In a joint statement, the foreign ministers of the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Indonesia, Pakistan, Turkey, Qatar and Egypt said they supported steps announced by Hamas, including the release of hostages — alive or deceased — and the group’s readiness to transfer administration of Gaza to a transitional Palestinian committee of independent technocrats.

The ministers also endorsed President Trump’s call on Israel to halt its military campaign and begin implementing an exchange agreement linked to the proposal. They described the US leader’s commitment to peace as “an opportunity to achieve a ceasefire and address the critical conditions facing the people of Gaza”.

The ministers urged the launch of immediate negotiations to agree on practical mechanisms for implementing the plan. They stressed the need for unrestricted humanitarian aid deliveries, the prevention of Palestinian displacement, and guarantees for the security of civilians.

The joint statement also called for the return of the Palestinian Authority to Gaza and efforts to unify governance across Gaza and the West Bank.

The ministers underlined that any agreement must include a security mechanism to protect all sides, ensure a full Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, and pave the way for reconstruction. They reiterated support for a “just peace” based on the two-state solution.

The statement marks a rare moment of regional alignment on Gaza’s future, though much depends on whether the proposal gains traction with Israel and key international stakeholders.

While the summit in New York could boost the morale of Palestinians, it is not expected to deliver change on the ground, where the most far-right government in Israel’s history has declared there will be no Palestinian state as it pushes on with its fight against militant group Hamas.

The two-state solution was the bedrock of the U.S.-backed peace process ushered in by the 1993 Oslo Accords. The process suffered heavy pushback from both sides and has all but died.

Israeli Ambassador Calls Summit a ‘Circus’

Israel and the United States will boycott the summit, Israel’s U.N. Ambassador Danny Danon, said, describing the event as a “circus.”

Britain, Canada, Australia and Portugal all recognised a Palestinian state on Sunday. France and five other states are expected to also formally do so on Monday at the meeting ahead of the United Nations General Assembly.

While the majority of European countries now recognise a Palestinian state, both Germany and Italy have signalled they are unlikely to make such a move soon.

Germany — long a strong supporter of Israel because of its responsibility for the Holocaust — has grown more critical of Israeli policy, while insisting that recognition of a Palestinian state should come at the end of a political process to agree on a two-state solution.

The German government spokesperson also said on Monday there must be no further annexations in Israeli-occupied territory.

Italy said recognising a Palestinian state could be “counterproductive”.

Russia still believes that a two-state solution is the only way to settle the conflict, the Kremlin said on Monday.

“This remains our approach, and we believe that it is the only possible way to find a solution to this extremely complex, long-standing conflict, which is now perhaps at its most acute and tragic stage in its entire history,” Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told reporters.

Israeli Response May Include West Bank Annexation

Israel has become isolated and drawn global condemnation over its military conduct in Gaza, where more than 65,000 Palestinians have been killed, according to local health authorities.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has rejected numerous calls to end the campaign until Hamas is destroyed and has said he will not recognise a Palestinian state. Netanyahu said in a statement on Sunday he will announce Israel’s response when he returns from the U.S., where he is scheduled to meet U.S. President Donald Trump.

Israel is considering annexing part of the occupied West Bank as a possible response as well as specific bilateral measures against Paris, Israeli officials have said, even though the recognitions are expected to be largely symbolic.

Annexation could backfire and alienate key countries like the United Arab Emirates, a global oil power and trade hub with wide diplomatic clout across the Middle East.

The United Arab Emirates, the most prominent of the Arab states that normalised ties with Israel under the U.S.-brokered Abraham Accords in 2020, has said such a move would undermine the spirit of the agreement.

The U.S. administration has also warned of possible consequences for those who take measures against Israel, including against France, whose president, Emmanuel Macron, is hosting the New York summit.

The summit follows Israel’s launch of a long-threatened ground assault on Gaza City with few prospects for a ceasefire two years after Palestinian Islamist militants Hamas attacked Israel, triggering the war in the Palestinian enclave.

France Says Declaration Shows Commitment To Two-State Solution

Amid Israel’s intensified Gaza offensive and escalating violence by Israeli settlers in the West Bank, there is a growing sense of urgency to act now before the idea of a two-state solution vanishes forever.

