so, therefore, he might manage some very symbolic moving of the Israeli army within Gaza,” she said.

One tactic, Scheindlin suggested, could be for the Israeli military to withdraw back to the positions it was supposed to be in as part of the October 2025 ceasefire agreement. Israel has killed more than 1,200 Palestinians since that agreement, and also repeatedly expanded the territory under its control, ignoring the deal.

Keeping Trump happy

Managing US expectations of Israel is likely to be a problem, not just for Netanyahu, but for all of the politicians vying for leadership of the country.

One anonymous US official has already said that Trump would be “very, very disappointed” if Israel did not adhere to the disarmament agreement.

“Netanyahu already faces an uphill battle in forming any government, more so if he agrees to this,” said Dov Waxman, professor of Israel studies at the University of California, Los Angeles.

Netanyahu has previously been able to sidestep requirements placed on Israel when it comes to Gaza, maintaining unity within his far-right coalition, with some members repeatedly threatening to bring the government down if the war ended without Hamas’s total defeat.

He may be silent on the latest deal for now, but he will eventually have to speak.

“That could be a real problem,” Waxman said, “because, if he criticises the deal, he risks angering Trump who – though he hasn’t endorsed him [in the Israeli election] yet – he must be hoping will deliver him some kind of present during the election cycle, whether that’s a further call for his pardon or normalisation with Saudi Arabia, maybe both. But he has to keep Trump on his side.”

And while the Israeli public has grown sceptical that Israeli security remains at the forefront of the Trump administration’s priorities, the need for the US security umbrella is accepted by the vast majority of the public and political establishment, elements of which have seized upon any potential fracturing in it as a means to criticise Netanyahu.

“Netanyahu has shown himself to be very good in the past at handling these kinds of things,” Nimrod Goren, president and founder of Mitvim – The Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies, said.

“He’ll make sure Trump gets his announcement, his signing ceremony and all the optics are in place, but I don’t see him withdrawing from Gaza,” Goren said.

“I think the idea of him withdrawing goes further than just public opinion,” the Israeli analyst added. “It goes against his whole philosophy, ideology and worldview: that Israel needs to be present beyond its borders and everywhere bad intentions could be turned into action. If anything, I see him escalating in the build-up to the election rather than discussing withdrawal.”

Hamas has agreed to gradually disarm in Gaza as part of Donald Trump’s 20-point peace plan. The US president called the deal ‘historic’. Here’s what we know.

July 30 (UPI) — Negotiators implementing the Gaza cease-fire plan and Iran-backed Hamas have reached a framework for disarming militant groups in the Palestinian enclave, President Donald Trump announced Thursday.

The tentative agreement could mark a significant breakthrough toward ending Israel’s war in Gaza, though it is contingent on Israel agreeing to withdraw its troops. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu‘s administration has yet to comment.

“This agreement is a critical step towards Gaza finally being governed by a new Palestinian government that will work closely with the Board of Peace to help the Palestinian people,” Trump said in a statement.

“At the same time, Israel will have the security it deserves, with Gaza no longer used as a base for terror attacks.”

Trump’s so-called Board of Peace — a coalition of 28 countries, including Israel and weighted toward Middle Eastern and smaller or midsize nations — was formed in January and is tied to a U.N.-backed, 20-point plan for the stabilization and reconstruction of Gaza, which has been devastated by the war.

According to a late Thursday statement from the Board of Peace, the agreement concludes months of negotiations and is the first time Hamas has committed to disarmament.

The board said that under the agreement, Israeli forces are to withdraw from Gaza after Hamas and other militant groups in the Palestinian enclave relinquish their weapons.

Trump said that after Israel withdraws, the International Stabilization Force will work with a new Palestinian police force to assume responsibility for security of Gaza.

The agreement “holds the promise of delivering significant benefits to the people of Gaza, who have waited for too long for a better future, and security to the people of Israel,” the board said.

Egypt, Qatar and Turkey mediated the agreement, Trump said.

This is a developing story.

BEIRUT, Lebanon, July 30 (UPI) — The widespread destruction left behind by Israeli forces in Zawtar al-Gharbieh — the first U.S.-backed “pilot zone” in southern Lebanon — was beyond anything its returning displaced residents could have imagined, providing a glimpse of the devastation across the southern region and the extensive reconstruction needs ahead.

Situated in the central sector of southern Lebanon near the strategic Litani River, Zawtar al-Gharbieh represents the testing ground for the success of the pilot zones — the cornerstone of the U.S.-brokered framework agreement reached between Lebanon and Israel on June 26.

