Maybe They Have to Do It Differently: Trump Breaks With Netanyahu, Calls Gaza a Famine Zone and Urges Ceasefire Push
U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday signalled a sharp rhetorical shift on the Gaza conflict, saying he believed a famine is underway in the Palestinian enclave and urging Israel to “maybe… do it in a different way.”
Speaking outside his Turnberry resort in Scotland alongside U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Trump also called for renewed ceasefire talks and expressed frustration with Israeli and Hamas actions, saying “nobody’s done anything great over there.”
 |
| Image Source: Obua Bey on X |
Asked directly if he agreed with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s claim earlier that day that there was no starvation in Gaza, Trump replied, “I don’t know… based on television, I would say not particularly, because those children look very hungry.”
Trump confirmed the United States has sent “a lot of money and a lot of food” to Gaza, and said “other nations are now stepping up.”
He emphasized the urgency of addressing hunger and civilian safety: “They need to get food and safety right now.”
While he did not call explicitly for a ceasefire, he said his goal was to “get ceasefire talks restarted,” suggesting a more active diplomatic posture moving forward.
In his most pointed remark toward Israeli military strategy to date, Trump added, “I told Israel maybe they have to do it a different way,” referencing the toll on civilians.
Asked if Israel had done enough to prevent civilian casualties, he responded: “Nobody’s done anything great over there. The whole place is a mess.”
Standing beside him, U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer called the situation in Gaza “a real humanitarian crisis,” adding: “People in Britain are revolted at what they’re seeing on their screens.”
Starmer’s comments align with growing political pressure in Westminster, where over one-third of Labour MPs are reportedly urging the government to recognise Palestinian statehood without further delay.
Trump, when asked whether the U.K.’s recognition of a Palestinian state would affect U.S. policy, declined to take a position.
“I’m not going to take a position. I don’t mind him (Starmer) taking a position. I’m looking for getting people fed right now,” he said.
The U.S. president also reiterated skepticism about Hamas’s willingness to release the remaining Israeli hostages.
“A lot of that money is stolen by Hamas and a lot of that food is stolen,” he added, referring to American aid efforts.
Downing Street had indicated before the meeting that Starmer would urge Trump to toughen his stance on Israel’s actions in Gaza and push for immediate humanitarian measures.
An emergency cabinet session is now expected later this week to reassess the U.K. government’s approach, amid public outrage over graphic images of Gaza’s starvation crisis.
Trump’s comments come at a critical juncture in the Middle East and as international attention intensifies around both humanitarian access and diplomatic solutions.
With a UN conference scheduled in New York this week, U.K. Foreign Secretary David Lammy is expected to attend, focusing on a pathway toward recognition of a Palestinian state.
In the same appearance, Trump also turned to the war in Ukraine, expressing frustration with Russian President Vladimir Putin. He accused Moscow of violating the spirit of ceasefire efforts by launching missile attacks on civilians, including in Kyiv.
“We thought we had that settled numerous times, and then President Putin goes out and starts launching rockets into some city like Kyiv and kills a lot of people in a nursing home or whatever,” Trump said.
He signaled a change in strategy, stating he would reduce the previously announced 50-day window for Russia to agree to a ceasefire before facing new tariffs.
“I’m going to reduce that 50 days that I gave him to a lesser number, because I think I already know the answer,” he said.
The dual crises in Gaza and Ukraine are increasingly shaping Trump’s foreign policy agenda during his return to the White House. Monday’s remarks suggest a recalibration of tone -- and possibly substance -- in how the U.S. engages with both conflicts, with potential consequences for its alliances and global leadership role.
Also Read: