Watan-The Israeli occupation army continues its war of extermination on the besieged Gaza Strip, while political negotiations to return to a ceasefire agreement or reach a new prisoner exchange deal remain stalled. This impasse is largely due to the obstinacy of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who insists on negotiating “under fire,” as he put it.

In this context, Netanyahu is reportedly considering withdrawing the Israeli negotiating delegation currently in Doha on Tuesday if no progress is made in the indirect talks with Hamas via mediators. According to Israel’s public broadcaster KAN, a small task force may remain in Doha to continue discussions in place of the full delegation.

Commenting on the talks, Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani stated on Tuesday that “the catastrophe in Gaza continues, and every chance at de-escalation is unfortunately being undermined.” He added that Israel’s aggressive behavior “undermines every possible opportunity for peace.”

Global Leaders Warn Israel Over Gaza Assault as Netanyahu Defends Ongoing War

The military escalation comes amid growing international pressure on Israel to end its aggression in Gaza. On Monday, the French President, along with the British and Canadian Prime Ministers, warned that they would not remain “idle” in the face of Netanyahu’s “shameful actions” in Gaza. They hinted at taking “concrete measures” if Israel fails to halt its military operation and allow humanitarian aid into the Strip.

In a joint statement, Emmanuel Macron, Keir Starmer, and Mark Carney said: “We are determined to recognize a Palestinian state as part of a two-state solution, and we are ready to work with others to achieve that goal,” referencing a UN conference planned for June to build global consensus. They strongly opposed the expansion of Israeli military operations in Gaza and described the humanitarian suffering in the territory—under total Israeli blockade for nearly three months—as “unbearable,” with food, medicine, and other supplies blocked from entry.

Netanyahu Clashes with Western Leaders as U.S. Signals Discomfort Over Gaza Offensive Netanyahu, in turn, lashed out at the leaders of Britain, Canada, and France for urging Tel Aviv to halt the genocide in Gaza and threatening “concrete steps” against it. In a post on X (formerly Twitter), Netanyahu claimed that these leaders were “rewarding” the October 7 Hamas attack by demanding an end to what he called Israel’s “defensive existential war” and by advocating for the establishment of a Palestinian state. He argued such moves would “invite more atrocities of this kind.”

Meanwhile, the U.S. news site Axios reported on Monday that U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance canceled a planned visit to Israel scheduled for Tuesday due to the expansion of Israel’s military operations in Gaza, according to a senior American official. The official said Vance made the decision because he did not want his visit to appear as an endorsement of Israel’s massive operation in Gaza at a time when the U.S. is pushing for a ceasefire and hostage exchange deal.

Although Axios noted that Vance cited “logistical reasons” for canceling, the outlet emphasized that the decision sheds light on Washington’s unease with Israel’s current strategy in Gaza.

WASHINGTON — When President Donald Trump took office in January, he and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu were closely aligned on how to approach the most pressing issues in their relationship: the war in Gaza and aggression from Iran.

Trump lifted a hold the Biden administration had put on sending large bombs to Israel. He encouraged Israeli military operations “to finish the job” against Hamas in Gaza. He agreed with Netanyahu on confronting Iran and its proxy groups in the region.

But in recent weeks, the relationship between Trump and Netanyahu has become strained as the two leaders are increasingly at odds over a strategy for tackling these challenges now that Hamas has been significantly degraded and Iran weakened, according to two U.S. officials, two Middle Eastern diplomats and two other people with knowledge of the tensions.

Where Netanyahu sees an opportunity to finally take out Iran’s nuclear facilities, Trump sees an opportunity to remove the threat of Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon by making a deal. As Israel hits Gaza with a new military offensive, Trump is pushing for a ceasefire and looking to implement his postwar plan for rebuilding the area into a “Riviera of the Middle East.” And after Trump halted the U.S. military campaign against the Iranian-backed Houthi militant group, a shocked Netanyahu said Israel would then defend itself.

The recent differences between the two leaders on key strategies and positions has put Trump’s relationship with one of America’s closest allies at a bit of a crossroads. How they navigate their disagreements going forward will shape the outcome of some of the core components of the president’s foreign policy agenda.

Twice in just this past week alone, Trump made public comments that rankled Netanyahu, the two U.S. officials, the two Middle Eastern diplomats and two other people with knowledge of the tensions said.

Netanyahu was particularly upset when Trump said Wednesday that he had yet to decide whether Iran would be allowed to enrich uranium under a new nuclear deal his administration is negotiating, the two U.S. officials said. A top adviser to Netanyahu, Ron Dermer, conveyed that message to Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, during a meeting at the White House on Thursday, according to one of the U.S. officials.

For his part, Trump has been frustrated with Netanyahu’s decision to begin a new military offensive in Gaza, which the president sees as at odds with his plan for rebuilding there, according to one of the U.S. officials and one of the people familiar with the tensions between the two leaders.