It was the first village designated by Israel to begin withdrawing its troops, allowing for the deployment of the Lebanese Army and return of displaced residents. Yet, it reveals the significant and complex challenges facing the process.

The residents rushed back to the village when the Lebanese Army moved in July 21, returning each morning and waiting at the entrance for five days before they were finally allowed to enter and inspect their homes and properties.

The army was carrying out security inspections of all homes and removing missiles and unexploded ordnance remaining from the Israeli military presence.

“We were shocked by the scale of the destruction. It was much, much more than we had expected,” Mayor Abed Ezzedine told UPI.

Ezzedine said Israeli forces “spared nothing,” destroying or damaging everything in their path — from homes and schools to places of worship, shops and the municipality building.

He said the water infrastructure was torn up, the electricity networks blown up and burned, and the village’s only water well destroyed.

“In this life, everything has limits. Even war should have limits,” he added. “They changed the face of the village beyond recognition.”

Some 250 housing units — representing up to 80% of the village’s homes — have been destroyed, while the remaining houses have suffered severe damage and are no longer habitable.

Several of Zawtar al-Gharbieh’s 4,500 to 5,000 residents were killed, including entire families, while others were injured as they fled Israeli attacks and advancing troops three months ago, according to Ezzedine, who said “they showed no mercy to anyone.”

Although Israel stopped targeting the village after the Lebanese Army deployment, he said its drones never left the sky, hoovering at very low altitude “over our heads.”

“What kind of cease-fire or arrangement this is?” Ezzedine asked rhetoically.

Very few residents were able to stay — those who were fortunate enough to still have one room in their homes standing and safe. However, they lacked the basic necessities to continue living, including water, electricity and even Internet access.

The vast majority, meanwhile, spent their days in the village and returned at night to their shelters.

Ezzedine struggled to locate his home among the rubble — one of 25 houses in his neighborhood that had been reduced to ruins.

The rapid reconstruction of Zawtar al-Gharbieh will be a key factor in determining the success of the pilot zones, easing residents’ suffering, restoring confidence in the Lebanese state and reducing the likelihood of them turning again to Hezbollah.

“We want to see action on the ground. This is a test of good faith,” Ezzedine said.

According to a Lebanese official source, the main obstacle is the lack of necessary funding.

The source emphasized that rebuilding the village is an important step in supporting Lebanon’s diplomatic approach and consolidating the success of the pilot zones.

He told UPI that the government faces two options: organizing a reconstruction conference for southern Lebanon, which would require considerable time, or quickly rallying support from friendly states such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar to rebuild the first pilot village.

However, success also largely depends on Israel, which has insisted that it will not withdraw from parts of southern Lebanon it is occupying — specifically its self-declared “yellow zone” — or from Gaza and Syria.

Lebanese and Israeli negotiating teams are scheduled to meet Aug. 4 to 5 to evaluate progress on the pilot zones, the U.S.-led verification mechanism and the withdrawal of Israeli forces from additional occupied Lebanese territories.

The official source told UPI that the United States, which does not want to have boots on the ground in southern Lebanon, would have to “find an acceptable formula for all parties” for the verification process, potentially involving countries such as Italy, France or Spain — proposals reportedly rejected by Israel — or others to carry out the mission.

The source confirmed Lebanon’s commitment to the framework deal, saying, “We will not back out of it,” despite knowing that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is not prepared to withdraw from southern Lebanon at this stage, ahead of the October 17 Israeli elections.

Netanyahu remained firm that the disarmament of Hezbollah is a precondition for Israel’s complete withdrawal from southern Lebanon.

A well-informed source expects “tough negotiations” at next week’s Rome talks over the establishment of additional pilot zones, as Israel continues “its aggressions, infiltrations and systematic house demolitions” in violation of the framework agreement.

The Lebanese Army warned this week that Israeli aggressions are hindering completion of its deployment, delaying the return of displaced residents to their villages and undermining efforts to consolidate stability in southern Lebanon.

The source told UPI that the U.S. is exerting pressure on Israel, but “not enough,” adding that Israel “is trying to find an excuse” to withdraw from the framework agreement, which aims to end the nearly three-year war between Israel and Hezbollah and pave the way for peaceful relations between Lebanon and Israel.

Israeli strikes hit multiple areas across Gaza overnight, including tents sheltering displaced families in al-Mawasi, Khan Younis. In Gaza City, an attack on a residential apartment injured many Palestinians, most of them children, according to eyewitnesses.

