Hamas says Israel rejected ceasefire deal releasing all captives in Gaza

Israel rejected a ceasefire agreement that would release all of the prisoners held in Gaza, according to the military wing of Hamas, and it is said the organization is prepared for a protracted conflict if a deal is not reached.

The Qassam Brigades’ long-time leader, Abu Obeida, claimed in a nearly 20-minute prerecorded video that the organization had in recent months offered a “comprehensive deal” that would release all captives at once, but Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his far-right ministers rejected it.

Hamas supports a deal that allows the Israeli military to withdraw, the release of humanitarian aid, and the entry of besieged Palestinians, he said, adding that it has become clear that the government of the criminal Netanyahu has no real interest in the captives because they are soldiers.

According to Abu Obeida, Hamas cannot guarantee a return to any partial agreements, including a 60-day deal currently being discussed that would result in the release of ten captives if Israel resigns from this round of indirect talks held in Qatar.

In Gaza, Hamas is still holding 50 people, with 20 of whom are reportedly still alive.

Palestinians who were killed in Israeli airstrikes are interred at the Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis, in the southern Gaza Strip, on July 18, 2025. [Hussam Al-Masri/Reuters]

Abu Obeida added that Hamas fighters are “ready to continue a long battle of attrition” and will keep up ambushes throughout Gaza with the intention of capturing or killing Israeli soldiers in his first video message since early March.

He criticized the governments of the Arab and Islamic countries for their actions in response to Israel’s “genocide,” stating that “your necks are burdened with the blood of tens of thousands of innocent people who were betrayed by your silence.”

The comments come as the Doha talks have failed to produce any conclusions because Israel insists on maintaining and expanding military dominance over Gaza, including the Morag Corridor and the new Magen Oz Corridor, which set Rafah and Khan Younis apart from the rest of the enclave, respectively.

Israel is moving forward with plans to construct a concentration camp on the ruins of Rafah as soldiers continue to block humanitarian aid to the besieged population and slaughter Palestinians who are starving at GHF-run sites, despite international criticism.

According to medical sources, Israeli forces killed at least 41 Palestinians on Friday, according to Al Jazeera.

Since Israel broke the last ceasefire in March, more than 58, 667 Palestinians have died and 139, 974 have been injured, including at least 7, 843 of whom have been killed and 27 993 have been injured, according to the most recent figures released by Gaza’s Ministry of Health.

Dubois-Usyk 2: Londoner ‘on a different level’ before title fight

Oleksandr Usyk should defeat Daniel Dubois to claim the undisputed world heavyweight title on Saturday night for a number of reasons.

The Ukrainian hasn’t lost a fight in 16 years and is undefeated in all competitions, including Dubois, which he stopped two years ago. British fighters are a staple diet for Usyk. In a packed Tottenham Hotspur Stadium in 2021, he defeated Anthony Joshua to take the title. At the London Olympics, he won a gold medal.

Dubois, a native of London, insists that things will change this time and that his three most recent clinches, including Joshua’s defeat at Wembley in September, demonstrate that he can do Beat Usyk, a feat no other professional has ever done.

The 27-year-old Dubois said, “I’m just on a different level now.” On Saturday, I’m prepared to go through whatever I need and get those belts.

When Usyk (3-0, 14 KOs) places his WBA, WBC, and WBO titles on the line, an expected crowd of 90,000 will be present. He’ll fight to become the two-time undisputed world heavyweight champion after capturing Dubois’ IBF belt.

Lennox Lewis won the title of last British heavyweight champion in November 1999, making it the last time he’d won a major belt.

Usyk values “young guy” Dubois.

In their first fight, Dubois (22-2, 21 KOs), who was unable to defend the Ukrainian southpaw’s jab and who lacked numerous power punches in Wroclaw, Poland, in August 2023, duo Usyk and Dubois (22-2). In the fifth round, Dubois sent Usyk to the box, but the decision was made to consider the punch to be low. In the ninth minute, Dubois’ evening was ended by a straight right turn.