Privately, Trump has said the new Israeli offensive in Gaza is a wasted effort because it will make it harder to rebuild, according to those two sources.

The U.S. is currently pushing Israel and Hamas to agree to a ceasefire in Gaza, which Dermer was set to discuss with Witkoff during his White House visit this week, according to the Middle Eastern diplomats and a senior Trump administration official.

But Trump’s approach to Iran has been the biggest point of contention for Netanyahu.

The Israeli leader has been frustrated for weeks with Trump’s refusal to support military strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities and his decision to instead try to reach a deal aimed at blocking Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, according to the two U.S. officials, the two Middle Eastern diplomats and two other people with knowledge of the tensions.

“They’re worried about any deal,” one of the U.S. officials said of the Israelis.

Israel has made clear to the U.S. that it does not want Trump to cut a nuclear deal that leaves Iran with any uranium enrichment capabilities, the U.S. officials and Middle Eastern diplomats said. Trump has expressed an openness to Iran maintaining a civilian nuclear program.

“We haven’t made that decision yet,” Trump said Wednesday when asked if the U.S. position is that Iran can have a uranium enrichment program for civilian nuclear purposes.

“Israel has had no better friend in its history than President Trump,” James Hewitt, a spokesperson for the National Security Council, said in a statement responding to this story. “We continue to work closely with our ally Israel to ensure remaining hostages in Gaza are freed, Iran never obtains a nuclear weapon, and to strengthen regional security in the Middle East. As he has repeatedly stated in his first and second terms, the president is committed to ensuring Iran never obtains a nuclear weapon.”

A third U.S. official said the president’s team has communicated with Israeli officials regularly about the status of negotiations with Iran, providing updates and coordinating on elements of a potential deal.

Netanyahu’s office did not respond to a request for comment.

‘Trump has his own agenda’

Netanyahu was blindsided — and infuriated — this past week by Trump’s announcement that the U.S. was halting its military campaign against the Iranian-backed Houthis in Yemen after the Houthis agreed to stop firing on U.S. ships in the Red Sea, according to one of the U.S. officials and the two Middle East diplomats.

The Houthis had just attacked Israel with a missile that hit close to Ben Gurion, Israel’s main airport.

When Netanyahu visited the White House last month, for the second time since Trump took office, he hoped the president would pledge U.S. air support for a possible Israeli operation against Iran’s nuclear facilities, according to the two Middle Eastern diplomats. The Israeli leader was taken aback when the president instead announced he would agree to direct talks with Tehran, the diplomats said.

Netanyahu has privately said he thinks Trump’s negotiations with Iran are a waste of time because Tehran will never hold up its end of any deal, according to the two U.S. officials. Israel has argued that Iran is so weakened by economic sanctions and the degradation of its proxies in the region that now is an ideal moment to take out its nuclear facilities, and it is concerned the window for doing so is closing while the U.S. negotiates, the officials said.

Adding to that concern about timing, Israeli military strikes crippled Iranian strategic air defenses in October, meaning manned aircraft conducting new strikes now would not be as susceptible to being shot down. But the Iranians are rebuilding their air defenses.

Republican Sens. Tom Cotton and Lindsey Graham said this week that the only acceptable Iran deal is one that completely stops Tehran from any uranium enrichment. They also urged Trump to submit any Iran nuclear deal to the Senate for ratification, which requires a two-thirds majority vote.

Asked about Cotton and Graham’s comments, a fourth U.S. official said Witkoff is in “constant contact” with Graham about Iran negotiations and briefed Cotton on them this past week.

The 2015 Iran nuclear deal reached by President Barack Obama was not ratified by the Senate, which allowed Trump to simply withdraw the U.S. from the agreement during his first term.

“I think what you’re seeing is the Israelis recognizing that as much as they welcomed the election of President Trump and thought that would really give them a blank check to pursue whatever agenda they wanted, Trump has his own agenda,” Frank Lowenstein, a former Middle East envoy under the Obama administration, said during a virtual briefing organized by J Street, an advocacy organization that describes itself as pro-Israel and pro-peace.

Although Trump’s diplomacy with Iran and the U.S. deal with the Houthis are “anathema” to Netanyahu, the prime minister does not have the political leverage in Washington or Israel to enter into a direct confrontation with Trump, who is popular with Netanyahu’s base in Israel, said Ilan Goldenberg, who worked on Middle East policy as a senior official during the Biden and Obama administrations.

Netanyahu’s “whole political strategy and survival strategy is based on holding his coalition and holding his political base together,” Goldenberg said in the briefing organized by J Street. “And those folks love Trump, so for him to go very publicly against Trump is something he really can’t do.”

The strain in the relationship between Trump and Netanyahu comes as the president is set to travel to the Middle East next week, with stops scheduled in Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. Trump is not currently scheduled to visit Israel on this trip, though he did during his first term.

