Middle East
Netanyahu publicly backs Trump’s Gaza plan while vowing never to withdraw troops
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has approved a plan by former US President Donald Trump that does not reference a Palestinian state and leaves the process for the Israeli army’s withdrawal from Gaza ambiguous. Immediately after the announcement, Netanyahu spoke to the Hebrew press about the Israeli army’s withdrawal from Gaza, stating, “Never, such a thing will not happen.”
US President Trump, alongside Netanyahu, announced the text prepared after contacts with the leaders of eight countries, including Turkey. Stating that “Arab and Muslim countries have given written commitment to this process,” Trump assigned these nations the task of “disarming Hamas.” Netanyahu, in turn, announced his approval of the plan with the words, “we are achieving our war objectives.”
20 articles, not 21
The draft envisages the disarmament of Hamas and the placement of Gaza under the supervision of an international board led by the US. The proposal, initially referred to as having 21 articles, was presented in its final form with 20 articles. It was shared that during the summit, Israel apologized for its attack on Qatar, and in this context, Qatar would support the plan.
At the press conference, Trump announced that Netanyahu had accepted the plan. Netanyahu confirmed this, warning that if Hamas rejects the offer, Israel will “finish the job on its own.” Trump said, “If Hamas refuses, I have full support for Israel to destroy Hamas.”
Withdrawal schedule: “Thresholds” and mapped stages
The Israeli side had the withdrawal clauses in the initial US draft revised in its favor. The first version stated, “Israeli forces will withdraw to the lines of battle from the date the proposal prepared by [US special envoy Steve] Witkoff for the release of hostages is presented.” In the accepted text, the phrase “mutually agreed-upon line” was adopted, and a three-stage withdrawal timeline was presented with an accompanying map.
According to this, even after the first withdrawal, the Israeli army will be able to maintain its presence in a large part of Gaza. The current positions will be held until the International Stability Force (ISF), composed of Arab and Muslim countries, enters the field and effectively disarms Hamas. Even in the second stage, the army is projected to remain in more than a third of Gaza. When the third stage is completed and the final troops depart, a security buffer will be constructed around the entire perimeter of Gaza.
The updated text frames the withdrawal in Israel’s favor as follows: The army will withdraw in line with “disarmament standards, milestones, and timelines” to be agreed upon with the ISF, guarantors, and the US. In practice, until a full withdrawal occurs, it will gradually hand over the areas it controls to the ISF along with a transitional authority; a “security perimeter” presence will continue against any resurgent terrorist threat.

The White House has published a map which shows the three-stage withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza.
Conditions for disarmament
It was reported that changes were also made to the disarmament sections following long discussions between Netanyahu, Steve Witkoff, and Trump’s son-in-law and former senior advisor, Jared Kushner. While the previous version foresaw “amnesty for Hamas members who commit to peaceful coexistence,” the new text requires these individuals to “decommission” their weapons.
The plan also includes the provision that “all military, terrorist, and offensive infrastructure, including tunnels and weapons production facilities, shall be destroyed and not re-established.” The disarmament will be conducted under the supervision of independent auditors; the permanent disabling of weapons will be carried out through an agreed-upon disposal process, supported by internationally funded buy-back and reintegration programs, and verified by auditors.
Emphasis on phased withdrawal
Trump stated that as part of the plan, Israel will withdraw from Gaza “in phases,” adding that “Arab and Muslim countries will deal with Hamas.” Trump conveyed that these countries would support the training of local security elements in and around Gaza, saying, “Together with the transitional administration, the parties will agree on a timeline for the phased withdrawal of Israeli forces. Israel will withdraw in stages; they will no longer open fire.”
“We are approaching our war objectives”
Netanyahu argued that the plan brings Israel closer to its objectives. He said that the region would be demilitarized in proportion to the “disarmament” of Gaza, while the army would remain within a security perimeter for an indefinite period: “There will be a peaceful, civilian administration in Gaza; this administration will not be run by the Palestinian Authority or Hamas.”
“Never, such a thing will not happen”
However, in a statement made in Hebrew after the summit, Netanyahu said he had no intention of withdrawing Israeli soldiers from Gaza:
“This is a historic visit. Hamas was going to isolate us; we turned the tables and isolated Hamas. Now the whole world, including the Arab and Muslim world, is pressuring Hamas to accept the conditions we set with President Trump: the release of all our hostages, both the living and the deceased, while the Israeli army remains in most of the Gaza Strip. Who would have believed it? In the end, people keep saying, ‘The army must withdraw’… Never, such a thing will not happen.”
When asked, “Did you agree to a Palestinian state?” he said the following: “Absolutely not. The agreement does not say such a thing, but we did say one thing: that we will stand firmly against a Palestinian state. President Trump said this as well. He expressed that he understood. He also stated at the UN that this would be a great reward for terror and a danger to the state of Israel; naturally, we will not agree to it.”