“The decision that the President of the Republic will present this afternoon to the United Nations General Assembly is a symbolic, immediate, political decision that demonstrates France’s commitment to the two-state solution,” French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot told television channel TF1.

France has driven the move, hoping that Macron’s announcement in July that he would recognise a Palestinian state would give greater momentum to a movement hitherto dominated by smaller nations that are generally more critical of Israel.

In Gaza, some Palestinians found little relief in statehood recognition as they fled Israeli attacks on Gaza City on Sunday.

“Even if countries such as Australia, Canada, and France —who are now among those initiating this recognition — acknowledge Palestine, I believe there will still be no serious pressure on Israel to grant the Palestinians their rights,” said displaced Palestinian Nabeel Jaber.

In Tel Aviv, Israelis said the Palestinians turned down many chances to establish a state in the past.

“We’ve offered them peace about five times. They could have agreed to any one of those, and they never, ever chose peace. So why do we need to choose peace with people who want to kidnap, murder, rape our people? I don’t think we need to do that,” said film student Tamara Raveh, 25.

The development signals a potential shift in the group’s posture amid increasing diplomatic momentum and heightened security concerns for its leadership.

Among those reportedly ordered to disarm are high-ranking figures central to Hamas’s military, financial, and diplomatic operations:

Khalil al-Hayya, head of Hamas’s negotiating delegation,

Zaher Jabarin, the group’s chief financier, and

Muhammad Ismail Darwish, head of the religious council and liaison to Turkey and Iran.

According to Israeli media outlet Ynet, al-Hayya, who has been a key figure in hostage negotiations, has become acutely concerned for his safety since Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz publicly named him as the next assassination target.

These fears have reportedly influenced al-Hayya’s stance at the negotiation table. Insiders say he has now expressed openness to the latest ceasefire draft and is no longer opposing a temporary truce—a marked departure from earlier Hamas demands for a total end to the war before any hostage release.

Qatar’s reported demand that al-Hayya and his security team surrender their weapons has further deepened his sense of vulnerability. Analysts suggest that this disarmament may improve the chances of Hamas accepting the proposed ceasefire, which includes phased hostage releases in exchange for a halt in hostilities.

Israeli officials have expressed cautious optimism. “There is cause for hope,” a senior official in Jerusalem said, echoing similar sentiments from international diplomats who believe that a resolution may finally be within reach.

“There’s a big opportunity right now,” one diplomat briefed on the negotiations told the Associated Press. “The signals we’re getting show that people are ready.”

The diplomat added that former U.S. President Donald Trump’s recent sharp criticism of Israel has inadvertently emboldened Hamas by suggesting that Washington may now act as a more assertive guarantor in any future deal—something Hamas has long demanded.

Meanwhile, sources close to Hamas told Saudi daily Al Akhbar that the group was “satisfied” with new language added to the ceasefire proposal. The updated version reportedly includes stronger guarantees to end the war—an essential condition for Hamas to accept any deal.

A formal response from Hamas is expected by Friday. However, the nature and scope of American guarantees remain undisclosed.

Israeli officials have downplayed the significance of these foreign assurances.

“Israel is not bound by commitments made by the United States or any mediator,” one official stated.

Yet the road ahead is perilous. As Dr. Aluwaisheg warns, if nuclear diplomacy fails, the region could face a far darker scenario: a nuclear arms race.

The recent ceasefire between Iran and Israel, brokered under the decisive leadership of US President Donald Trump, marks a critical pause in a dangerous regional escalation. While missiles have stopped flying—for now—the deeper geopolitical implications are far from settled. As Dr. Abdel Aziz Aluwaisheg, the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Assistant Secretary-General for Political Affairs and Negotiation, noted in his recent analysis for Arab News, the fragile truce carries high stakes—not just for Iran and Israel, but for the entire Middle East.

Though writing in a personal capacity, Dr. Aluwaisheg’s insights reflect the strategic calculations within GCC circles, especially following Iran’s unprecedented missile attack on Qatar—an act that sent shockwaves through a region already teetering on the edge of conflict.

