Asking Israel to reach a ceasefire with Hamas is “untenable”, the UK’s defence secretary has said, as the number of MPs calling for a cessation of hostilities grows.
Grant Shapps said Israel has “a right” to “go after” Hamas after its gunmen killed more than 1,400 Israelis on 7 October and abducted over 220 other people who are now being held hostage in Gaza.
Mr Shapps, who recently replaced Ben Wallace as defence secretary, took the same position as Rishi Sunak who said during Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday that the “first and most important principle is that Israel has the right to defend itself under law”.
However, Mr Sunak agreed that humanitarian aid had to get to civilians in Gaza and confirmed an RAF plane was on its way to the region with 21 tonnes of supplies, including medical equipment and water filters.
Image: An Israeli tank and military vehicles are seen near Israel’s border with the Gaza Strip, in southern Israel
The Hamas-run health ministry has said at least 6,546 Palestinians have been killed in Israeli retaliatory strikes on Gaza.
Mr Shapps told the Politics Hub with Sophy Ridge that he agreed it was “very important that we can deliver that aid”.
More on Grant Shapps
Related Topics:
“The difference is we understand that Israel was attacked in a very brutal way by Hamas terrorists, butchering men, women and children ISIS-style,” he said.
“I think to then ask Israel not to respond – or what you would describe as a ceasefire – I think is untenable.
Advertisement
“They have a right to go after those terrorists but it is the international humanitarian situation that a pause could assist with.”
Mr Shapps went on to argue that if there had been a terrorist attack in the UK on the same scale that Israel had endured, “no one would expect us not to go after the perpetrators”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:03
Reality of Palestinians in Gaza City
“To call for a ceasefire is to essentially say to Israel, having gone through that absolutely horrific terrorist attack just over two weeks ago, don’t go after Hamas – and I don’t think anyone thinks that would be right,” he said.
“And so we can understand and appreciate under international law that Israel has the absolute right to do that.
“We also believe that it needs to be done in a proportionate way with international human rights law in place and that is very clear.”
In the past few days, a number of MPs from across the political divide have called for a ceasefire, arguing that there was a “human responsibility” to protect civilians in the Gaza Strip who have had their water and power limited by Israel following the 7 October attack.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
6:24
Grandmother on losing her grandson
Speaking at this week’s PMQs, the deputy leader of the SNP, Mhairi Black, pointed to warnings from the United Nations that some hospitals in Gaza City had less than 20 hours of fuel left and their electricity “runs out tonight”.
She was joined by the leader of Northern Ireland’s Social Democratic and Labour Party, Colum Eastwood, who asked: “As 1,400 Israelis and almost 6,000 Palestinians lay dying and dead, when will the prime minister say enough is enough? When will he call for a ceasefire?”
Labour shadow minister for equalities Yasmin Qureshi also echoed the calls for a truce and read out an email from one of her constituents with relatives in Gaza, which read: “My heart can’t handle this. We are being massacred, relentlessly bombed, homes are being destroyed [and there is] no water, no food, no electricity.”
In response to the calls from MPs, Mr Sunak urged people to remember that Israel had suffered “a shockinglybrutal terrorist attack”.
“Hamas is responsible for this conflict and Israel has the right to protect itself in line with international law as the UN charter makes clear.”
The Labour Party has also resisted calls for a ceasefire but has signalled its support for a humanitarian pause in order to protect civilians.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
The stance is the same as that adopted by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who told the UN Security Council on Tuesday that a humanitarian pause meant Israel “must take all possible precautions to avoid harm to civilians.
“It means food, water, medicine, and other essential humanitarian assistance must be able to flow into Gaza and to the people who need them.”
Asked whether he believed a ground invasion would fall under Israel’s right to defend itself, Mr Shapps told Ridge: “As long as the people that they are going after are the Hamas terrorists, yes.
“The problem we have with Hamas is not just that they butchered and killed and raped those Israelis. It’s that they also use their own Palestinian population – who are no friends of Hamas – as human shields, and they hide themselves amongst them.
“And so we understand and appreciate that it’s a very difficult position for Israel to be in.”
Taiwan could see its first stablecoin launched as early as the second half of 2026 as lawmakers advance new rules for digital assets, according to one of the country’s financial regulators.
According to a Focus Taiwan report on Wednesday, Financial Supervisory Commission (FSC) Chair Peng Jin-lon said that, based on the timeline for passing related legislation, a Taiwan-issued stablecoin could enter the market in the second half of 2026.
Should the Virtual Assets Service Act pass in the country’s next legislative session, and accounting for a six-month buffer period for the law to take effect, it would lay the groundwork for the launch of a Taiwanese stablecoin.
Peng said the draft legislation was derived from Europe’s Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) and would eventually allow non-financial institutions to issue stablecoins. Initially, however, Taiwan’s central bank and the FSC would restrict issuance to regulated entities.
Last year, Taiwan’s policymakers began enforcing Anti-Money Laundering regulations in response to alleged violations by crypto companies MaiCoin and BitoPro. As of December, however, regulated entities in the country have yet to launch a stablecoin pegged to either the US dollar or the Taiwan dollar.
In addition to the FSC’s advancement of stablecoin regulations, Taiwan’s policymakers are reportedly assessing the total amount of Bitcoin (BTC) confiscated by authorities. The move signaled that the nation could be preparing to launch its own strategic crypto stockpile.
Ju-Chun, a Taiwanese lawmaker, called on the government to add BTC to its national reserves in May as a hedge against economic uncertainty.