Southern Lebanon’s Mansouri village is divided by Israel’s Yellow Line, a military boundary separating 6% of Lebanese territory it occupies from the rest of the country. Al Jazeera’s Zeina Khodr spoke to residents who say they’re living with fear.

The United States military says it intercepted ballistic missiles fired by Iran across the Middle East.

In a statement on X on Wednesday, US Central Command (CENTCOM) said Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) launched multiple ballistic missiles in an “attempted surprise attack on US forces based in the Middle East”.

All the missiles were intercepted, and “US forces remain vigilant and at a high state of readiness”, the statement added.

Five missile interceptions were reported over Jordan, according to the Jordan News Agency.

The IRGC said its air force targeted a US airbase and Central Command centre in Jordan, “with several ballistic missiles”.

“As long as threats against the Islamic Republic of Iran continue and illegal and vicious actions by American forces against our interests continue, the resistance will continue,” the IRGC said in a statement carried by Iran’s IRIB broadcaster.

Reporting from Tehran, Al Jazeera’s Resul Serdar said the latest escalation seemed like a “pre-emptive attack, not a reactionary measure”, from the Iranians.

US President Donald Trump had called off a two-week US bombing campaign on Iran on July 24, claiming after that “good talks” were under way with Iran.

“After 13 consecutive days of constant bombing, in the tit-for-tat US-Iran bombings, these latest attacks will most definitely have an impact on the mediation efforts”, Al Jazeera’s Serdar said.

Trump has threatened to ⁠restart strikes if negotiations stagnate, while Iran has denied seeking to resume talks with Washington.

‘Sending a message’

The Iranian attacks targeting US bases came as Trump was meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has been pushing for war on Iran, in the White House.

“This is Iran sending a message to Trump that they need to be involved in all discussions,” Al Jazeera’s Alan Fisher said from Washington, DC.

“It was reported in Israel that Netanyahu was very keen to raise the question of Pickaxe Mountain. The Israelis said there has been building work going ahead there; they believe the Iranians are putting together another nuclear facility”, he said.

Jason Campbell, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, told Al Jazeera that Tehran is “trying to retake the initiative and the momentum with these latest attacks”.

“Iran has expressed scepticism that the US engages in these pauses between attacks to prepare for another phase of violence, so Tehran likely thinks the US is doing just that with this latest pause”, he said.

US oil futures jumped more than 4 percent to more than $82 a barrel, while Brent crude futures went to more than $88 a barrel after the US military confirmed the Iranian attack.

Oil prices were dropping earlier on Tuesday as Washington’s suspension of strikes on Iran continued, with traders closely monitoring reports of renewed talks.

Hormuz tensions continue

The Strait of Hormuz and its shipping traffic have been major talking points for Trump, who has decried Iran’s blocking of some vessels.

Iran asserts that it is within its rights to control shipping through the strait.

On Wednesday, the IRGC said it “struck and stopped” three oil tankers in Hormuz, according to Tasnim news agency.

It said the tankers “continued to move along an unsafe and illegal route, ignoring our warnings”,

Oman has presented Iran with a proposal to jointly manage traffic in the strait, but Iran has rejected it.

Deputy Iranian Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi told state television that Tehran rejected splitting transit routes equally.

Instead, he said, Tehran proposed managing shipping on its side of the strait, while Muscat would manage part but not all of the opposite lane.

Hundreds of mourners have paid their respects to the late Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina.

The Republican lawmaker and key ally of President Donald Trump unexpectedly died on July 11.

Graham was elected to the US Senate in 2002 and was re-elected in 2008, 2014 and 2020. In 1994, he was elected to ⁠the US House of Representatives, the lower house of the US Congress, for South Carolina’s third congressional district. He recently served as chairman of the Senate Budget Committee. Graham also served as a member of ‌the Senate Committee on Appropriations, the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.

He was a strong supporter of the 2003 US invasion of Iraq and had long pushed for military action against Iran.

Graham was a longtime backer of Israel and supported Trump’s ongoing war on Iran. In a planned documentary, Graham told the filmmakers he “almost cried” after the US and Israel began strikes on Iran in February.

He also vocally supported Ukraine after Russia invaded the country in 2022.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and several other world leaders attended Graham’s funeral service on Tuesday afternoon at the Washington National Cathedral in Washington, DC.

Trump gave remarks, calling Graham a force in the world and US politics. He called Graham “a beloved friend” and said that he “died doing the work he was born to do”.

