Category World News

Across Israeli society, the reaction to the news of a Gaza ceasefire deal has been almost uniform: Joy.

In Tel Aviv, the families of those taken captive during the Hamas-led attack on Israel in October 2023 celebrated on Thursday after the announcement. And a man dressed as United States President Donald Trump – who played a large part in brokering the deal – carried Israeli and US flags and posed for photographs with smiling passersby.

Two years of war on Gaza have fractured Israeli society. The minority who have openly opposed Israel’s killing of more than 67,000 Palestinians say they have been ostracised, while those who cheered on what experts have confirmed is a genocide have been left angered by growing international condemnation of Israel’s aggression.

“I cried when I got the news,” Israeli political analyst Nimrod Flaschenberg said from Berlin. “It’s really big. It’s like there’s a complete emotional unravelling across Israel; it’s like people are decompressing. There’s just massive, massive relief.”

Cautiously optimistic

For some, the news seems too good to be true, with speculation and nerves turning to how the ceasefire may ultimately unravel, as a deal earlier this year did.

“Everyone is happy. It’s what we’ve been calling for for two years,” said Aida Touma-Suleiman, a member of parliament from the left-wing Hadash-Ta’al party. “I’ve been watching videos from Gaza, television from Tel Aviv showing the families of the hostages: Everyone is happy.

“Though there’s still caution,” she added. “There’s a feeling that someone, somewhere will find a reason to return to the war. People don’t trust this government – not just in Gaza, but in Israel, too.”

Much of that doubt centres on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has previously resisted calls to end the war at every opportunity.

Accusations from political opponents and captives’ families that he was prolonging the conflict for his own political ends – to ensure that his coalition holds together – have persisted throughout the war. Former US President Joe Biden also suggested that may be the case.

Today’s ceasefire does little to remove that suspicion. Netanyahu still faces the prospect of a verdict in his long-running corruption trial, an inquiry into his own failings before the October 7 attack, as well as the controversy over extending Israel’s military draft to its ultra-Orthodox community, whose parties are an important part of Netanyahu’s governing coalition. All of these have been conveniently relegated to secondary concerns while the war on Gaza has continued, but that will change once the fighting ends.

Nevertheless, with elections due by next year, or potentially even earlier, Netanyahu has successes that he can point to, particularly in weakening the Iranian-backed “axis of resistance” in the wider region. Perhaps most notable were the 12-day war with Iran in June, and the decapitation of much of the Lebanese group Hezbollah’s leadership in a war last year.

“Netanyahu is going to portray this as a victory,” the prime minister’s former aide and political pollster, Mitchell Barak, told Al Jazeera from West Jerusalem. “He can say he’s achieved everything he wanted to at the start of the war. He’s got the hostages back, he’s destroyed Hamas. On the sidelines of this, he’ll also claim that he used the opportunity to wipe out Hezbollah, weaken Iran and watch over as the Syrian regime fell. He’s reshaped the Middle East, he’ll claim, and removed many, if not all, of the main threats facing Israel.”

Others in Netanyahu’s far-right coalition already appear ready to oppose the deal. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir have voiced hostility to the ceasefire, and have previously pledged to leave the government if a deal is passed that they do not agree with. However, what meaningful resistance they can muster –  with Israel’s political opposition already pledging to support the government to secure the deal – is unclear.

“Hadash and the so-called opposition have all said they’ll support the ceasefire,” Touma-Suleiman said of a mainstream opposition that has, through the last two years, largely backed Israel’s actions in Gaza. “Ben-Gvir and Smotrich will make some noise, but they can’t really do much.”

The hand of Trump

How much the Israeli public credits Netanyahu, as opposed to Trump, for the ceasefire is unclear.

The US has been Israel’s staunchest ally amid international criticism of its actions in Gaza. In addition to its blanket backing at the United Nations, reports from Brown University’s Costs of War Project released this week confirmed what many long suspected: That the US treasury largely financed Israel’s war on Gaza and its attacks across the region.

However, for many Israelis, Israel’s failed strike on Hamas negotiators in Qatar and the unified response from Arab states proved a turning point for the US administration and its priorities within the Middle East, and ultimately led to Trump telling Netanyahu that he had to agree to a deal and end the war.

“I think Trump, allied with this coalition of Muslim and Arab states such as Turkiye and Qatar, probably succeeded in forcing the Israeli government’s hand,” Flashenberg said. “This could have been reached earlier, which suggests Trump forced it.”

The future is unwritten

“Netanyahu has to complete the first stage,” Touma-Suleiman said of the loosely worded ceasefire plan. “We know that, but there’s still a lot we don’t know about the second phase.

“That’s still to be negotiated – and on Israel’s side, those negotiations are going to be led by a government that is probably looking to restart the war.”