Witkoff also planned to attend another round of negotiations with Iran this weekend in Oman.

The Israeli military declared on Sunday it had begun an “extensive ground operation” in Gaza as part of an intensified assault which has killed hundreds of Palestinians over the past several days.

The announcement came despite high stakes ceasefire talks between Israel and Hamas continuing in Qatar, where mediators are hoping to pressure both sides to agree to a new temporary truce.

A key meeting of Israel’s war cabinet is expected to happen on Sunday, where ministers will choose between a US-backed ceasefire plan or widening the devastating military campaign under what the government has dubbed Operation Gideon’s Chariots.

Israel is under growing international pressure to accept a deal. Officials say Israel is open to small changes in the American proposal by envoy Steve Witkoff, but is refusing to make serious compromises. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says all Israeli captives must be released before stopping the war.

On the ground in Gaza, the situation is getting worse. Israeli airstrikes have killed more than 250 people in recent days. At least 125 people died early Sunday, including women, children, and at least five journalists, according to Gaza’s health ministry.

One of the deadliest strikes hit a tent camp in al-Mawasi near Khan Younis, where displaced families were sheltering. Videos showed bodies burned and scattered, with survivors rushed to overcrowded field hospitals.

This latest wave of violence comes amid reports of a new Israeli plan to physically divide Gaza into isolated civilian zones.

A leaked military map, obtained by The Sunday Times and reportedly shared with diplomats, outlines Israel’s vision for the post-war future of Gaza if no ceasefire is reached.

The plan, part of a strategy labelled “the complete takeover of Gaza”, would divide the territory into three heavily fortified military corridors—north, central, and south—separating Palestinian civilians into four enclaves.

According to the report, the Israeli army wants to control three major areas: one in the north, one in the centre near the Netzarim corridor, and one in the south near Rafah. Palestinians would need permission to move between areas. Aid deliveries would also be controlled, with barcodes and tags used to track packages. Only 12 specific places would be used to hand out aid.

Work has already started to prepare these zones with bulldozers already clearing land along the Netzarim corridor. In the north, the military is making room for more roads and bases. The full project could take about three weeks and would mark the first step toward a long-term military presence in Gaza.

The illegal plan is backed by the United States, which is helping set up a system where private companies deliver aid under Israeli military watch. This is similar to how checkpoints operate in the West Bank. Aid to Gaza has been mostly blocked since March 2, making hunger and illness worse across the territory.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres spoke out strongly on Israel’s horrific attacks in Gaza and its plans for permanent control of the territory.

At an Arab League summit in Baghdad, he said: “The situation for Palestinians in Gaza is beyond inhumane.” He called for a permanent ceasefire and said blocking food and aid was against international law.

Despite Israeli denials, reports say Hamas is offering to release half of the remaining hostages, both alive and dead, in exchange for a two-month ceasefire. But Israel says this offer isn’t serious. According to Axios, Israel’s team in Doha believes there is a real chance for a deal and is urging Netanyahu to keep negotiating.

On Saturday night, thousands of people protested in Tel Aviv and other cities, demanding a deal to bring the remaining Israeli captives in Gaza home and end the war. Families of the hostages accused Netanyahu of dragging out the war to stay in power. In Rehovot, clashes broke out between protesters and Netanyahu supporters, with videos showing physical fights and insults.

“April 22, 2025” will be forever etched in our national memory. The Rubicon was crossed when terrorists massacred innocent tourists in cold blood in Pahalgam, Kashmir. The initial anger and shock have dissipated. And in its place is now a steely resolve to teach the perpetrators a befitting lesson. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who cut short his visit to Saudi Arabia, has vowed to avenge the slain.

advertisement

One thing is clear at this point: it was not a localised terrorist action, and even with the limited evidence available, Pakistan appears culpable. Diplomatic measures have already been announced against Pakistan after a Cabinet Comcmittee of Security meeting on April 23, and more are likely to follow.

Speaking at a public rally in Madhubani, Bihar, on April 24 – the first time after the massacre – the PM assured the nation: “India will identify, track and punish every terrorist and their backers. We will pursue them to the ends of the Earth.”

Multiple options, both kinetic and non-kinetic, have been presented. Kinetic options are the active actions that mostly refer to military options. These range from small tactical team-level operations across the Line of Control to full-scale military operations.

Many have recommended a repeat of the Balakot air strike, which the Indian Air Force conducted to avenge the deadly Pulwama attack of February 14, 2019. But will it suffice this time? While each option appears appropriate in its own right, let us examine the range of kinetic options at India’s disposal.

advertisement

Revoking ceasefire agreement: A ceasefire agreement between India and Pakistan has been in place since 2021 and has largely been respected. In hindsight, however, it has been counterproductive for India. While it has ensured that people in Kashmir’s border villages have been able to lead normal lives and the Indian Army has been able to concentrate on counterterror operations, it has allowed Pakistan to thin out forces from the LoC and divert them to the Afghanistan border and in the fight against Baloch insurgency. Revoking the ceasefire agreement will force Pakistan to reinforce the LoC, imposing costs on it elsewhere.