“For more than 30 years, nothing of consequence happened in this capital without Lindsey Graham knowing about it. Nothing of significance happened anywhere in the world without Lindsey Graham having a view on it,” Trump said. “And no bill became law in the most exceptional republic in human history without Lindsey Graham having a say in it.”

He added: “He was a man who gave America the full measure of his good and mighty heart until that heart itself just gave out.”

WASHINGTON — Sen. Lindsey Graham, the son of pool hall owners who rose to become one of his generation’s more influential U.S. politicians at home and abroad, is being eulogized Tuesday as a “swashbuckling” public servant and “true American original” during memorial services in Washington.

Graham’s remains arrived at the U.S. Capitol, where the Republican served for more than 30 years as an indefatigable dealmaker who talked and laughed and badgered his colleagues into action. His flag-draped casket was carried inside by an armed forces team, in recognition of his military service.

Later, a funeral will be held at Washington National Cathedral with lawmakers and foreign leaders, a testament to his stature on the global stage.

“Lindsey was a towering figure,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune, adding there was “no one more capable of cracking up a room.”

“I look forward to the days when you make us all laugh again,” said Thune (R-S.D.), choking back tears.

President Trump is expected to deliver remarks at the cathedral, alongside Fox News Channel’s Sean Hannity and other conservative leaders.

Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu and Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyplan to be in attendance, a nod to Graham’s role as a foremost believer in the power of the U.S. and its military to intervene in the world’s problems.

It’s the start of two days of services, with burial Wednesday in Graham’s home state of South Carolina. Joint Base Charleston will be renamed in his honor, the White House said.

Graham died suddenly on July 11 at his home in Washington of a likely aortic tear, according to preliminary findings. He had just returned from a whirlwind trip to a NATO summit in Turkey, where he celebrated his birthday, and a visit to Ukraine. He was 71.

A place of honor to ‘say our final goodbyes’

The morning service in the Capitol Rotunda provided a place of tribute where former presidents and military leaders and other prominent Americans have been memorialized.

Vice President JD Vance along with several Cabinet officials and former senators, including Markwayne Mullin, the Homeland Security secretary, were in attendance, as was acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche, who faces a rocky Senate confirmation for the job.

Vance described Graham as a “swashbuckling” figure — “who swashbuckled into the Senate” with his suit jacket open — and was impossible not to like.

“A true American original,” Vance said.

First elected to Congress in the 1994 Republican revolt that swept the GOP to power, Graham was part of a new era of conservatives to take their seats in the House — and among the first Republicans from his Southern state since Reconstruction.

Mascaro, Kinnard and Jalonick write for the Associated Press. Associated Press writer Michelle L. Price contributed to this story.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has long presented his closeness to the United States – both politically and personally – as evidence of his indispensability to Israel.

Arriving with a camera-ready American accent after spending a large portion of his youth in the country, Netanyahu is said to have used his unique understanding of US politics to charm and cajole numerous presidents into maintaining their unflagging support of Israel and his personal political projects.

For a time it appeared as though US President Donald Trump was the most amenable of all past presidents to Israel and to Netanyahu, particularly after he became the first US leader to agree to participate in a joint war with Israel against Iran.

And yet, with that war stalling, Trump appearing more willing to make deals in the Middle East without Israeli input, and increasing criticism of Israel in the US, there is a sense in Israel that Netanyahu’s Trump card may not be as useful as it once was.

That has come at a bad time for Netanyahu, who faces an election at home in late October and an ongoing trial for corruption, as well as several unresolved conflicts in the region.

Netanyahu’s visit to Washington on Tuesday to meet Trump – his first since the war on Iran began – therefore is an opportunity for a refresh – and a photo opportunity to remind the Israeli public of his ties to the US president.

The optics

Strains in Netanyahu’s relationship with Trump have been growing since the start of the war on Iran, after reporting emerged that it was the Israeli prime minister who convinced the US president of the feasibility of the mission, and the potential for the Iranian state to be overthrown.

Concern has also grown within the US Congress over Netanyahu’s apparent indulgence of Israel’s increasingly violent settler movement – which included the extrajudicial detention of a US senator by settlers – alongside friction over Washington’s decision to consider selling F-35s to Israel’s regional rival Turkiye and agreeing a nuclear cooperation deal with Saudi Arabia.

“The real reason Netanyahu’s got this visit [to Washington] is purely cynical,” Alon Pinkas, a former Israeli ambassador and consul general in New York, told Al Jazeera. “He’s claimed that he’s flying all the way to the US to attend the wake of his apparently great friend [deceased Republican Senator] Lindsey Graham.”