Egor Mekhontsev from Russia won the amateur world championships in September 2009, defeating Usyk.

Usyk shrugged off the rumors that he was getting too old to keep up his success.

Usyk remarked, “I respect this guy, this young man.” “I’m motivated, but this guy isn’t alone.” 38 is not an old man, but I’m not an old man.

Daniel Dubois and Oleksandr Usyk speak at the Wembley Stadium press conference [Andrew Couldridge/Reuters]

The last six of Usyk’s six fights were against British opponents, with victories coming against Tyson Fury, the Dubois stoppage, Anthony Joshua victories in a row, and then Zimbabwe-born boxer Derek Chisora, who was born in Zimbabwe.

Only one of his heavyweight fights featured a non-British opponent, which was Chazz Witherspoon of the United States in his division debut in October 2019.

Usyk is content to compete on Dubois’ own turf in London.

At Wembley, Usyk declared, “I’m happy to be here again.”

He has a good reason to be.

At the 2012 London Olympics, he won an Olympic gold medal. He won the amateur European title in the light heavyweight category four years prior to his victory in Liverpool.

In his final fight at cruiserweight, Usyk defeated Tony Bellew of Liverpool in Manchester. In 2020, he defeated Chisora at Wembley Arena.

Joseph Parker said he would use more combinations and pressure on Usyk than Chisora did five years ago.

After the news conference on Thursday, Parker said, “I think this fight depends on how Dubois appears.” In his previous three fights, we saw him become much more self-assured of his abilities in the ring.

Boxing - Oleksandr Usyk & Daniel Dubois Workouts - BoxPark Wembley, London, Britain - Dubois during his workout
Before Saturday’s title fight, Dubois performed in London. [Photo: Andrew Couldridge/Reuters]

Dubois was scheduled to defend his title against Parker in February, but he resisted the invitation due to a medical issue.

Dubois’ father, Stanley, who also plays Dave in his son’s career, continues to have a significant influence on him. Caroline Dubois, who is also a world champion boxer, was one of his children’s parents who backed home education. About two years ago, Caroline Dubois told The Associated Press that it was either that or that she would have ended boxing and be in a “really bad mental place.”

Riz Khan, Daniel Dubois’ manager, claimed that one person is responsible for his fighter’s success since losing to Usyk.

“We have all the credentials to support Daniel in the background, so we have to acknowledge that his father, Stan Dubois, has clearly guided the resurgence, whether it be from a management perspective or from a coaching perspective,” Khan said.

Dubois’ attempts to talk about things seem more like box-checking than being a man, such as when he grinned when he yelled “And the new”! this week in Usyk’s face. There was a slow-motion shove of Usyk that wasn’t strong enough at the time.

He’s still the same type of person he was before the Joshua fight, which Dubois was awestruck by.

Felix Baumgartner death: Witnesses heard loud boom before crash

Beachgoers were aware of a paraglider’s malfunction when they heard a loud boom ring as it sprang into flames near the Adriatic Sea, killing its only passenger, extreme athlete Felix Baumgartner.

A 30-year-old mother and her two young children, who were enthralled by the constant paragliding above the beach town of Porto Sant’Elipido in the Marche region, watched the deadly descent unfold Thursday afternoon from a nearby house.

“Everything was normal until it started to spin like a top,” Mirella Ivanov said on Friday. We audibly heard a roar as it fell. I actually turned around because I believed it had sunk into the rocks. Then I ran into two lifeguards, heading toward “the crash site.”

She hustled her two children away when she saw people attempting to save the owner.

Baumgartner, 56, was credited with being the first skydiver to fall more quickly than the speed of sound, according to the city’s mayor. Investigating the paragliding accident was ongoing. Calls to the police for comment were not returned.

According to Mayor Massimiliano Ciarpella, “It is a destiny that is very difficult to comprehend for a man who has broken all kinds of records, who has been an icon of flight, and who travelled through space.”