Qatar: From Mediator to Target

On June 24, GCC foreign ministers met in Doha to express solidarity with Qatar after it became the unlikely target of Iranian missile fire. The attack caused no casualties or major damage, but its symbolism was alarming: Iran had, for the first time in recent memory, directly attacked Qatari soil.

What made the move even more perplexing is Qatar’s longstanding dual-track diplomacy. As Dr. Aluwaisheg observed, Doha has “cultivated a close rapport with Tehran while maintaining good relations with the US,” which operates a major military base in the country. Qatar has often positioned itself as a neutral mediator between Iran and the West. Iran’s decision to attack such a partner was seen by GCC officials as a shocking betrayal of regional norms.

The GCC ministers swiftly condemned the strike, invoking the 2000 Mutual Defense Treaty, which binds all six member states to respond collectively to external aggression. “An attack on one state,” the Council reaffirmed, “is an attack on all.”

Qatar’s ability to intercept most of the incoming missiles was praised, but the attack raised troubling questions: Was it a warning shot from Tehran to discourage further mediation? Or a miscalculation that could unravel years of GCC-Iran engagement?

Trump’s Diplomatic Gamble Pays—For Now

One of the most striking elements of Dr. Aluwaisheg’s commentary is his acknowledgment of President Donald Trump’s role in halting the 12-day Iran-Israel conflict. While Trump is rarely praised for subtle diplomacy, this time, even GCC ministers applauded his intervention.

“Trump gave a rare public rebuke of Israel’s prime minister after Netanyahu violated the ceasefire,” Dr. Aluwaisheg wrote, calling the move both decisive and surprising.

With help from his Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, Trump managed to steer both parties toward a temporary truce, creating an opening to resume nuclear negotiations. Talks that had been hosted in Oman were abruptly derailed following Israel’s June 13 strikes on Iranian nuclear infrastructure.

Now, with the dust settling—at least temporarily—the United States has a chance to re-engage Tehran diplomatically. “The cessation of hostilities,” Aluwaisheg emphasized, “provides an opportunity to return to the nuclear talks.”

A Nuclear Domino Effect?

Yet the road ahead is perilous. As Dr. Aluwaisheg warns, if nuclear diplomacy fails, the region could face a far darker scenario: a nuclear arms race.

“If Iran decides to go nuclear militarily,” he wrote, “other states in the region could do the same,” thereby ushering in a destabilizing cascade of proliferation. Such a development would not only isolate Iran—comparable to North Korea’s pariah status—but also divert much-needed resources away from its struggling population. The country would face prolonged sanctions, making economic reintegration nearly impossible.

Equally worrying is the potential collapse of regional diplomatic efforts. Proposals for GCC-Iran integration, built over years of quiet talks and confidence-building, would likely be shelved indefinitely.

Fragile Truce, Heavy Stakes

Dr. Aluwaisheg describes the current ceasefire as “informal and fragile,” a phrase that encapsulates the precarious balance in the region. With mutual mistrust running deep and hardliners on all sides eager to sabotage progress, even the slightest miscalculation could reignite hostilities.

It is precisely this fragility that makes diplomatic momentum so vital. The International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) June 12 finding that Iran was in non-compliance with its nuclear obligations adds an important layer of accountability. Unlike political accusations, these are verified facts from a respected UN agency. They provide a solid foundation for future negotiations—if all parties are willing.

Gaza: The Other War

While attention was fixated on Tehran and Tel Aviv, the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza has worsened. The GCC foreign ministers, building on the momentum of the Iran-Israel ceasefire, called on President Trump to use his influence to bring an end to the war on Gaza.

Dr. Aluwaisheg did not mince words. “The US should not support Israel’s sadistic policies of siege, starvation, and mass executions of helpless Gazans,” he wrote, describing the ongoing crisis as a “deliberate extermination of innocent women and children.”

The call is clear: the same urgency that was applied to defusing the Iran-Israel conflict must now be redirected to Gaza, where daily suffering continues unabated.

Securing the Region’s Lifelines

Beyond human costs, the strategic implications of prolonged instability are immense. The GCC ministers emphasized the need to secure maritime passageways and energy routes, as the Gulf supplies nearly 50% of the world’s oil and 25% of its gas. Any disruption could trigger global economic tremors.

For this reason, the GCC’s alignment with US-led diplomacy is not just about political posturing—it’s about survival. Regional stability underpins global energy security and economic equilibrium.

A Nobel Moment or a Missed Opportunity?

As the region stands at a crossroads, the path forward hinges on diplomatic resolve. The Trump administration, buoyed by its success in halting the Iran-Israel war, has an opportunity to lead broader peace efforts. The question is whether it can—or will—seize it.

As Dr. Aluwaisheg concludes, the chance to prevent catastrophe and pursue diplomacy must not be squandered. “He [Trump] will undoubtedly edge closer to his goal of getting a Nobel Peace Prize,” he notes, “if he and his team continue on this path.”

Whether history remembers this moment as the start of a new diplomatic era or a brief lull before greater conflict depends on what happens next. The stakes could not be higher.

While international headlines now center on Iran’s unprecedented missile strike on Israel, Gaza’s humanitarian catastrophe has largely vanished from the global conscience. The enclave, already reeling from nearly two years of conflict, continues to endure relentless aerial assaults, a crumbling health system, and a widening starvation crisis.

The fate of 53 Israeli hostages still held by Hamas—a driving pretext for Israel’s ongoing war—has also faded from the news cycle, as attention pivots to the possibility of a broader regional war. But inside Gaza, where destruction is measured not in headlines but in collapsed homes and silent morgues, hope has never felt more distant.

Rising Death Toll and Infrastructure Collapse

According to Gaza’s Hamas-run Health Ministry, at least 202 Palestinians were killed and 1,037 injured in just the last 48 hours, bringing the total death toll to staggering heights.

UNICEF reports that only 40% of water infrastructure remains functional. Most sewage systems have ceased operating entirely, threatening disease outbreaks in already overcrowded shelters. Over 70% of Gaza’s communication networks have been destroyed, severely impeding rescue efforts and aid coordination.

In scenes that mirror a dystopian nightmare, civilians lining up for food in Khan Younis and Rafah were reportedly met with live fire, with footage capturing children ducking for cover. Multiple casualties were confirmed in incidents where humanitarian queues became deadly battlegrounds.

Gaza Reacts to Iran-Israel Escalation

Amid the humanitarian breakdown, the Israel-Iran war has sparked a mix of hope and skepticism on Gaza’s streets.

Slogans like “From Gaza to Tehran — One Front” have begun appearing in graffiti and social media posts. Palestinian factions, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad, have expressed vocal solidarity with Iran and its proxies in Lebanon and Iraq. For them, Iran’s direct military strike on Israel is being cast as an act of “Muslim unity” against a common adversary.

“For the first time, the missiles didn’t fall on us, but on Israel,” said Abu Abdallah, a 32-year-old resident of Gaza. “That alone makes us feel like we’re not alone anymore.”

For others, like 52-year-old Majed Abu Hamza, symbolism is enough: “Anyone who attacks Israel is seen as a hero by Palestinians, whether or not we agree with their ideology. Iran gives us hope—any hope is better than none.”

Doubts About Iran’s Intentions

But the praise is far from unanimous. A deeper current of skepticism runs beneath the slogans.

“We’ve been dying here for two years,” said Mahmoud Farhat, another Gazan. “Where was Iran’s help when we were being bombed every day? Now they fire missiles only after their nuclear sites are hit—and suddenly we’re supposed to believe they’re defending us? That’s laughable.”

This sentiment reveals the delicate balance between political opportunism and genuine solidarity—where even the oppressed question whether they’re pawns in someone else’s war.

Humanitarian Aid Amid Chaos

Despite the escalating conflict, efforts to deliver aid persist—though at a pace nowhere near the scale of need.

The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) distributed over 1.27 million food portions on Saturday in three key locations. Yet logistical nightmares continue. The Kerem Shalom crossing remains periodically shut, and the Iran-Israel confrontation has only deepened the chaos.

“Large parts of Gaza are now inaccessible,” said Acting GHF Director John Ackrey. “We are working with Israeli authorities to open more delivery points in the north, but the window is narrowing fast.”

As the Iran-Israel confrontation threatens to spiral into a broader regional war, Gaza remains trapped in a deepening nightmare—voiceless, wounded, and uncertain whether the missiles overhead are signs of rescue or harbingers of more ruin. While slogans and strikes make headlines, what Gaza needs most now is not rhetoric, but relief.

The high-level statement came just days after Israel launched preemptive strikes on Iranian military installations—an operation it claims was aimed at preventing Tehran from advancing toward nuclear weapon capabilities. Iran responded with retaliatory attacks, triggering a new phase in the already volatile regional dynamics since the outbreak of the Gaza war in October 2023.

“We affirm that Israel has a right to defend itself. We reiterate our support for the security of Israel,” read the G7 communiqué, which also emphasized that “Iran is the principal source of regional instability and terror.”

The leaders of the G7—comprising the United States, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, Canada, and Japan—also reiterated a critical demand: “Iran can never be allowed to possess a nuclear weapon.”

Rising Death Toll and Escalation Fears

The conflict has already resulted in tragic civilian casualties. Iranian sources report over 220 deaths, including women and children, while Israel has confirmed 24 civilian fatalities. Both sides have accused each other of targeting civilian infrastructure, heightening fears of further escalation.

On Monday, an Israeli airstrike reportedly targeted Iran’s state broadcaster headquarters, intensifying panic among Tehran’s residents. U.S. President Donald Trump, attending the G7 summit in Canada, abruptly announced his early departure to return to Washington, citing the urgent regional developments.

In a social media post, Trump warned: “Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran.”

U.S. Stance: Awareness Without Involvement?

While the United States has publicly distanced itself from direct involvement in the Israeli operations, Trump admitted that Washington had prior knowledge of the strikes and called them “excellent.” Nevertheless, the U.S. has issued stern warnings to Iran not to retaliate against American personnel or assets stationed in the region.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio held a series of calls with foreign counterparts in Europe to coordinate diplomatic responses and assess regional fallout. Despite the heated tensions, Washington maintains that it still seeks a nuclear agreement with Iran—underscoring the fragile balance between deterrence and diplomacy.

Nuclear Standoff: Two Realities

Iran has long denied ambitions to build nuclear weapons, insisting its nuclear activities are for peaceful energy purposes as permitted under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), to which it is a signatory.

In contrast, Israel—while not a party to the NPT—is widely believed to possess an undeclared nuclear arsenal. It neither confirms nor denies this status, maintaining a policy of strategic ambiguity.

Call for Regional De-escalation and Gaza Ceasefire

Beyond the immediate hostilities between Israel and Iran, the G7 emphasized the need for a broader ceasefire across the Middle East, including Gaza.

“We urge that the resolution of the Iranian crisis leads to a broader de-escalation of hostilities in the Middle East, including a ceasefire in Gaza,” the statement read.

The G7 also expressed readiness to collaborate in ensuring energy market stability, amid concerns that the conflict could disrupt global oil supply lines and inflate prices.

As tensions remain high, international observers warn that without swift and strategic diplomacy, the Israel-Iran showdown could spiral into a multi-front conflict with far-reaching global implications.

On board was Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg, along with 11 other crew members including Rima Hassan, a French Member of the European Parliament.

The vessel, operated by the Freedom Flotilla Coalition (FFC), carried a modest consignment of humanitarian aid—baby formula and rice—intended for civilians in Gaza, where the United Nations has warned of looming famine and mass displacement following months of war.

Seized in International Waters

According to a statement by the FFC, Israeli forces boarded the vessel at around 2:00 a.m. local time while it was still in international waters. A dramatic image shared by the coalition shows crew members sitting with hands raised, illuminated by intense spotlights.

Israeli authorities later confirmed the interception, stating that the crew was unharmed and en route to the Israeli port of Ashdod. “The ‘selfie yacht’ of the ‘celebrities’ is safely making its way to Israeli shores. The passengers are expected to return to their home countries,” wrote Israel’s Foreign Ministry on X (formerly Twitter).

The ministry added that the activists were “provided with sandwiches and water,” before bluntly concluding: “The show is over.”

Detentions and Defiance

The crew has reportedly been detained for interrogation. Rima Hassan posted on X, “The crew of the Freedom Flotilla was arrested by the Israeli army in international waters around 2 a.m.,” reaffirming their resolve by sharing the image of the crew’s detention.

In response, climate activist Greta Thunberg has yet to issue a direct statement, but supporters have called the seizure a blatant act of aggression against peaceful humanitarian efforts.

The Israeli Defense Ministry, however, defended the operation. Defense Minister Yoav Gallant said he had authorized the naval action to prevent what he labeled a “propaganda exercise supporting Hamas,” and confirmed that the intercepted aid would be routed through “official humanitarian channels.”

A Polarizing Mission

The Madleen’s voyage was never about scale—it carried only a symbolic amount of aid. But its intent was powerful: to highlight the severe humanitarian crisis in Gaza and challenge the legality and morality of Israel’s long-standing naval blockade.

Israel has enforced the blockade since 2007, after Hamas seized control of the coastal enclave. While Israel and its allies justify the measure as essential to preventing arms smuggling, critics argue it constitutes collective punishment against Gaza’s 2.3 million residents.

The situation has worsened dramatically since the October 7, 2023, Hamas-led attack on southern Israel, which killed over 1,200 people and led to the abduction of more than 250 individuals, according to Israeli sources.

In response, Israel launched a relentless military campaign that has killed over 54,000 Palestinians and displaced the vast majority of Gaza’s population, according to the Gaza Health Ministry.

International Support and Condemnation

The United Nations’ Special Rapporteur on the Palestinian Territories, Francesca Albanese, voiced strong support for the flotilla’s efforts.

In a post on X, she wrote, “Madleen’s journey may have ended, but the mission isn’t over. Every Mediterranean port must send boats with aid & solidarity to Gaza.”

Hamas condemned the seizure of the vessel, calling it “state terrorism” and saluting the activists for their “moral courage” and “solidarity with the oppressed.”

Meanwhile, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz revealed a provocative plan to show the detained activists videos of the October 7 Hamas attacks upon their arrival at Ashdod Port. “They need to see what they are defending,” he declared.

A Legacy of Flotillas

The interception of the Madleen echoes earlier flotilla efforts to challenge Israel’s blockade. The most infamous incident occurred in 2010, when Israeli commandos stormed the Mavi Marmara, a Turkish vessel, killing ten activists in an operation that strained Israel’s diplomatic ties with Turkey and ignited international outrage.

While this week’s operation ended without violence, it has once again exposed the raw tensions surrounding Gaza and the sharply diverging narratives around activism, security, and human rights.

The Freedom Flotilla Coalition said its mission is far from over. “We are not deterred. More ships will sail. The people of Gaza are not forgotten,” it said in a statement.

Aid Symbolism vs. Political Narrative

Though the Madleen carried only a symbolic quantity of aid, its interception has transformed it into a powerful political message. For supporters of Gaza, it represents solidarity against a prolonged humanitarian siege. For Israel, it is a line that cannot be crossed without invoking national security concerns.

This confrontation, once again, places the international community at a crossroads: should symbolic activism be embraced as a tool to spotlight suffering, or be condemned as a political stunt that complicates diplomacy and security?

Whatever the answer, the image of Greta Thunberg—more often associated with climate marches and UN podiums—being escorted by naval forces in a geopolitical flashpoint, has thrust the Gaza crisis back into the global spotlight.

Macron’s remarks, delivered during a state visit to Singapore, called on European nations to reconsider their diplomatic posture toward Israel, warning that the continuation of the status quo in Gaza was morally and politically untenable.

“If the situation in Gaza continues to deteriorate, Europe must adopt a hardened stance,” Macron said, adding that such a stance would involve “dropping the assumption that human rights are being respected, and applying sanctions.”

