Israeli airstrikes killed at least four people in Gaza on Saturday, just hours after Donald Trump and his Board of Peace announced a "historic" roadmap for the complete disarmament of Hamas and a phased withdrawal of Israeli forces.

“Today, the Board of Peace reached a HISTORIC agreement for the COMPLETE DISARMAMENT of Hamas and all other armed groups in Gaza,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post. “This is a monumental step toward lasting PEACE and SECURITY.”

The agreement stipulates that disarmament and withdrawal must occur in "lockstep," yet Israel has not officially accepted the plan and continues military operations.

Tensions escalated when notorious Jewish extremist and Israeli minister Itamar Ben-Gvir labeled the agreement "unacceptable," insisting that "assassinations in Gaza must continue." Consequently, the IDF struck multiple targets, including weapons depots and medical warehouses near Al-Aqsa Martyrs Hospital, killing civilians and wounding others.

The 14-point roadmap, finalized in Cairo with mediators from Egypt, Qatar, and Turkey, outlines a transition where Hamas decommissions weapons while the IDF gradually withdraws.

Key provisions of the agreement include:

Phased Disarmament: Hamas agrees to hand over heavy weapons to a new technocratic body, the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG), over an estimated 200 to 320 days.

Security Transition: An International Stabilization Force (ISF) and a new Palestinian police force will assume security responsibilities as Israeli troops pull back.

Verification: An international verification committee will monitor compliance, with the principle that "withdrawal must move in lockstep with decommissioning."

Despite the announcement, Israel has not formally accepted the deal, with officials demanding complete demilitarization as a precondition for any withdrawal. Ghazi Hamad of Hamas insisted the group would not disarm prior to Israeli withdrawal, calling the deal a draft pending Israeli commitment.

While Trump hailed the agreement as a "monumental step toward lasting peace," the violence underscored deep skepticism and unresolved conditions between the parties, signaling a potential stalemate in implementing the ceasefire.

Thousands of migrants streamed into Ceuta from Morocco on Thursday, prompting Spain to deploy its military to restore order after at least nine people died during the crossing. Local officials described the situation as "absolute chaos" with the border fence "totally collapsed," leading Ceuta's government to request a national emergency declaration, which the left-wing government in Madrid denied.

Crowds, consisting mainly of young Moroccan men along with some families, bypassed border controls by walking around breakwaters at Tarajal beach or swimming from the Moroccan town of Fnideq.

While Ceuta's leader Juan Jesús Vivas warned that reception centers were overwhelmed and minors' facilities were operating at 2,400% capacity, the Spanish Interior Ministry said in a statement that it would guarantee citizen safety using the Armed Forces and Civil Guard without declaring a formal emergency.

Left-wing Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez and Interior Minister Fernando Grande-Marlaska scheduled a visit to the enclave for July 31 to evaluate the crisis, while Morocco and Spain agreed to cooperate on returning those who entered illegally.

Ceuta is a Spanish autonomous city on the North African coast that has been a Spanish possession since 1580 and serves as one of the European Union's only land borders with Africa. Because they are part of Spain and the European Union, reaching Ceuta puts migrants on European soil. As a result, both enclaves are high-priority transit points for migrants fleeing economic hardship, conflict, or political instability.

The territory is a recurring diplomatic flashpoint; a similar crisis in May 2021 saw 8,000 migrants enter after Morocco allegedly eased controls in retaliation for Spain treating a Western Sahara independence leader Brahim Ghali, leader of the Polisario Front.

Dynamics: Border security at Ceuta relies entirely on bilateral cooperation. Whenever diplomatic channels fray, or when enforcement shifts, human smuggling networks rapidly exploit gaps.

While some officials linked the 2026 surge to a recent Spanish left-wing Supreme Court ruling regarding due process for sea arrivals, activists doubt most migrants were aware of the legal change, and the precise trigger for the mass crossing remains unclear.

The supreme court ruling restricted summary pushbacks (devoluciones en caliente) for migrants intercepted in coastal waters near Ceuta, requiring individual due process procedures before deportation. Spanish officials noted that human smuggling rings took advantage of perceived procedural delays to organize mass land and sea attempts simultaneously.

Critics, including opposition leaders and right-wing parties across Europe, directly blame Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez's migrant-friendly policies and a recent Spanish Supreme Court ruling for creating a "pull factor" that led to the surge.