The country’s reserves include US Treasury bonds and gold, but no cryptocurrencies. Other countries, such as the US, have adopted policies that promote Bitcoin and crypto reserves.
Former US Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Gary Gensler renewed his warning to investors about the risks of cryptocurrencies, calling most of the market “highly speculative” in a new Bloomberg interview on Tuesday.
He carved out Bitcoin (BTC) as comparatively closer to a commodity while stressing that most tokens don’t offer “a dividend” or “usual returns.”
Gensler framed the current market backdrop as a reckoning consistent with warnings he made while in office that the global public’s fascination with cryptocurrencies doesn’t equate to fundamentals.
“All the thousands of other tokens, not the stablecoins that are backed by US dollars, but all the thousands of other tokens, you have to ask yourself, what are the fundamentals? What’s underlying it… The investing public just needs to be aware of those risks,” he said.
Gensler’s record and industry backlash
Gensler led the SEC from April 17, 2021, to Jan. 20, 2025, overseeing an aggressive enforcement agenda that included lawsuits against major crypto intermediaries and the view that many tokens are unregistered securities.
The industry winced at high‑profile actions against exchanges and staking programs, as well as the posture that most token issuers fell afoul of registration rules.
Gary Gensler labels crypto as “highly speculative.” Source: Bloomberg
Under Gensler’s tenure, Coinbase was sued by the SEC for operating as an unregistered exchange, broker and clearing agency, and for offering an unregistered staking-as-a-service program. Kraken was also forced to shut its US staking program and pay a $30 million penalty.
The politicization of crypto
Pushed on the politicization of crypto, including references to the Trump family’s crypto involvement by the Bloomberg interviewer, the former chair rejected the framing.
“No, I don’t think so,” he said, arguing it’s more about capital markets fairness and “commonsense rules of the road,” than a “Democrat versus Republican thing.”
He added: “When you buy and sell a stock or a bond, you want to get various information,” and “the same treatment as the big investors.” That’s the fairness underpinning US capital markets.
On ETFs, Gensler said finance “ever since antiquity… goes toward centralization,” so it’s unsurprising that an ecosystem born decentralized has become “more integrated and more centralized.”
He noted that investors can already express themselves in gold and silver through exchange‑traded funds, and that during his tenure, the first US Bitcoin futures ETFs were approved, tying parts of crypto’s plumbing more closely to traditional markets.
Gensler’s latest comments draw a familiar line: Bitcoin sits in a different bucket, while most other tokens remain, in his view, speculative and light on fundamentals.
Even out of office, his framing will echo through courts, compliance desks and allocation committees weighing BTC’s status against persistent regulatory caution of altcoins.
New figures reveal a 70% year-on-year increase in Cayman Islands foundation company registrations, with more than 1,300 on the books at the end of 2024, and over 400 new registrations already in 2025.
According to a news release from Cayman Finance, many of the world’s largest Web3 projects are now registered in the Cayman Islands, including at least 17 foundation companies with treasuries over $100 million.
Why DAOs are choosing Cayman
The Cayman foundation company has emerged as a preferred tool for DAOs that need to sign contracts, hire contributors, hold IP and interact with regulators, all while shielding tokenholders from personal liability for the DAO’s obligations.
The legal wake‑up call for many communities came in 2024 with Samuels v. Lido DAO, in which a US federal judge found that an unwrapped DAO could be treated as a general partnership under California law, exposing participants to personal liability.
The Cayman foundation company is designed to plug that gap, offering a separate legal personality and the ability to own assets and sign agreements, while giving tokenholders assurance that they are not partners by default.
Rise in Cayman Islands foundation company registrations | Source: Cayman Finance
Add tax neutrality, a legal framework familiar to institutional allocators and an ecosystem of companies that specialize in Web3 treasuries, and it becomes clear why more projects have quietly redomiciled their foundations to Grand Cayman.
Elsewhere, policymakers have made big promises but delivered patchwork. US President Donald Trump has repeatedly pledged to turn the United States into the “crypto capital of the planet,” but at the entity level, only a handful of states explicitly recognize DAOs as legal persons.
Switzerland remains the archetypal onshore Web3 foundation center, with the Crypto Valley region now hosting over 1,700 active blockchain firms, up more than 130% since 2020, with foundations and associations representing a growing share of new structures.
The surge in Web3 foundations coincides with a shift in Cayman’s own regulatory posture — the arrival of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Crypto‑Asset Reporting Framework (CARF), which the Cayman Islands has now implemented via new Tax Information Authority regulations that take effect from Jan. 1, 2026.
CARF will impose due diligence and reporting duties on Cayman “Reporting Crypto‑Asset Service Providers” (entities that exchange crypto for fiat or other crypto, operate trading platforms or provide custodial services), requiring them to collect tax‑residence data from users, track relevant transactions and file annual reports with the Tax Information Authority.
Legal professionals note that CARF reporting under the current interpretation applies to relevant crypto-asset service providers, including exchanges, brokers and dealers, which likely leaves structures that merely hold crypto assets, such as protocol treasuries, investment funds, or passive foundations, off the hook.
“The key question is whether your entity, as a business, provides a service effectuating exchange transactions for or on behalf of customers, including by acting as a counterparty or intermediary or by making available a trading platform.”
In practice, that means many pure treasury or ecosystem‑steward foundations should be able to continue benefitting from Cayman’s legal certainty and tax neutrality without being dragged into full reporting status, so long as they are not in the business of running exchange, brokerage or custody services.