He further declared that recognizing a Palestinian state under conditions was “not only a moral duty, but a political necessity,” signaling a shift in France’s approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

In a swift and scathing response, Israel’s Foreign Ministry issued a statement denouncing Macron’s position. “There is no humanitarian blockade. That is a blatant lie,” the statement said, defending Israeli efforts to facilitate humanitarian aid into Gaza.

“But instead of applying pressure on the jihadist terrorists, Macron wants to reward them with a Palestinian state,” the ministry added. “No doubt its national day will be October 7,” referencing the date of Hamas’ surprise attacks in southern Israel in 2023.

The Israeli government’s unusually sharp rhetoric underscores growing diplomatic friction between Tel Aviv and European capitals, particularly as calls intensify for an immediate ceasefire and increased humanitarian access in Gaza.

Macron’s stance aligns with a broader European sentiment that the prolonged conflict and civilian toll in Gaza require a recalibration of the West’s policies toward Israel. While France has traditionally maintained strong ties with both Israel and the Arab world, the war in Gaza appears to be testing those diplomatic balances.

France has not formally recognized a Palestinian state but has indicated it may do so unilaterally if peace prospects remain blocked — a move Israel sees as undermining negotiations and rewarding extremist factions.

As Gaza’s humanitarian crisis deepens and global outrage mounts, Macron’s call may signal a turning point in European diplomacy — and a potential diplomatic rift with Israel.

The $24 million deal for Colt Carbine 5.56mm fully automatic rifles was officially notified to Congress by the State Department on March 6. The stated end user is the Israeli National Police.

A Controversial Deal

While the sale is relatively small compared to the billions of dollars in U.S. arms supplied to Israel, it has drawn significant attention due to previous concerns that the rifles could be used by extremist Israeli settlers in the occupied West Bank. The Biden administration had initially delayed the deal, citing fears that some of the weapons might end up in the hands of settlers involved in attacks on Palestinians.

Under Biden, the U.S. had imposed sanctions on individuals and entities linked to settler violence in the West Bank. However, on his first day in office on January 20, Trump rescinded those sanctions through an executive order, reversing U.S. policy. Since then, his administration has approved multiple arms sales to Israel worth billions of dollars.

The March 6 notification to Congress stated that the U.S. had considered “political, military, economic, human rights, and arms control” factors in approving the sale. However, the State Department did not confirm whether any assurances had been sought from Israel regarding how the rifles would be used.

Deepening U.S.-Israel Ties

Israel has occupied the West Bank since the 1967 Middle East war, and the settlements it has built there are widely considered illegal under international law—though Israel disputes this, citing historical and biblical connections to the land.

Violence by settlers against Palestinians had already been rising before the Gaza war erupted, and it has intensified since the conflict began over a year ago.

Trump has maintained close ties with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, promising unwavering support for Israel in its war against Hamas in Gaza. His administration has proceeded with multiple arms sales to Israel, even as some Democratic lawmakers have urged for pauses to review their potential impact.

On Thursday, the U.S. Senate overwhelmingly rejected an attempt to block $8.8 billion in arms sales to Israel due to human rights concerns. Senators voted 82-15 and 83-15 against two resolutions, introduced by Senator Bernie Sanders, which aimed to halt the sale of massive bombs and other offensive weapons.

Context of the Conflict

The rifle sale was initially put on hold after Democratic lawmakers demanded clarity on how Israel intended to use them. While congressional committees eventually cleared the deal, the Biden administration had kept it frozen.

The current phase of the long-running Israeli-Palestinian conflict began on October 7, 2023, when Hamas launched an attack on Israeli communities, killing 1,200 people and taking more than 250 hostages, according to Israeli sources. In response, Israel has carried out a military campaign that, according to Gaza health authorities, has killed more than 50,000 Palestinians.

Israel’s National Security Minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir—a far-right member of Netanyahu’s government—oversees the country’s police force. In November 2023, The Times of Israel reported that his ministry had placed “a heavy emphasis on arming civilian security squads” in the wake of the October 7 attacks.

This latest arms deal reflects the Trump administration’s continued push to support Israel militarily, despite concerns from human rights advocates and opposition from some U.S. lawmakers.