“Supposedly there’s an agenda, supposedly they’re going to talk about Iran, F-35s and Saudi Arabia’s potential nuclear deal,” said Pinkas.

“But really this is about two things: hoping to assure allies and critics within Israel that the relationship with Trump holds and, separately, hoping that Trump will again call for his pardon in the corruption trial,” he added, referring to Trump’s unorthodox intervention in Israel on Netanyahu’s behalf in November 2025.

However, while Netanyahu may be hoping that a good meeting with Trump may help him in the polls, he arrives at a time when his stock in the US is potentially at its lowest.

Netanyahu has received widespread criticism from figures on the American right, such as podcast host Tucker Carlson and the former Republican US Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene. Vice President JD Vance has also been critical of “some” Israelis, using an interview with US podcaster Joe Rogan to suggest that figures within the Israeli government were trying to derail the agreement he was brokering with Iran to end the war.

Analysts have suggested that the Trump-Netanyahu meeting will combine public flattery with private cynicism on the US president’s part. Asked about Netanyahu’s public resistance to the F-35 sale to Turkiye on board Air Force One on Monday, Trump told reporters, “Nobody tells me what we should be selling”.

“Netanyahu arrives in Washington at a time when even many around [Trump] are suspicious of him. He has become toxic in the US,” Ahron Bregman, an Israeli security analyst and senior teaching fellow in the Department for War Studies at King’s College London. “He is regarded in the US – rightly or wrongly – as the one who dragged Trump into a war of choice that has turned into a strategic catastrophe. Nobody, not even Trump, will let him pretend to be the cleverest guy in the room. Those days are gone.”

While few expect any overt signs of disharmony from the visit in public, Netanyahu’s ability to present himself as uniquely positioned to manage the country’s relationship with the US – a key factor in the upcoming election – may be limited.

“Netanyahu’s had a tremendous track record with the US, but he’s burned a lot of bridges,” Mitchell Barak, an Israeli pollster and a former Netanyahu aide in the 1990s, told Al Jazeera, adding that the criticism of Netanyahu was not isolated to figures within the nationalist wing of the Republican Party, but included Israel’s traditional allies within the party’s centre right.

“We’ve seen tension through Trump’s comments on the various F-35 sales, including most recently to Turkiye, as well as US criticism of Netanyahu at the start of the Iran war, so I’m not too sure if Trump’s going to be stumping for Netanyahu for all that much longer,” Barak said. “It could easily be that Trump declares Netanyahu was a great wartime leader, but that it was time for Israel to move on, before meeting with [other Israeli politicians] and endorsing a new prime minister for Israel.”

July 28 (UPI) — Chad has announced it is withdrawing from the International Criminal Court, days after a U.S. official urged the central African nation to consider doing so and amid a concerted U.S. campaign seeking to dismantle the court.

In an official communique made public Monday, Chad’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said it notified United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres of its decision to withdraw from the Rome Statute, the treaty establishing the court, following what it described as an “in-depth examination” of its operations.

The ministry said the court’s effectiveness “has remained limited and uneven in light of the expectations that led to its creation,” alleging an anti-African bias and noting that its first nine investigations concerned situations in Africa. The ICC currently lists 17 situations under investigation.

Chad also highlighted that six of the seven people in the court’s custody are being prosecuted in connection with situations in Africa.

“Taken together, these objective factors explain the perception, widely shared among numerous states and their populations, that the court’s judicial activity has remained durably concentrated on the Global South in general and on the African continent in particular, which have consistently been victims of a form of political instrumentalization of the ICC,” the ministry said.

It called on the African Union and member stats to reconsider the future of what it called an “apparently biased system” and to strengthen the African judicial mechanisms instead.

The decision, which is to take effect in one year, comes amid an intensified U.S. campaign against the ICC following the court’s issuance of arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant over alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza.

Earlier this month, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced a campaign seeking to “dismantle the threat posed by the International Criminal Court to U.S. sovereignty.”

The United States is not a member of the ICC, and although the Trump administration has taken a more aggressive stance toward the court, the United States has long rejected the cour’s assertion of jurisdiction of U.S. nationals without Washington’s consent.

Four days before Chad announced its decision to withdraw from the ICC, Foreign Minister Abdoulaye Sabre Fadoul spoke with U.S. Under Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Frank Garcia Jr..

