Netanyahu Rejects Trump’s Gaza Peace Plan, Insists No Israeli Withdrawal Until Hamas Is Fully Disarmed

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has publicly rejected the United States’ 15-point peace plan for Gaza, declaring that Israeli forces will not withdraw from the territory until Hamas is completely disarmed. The announcement marks a significant break with President Donald Trump and his Board of Peace just months before Israel’s October 27 elections. “Israel rejects the 15-point document,” Netanyahu said at a cabinet meeting on Sunday. 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,” he added.

The plan, announced by Trump’s Board of Peace in late July, was described by the US president as a “major milestone” towards ending the war in Gaza. The proposal includes complete disarmament of Hamas and other armed groups in Gaza, phased withdrawal of Israeli forces from the territory, transition to governance by a new Palestinian administration called the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG), deployment of an International Stabilisation Force to work alongside Palestinian police, and reconstruction of Gaza under the oversight of the Board of Peace. Netanyahu, however, has made clear that the sequencing is unacceptable to Israel. While the plan originally suggested Israel would begin pulling out forces in tandem with disarmament, the Board of Peace later backtracked after meeting Netanyahu, saying withdrawal would only occur after “complete” disarmament. Even this was apparently not enough for the Israeli leader.

Netanyahu insisted that Israel would only accept “genuine disarmament” of Hamas. “When I say Hamas is disarmed, that means the heavy weapons, the less heavy weapons, all the weapons,” he said. “We are talking about real disarmament, not fictitious disarmament,” Netanyahu emphasised, adding that Israel was raising its objections with the United States. “They have ideas; some of them are acceptable to us and some are not, and we know how to stand our ground on these matters,” he said.

READ ALSO:

• Biden condition deteriorates as cancer spreads to bones
• “Don’t Paint What Doesn’t Exist”: Kamo State Addresses Funke Akindele Speculation
• Onaiyekan: Is Tinubu insensitive to Nigerians’ plight? By Bolanle BOLAWOLE
• Osun 2026: Police arrest commissioner over APC rally gunshots as Adeleke alleges political intimidation

The Israeli prime minister used the occasion to reiterate his long-standing opposition to Palestinian statehood. “As long as I am prime minister, no Palestinian state will be established—not in Gaza and not in the West Bank,” he said. He added: “Neither ‘Fatahstan’ nor ‘Hamastan’.” This broad declaration suggests that the disagreement is not just about military tactics in Gaza but also about the fundamental political framework for the future of the territories.

Despite describing Trump as “our greatest friend in the White House,” Netanyahu made clear he was willing to challenge the US president. The rejection comes after more than a week of gradually escalating criticism of the plan. Netanyahu until recently campaigned on the strength of his relationship with Trump, who since his first term has taken unprecedented steps to back Israel. However, the two leaders have diverged on key issues, including Trump’s pursuit of a ceasefire with Iran in April.

Hamas, which announced days earlier it supported the plan, has linked disarmament to Israeli actions. The group said it would only implement the disarmament deal if Israel halted strikes in Gaza and pulled its troops back to the “yellow line” as defined by the October 2025 ceasefire agreement. Bassem Naim, a member of Hamas’s political bureau, called on the United States to “pressure Netanyahu and his government to adhere to the roadmap and not obstruct the process for internal political and electoral reasons.” This highlights the fundamental impasse: Israel demands disarmament before withdrawal, while Hamas insists withdrawal must precede or accompany disarmament.

Israel has continued to carry out strikes on Gaza since agreeing to the initial ceasefire last October. The Board of Peace’s lead envoy for Gaza, Nickolay Mladenov, urged Netanyahu to stop attacks on Gaza during a meeting last week. However, Israel has steadfastly refused to do so. According to reports, Israeli forces have killed more than 1,200 Palestinians since the October ceasefire took effect, including dozens after the disarmament deal was announced. This ongoing violence has further complicated efforts to reach a lasting peace agreement.

Netanyahu, Israel’s longest-serving leader, is running even or trailing in some polls ahead of the October 27 elections. The Gaza plan is widely unpopular with his right-wing base and far-right members of his cabinet. National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir dismissed the draft as “not acceptable” and called for a new cabinet vote to end the Gaza plan. The political pressure may explain Netanyahu’s firm rejection of US-backed proposals that could alienate his core supporters, as he seeks to maintain his coalition ahead of the critical elections.

The rejection leaves the future of Trump’s Gaza peace plan in serious doubt. The plan, which was unveiled in September 2025, was intended to provide a comprehensive framework including disarmament, Israeli withdrawal, and reconstruction. The Board of Peace has already begun establishing itself on the ground, with Mladenov appointed as High Representative for Gaza and Palestinian technocrats assembled to lead the NCAG. However, without Israeli cooperation, the plan’s implementation appears highly uncertain. The core dispute over sequencing remains unresolved: Israel demands disarmament before withdrawal, while Hamas insists withdrawal must precede or accompany disarmament. With Netanyahu facing electoral pressure and Hamas seeking assurances of an end to Israeli strikes, the path to peace remains as elusive as ever.