However, any effort to resume hostilities would unfold against the backdrop of an unpredictable US president who, having sent his special envoy Steve Witkoff and son-in-law Jared Kushner to negotiate the ceasefire, appears heavily invested in the process.

“How long this will last depends on Trump,” Barak said. “He uses the presidency as a global bully pulpit. He’s shown he’s ready to do anything, irrespective of the norms, as he writes his own rulebook with new norms.

“Israel has always been a critical ally of the US in the Middle East, as well as its most favoured nation, but it’s not really clear any more if Trump particularly cares about critical allies or favoured nations, or even foreign allies in general,” Barak continued. “He wants peace, and Netanyahu knows that. He knows Trump could really leave him – and that would be a disaster.

A government spokesperson has laid out how Israel will implement the first phase of US President Donald Trump’s peace plan in Gaza, saying it will start after today’s Israeli government cabinet meeting.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said Moscow supports US President Donald Trump’s plan to end the Gaza war, expressing hope it will be implemented. Speaking at a regional summit in Tajikistan, Putin said Russia is ready to back any peaceful effort to stop the bloodshed.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi have hailed their countries’ recent trade deal as transformative, saying the partnership has already begun to bear fruit.

The United Kingdom and India signed a trade agreement in July aimed at reducing tariffs on goods from textiles to whisky, cars and spices and allowing more market access for businesses. The stated goal is to boost trade by a further 25.5 billion pounds ($34bn) by 2040.

Starmer met Modi on Thursday in Mumbai, where the British prime minister and more than 100 leaders from the UK’s business, culture and university sectors were wrapping up a two-day trade mission to India.

“In the three months since we actually signed that (trade deal) … we’ve seen a 6-billion-pound boost in trade and investment, that’s on top of the increased numbers over the last year already,” Starmer told business leaders from both countries at the India-UK CEO Forum in Mumbai.

Both countries are seeking to realign their trading relationships in the wake of tariffs imposed by United States President Donald Trump’s administration.

In August, the US slapped 50 percent tariffs on goods from India in response to New Delhi’s trade with Russia, specifically its imports of Russian oil, while the UK, which secured a trade deal with Washington in May, has also been hit with tariffs, albeit at much lower rates.

Modi told the forum on Thursday that he was confident the two countries would double their trade from the current $56bn before their target to do so.

Starmer’s visit “reflects the new energy and broad vision” in the partnership, Modi said after talks with the British prime minister.

“India’s dynamism and the UK’s expertise together create a unique synergy,” Modi said, speaking in Hindi.

Starmer said the focus of his visit was doubling down on the potential of the trade deal, expected to take effect within a year.

“This is just the start,” Starmer later told a fintech conference. “It’s time to invest in the United Kingdom, invest in this relationship and invest in our shared future.”

A statement by the Indian Ministry of External Affairs said the two sides agreed to set up a connectivity and innovation centre and a joint centre for AI, and unveiled a critical minerals industry guild to bolster supply chains and promote green technologies.

Earlier, Starmer’s office said 64 Indian companies would collectively invest 1.3bn pounds ($1.73bn) in the UK, without elaborating.

India-Russia ties

Despite the cordiality on display in Mumbai, the two countries are not aligned on some key issues, including the Russia-Ukraine war.

After Modi wished Russian President Vladimir Putin a happy birthday on Tuesday, Starmer joked to reporters that he would not be doing the same, given Britain’s strong backing for Ukraine and condemnation of Russia over its invasion.

Asked if he raised with Modi concerns about India buying Russian oil, Starmer said they did discuss it and looked particularly at ways to end the Russia-Ukraine war, which he said was “the outcome that we both want”.

The UK says it respects India’s strategic independence and can work with countries even if their views may differ on certain issues.

In an early indication of that strategy and a bid for closer defence ties, the UK said it had signed a 350 million pound ($465m) contract to supply the Indian army with lightweight multi-role missiles built in Northern Ireland, and the next phase of a deal, worth an initial 250 million pounds ($332m), includes collaboration on electric-powered engines for naval ships.

For decades, India has been dependent on Moscow for much of its military hardware. And Western sanctions levied against Russia since its invasion of Ukraine have pushed the country into a deeper trading partnership with India.

In August, India hit back at the US and European Union over sanctions, tariffs and threats it faced from them due to its purchase of Russian oil amid the war on Ukraine.

“Like any major economy, India will take all necessary measures to safeguard its national interests and economic security,” External Affairs Ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said at the time.

But Jaiswal also directly pushed back against suggestions from the US and EU that India – in buying large volumes of Russian crude – had acted in a way that broke with the West’s own behaviour.