A statement from Chad said the call was made at the request of the United States. During the call, Garcia expressed the United States’ concerns about the ICC’s operation and requested that Chad review its membership, which Fadoul said Chad would.

“The United States welcomes Chad’s decision to withdraw from the ICC and join the growing number of nations reclaiming their sovereignty from this flawed institution,” the State Department’s Bureau of African Affairs said in a statement.

“The United States will never surrender its sovereignty to an unaccountable global tribunal, and we are launching a comprehensive, whole-of-government campaign to end the ICC’s illegitimate overreach. We call on all other ICC members to withdraw from the Rome Statute.”

The announcement comes days after Venezuela announced it was withdrawing from the ICC.

Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger all announced their withdrawals from the court in June 2026.

July 27 (UPI) — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was on his way to Washington, D.C., on Monday for his eighth meeting with President Donald Trump since he returned to the White House last year.

The war in Iran will be the key topic Trump and Netanyahu are expected to discuss when they meet at the White House this week. It will be their first meeting since the war began. The two leaders have expressed differing opinions about peace agreements in recent weeks.

“In these complex times, you need to act with both great determination and great wisdom,” Netanyahu said in a video statement Monday. “We will discuss all the issues on the agenda, primarily Iran. Of course, our goal is to protect our security and also to expand the circle of peace around us.”

Fighting between the United States and Iran resumed over the past two weeks after a preliminary peace agreement between both sides fell apart. The U.S. military said it paused strikes on Iran over the weekend after a series of daily attacks.

Iran’s military said it is also halting strikes against the United States as long as the United States holds off.

It is a politically significant time for both Netanyahu and Trump. On Oct. 27, Israel’s legislative election will include all 120 seats in the Knesset, determining who will lead the government. The prime minister will be determined in consultation between the Israeli president and the Knesset, through a series of coalition formations.

Meanwhile, Trump’s focus politically is on the midterm elections in November. The elections will determine the political makeup on Capitol Hill and Trump’s path toward advancing his agenda in the final two years of his term.

Months after the United Nations Security Council backed a comprehensive framework to end Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, Israel’s security cabinet has approved a highly constrained pilot project to allow foreign security forces into a narrow pocket of the devastated territory.

Israeli media reported on Sunday that the so-called International Stabilization Force (ISF), part of United States President Donald Trump’s 20-point “peace plan”, will include 200 members from countries such as Morocco and Uganda deploying to a designated “test” zone in the southern city of Rafah.

While international officials have welcomed the move, analysts describe the limited deployment as a calculated diplomatic gesture with little practical effect that comes as the US-backed peace process has largely stalled and as Israel’s deadly attacks continue.

Instead of a genuine transition towards peace, they argue, the move is a political manoeuvre designed to deflect US pressure ahead of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to Washington this week, while simultaneously entrenching the geographic fragmentation of the Gaza Strip.

“Netanyahu is going to Washington to say ‘no’ to the broader demands of withdrawal” from the Strip, says Wissam Afifa, a Gaza-based political analyst. “Instead, he is offering this alternative: ‘Take this small appetiser, take this minor achievement, and play within this highly restricted space.’”

Scaled-back forces and ‘rubber batons’

The Israeli daily Haaretz reported that the original plan anticipated the deployment of 500 Moroccan troops to a refugee camp in the city. The drastic reduction to just 200 troops may indicate that Israel’s political-security cabinet has decided to divide the deployment into even smaller, heavily controlled stages.

The force will operate in full coordination with the Israeli military. According to the Israeli news outlet Ynet, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir was the sole cabinet member to vote against the measure, arguing that the Palestinian group Hamas had failed to fulfill its commitment to disarm and insisting that “the solution in Gaza is to encourage migration”.

Israeli media also reported that the government maintains that the Israeli military will retain control of the “Yellow Line” – a unilaterally imposed boundary that effectively places up to 70 percent of the Gaza Strip under tight Israeli control – and that no withdrawal will take place until Hamas has fully disarmed.

The original framework endorsed by UNSC Resolution 2803 called for the deployment of an international force alongside a transitional Palestinian administration.

Earlier this month, Hamas announced it would dissolve its government in Gaza and hand over power to a new, Palestinian technocratic governing authority called the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG).

Analysts said Hamas’s move was likely designed to apply pressure on Israel and demonstrate the group’s commitment to handing over governance and allowing the rebuilding of the territory.

The pilot programme also envisions the NCAG’s entry to oversee civil affairs in Gaza. Yet, according to Haaretz, the Palestinian police accompanying them will be stripped of firearms, permitted to carry only “rubber batons and tasers”.