Trump Signs New Executive Orders Targeting Birthright Citizenship, ‘Birth Tourism’

President Donald Trump signed two executive orders on August 6, 2026, aimed at narrowing birthright citizenship and blocking the practice of “birth tourism” — just weeks after the Supreme Court struck down his broader attempt to end automatic citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants. The new orders represent a more targeted approach to restricting who qualifies for U.S. citizenship at birth, focusing on specific categories of foreign nationals rather than attempting a blanket ban.

The first executive order targets birth tourism, which the White House defines as foreign nationals entering the United States on nonimmigrant visas with the primary purpose of giving birth on U.S. soil. The order directs the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security to deny or revoke visas and travel authorizations for individuals suspected of engaging in birth tourism, block entry or authorize deportation of foreign nationals participating in or planning birth tourism, and take action against operators — both in the U.S. and abroad — who organize or facilitate birth tourism schemes. The White House accused birth tourism operators of deceiving foreign nationals through advertisements encouraging them to travel to the U.S. to give birth, arguing that these schemes “undermine” the integrity of the U.S. immigration system. Exceptions apply for foreign nationals entering on humanitarian grounds or when their entry serves the national interest.

The second executive order expands the definitions of individuals whose U.S.-born children would not qualify for automatic citizenship. Under the new order, children are ineligible if their parents fall into any of several expanded categories. These include foreign government employees such as diplomats, consular officers, and employees of foreign governments or international organizations with immunity; designated Foreign Terrorist Organization members as well as “specially designated global terrorists”; individuals who engaged in fraudulent acts to obtain U.S. citizenship; “alien enemies” considered enemy aliens under U.S. law; and children born through commercial surrogacy arrangements or commercial transactions. The order also clarifies that children born in U.S. territories or territorial waters where federal law does not grant birthright citizenship are excluded from automatic recognition. Federal agencies including the State Department, Justice Department, Homeland Security, and Social Security Administration must issue implementation guidance within 30 days.

READ ALSO:

• Trump rejects US munitions shortage reports, threatens alleged leakers
• Military uncovers identities of senior ISIS, ISWAP commanders operating around Lake Chad
• Nigeria’s first indigenous female neurosurgeon appointed medical director of US hospital

These executive orders come after a major legal setback for the administration. On June 30, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court voted 6-3 to reject Trump’s earlier executive order — signed on his first day back in office in January 2025 — which sought to deny birthright citizenship to children of undocumented immigrants or temporary residents. Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the majority opinion, stating that “Citizenship, then and now, was the right to have rights — to freely participate in our political community. The Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment extended that promise to ‘every free-born person in this land’ … We keep that promise today.” The Court upheld the long-standing interpretation of the 14th Amendment, which states that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” The ruling reaffirmed the precedent set by the 1898 case United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which established that virtually all children born on U.S. soil are citizens — with only narrow exceptions such as children of foreign diplomats or enemy occupying forces.

Speaking from the Oval Office as he signed the new orders, Trump described the Supreme Court decision as “very unfortunate.” He stated, “We had a very unfortunate decision in the Supreme Court concerning birthright. It was close, but a very, very unfortunate decision. So we’re making adjustments because it’s very unfair.” Trump also called the previous situation “a disgrace,” arguing that wealthy individuals are building businesses around birthright citizenship and exploiting the system. He remarked that “Wealthy people are building businesses around birthright citizenship. That’s not the way it was supposed to work.” Following the Supreme Court defeat, Trump had announced he would seek to address birthright citizenship through Congress. The new executive orders represent a shift to a more targeted administrative strategy.

There are no official government statistics on birth tourism. However, a 2020 analysis by the Center for Immigration Studies — which supports lower levels of immigration — estimated that between 20,000 and 25,000 women entered the U.S. for birth tourism between 2016 and 2017. Trump has claimed the number could be much higher, stating that “hundreds of thousands” of children may be obtaining citizenship through birth tourism annually.

The new executive orders are expected to face legal challenges, similar to the previous effort. Constitutional scholars have noted that the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause has long been interpreted broadly, and any attempt to narrow its application — even in specific categories — is likely to be tested in court. The administration argues that the new orders are more narrowly tailored and therefore constitutional, focusing on specific scenarios rather than attempting a blanket denial of citizenship.

In summary, two new executive orders were signed August 6, 2026, following a Supreme Court defeat on a broader birthright citizenship ban. Birth tourism is targeted, with foreign nationals entering on nonimmigrant visas to give birth facing possible visa denials, entry blocks, or deportation. Expanded ineligibility now includes children of foreign government employees, terrorist organization members, and those who committed citizenship fraud. The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 against the administration’s earlier order on June 30, 2026, and legal challenges are expected as the new orders test the limits of the 14th Amendment.