President Donald Trump publicly rebuked Israel's military campaign in Lebanon during a bilateral meeting with Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani on the sidelines of the G7 summit in Evian-les-Bains, France, on Tuesday.

Trump said he was "not happy" with how Israel has conducted its operations, criticizing the duration of the conflict and the high civilian casualty count, asserting that "too many people are being killed."

The public friction between Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu signals a significant diplomatic rift over the trajectory of the US-Israeli-Iran war. The United States and Iran recently moved toward a major diplomatic agreement to de-escalate hostilities and reopen the Strait of Hormuz. A core element of the broader regional peace framework involves stabilizing Lebanon.

Netanyahu has heavily resisted international calls to halt operations. In a public address, he said that Israel has established "deep security zones" in Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria, and intends to remain in them for as long as necessary to protect the country.

According to Lebanon's health ministry, intense military actions since early March have resulted in thousands of deaths and injuries, alongside the displacement of over 600,000 residents from southern Lebanon.

While Trump dismissed the conflict in Lebanon as a "minor war" compared to broader regional tensions, his statements at the G7 underscore that the White House views Israel's continuous bombardment of Beirut and civilian infrastructure as a direct impediment to securing a historic deal with Iran.

"Israel is fighting Hezbollah too long and too many people are being killed" Trump said. "And you don't have to knock down an apartment house every time you're looking for somebody. Because there are a lot of people in those apartment houses. And they're not all Hezbollah—that I can tell you."

The US president specifically condemned the destruction of residential infrastructure, remarking, "You don't have to knock down an apartment house every time you're looking for somebody because there's a lot of people in those apartment houses – and they're not all Hezbollah." He argued that Israel's fight against Hezbollah has gone on "too long" and should have been concluded faster, noting that the ongoing violence threatens to derail delicate peace negotiations between the U.S. and Iran.

"I'm not happy with the way Israel has handled themselves with Lebanon and with Hezbollah, Trump said. "They should have been able to do the job faster. It just goes on forever. And when that happens, it throws a negative light on the big deal, and that's the deal with Iran."

In a surprising suggestion, Trump proposed that Syria should "take care" of Hezbollah, claiming Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa would "do a better job" than Israel at managing the threat without mass casualties.

"I suggested to Israel to let Syria take care of Hezbollah," Trump said. "Because to be honest with you, I think they'd do a better job of doing it... He’s very capable. And he's been very good for me. He’s protected everything that I’ve asked for. If Israel can't do the job without killing everyone else, he'll do the job. Syria will do the job."

While Trump maintained he has a "great relationship" with Netanyahu, he issued a stark warning that "there would be no Israel" without U.S. support and demanded Netanyahu be "more responsible with respect to Lebanon," particularly following an Israeli airstrike on Beirut that occurred just hours before a planned U.S.-Iran agreement signing.

"I had a great relationship with Bibi, but now Bibi has to be more responsible with respect to Lebanon..." Trump said. "Without us, without the United States, there would be no Israel. Without me, there would be no Israel because no other president was willing to do what I did. Israel would have been blown off the face of the earth, 100 percent. And every smart person in Israel knows that."

Trump was particularly vocal about the Israeli airstrike executed in Beirut just hours before the U.S. and Iran finalized an interim peace agreement: "I didn't like where, two hours before we're signing the agreement, that there was an attack in Lebanon, in Beirut. I let them know that. I didn't like that, not at all."

The leaked text of the multi-point U.S.–Iran memorandum of understanding (MOU) has exposed deep fissures within the Republican coalition. Following a dramatic escalation that began with joint U.S.–Israel military strikes in late February 2026, Trump announced on Sunday that a formal ceasefire framework had been reached.

During a media blitz, Tuesday, on The Megyn Kelly Show, Tuesday, Vice President JD Vance aggressively defended the agreement, directing his sharpest rebukes not just at traditional neoconservatives, but also at non-interventionist allies who feel betrayed by the administration's military actions and subsequent diplomacy.

"They want this to go on until every bomb has been dropped, or until every Iranian is dead. That is not what the President of the United States wants," Vance said of neoconservative warhawks who have been having a meltdown on social media, since Trump announced that the US and Iran has signed the MOU.

The leaked draft text of the U.S.–Iran memorandum, reportedly reveals a temporary structure designed to halt hostilities for 60 days while permanent nuclear talks take place.