Since the beginning of the war, Hamas has been demanding Israel’s complete withdrawal from Gaza in exchange for the hostages. Although it has indicated it might be willing to step back from governing Gaza, giving up its weapons remains a red line, as it considers them vital for maintaining the organization’s influence in the strip.
Governance architecture: “Peace Council” and transitional authority
Trump said that if the plan is accepted, a transitional authority will be established in Gaza, and figures including former British Prime Minister Tony Blair could take on roles. He announced that the international supervisory body would be named the “Peace Council” and that he would preside over it.
Regional commitments and expectations
Trump stated that if Hamas accepts the proposal, the Israeli hostages will be released within 72 hours at the latest: “This plan means an immediate end to the war. Arab and Muslim countries have made a written commitment; I trust their word to demilitarize Gaza.”
Praising the leaders of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, Jordan, Turkey, Egypt, Pakistan, and Indonesia during his contacts within the scope of the UN General Assembly, Trump said that Hamas would not be included in the process and that if it refused, he would give “full support” to Israel. In his speech, he argued that the Abraham Accords should continue and that even Iran could be included in this framework.
Apology and continuation regarding the crisis with Qatar
During the summit at the White House, it was announced that Netanyahu apologized to Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani for the attack in Doha. According to information confirmed by the White House, Israel, and Qatar, in a trilateral phone call, Netanyahu expressed his regret for the attack that led to the death of a Qatari soldier, apologized for the violation of Qatar’s sovereignty, and pledged that a similar attack would not be repeated. Following this apology, Qatar announced its readiness to participate in efforts to end the war in Gaza within the framework of Trump’s initiative.
Middle East
US submits draft IAEA resolution demanding immediate Iranian cooperation on enriched uranium
The United States has approached the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to determine the fate of Iran’s highly enriched uranium.
According to a report by Reuters, which cited diplomatic sources and obtained a draft resolution prepared by the US and presented to member states, Tehran is being called upon to provide the agency with precise and clear information regarding its nuclear material accounting and monitored nuclear facilities.
The text drafted by the US demands that the Tehran administration grant all necessary access permissions required to verify this information. The draft resolution emphasizes that Iran’s cooperation is a vital and urgent necessity, stating that the process must be executed without any delay.
The current draft does not yet include a referral to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), which would typically be expected following an IAEA resolution declaring that Iran has violated its obligations under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). That violation decision was issued on June 12, 2025, one day before a 12-day war waged by the US and Israel against Iran last year. Diplomats speaking to Reuters indicated that the option of referring the matter to the UNSC remains under evaluation.
The Al Mayadeen television channel also reported, based on a copy of the draft resolution it obtained, that Washington is lobbying member states of the IAEA Board of Governors intensively to support its position.
These diplomatic moves coincide with a call from IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi for renewed engagement with Tehran. In his statement, Grossi said, “I call on Iran to work constructively with the agency to facilitate the full and effective implementation of safeguards in Iran. Re-engaging is of utmost importance.”
Reuters had previously reported in early June that the US was preparing a draft resolution to censure Iran at the upcoming IAEA meeting.
The Tehran administration continues to accuse the IAEA of systematically leaking sensitive and confidential information to Israel. At the end of the 12-day war last year, the US targeted Iran’s critical nuclear facilities and claimed to have destroyed Tehran’s entire nuclear program. However, intelligence assessments at the time revealed that Washington’s claims did not reflect reality.
Since those attacks, the IAEA has been requesting access to the struck nuclear facilities for inspection purposes. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi characterized the agency’s request last year as malicious.
In early April, Washington announced it had launched a rescue operation for a pilot downed in Iranian airspace. However, during the operation, US forces encountered stiff resistance from Iranian soldiers and, according to reports in the press, lost numerous aerial assets.
Following these developments, the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement suggesting that the military move conducted by the US under the guise of a pilot rescue operation may have been part of a deceptive and covert mission with the actual objective of stealing enriched uranium.
Middle East
IAEA reports no major change in Iran nuclear assessment despite three months of conflict
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported no major changes in its assessments of Iran’s nuclear program since clashes between the US, Israel, and Iran began approximately three months ago, according to a report sent to United Nations (UN) member states on Thursday.
The confidential report, reviewed by the Reuters news agency ahead of next week’s meeting of the IAEA’s 35-nation Board of Governors, revealed very few differences compared to previous reports prepared before the conflict began.
In the report, the agency reiterated its call for Iranian officials to provide updated information on the status of their enriched uranium stockpiles.
According to Reuters, the report stated: “The Director General has stressed that the effective implementation of Iran’s Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) Safeguards Agreement is mandatory and urgent, and that this implementation cannot be suspended by Iran under any circumstances.”