Targeting terrorist camps: Indian intelligence, in every briefing, provides details of the number of terrorist camps and launch pads across the LoC. The time has now come to target them as they crop up. It will not only destabilise their strategies but also impose additional costs on them in terms of time and ease of infiltration.

Targeted assassinations: It is one of the oldest forms of revenge, mastered best by Israel. How Israel was able to assassinate Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, or Hezbollah chief Hasan Nasrallah, is now a well-established story. In Pakistan’s case, however, key figures in the army and major terrorist groups like the Lashkar-e-Taiba and the Jaish-e-Mohammed could be targeted and eliminated. With the advancement in surveillance technology and targeting systems, it may not even be necessary to have a physical presence of an operative, once the initial work has been done.

advertisement

Missile strikes: Many options exist. India has a range of ballistic missiles like the surface-to-surface missiles Prithvi and Agni, which can cover the entire Pakistani territory. With India’s capability to launch these missiles from mobile land platforms, the element of surprise can be maintained. In addition, India has missiles that can be launched by air and sea, deep into Pakistani territory. Having developed hypersonic missiles that travel at Mach 5, India now has a missile capability that cannot be intercepted by any anti-missile defence.

Change in ‘No First Use’ policy: The current policy is, by nature, reactive. So, Pakistan knows it does not have to fear any preemptive nuclear strike. A mere change in this policy would add a big deterrence value, especially as India has completed its Nuclear TRIAD, i.e. the capability to launch nuclear missiles by air, land and sea.

Revoking Simla Agreement: The Simla Agreement of 1972 made the LoC the de facto border between India and Pakistan. Although minor violations of the LoC have taken place over the decades, its sanctity has more or less been maintained. If the Shimla Agreement and the ceasefire across the LoC are revoked, the army could use the opportunity to recapture enclaves in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, which could offer a tactical advantage.

advertisement

Naval blockade: With most of the trade going through the sea, a naval blockade across Pakistan in the Arabian Sea could be a worthwhile option. Remember, the Houthis have been able to block sea trade across the Red Sea for over two years. And, despite best efforts by the US and its allies — including the deployment of aircraft carrier ships — the Houthis have not been deterred. However, it should be noted that a naval blockade across Pakistani ports would be considered an act of full-scale war.

Full-scale military operations: This is on the extreme end of the escalatory ladder, and there are many factors to consider. Most important is the identification of clear, achievable military objectives. Remember the Gaza war! The military objectives defined by Israel in its war in Gaza are yet to be realised after almost two years of war against a defenceless enemy. Pakistan is no Gaza, and its Army is no Hamas. Plus, both Pakistan and India are nuclear weapons powers, with Pakistan having a very low threshold of using a nuclear weapon. Therefore, a full-scale military operation has to be undertaken with due consideration, if at all.

advertisement

The Balakot airstrike may have demonstrated that India has shed its strategic reluctance to cross the LoC. But it is also now evident that the one-off strike had limited deterrent value for Pakistan. Therefore, any strategy India now adopts, including kinetic options, must ensure that it “keeps the Pakistani head down” sufficiently so that it is never again able to even think of another Pahalgam.

(Col Rajeev Agarwal is a Foreign Policy Expert and a Senior Research Consultant at Chintan Research Foundation, New Delhi.)

– Ends

(Views expressed in this opinion piece are those of the author)

Published By: Akshita Singh Published On: Apr 25, 2025

Tune In

European leaders hold talks with Iran as strikes continue

Image source, EPA Image caption, Iran’s foreign minister attended talks in Geneva today with some of his European counterparts

Eight days into the latest conflict between Iran and Israel, and Iran’s foreign minister has met with some of his European counterparts for talks in Geneva – as part of an effort to ease tensions.

Speaking to reporters afterwards, UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy said he and his fellow Europeans were “keen” to continue “ongoing discussions” on negotiations with Iran.

While Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Iran was only ready to consider diplomacy “once the aggression is stopped”.

Shortly afterwards, US President Donald Trump cast doubt over the impact European ministers had today, saying that “Iran doesn’t want to speak to Europe, Iran wants to speak to us”.

And away from the talks in Europe, Israel and Iran have continued to trade strikes.

Dozens of people were injured earlier today in strikes in Israel, according to its emergency service Magen David Adom (MDA). Overnight Israel said it had about 60 jets hitting targets around the Iranian capital Tehran.

We’re ending our live coverage shortly. For more you can read our news story here.

You can keep up to date with the latest updates in our new live page.