Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Biden and Trump Take Credit For Gaza Ceasefire

News

Biden and Trump Take Credit For Gaza Ceasefire

Palestinians gather to celebrate after the announcement of an cease-fire agreement between Israel and Hamas in Ramallah, West Bank on January 15, 2025.

(Photo by Issam Rimawi /Anadolu via Getty Images)

WASHINGTON— On Wednesday, both U.S. President Joe Biden and President-elect Donald Trump took credit for a ceasefire-for-hostages agreement related to the conflict in Gaza. This deal, which had been in the works for several months, received additional support from an envoy associated with Trump, helping to facilitate its completion.

In announcing the ceasefire, Biden noted the final deal largely mirrored the framework of a proposal he made back in May, Reuters reported. He smiled when a reporter asked who the history books will credit for the ceasefire and asked, "Is that a joke?"


In a social media post, Trump promptly asserted that he deserved some credit for the recent breakthrough, which followed months of stalled negotiations. He had previously expressed strong concerns, stating there would be "hell to pay" if a deal wasn't reached before he assumes office on Monday.

"This EPIC ceasefire agreement could have only happened as a result of our Historic Victory in November, as it signaled to the entire World that my Administration would seek Peace and negotiate deals to ensure the safety of all Americans, and our Allies," he said.

Reuters reported that Trump had dispatched his Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, to join the negotiations in Doha, and Witkoff was there for the last 96 hours of talks leading up to the deal.

A senior official from the Biden administration, during a briefing with reporters, acknowledged Witkoff's contributions to facilitating the deal, noting his collaboration with Biden's envoy, Brett McGurk, who has been in Doha since January 5.

The cease-fire will be implemented in two phases. The first phase, expected to last approximately six weeks, involves a complete cease-fire, the withdrawal of Israeli forces from all populated areas in Gaza, and the release of several hostages held by Hamas, including women, the elderly, and the wounded.

Israel has also released hundreds of Palestinian prisoners, Biden said, and Palestinians "can also return to their neighborhoods in all areas of Gaza, and a surge of humanitarian assistance into Gaza will begin." The second phase of the cease-fire will begin after Israel negotiates "the necessary arrangements," which Biden said would mark "a permanent end of the war,” Fox News reported.

Jonathan Panikoff, director of the Scowcroft Middle East Security Initiative at the Atlantic Council, told the Associated Press that Biden deserves praise for continuing to push the talks despite repeated failures. But Trump’s threats to Hamas and his efforts through Witkoff to “cajole” Netanyahu deserve credit as well, he said.

“The ironic reality is that at a time of heightened partisanship even over foreign policy, the deal represents how much more powerful and influential U.S. foreign policy can be when it’s bipartisan,” he said. “Both the outgoing and incoming administration deserve credit for this deal, and it would’ve been far less likely to happen without both pushing for it.”

Israeli President Isaac Herzog expressed his appreciation to both the incoming and outgoing U.S. presidents.

According to a senior U.S. official involved in the negotiations, the agreement implementation could start on Sunday, when the first group of hostages might be released.

Hugo Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum, and the publisher of the Latino News Network.


Read More

Who’s Responsible When AI Causes Harm?: Unpacking the Federal AI Liability Framework Debate
the letters are made up of different colors

Who’s Responsible When AI Causes Harm?: Unpacking the Federal AI Liability Framework Debate

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key takeaways

  • The U.S. has no national AI liability law. Instead, a patchwork of state laws has emerged which has resulted in legal protections being dependent on where an individual resides.
  • It’s often unclear who is legally responsible when AI causes harm. This gap leaves many people with no clear path to seek help.
  • In March 2026, the White House and Congress introduced major proposals to establish a federal standard, but there is significant disagreement about whether that standard should prioritize protecting innovation or protecting people harmed by AI systems.

Background: A Patchwork of State Laws

Without a national AI law, states have been filling in the gaps on their own. The result is an uneven landscape where a person’s legal protections depend entirely on which state they live in.

Keep ReadingShow less
Stethoscope, pile of hundred dollar bills and a calculator

A deep dive into America’s healthcare cost crisis, comparing reform to a modern “moonshot.” Explores payment models, rising costs, and lessons from John F. Kennedy’s space race vision to drive systemic change.

IronHeart/Getty Images

The Moonshot America Needs to Solve Its Healthcare Crisis

In 1961, President John F. Kennedy told the nation, “We choose to go to the moon.” It’s often remembered as a moment of national ambition. In reality, the United States was locked in a Cold War with the Soviet Union, and the fear of falling behind in technological dominance made the mission unavoidable.

Today’s space race is driven by a different force. Governments and private companies are investing billions to capture economic advantages, from satellite infrastructure to advanced computing to the next frontier of resource extraction.

Keep ReadingShow less
After the Court's Voting Rights Decision - How to Protect Black-Majority Districts
a large white building with columns with United States Supreme Court Building in the background

After the Court's Voting Rights Decision - How to Protect Black-Majority Districts

The Supreme Court recently ruled that Louisiana violated the Constitution in creating a new Black-majority voting district. This was after a Federal court had ruled that the previous map, by packing Blacks all in one district, diluted their votes, which violated the Voting Rights Act.

The question is what impact the decision in Louisiana v Callais will have on §2 of the Voting Rights Act ... and on the current gerrymander contest to gain safe seats in the House. The conservative majority said that the decision left the Act intact. The liberal minority, in a strong dissent by Justice Kagan, said that the practical impact was to "render §2 all but a dead letter," making it likely that existing Black-majority districts will not remain for long.

Keep ReadingShow less