Since Israel and the US bombed the nuclear installations for the first time last June, the UN nuclear watchdog has been unable to return to these sites, and Iran has not shared updated data regarding the status of its stockpiles.
“The issue of the Agency losing continuity of knowledge regarding all previously declared nuclear material at the affected facilities in Iran needs to be addressed with extreme urgency,” the confidential report warned, referring to the sites affected by the US and Israeli bombardments.
Iran’s nuclear program became one of the primary triggers of the conflict, with the Trump administration asserting that Iran posed an “imminent nuclear threat.”
The issue also represents one of the greatest impasses in the recent round of negotiations aimed at ending the conflict.
Nevertheless, both sides have reached a tentative agreement to extend the delicate ceasefire in the three-month conflict for an additional 60 days, reopen the Strait of Hormuz to transit, and establish a framework mechanism for comprehensive talks on the future of Iran’s nuclear program and stockpiles.
However, this emerging memorandum of understanding still awaits approval from President Donald Trump and Iranian leaders.
According to a report by The Associated Press, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio painted an optimistic picture of the talks between the US and Iran during his testimony on Tuesday before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the House Appropriations Subcommittee.
“Just a month ago, they agreed to negotiate certain aspects of their nuclear program that a year ago they refused to even mention,” Rubio told senators, later adding that instability within the Iranian leadership has complicated the talks.
Meanwhile, US Vice President JD Vance noted last Thursday that negotiators continue to exchange proposals on certain terms of the agreement, including Iran’s nuclear capacity.
Middle East
Qatar and UAE LNG tankers go dark in Strait of Hormuz to evade security risks
Qatar and United Arab Emirates liquefied natural gas (LNG) tankers are turning off their transponders in the Strait of Hormuz, shifting their logistical strategies in response to ongoing military conflict in the Middle East and the closure of the strategic waterway.
According to a Bloomberg report citing industry sources and vessel-tracking data, as time and patience run thin for both nations, tankers have begun operating under radio silence to conceal their movements and secure their LNG shipments.
The report noted that neither Qatar nor Abu Dhabi, the federal emirate of the UAE, is subject to international sanctions. Despite this, state-owned QatarEnergy and Abu Dhabi National Oil Co. (ADNOC) are employing these “going dark” tactics to minimize security risks for their vessels and crews transiting the Strait of Hormuz.
Vessel-tracking data revealed that in May, at least four Qatari LNG vessels and four tankers linked to Abu Dhabi-based ADNOC transited the Strait of Hormuz without transmitting tracking signals. Sources speaking to Bloomberg stated that Qatari authorities requested captains of state-owned and chartered tankers to turn off their Automatic Identification System (AIS) transponders when navigating around the Ras Laffan port—the world’s largest LNG export terminal—as well as when transiting or exiting the Persian Gulf.
The implemented security measures extend beyond turning off transponders. Sources reported that vessels have been instructed to transit the gulf in pairs to enhance security, and tanker captains who refused to comply with the “shadow” navigation protocols have been replaced.
Industry sources speaking to Bloomberg warned that the increase in covert transits undermines the fundamental rules of international maritime trade and transforms these shipping routes into high-risk areas.
They emphasized that until recently, every cargo in the LNG sector could be tracked in real time, but these newly adopted tactics have eliminated that transparency.
Saul Kavonic, a senior energy analyst at energy consultancy MST Marquee, commented on the situation, saying: “It is entirely natural for Persian Gulf LNG producers to try to avoid Iranian attacks and consequently adopt shadow fleet methods. This could persist as long as Iran continues to control and threaten transits through the Strait of Hormuz. This practice may continue for a long time even after a peace agreement is signed.”
Following the start of US and Israeli attacks on Iran, the Tehran government closed the Strait of Hormuz, a choke point for approximately 20% of global oil shipments and 30% of global liquefied natural gas.
After negotiations in Islamabad failed, US President Donald Trump announced on April 13 that he would impose a blockade on Iranian ports. In late May, he announced that the blockade was lifted as part of the planned peace treaty process with Tehran.
-
Middle East2 weeks agoLeaked documents show IRGC routed Chinese military equipment through UAE
-
Asia2 weeks agoChina launches long-duration Tiangong mission ahead of planned Moon landing
-
Middle East2 weeks agoIran says Hormuz transit will remain free but ships must cover operational costs
-
Europe2 weeks agoFrench justice minister calls for three-year halt to legal immigration
-
America2 weeks agoUS seeks new tungsten supplies after Iran war drains military stockpiles
-
America1 week agoUS Marines test lower-cost counter-drone system to reduce missile dependence
-
Russia2 weeks agoRussia moves to privatize major oil port operator amid widening budget deficit
-
Europe1 week agoUkraine reburies OUN leader Melnyk as Poland and Israel condemn honoring of wartime nationalist figures