Unlike land crossings, which allow for immediate rejection under special border regimes, the supreme court ruling mandates that sea arrivals undergo ordinary legal and asylum processes. Vivas noted that this removed a vital deterrent, leading to an "explosion" of arrivals.

Critics accuse Prime Minister Sánchez of fostering an "invasion" through his government's extraordinary regularization program, launched in April 2026 to grant legal status to undocumented migrants.

While the government intended to regularize approximately 500,000 people, the scheme received over 1.2 million applications, fueling accusations from Vox leader Santiago Abascal and People's Party leader Alberto Núñez Feijóo that the policy encourages illegal entry.

U.S. President Trump reportedly "erupted" in expletive-laden fury during a national security meeting last week, expressing deep frustration over the stalled Iran conflict and the lack of a clear strategy to force Tehran into a deal after nearly six months of war.

While Trump claimed he did not intend a "long, drawn-out war," unnamed officials describe a White House facing "strategic defeat" due to internal disunity and Iran's refusal to negotiate despite tactical US victories. The White House has officially denied the account of Trump's outburst, insisting the administration remains united and "locked and loaded" to continue punishing Iran.

“I don’t think he believed it was going to be this difficult to get the Iranians to agree to a deal," a close Trump ally who spoke to him recently, reportedly said. "There was not a real strategy for how long or what they should do to get to the endpoint. He did not intend this to be a long, drawn-out war."

Deep divisions have emerged within Trump's inner circle regarding the path forward, splitting advisers into two distinct camps. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and US Central Command (CENTCOM) Commander Brad Cooper advocate for increased military pressure, whereas Vice President JD Vance and Joint Chiefs Chairman Dan Caine warn against depleting munitions stockpiles without a defined endgame.

Trump expressed deep irritation at being unable to secure a lasting deal or exit strategy after a preliminary Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) collapsed. Insiders noted he was frustrated that his national security team lacked a cohesive, unified policy guidance. The president reportedly referred to Iranian leadership as "lunatics and scumbags," lamenting that trying to negotiate with Tehran was a "waste of time."

This strategic deadlock coincides with rising domestic political pressure ahead of the November midterm elections, as Republicans fear voter backlash over soaring fuel prices and war fatigue.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt denied reports that Trump lost control or lacked confidence in his team, stating: "The president has a great team whom he trusts... He's locked and loaded to keep punishing Iran."

Meanwhile tensions between the US and Israel reared its head as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu confronted JD Vance in a candid private meeting on Wednesday, following Vance's public criticism of the Israeli government's disloyalty to Trump.

Since the start of the US-Israel-Iran war, Vice President Vance has been one of the Trump administration's most vocal advocates for a diplomatic resolution with Iran to prevent a nuclear weapon without entangling the U.S. in a prolonged regional war.

Tensions escalated after Vance appeared on The Joe Rogan Experience, where he openly accused elements inside Netanyahu's government of trying to manipulate U.S. public opinion, running foreign influence campaigns to sabotage U.S.–Iran peace talks, and attempting to drag the U.S. into an endless war. On the podcast, the vice president also claimed that convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein had links to "Israeli intelligence" elements.

During their direct one-on-one meeting at the Blair House in Washington, Netanyahu confronted Vance over his public criticisms, arguing that the public comments undermined Israel and threatened the bilateral alliance. Vance, on the other hand, held his ground, suspecting Netanyahu and his allies in pro-government Israeli media of orchestrating attacks to target the vice president politically.

Netanyahu, who is facing reelection in October, sought to repair strains in the alliance after Trump privately complained that the Israeli leader was trying to drag the US deeper into the conflict to serve his own political needs. During a recent Fox News interview, Trump expressed annoyance that Netanyahu was sharing intelligence on Iranian nuclear activities, stating, "Bibi is telling me that because he wants me to stay involved."

The U.S. has achieved several tactical military objectives, but the administration remains divided over whether to push for aggressive regime-level military pressure on Iran or force a diplomatic deal.

While Netanyahu publicly praises his rapport with President Trump, Israeli leadership has pushed to keep up military pressure on Iran's nuclear sites (such as Pickaxe Mountain). Meanwhile, figures like Vance argue that Israel is attempting to dictate U.S. foreign policy timelines at the expense of American strategic interests.