Baumgartner claimed that he had taken a vacation and that Baumgartner’s family believed he may have fallen ill during the fatal flight.

In recent days, Baumgartner has been taking off from a nearby airfield surrounded by cornfields while using a motorized paraglider, or paramotoring, above seaside towns.

In Porto Sant’Elpidio, Italy, where Felix Baumgartner’s paraglider crashed, killing him and injuring an hotel employee on the ground, workers stand near the resort’s swimming pool.

A statement from the beachside resort Clube de Sole Le Mimose claimed that a worker who was “middle injured” in the accident was in good condition. The pool has been reopened, and there are no injuries.

Baumgartner, known as “Fearless Felix,” broke the silence on sound with only his body in 2012. He jumped from a capsule he had inflated to more than 24 miles (39 kilometers) by a huge helium balloon over New Mexico while wearing a pressurized suit.

During a nine-minute descent, the Austrian, who was a member of the Red Bull Stratos team, topped out at 843.6 mph (1, 357.6 km/h), which is the equivalent of 1.25 times the speed of sound. His crew later reported that at one point, while still supersonic, he spun for 13 seconds before going into a potentially dangerous flat spin.

Millions of people watched Baumgartner’s livestream on YouTube in 2012 as he activated his parachute as he approached the ground and raised his arms in triumphant height as he rose from the capsule high above Earth.

Before Google’s executive Alan Eustace set new records for the highest free-fall jump and longest free-fall distance, Baumgartner’s altitude record lasted for two years.

Former Austrian military parachutist Baumgartner performed thousands of jumps from famous landmarks, including the Christ the Redeemer statue in Brazil, including airplanes, bridges, skyscrapers, and other landmarks.

After being dropped from a plane in 2003, he took a carbon-fiber wing across the English Channel.

He has recently performed as a helicopter stunt pilot for The Flying Bulls, an aviation team owned and run by Red Bull, in various European venues.

In a post on Friday, Red Bull paid tribute to Baumgartner, calling him “precise, demanding, and critical.” Above all, you have to respect yourself.

The statement highlighted Baumgartner’s bravery and research in facing “the greatest challenges.”

Analysis: PKK recalibrates from armed struggle to politics in Turkiye

“We voluntarily destroy our weapons … as a step of goodwill and determination,” said senior Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) leader Bese Hozat, speaking in front of a gathering of the group’s fighters.

The footage, filmed last Friday in the northern Iraqi city of Sulaimaniyah, then shows the fighters – about 30 of them – placing their weapons inside a cauldron, where they were set alight.

The ceremony may have been symbolic, but it capped what might be one of the most consequential periods in Turkiye’s recent political history. It wraps up a carefully planned sequence of gestures and messages, and shows that both sides are not just coordinating symbolically, but are also politically aligned in their intent to move from armed conflict to political dialogue.

The choreography of the build-up to the ceremony unfolded with remarkable precision, revealing both political coordination and calculated restraint. Such an alignment would have been impossible without mutual recognition between the PKK and Turkiye of the importance of what was about to happen, as well as the consequences of any failure.

On July 7, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan received his country’s pro-Kurdish DEM Party delegation for the second time in four months. A smiling group photo from the meeting was widely circulated, signalling both the normalisation of dialogue and the symbolic approval of the process at the highest level.

Two days later, on July 9, Abdullah Ocalan – the imprisoned PKK leader and founder – appeared in a seven-minute video released by ANF, the PKK’s affiliated media outlet. It marked his first public visual appearance in 26 years and carried a simple but historic message: The time for arms has ended.

In it, Ocalan emphasised that the movement’s original aim, the recognition of Kurdish identity, had been achieved, and that political engagement must now replace armed resistance. The message was as much to the PKK as it was to the public.

Lastly, on July 13, Erdogan addressed the governing AK Party’s retreat, reaffirming his commitment to the disarmament process and announcing that a parliamentary commission would be established to address its legal framework. His message aimed to reassure the broader public, especially his supporters, that the process would strengthen national untiy and benefits all of Turkiye’s citizens, whatever their ethnicity.