Meanwhile, preparations on the ground appear to be moving forward to accommodate this new security architecture. Israeli Army Radio recently broadcast a video showing a military base under construction in the southern “Gaza envelope” near the Karem Abu Salem (Kerem Shalom) crossing.

The station reported that the sprawling facility is being built specifically to host the incoming multinational forces before their deployment.

Despite the severe Israeli restrictions, Nickolay Mladenov, the high representative for the Board of Peace, welcomed the Israeli cabinet’s decision, praising it as a “critical part of the agreed framework for stabilizing Gaza, supporting demilitarization, and enabling the transition to effective Palestinian transitional administration”.

A ‘sweetener’ for Washington

To understand the timing and motivation behind the decision, experts pointed to the diplomatic deadlock surrounding the US-brokered peace initiative. Trump’s plan envisioned a phased approach, bridged by the handover of Gaza to a technocratic committee. However, this framework has been stalled by Israel’s refusal to link a ceasefire to the broader political situation and its rejection of a phased withdrawal.

Afifa said the “failure” of the US administration’s flagship initiative had left it “embarrassed” as the project that was repeatedly highlighted by Trump “as a great achievement, resulted in zero”.

With Netanyahu heading to Washington, the Israeli prime minister desperately needed a deliverable, said Afifa. The cabinet’s decision, passed hastily via a telephone vote during a Knesset recess to avoid internal coalition fractures, provides exactly that, he added.

Mamoun Abu Amer, an expert on Israeli affairs, echoed this assessment. He viewed the rushed cabinet vote as an attempt to preempt US pressure and present an image of compliance to Trump, while fundamentally altering the agreement’s core terms to suit Israel’s long-term security strategy.

Abu Amer also said that Israel has effectively turned Resolution 2803 upside down through selective and highly conditional implementation.

“This is an inverted process,” said Abu Amer. The original text implied that the NCAG would enter Gaza, the ISF would deploy and the Israeli military would withdraw to new lines to allow for stabilisation. Instead, Israel is demanding unilateral disarmament first, while keeping the technocratic committee besieged within an Israeli security envelope.

Abu Amer also suggested the requirement for the Palestinian police force to only carry rubber batons and tasers reflects a premeditated Israeli strategy to strip the Palestinian administration of genuine law enforcement capabilities, reducing them to subcontractors managing municipal decay in a thoroughly devastated environment under a strict military occupation.

The NCAG itself appeared to reject this Israeli paradigm. In a recent statement, the committee declared it would only assume responsibility for Gaza after UNSC approval of the force’s deployment and, crucially, a full Israeli military withdrawal.

‘False witnesses’

The spatial realities of the Israeli plan reveal a strategy of deep fragmentation and long-term control, experts said, pointing to the cabinet’s decision to explicitly restrict the ISF and the technocrats to operating strictly outside the “Yellow Line”.

Afifa warned that transforming a small pocket of Rafah into an “experimental bubble” subverts the idea of Gaza as a single, contiguous territorial entity.

“This raises a massive question about the fate of two million people,” he said. “If this entire project is reduced to a few thousand individuals selected under Israeli criteria, it means a tacit agreement from the international community to leave two million Gazans hostage to a catastrophic humanitarian crisis while Israel claims to be implementing a peace plan.”

This also carries significant diplomatic risks for the participating nations. Israeli media reported the cabinet’s decision stipulated that ISF contributors must be nations that have peace agreements with Israel and do not pursue legal actions against it in international forums.

“It is not wise for an Arab country like Morocco to be a party to helping Netanyahu implement his political agenda,” said Abu Amer, urging participating nations to reject the altered Israeli formula and insist on a comprehensive withdrawal.

Failing to do so, he cautioned, would reduce foreign troops to mere security buffers, acting as “false witnesses” to the continuation of the occupation and the destruction of the Palestinian society.

Sumaya Yaghi returns to what’s left of her destroyed home in southern Lebanon after Israeli troops withdrew from her ‘pilot zone’ village under a US-backed agreement.

Media freedom organisations and opposition lawmakers have criticised sweeping media reforms pushed through by Israel’s right-wing coalition as part of a legislative blitz before the parliament’s dissolution in advance of elections later this year.

The parliament, or Knesset, last week approved the bill that could give the government a far greater say in Israel’s news and broadcast sectors. The controversial measure strips away traditional oversight safeguards, eliminates requirements for minimum journalism standards and lifts longstanding limits on cross-ownership, among others.