“In fact, India began importing from Russia because traditional supplies were diverted to Europe after the outbreak of the conflict,” Jaiswal said, referring to Russia’s full-fledged invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

On his first visit to India since becoming the United Kingdom’s prime minister last year, Keir Starmer has met with his Indian counterpart, Narendra Modi, in Mumbai, the country’s financial capital, alongside a caravan of British business and cultural leaders.

In particular, Starmer wants to know more about India’s mammoth digital ID system – which logs the world’s largest population, with more than 1.3 billion cards issued – two weeks after announcing a controversial digital ID system for the UK.

Starmer hailed India’s ID system as a “massive success” as he defended that announcement, which has been met with criticism from rights groups.

During his trade-centric visit to Mumbai, Starmer also held a meeting with Nandan Nilekani, cofounder and chair of Indian tech services group Infosys, who headed the government body which delivered the ID database more than a decade ago.

So, why is Starmer so interested in India’s ID system? What are the concerns in the UK? And what can London learn from mistakes made in New Delhi?

Why is the UK introducing a digital ‘Brit Card’?

Starmer has pitched the new digital ID, to be known as a “Brit Card”, at the core of his plans to tackle irregular migration and exploitative work practices in the UK.

A digital ID system “will make it tougher to work illegally in this country, making our borders more secure”, Starmer said last month.

In addition to verifying that a person is permitted to work in the UK, the Brit Card will also offer citizens “countless benefits, like being able to prove your identity to access key services swiftly”, he said.

While ID cards have long been common in other Western European countries, the UK has a history of strong resistance towards them.

Speaking to reporters on his way to Mumbai this week, Starmer said he hopes, however, that digital IDs, which will become mandatory by 2029, will gain public confidence because of the convenience they will be able to provide.

“I don’t know how many times the rest of you have had to look in the bottom drawer for three bills when you want to get your kids into school or apply for this or apply for that – drives me to frustration,” he said. “I do think that we could gain a significant advantage.”

However, rights groups have strongly criticised the proposal of digital IDs, which, they say, would infringe on people’s right to privacy – and more than 2.2 million people have signed a petition opposing the introduction.

The petition describes the Brit Card as a “step towards mass surveillance and digital control”, and adds that “no one should be forced to register with a state-controlled ID system.”

How does India’s ‘Aadhaar’ digital ID system work?

India’s digital ID system, Aadhaar, is much bigger and far more detailed than the one the UK is planning. New Delhi stores people’s fingerprints, eye scans, photos, home addresses and phone numbers, and its system processes about 80 million authentications each day.

By comparison, the UK’s proposed digital ID system will be much narrower in scope, focusing on basic identity verification, without collecting biometric data like fingerprints or iris scans.

Under Aadhaar, every Indian citizen receives a 12-digit number that aims to replace many paper documents. All adults and children more than the age of five must provide biometric information.

The system is used to verify identities when people open bank accounts or apply for a new SIM card for their mobile phones, for example. The system has also aimed to streamline the disbursement of government benefits, giving the holder instant proof of identity and access to basic services.

Launched in 2009, the Indian government has issued more than 1.3 billion cards and claims to have saved nearly $10bn in administration costs. Some critics say that is an overstatement, however.

UK officials have made it clear that they do not wish to replicate the Aadhaar system – rather, to learn from how it has been implemented.

A government spokesperson denied that the system would store biometric data of holders, adding that “one of the core priorities is inclusivity and that’s what the British consultation will be about.”

Why is India’s Aadhaar controversial?

India’s Aadhaar has suffered several mass data leaks, at times exposing the personal information belonging to as much as 85 percent of the population and raising concerns about privacy.

At least three large-scale Aadhaar data leaks were reported in 2018, 2019 and 2022, with personal information put up for sale on the dark web, including one from the government’s COVID-vaccination portal.

In January 2025, the Indian government allowed private companies to access Aadhaar’s databases for authentication purposes. To gain access, private companies must apply and be vetted by the government. Critics have opposed this access to behavioural and biometric data.

“The core problem with Aadhaar was conceptual – centralisation of digital ID and accompanying biometric information should be avoided,” said Vrinda Bhandari, a Supreme Court lawyer with a focus on digital rights and privacy. “More importantly, it should never be linked or seeded into other databases.”

Public confidence is low. A survey conducted earlier this year by civic-tech company LocalCircles revealed that 87 percent of Indian citizens believe elements of their personal data are already in the public domain or on compromised databases. That number is a rise from 72 percent in 2022.

The government body, Unique Identification Authority of India, which issues Aadhaar cards, maintains that personal data is secure. But India does not yet have a robust data protection law in practice, so critics say there is no way to be sure of this.

“The creation of a digital ID architecture requires strong legal and data privacy protections,” said Bhandari. “Without this supporting law and the surrounding complaints infrastructure, citizens are forced to fight expensive legal battles in courts.”