The core elements of the leaked document include:

• Regional Ceasefire: A total cessation of hostilities from all sides, explicitly extending to Iran's proxies and the Israel-Hezbollah front in Lebanon.

• Maritime Reopening: The U.S. will lift its naval blockade, and Iran must restore commercial navigation to pre-war volumes through the critical Strait of Hormuz.

• Sanctions & Oil Relief: The U.S. will grant immediate sanctions relief allowing Iranian oil exports and refrain from introducing new sanctions or deploying additional troops during the 60-day window.

• The Nuclear Question: Iran must reaffirm its commitment to never develop or acquire nuclear weapons. It must halt current uranium enrichment and maintain a strict status quo while negotiating the timeline for dismantling its nuclear sites. (The U.S. is pushing for a 20-year freeze; Iran is holding at 10).

• The Investment Controversy: Most controversially, reports indicate the framework outlines a path to release Iran’s frozen assets, potentially funneling into a $300 billion reconstruction and regional investment fund, though the administration claims these funds are strictly conditional on verifiable behavior changes.

On the Megyn Kelly’s podcast, Vance faced tough questions about a GOP "civil war." Right-leaning figures—including Kelly herself, Tucker Carlson, and Candace Owens—had previously criticized the administration's aggressive military steps, while hawkish Republicans are now furious over the diplomatic concessions being offered to Tehran.

Vance dismissed the idea that Republicans should abandon Trump over the deal, calling the internal revolt "immature."

“Even if you disagree with this particular action, it's completely ridiculous to pick up your marbles and go home, Vance said. "That's not how politics works... You can't just quit politics because the leader of a country of 330 million people makes a decision that you disagree with.”

Vance noted his frustration with non-interventionist Republicans who distance themselves from the administration whenever a disagreement arises, contrasting them with establishment hawks. “The reason why neocons are so much more effective in politics than the people on the other side in our coalition is because they play the game," he said. "They get disappointed, they make their criticisms, and they go back to fight another day.”

When pressed on the optics of lifting blockades and freeing up frozen capital for Iran, Vance downplayed the immediate financial windfall, insisting that regional investment and asset releases are entirely locked behind compliance benchmarks. “Iran won't get unfrozen funds without behavior changes,” he said.

Vance reminded Kelly that the populist MAGA coalition was built on a wide tent—ranging from non-interventionists like Tucker Carlson and Joe Rogan to traditional hawks like Mark Levin—and that maintaining a "good deal for the American people" requires staying engaged in the messy realities of governance rather than walking away.

The digital MOU framework has already been electronically signed by both nations. Vice President Vance, along with Middle East Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, are scheduled to fly to Geneva, Switzerland, to formally sign the physical accord, after which the White House is expected to officially publish the unredacted terms of the deal.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced on Monday, that the UK will ban children under 16 from using major social media platforms, including TikTok, Snapchat, Instagram, Facebook, X, and YouTube, with regulations expected to take effect by spring 2027.

The government intends to pass the necessary legislation before Christmas 2026 using secondary powers under the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Act to accelerate implementation. While the ban targets "user-to-user" platforms with algorithmic feeds, messaging services like WhatsApp and Signal, as well as educational tools like YouTube Kids, are exempt.

The decision follows a public consultation receiving over 116,000 responses, in which 85-90% of parents stated that the dangers of social media outweigh the benefits. Starmer described the move as a "line in the sand" against tech giants, citing evidence that platforms expose children to harmful content, addiction, and bullying, making them "unhappy and unsafe."

The UK model mirrors Australia's December 2025 ban but includes stricter measures, such as default blocks on livestreaming and stranger communication for 16 and 17-year-olds to prevent a safety "cliff-edge."

Compliance will be enforced by Ofcom, which is tasked with developing "Highly Effective Age Assurance" (HEAA) methods, potentially involving facial analysis or ID checks, with fines levied against non-compliant tech companies rather than children.

While campaigners like the Smartphone Free Childhood group hailed the measure as a turning point, critics including the Molly Rose Foundation and tech firms like Meta and YouTube warn that blanket bans may drive minors to unregulated, less safe corners of the internet and fail to address harmful algorithms.

Free speech advocates and prominent figures like SpaceX CEO Elon Musk warn that the measure is a dangerous backdoor attempt by the UK government to introduce the widely unpopular digital ID, track and prosecute critics of government policies. The US Embassy expressed concern that the regulations could burden American companies and infringe on free speech principles.