Following the July 17 vote, watchdog groups, including the Union of Journalists in Israel, along with opposition parties, successfully petitioned the High Court of Justice to freeze parts of the legislation. They warned that some provisions that were set to take effect immediately, including the removal of limits on ownership of multiple media outlets and the stripping away of newsroom standards, could permanently distort the media landscape before the October 27 election, potentially influencing its outcome.

The government has until Sunday to respond, after which the court will decide whether to keep the freeze, widen it, or allow the provisions to take effect. Other, less contentious and immediate sections of the law were left to stand.

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did not vote on the measure. He is currently bound by a 2020 conflict-of-interest agreement that bars him from participating in government decisions that could affect his ongoing corruption trial, where, among other charges, he stands accused of using his position to unduly influence media coverage of his administration.

Nevertheless, Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi thanked Netanyahu directly, saying: “Mr prime minister, I want to thank you and tell you that the mission you gave me four years ago – to deliver right-wing reform of the media – was today successfully completed.”

Israeli media reported that such a directive by Netanyahu could be a violation of his agreement. Neither the Prime Minister’s Office nor the Communications Ministry responded to Al Jazeera’s queries over whether Netanyahu’s role in the legislation’s passage represented a conflict of interest. However, Karhi subsequently claimed that he had secured a legal opinion determining that the prime minister was not in breach of the conflict-of-interest agreement.

“Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi have proven repeatedly that they are enemies of independent journalism in Israel,” Martin Roux, of the Reporters Without Borders media monitor, told Al Jazeera.

“This means they’re attacking every Israeli citizen’s right to reliable information from diverse sources. This has been true for years, and it is becoming more obvious every day as the legislative elections, set for the end of October, approach. It’s all about controlling the narrative,” he said.

In a social media post, Karhi claimed the new legislation would bring “more right-wing coverage and less regulation”.

“After a determined struggle against every possible element from the deep state, tycoons, attorneys, officials and fearmongering networks – we managed to pass the right-wing media reform.”

‘Boosting propaganda channels’

However, for many observers, there was little new in overhauling media that had grown used to toeing the government line, with critical coverage of the multiple wars that Israel has engaged in and the international outrage that many have caused typically relegated to the sidelines of the national conversation.

“The reforms are part of Netanyahu’s ongoing media overhaul – undermining the remains of critical reporting and journalistic independence in the country, while boosting Netanyahu’s propaganda channels,” London-based Israeli academic and media analyst Ayala Panievsky told Al Jazeera.

She cited the far-right Channel 14, which she said emboldened Israel’s war crimes and offered unflagging support to what she described as the most right-wing government in Israel’s history.

“In 2020, they amplified ‘the Big Lie’ in the US elections, claiming Trump won the election – they might therefore act similarly following the Israeli general elections in October, if Netanyahu’s coalition indeed loses,” said Panievsky, echoing similar concerns among academics and legal analysts sparked by accusations from lawmakers within Netanyahu’s Likud party that the acting head of the Central Elections Committee, Dean Livne, was “clearly politically biased”.

Analysts and observers from across Israel have long pointed to the strongly nationalist undertone of much of Israel’s current affairs coverage and the absence of space given to Palestinians and Palestinian suffering.

When the United Nations’ Independent International Commission of Inquiry concluded in September 2025 that Israel had committed genocide in Gaza, Israel’s Foreign Ministry dismissed the findings as “distorted and false“, a framing echoed across domestic outlets rather than scrutinised.

A subsequent Molad report found only 3 percent of Channel 12’s early war coverage referenced Gaza’s humanitarian crisis, with just two of 206 visuals showing Palestinian civilian casualties. Elsewhere, allegations of Israeli war crimes, including sexual abuse, are either omitted or given pro-government framing, observers told Al Jazeera.

“The Israeli media just doesn’t feature Gaza. It’s not there,” political analyst Ori Goldberg said from outside Tel Aviv. “There’s no sense of solidarity with the journalists killed there, or those they don’t let in. They’re just not mentioned.”

Similarly, discussion panels on the various wars that the Netanyahu administration had embarked upon were typically staffed by ex-generals, who had no question with the need for war, only differences over its prosecution, said Goldberg.

However, even this relative compliance was not enough for a prime minister fighting an election that had come to rely on the appearance of forward momentum and paper enemies to sustain his political project.

“Netanyahu always needs to be seen to be pushing the envelope,” Goldberg added. “He needs a media that will give barely critical coverage of his every word, but one that he can still present as the enemy within.”