The reliance on Aadhaar has also led to greater hardship for some of the country’s most marginalised and poorest citizens, denying them medical care or food rations, critics say.

Technical problems have often halted the payment of pensions when fingerprints don’t match or internet connectivity has stalled, with researchers claiming that Aadhaar has often made welfare delivery more difficult, not easier.

India’s Supreme Court approved Aadhaar’s use for welfare and taxes but restricted its use by private companies or in education in 2018, following a case lodged by civil society groups. This year’s access to the system for private groups was made possible by policy changes which introduced government vetting into the process.

Furthermore, critics argue, India’s digital ID system has created an “architecture of surveillance” without strong enough safeguards.

Have other countries drawn inspiration from the Indian model?

Yes. In 2019, Kenya attempted to build a national digital ID system that closely followed India’s Aadhaar model.

The government launched the National Integrated Identity Management System (NIIMS), also called Huduma Namba, to streamline government services and fight fraud. Its design drew heavily from the Aadhaar framework.

But the project quickly faced pushback from civil society groups, who argued that it was fraught with privacy and exclusion flaws, with no adequate legal safeguards to protect citizens. In 2020, these groups lodged a case against the introduction of the system in the High Court in Nairobi, which halted the rollout.

The following year, Kenya passed its Data Protection Act, which created a legal framework for collecting, storing, and processing personal data, and later rebranded its system as “Maisha Namba”, promising stronger oversight of how citizens’ biometric and personal data would be stored and used. Various legal challenges, which argue that gaps in safety have not been adequately addressed, however, are ongoing.

The national ID systems in other countries, including the Philippines, Morocco and Ethiopia, are also modelled on Aadhaar.

In the UK, rights groups have raised concerns about Starmer’s Brit Card plan. Silkie Carlo, the director of Big Brother Watch, a UK-based civil liberties and privacy advocacy organisation, warned that the system would “make Britain less free” and create “a domestic mass surveillance infrastructure that will likely sprawl from citizenship to benefits, tax, health, possibly even internet data and more”.

Addressing these concerns in September when the ID system was announced, the UK’s culture secretary, Lisa Nandy, said ministers had “no intention of pursuing a dystopian mess”.

What else did Modi and Starmer discuss in Mumbai?

On Thursday, Modi and Starmer were hoping to capitalise on their July free-trade agreement. Aiming to turbocharge commercial links, the UK delegation included more than 100 leaders from British businesses and universities.

Under the trade agreement signed in July, India and the UK agreed to cut tariffs on goods ranging from textiles and whisky to cars in order to double trade to $120bn by 2030.

“India’s dynamism and the UK’s expertise together create a unique synergy,” Modi said, after talks with the British prime minister on Thursday, adding that the industry leaders accompanying Starmer “reflect the new energy and broad vision” in the partnership.

Starmer said: “When we leave India tonight, I expect that we will have secured major new investments creating thousands of high-skilled jobs in the sectors of the future.”

Ultimately, the two countries announced a string of new agreements on Thursday.

A statement by the Indian Ministry of External Affairs said the two sides had agreed to set up an India-UK connectivity and innovation centre and a joint centre for the development of artificial intelligence (AI), and unveiled a critical minerals industry guild to bring together businesses and researchers and to coordinate the safe mining and processing of minerals.

An official handout from the UK government noted that 64 Indian companies would collectively invest 1.3 billion pounds ($1.73bn) in the UK.

“The UK-India trade deal is already unlocking growth, and today’s announcements mark the beginning of a new era of collaboration between our two nations,” Starmer said.

What difficulties remain?

London and New Delhi do not see eye to eye on all issues, however.

One major bone of contention is Russia’s invasion of and ongoing war in Ukraine. The UK, as part of NATO, has taken a strong position against Moscow, imposing sanctions and sending weapons to Kyiv. India avoids condemning Russia, however, and has continued to buy Russian oil – part of the reason United States President Donald Trump said he was imposing 50 percent trade tariffs on India earlier this year.

Indian officials describe their position towards Russia as a policy of strategic autonomy, while British and European leaders view it as a major point of divergence within their broader partnership.

Another area of tension is Khalistan-related activism in the UK. India has repeatedly raised concerns about Sikh separatist groups operating from British soil, especially after the 2023 vandalism of the Indian High Commission in London.

In 2023, a BBC documentary that portrayed Modi in an unflattering light was denounced by Indian officials as “anti-India propaganda”.

At the same time, tensions between India and Canada – a member of the UK’s Five Eyes intelligence alliance – deepened after Ottawa alleged Indian involvement in the killing of Sikh separatist Hardeep Singh Nijjar.

Thousands of students rallied in Pakistan’s capital, Islamabad, after a Gaza ceasefire deal was announced, expressing solidarity with Palestinians and urging action to support those affected by the war.