Message to the Kurdish public

Ocalan’s rare video message aimed to reassure his Kurdish supporters that this was not a defeat, but a recalibration: a shift from armed struggle to political engagement. The message was carefully measured and stripped of triumphalism; it sought to redefine the past, rather than glorify it.

The dignified tone of the weapons-burning ceremony allowed both the PKK and state narratives to coexist. It did not alienate those who had sacrificed for the PKK’s struggle – activists, politicians in prison or exile, and the families of the disappeared. Instead, it signalled that their voices had been heard.

Despite his years of isolation, Ocalan’s words still carry weight. Not only because of his symbolic authority, but because his message reflects what many Kurds now seek: dignity without martyrdom, a voice without violence, and a future beyond armed struggle.

Public support for disarmament is growing, even among those long sceptical of the state’s intent. Recent surveys show that more than 90 percent of DEM voters, as well as those who identify as Kurdish or Zaza (a Kurdish-adjacent minority group) in Turkiye, support the process. Belief that the PKK will fully disarm is also significantly higher than the national average.

The PKK’s decision to disarm is not a retreat but a recalibration.

Since its founding in 1978, the group has waged a protracted armed struggle against the Turkish state, demanding autonomy and rights for Kurds. But after decades of rebellion, the regional landscape has changed.

In northern Iraq and Syria, the PKK’s operational space has altered. While the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), a key PKK-linked actor, remains active in northeastern Syria, its future hinges on shifting US commitments and delicate understandings with the new government in Damascus, an ally of Turkiye.

At the same time, Iran’s weakening regional influence, sustained Turkish military pressure, and a quiet but growing preference among Western actors for a stable Turkiye have all contributed to reshaping the group’s strategic calculus.

Crucially, this recalibration does not conflict with the United States and Israel’s core interests in curbing Iranian influence and maintaining a manageable status quo in Syria.

Against this backdrop, a disarmed and politically engaged Kurdish movement in Turkiye is not an isolated anomaly. In this context, the PKK has opted to step off the battlefield and into the political arena. As Ocalan expressed in his July 9 message, “I believe in the strength of peace, not the force of arms.”

The weapons-burning ceremony is not the end of the disarmament process. A Turkish parliamentary commission is expected to define the conditions for the reintegration of PKK fighters into civilian and political life in Turkiye, while a verification mechanism involving the Turkish Armed Forces and intelligence agency will monitor disarmament and issue a report to guide further steps.

Hozat, the PKK senior leader, framed the ceremony as a political milestone, and reaffirmed the group’s ambition to enter civilian politics, expressing an aim to become “pioneers of democratic politics in Amed [Diyarbakir], Ankara, and Istanbul” – a deliberate reference to key centres of Kurdish representation in Turkiye and national political power.

Yet this transition hinges on comprehensive legal reforms and credible guarantees that are both socially and politically viable, and civil society groups and humanitarian organisations in Turkiye are likely to play an active role in the forthcoming stages of full disarmament.

Turkish political support

In Turkiye, there is broad buy-in for the peace process with the PKK from across the political spectrum.

This is largely because the process benefits nearly all political actors by reducing the securitised political climate, easing judicial pressure, and offering a chance to reset deeply polarised governance.

With “terrorism” charges having been used expansively in recent years, even members of the opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) have found themselves entangled in legal problems. In this context, a de-escalation appeals to many, including party leaders such as Ozgur Ozel and Ekrem Imamoglu, even if many remain wary of the AK Party’s intentions. For many CHP supporters, what they view as the contradiction of a reconciliation effort with the PKK unfolding alongside a clampdown on opposition mayors is hard to ignore.

Other Turkish parties have been supportive, despite coming from different political traditions. The DEM Party has, of course, been a central part of the negotiations and the messaging that a page has been turned on the past.

It is notable that the group that the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) – perhaps the Turkish political party most opposed to the DEM Party and long a staunch opponent of any rapprochement with Kurdish nationalist groups – has also publicly backed the process, and indeed has also been heavily involved in the choreography in the past few months.

Its leader, Devlet Bahceli, has been front and centre in the process, formally inviting Ocalan to dissolve the PKK and reaching out to DEM members of parliament. His pragmatic stance has stemmed from his belief that the end of the PKK’s armed campaign aligns with national interests. In fact, delays in the process were ultimately overcome with the aid of the MHP leader.

And the AK Party has steered the peace process through some of its central figures, including Efkan Ala, a former interior minister and one of Erdogan’s most-trusted political allies. Erdogan has personally taken on the task of normalising the discourse of making peace with the PKK.

Still, not everyone in the party may be on board. Years of conflict with the PKK and attacks from the group, securitised rhetoric, the criminalisation of DEM-aligned actors, and the stigma surrounding any cooperation with the DEM Party have left deep internal reservations. Stepping away from that position is not easy, even if Erdogan has set a clear tone, signalling firm commitment from the very top of the Turkish establishment.

Potential pitfalls

This is not a conventional peace process, nor is it a one-sided act of capitulation.

Rather, it marks a convergence – tenuous, complex, and partial – between two longstanding adversaries.

Spoilers exist – within the state, among political factions, and across the border – but so far, none has derailed the process.

But those tied to the war economy, ideological hardliners, or actors who thrive in a securitised climate might yet try, even if the process has already weathered a lot of potential pitfalls, including the Turkish military bombing PKK positions in March and regional turbulence in the form of the war between Israel and Iran.

However, that does not mean that no future problems could arise. What lies ahead may be even harder. Without meaningful political reforms or guarantees, the space opened up by disarmament may quickly narrow again.

On the Kurdish political side, many questions also still remain.

DEM Co-Chair Tuncer Bakirhan, speaking in an interview with the Kurdish media outlet Rudaw last Wednesday, emphasised that symbolic gestures must be followed by institutional action.

“We have submitted our proposals to the speaker of parliament,” he noted, including mechanisms for reintegrating former militants into political and civilian life. “We don’t need to dwell on the details — those will follow. But there must be clarity: What happens to those who disarm? Where do they go? What protections will they have? These are not trivialities; they are the foundation of a credible peace.”

He is right to point out that disarmament alone is not enough; it is merely the starting point. The real question is what comes next.

What will happen to those imprisoned on “terror” charges, whether for political reasons or past involvement in armed struggle?

What about the fighters still in the mountains, the families stranded and the political figures exiled in Iraq, Europe or elsewhere? And what about the broader ecosystem: civil society actors, journalists, and others long caught in the grey zones of criminalisation?

For the PKK’s disarmament to reach this point, the right domestic and geopolitical conditions had to align, and today, they have.

Weapons will be burned, and the armed chapter, potentially including the Syrian front, as hinted by ongoing but difficult negotiations between the SDF and Damascus, will come to a close within Turkiye’s borders. But from this point on, representative politics, diplomacy, and public deliberation will matter more than ever.

It marks a historic threshold. What follows will depend not on symbols, but on substance: on the courage to legislate, to decentralise power, and to trust society’s readiness for coexistence.

No one can fully predict how the region will evolve, and most actors are likely preparing for multiple scenarios, not a single roadmap.

US withdraws from WHO pandemic response reforms

Washington, DC – As part of a wider campaign by Washington against international regulations, the United States withdrawn from reforms that the World Health Organization (WHO) instituted last year to improve the world’s response to pandemics.

The 2024 amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) that were put in place following the COVID-19 pandemic were officially rejected by President Donald Trump’s administration on Friday.

In a joint statement, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy stated that the move “prevents international bureaucrats from shaping US domestic policies.”

The regulations were made more stringent by the legally binding amendments to improve the international response to a potential pandemic.

They included efforts to improve information-sharing between nations around the world and WHO, as well as the adoption of a crystal clear definition of what constitutes a pandemic emergency and how it can be triggered.

Additionally, the amendments called for “equitably address the needs and priorities of developing countries” by allowing poorer nations to access medical products.

The reforms’ various provisions were opposed by the US officials.

Rubio and Kennedy both claimed in their statements that “the terminology used throughout the 2024 amendments is vague and broad, which puts off WHO-coordinated international responses that emphasize political issues like solidarity.”

During the pandemic, lockdowns and mandates for vaccines were contentious political issues in the US, with right-wing activists supporting Trump as the leader in rejecting the measures.

US conservatives have long been skeptical of multilateral institutions, believing that US laws violate the country’s sovereignty.

However, global health regulations advocate that global pandemics must be addressed through a coordinated, international effort because they do not stop at borders.

Trump made a formal announcement that the US would leave the WHO by January 2026 shortly after taking office earlier this year.

The amendments “compel countries to adopt digital health documents,” according to Kennedy and Rubio on Friday.

Our agencies have stated and will continue to do so: “We will put Americans first in everything we do, and we will not tolerate international policies that violate Americans’ freedoms, such as privacy and speech,” the officials said.

“These amendments pose a risk of unwarranted interference with our country’s sovereign right to formulate health policies.”

Participants would voluntarily submit information to the documents, even though the reforms call for WHO to create and improve a database for access to digital health certificates internationally.

During the pandemic, most nations, including the US during Trump’s first term, required visitors to take negative COVID tests.

When WHO signed a separate agreement to improve pandemic preparedness in May, the US did not.

Arsenal seal Madueke signing from Chelsea in divisive move

Noni Madueke’s controversial signing by Arsenal came in at a reported 48 million pounds ($65 million).

Despite complaints from Arsenal supporters, Madueke agreed to a five-year contract with the Gunners when he relocated to the Emirates Stadium.

Bukayo Saka and Gabriel Martinelli will square off on Mikel Arteta’s side against the 23-year-old.

Fans who don’t think Madueke is worth the price tag have harsh opinions about his switch to London, which could eventually exceed $69 million with performance-related add-ons.

More than 5, 000 Arsenal fans have signed a petition against the ban on Madueke, and graffiti on the walls of Emirates washed up with “Arteta out” slogans.

Last Friday saw the completion of Chelsea’s FIFA Club World Cup-winning campaign at the United States for Madueke to go through his medical at Arsenal.

“Noni is a young player who is exciting and powerful, with consistently high-quality performances and stats in recent seasons. One of the Premier League’s most gifted wide players, according to Arteta.

Noni, 23, already has extensive club and international football experience, and he is a master of the Premier League. We’re extremely excited that Noni will be joining us because we’ve closely monitored his performances over the past few seasons.

Noni joins a group of well-known England players and familiar faces from his own team. He will immediately feel at ease. His arrival will significantly improve our squad. We’re all delighted to have him here.

It’s a great moment for me, said Madueke, who was raised in north London. I’m so happy to return home and spend time with my parents. My mother must miss me inside the house, I am aware!

“It’s already a fantastic team with a clear identity, and I’m eager to adapt my style and try to assist the boys as much as possible in that direction.”

I want to win every competition we’re involved in. We are undoubtedly capable of doing that, in my opinion.

Madueke totaled 20 goals in 90 appearances for Chelsea overall last season, up from 11 in all competitions.

He also made his first England appearances, helping Chelsea to earn the title and win the UEFA Conference League last term.

Madueke is the latest close-season signing from Arsenal following the signings of goalkeeper Kepa Arrizabalaga and midfielders Martin Zubimendi and Christian Norgaard. He recently left PSV Eindhoven for 30 million pounds ($40 million at current rate) in 2023.

He adds about 120 million pounds ($161 million) to Arsenal’s current spending, with the finalization of Valencia’s 13 million ($17.5 million) acquisition set for the same period.

Viktor Gyokeres, a striker for Sporting Lisbon, is another possibility Arsenal has on the books.