An aid agency is warning that a lack of aid reaching Gaza is forcing Palestinians to search through destroyed buildings for basic necessities, putting them at risk of death or injury from unexploded bombs.
“Decades of occupation, blockade, and siege have been compounded by the catastrophic use of explosive weapons in one of the world’s most densely populated areas.
“The human cost is staggering with more than 44,000 people killed, 90 percent of the population displaced, and essential infrastructure obliterated.”
The report said that civilians were left grappling with “unimaginable risks” from widespread destruction to the deadly legacy of explosive ordinance (EO) contamination.
“Nearly everyone in Gaza has felt the devastating impact. Homes reduced to rubble, schools and hospitals targeted, and basic services like water and healthcare brought to a standstill,” the report said.
“Families face a grim reality, uprooted an average of six times, often returning to areas that have seen active fighting which are likely riddled with explosive ordnance.
War remnants ‘mistaken for toys’
“Children, tragically, are among the most vulnerable, mistaking deadly remnants of war for toys.”
This report has exposed the far-reaching consequences of the use of explosive weapons in populated areas in Gaza, “revealing a dire reality for a population trapped in danger”.
It underscores the devastating toll of impunity and disregard for international humanitarian law, which continues to result in immense suffering of civilians.
For almost six decades photographer John Miller (Ngāpuhi) has been a protest photographer in Aotearoa New Zealand.
From his first photographs of an anti-Vietnam War protest on Auckland’s Albert Street as a high school student in 1967, to Hīkoi mō te Tiriti last week, Miller has focused much of his work on the faces of dissent.
He spoke of his experiences over the years in an interview broadcast today on RNZ’s Culture 101 programme with presenter Susana Lei’ataua.
John Miller at the RNZ studio with his Hīkoi camera. Image: Susana Lei’ataua/RNZ
Miller joined Hīkoi mō te Tiriti at Waitangi Park in Pōneke Wellington last Tuesday, November 19, ahead of its final walk to Parliament’s grounds.
“It was quite an incredible occasion, so many people,” 74-year-old Miller says.
“Many more than 1975 and 2004. Also social media has a much more influential part to play in these sorts of events these days, and also drone technology . . .
“I had to avoid one on the corner of Manners and Willis Streets flying around us as the Hīkoi was passing by.
“We ended up running up Wakefield Street which is parallel to Courtenay Place to get ahead of the march and we joined the march at the Taranaki Street Manners Street intersection and we managed to get in front of it.”
Comparing Hīkoi mō te Tiriti with his experience of the 1975 Māori Land March led by Dame Whina Cooper, Miller noted there were a lot more people involved.
“During the 1975 Hīkoi the only flag that was in that march was the actual white land march flag — the Pou Whenua — no other flags at all. And there were no placards, no, nothing like that.”
Miller tried to replicate photos he took in 1975 and 2004: “However this particular time I actually was under a technical disadvantage because one of my lenses stopped working and I had to shoot this whole event in Wellington using just a wide angle lens so that forced me to change my approach.”
Miller and his daughter, Rere, were with the Hīkoi in front of the Beehive.
“I had no idea that there were so many people sort of outside who couldn’t get in and I only realised afterwards when we saw the drone footage.”
At least six Israeli soldiers have taken their own lives in recent months, the major Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronoth has revealed, citing severe psychological distress caused by prolonged wars in the Gaza Strip and southern Lebanon as the primary cause, Anadolu Agency reports.
The investigation suggests that the actual number of suicides may be higher, as the Israeli military has yet to release official figures, despite a promise to disclose them by the end of the year.
The report highlights a broader mental health crisis within the Israeli army.
Regional tension has escalated due to Israel’s brutal offensive on the Gaza Strip, which has killed more than 44,000 people, mostly women and children, since a Hamas attack last year.
Thousands of soldiers have sought help from military mental health clinics or field psychologists, with approximately a third of those affected showing symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
According to the investigation, the number of soldiers suffering psychological trauma may exceed those with physical injuries from the war.
The daily cites experts as saying the full extent of this mental health crisis will become clear once military operations are completed and troops return to normal life.
About 1700 soldiers treated
In March, Lucian Tatsa-Laur, head of the Israeli military’s Mental Health Department, told another Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, that approximately 1700 soldiers had received psychological treatment.
Since October 7 last year, reports Anadolu, Israeli military is alleged to have wiped out families in Gaza, pulverised neighbourhoods, dug up mass graves, destroyed cemeteries, bombed shops and businesses, flattened hospitals and morgues, ran tanks and bulldozers on dead bodies, tortured jailed Palestinians with dogs and electricity, subjected detainees to mock executions, and even raped many Palestinians.
Exhibiting sadistic behaviour during the genocide, Israeli soldiers have taunted Palestinian prisoners by claiming they were playing football with their children’s heads in Gaza.
Israeli troops have live streamed hundreds of videos of soldiers looting Palestinian homes, destroying children’s beds, setting homes on fire and laughing, wearing undergarments of displaced Palestinians and stealing children’s toys.
In their mission to “erase” Palestine, Israeli troops have killed a record number of babies, medics, athletes, and journalists — unprecedented in any war in this century.
But, said the news agency, now it’s coming with a cost.
Australia bars former minister
Meanwhile, former Israeli Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked has been banned from entering Australia over fears of “incitement”.
Shaked, a former MP for the far-right Yamina party, was scheduled to appear at a conference hosted by the pro-Israel Australia Israel and Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC).
However, the Australian Department of Home Affairs told the former minister on Thursday that she had been denied a visa to travel to the country under the Migration Act.
The act allows the government to deny entry to individuals likely to “vilify Australians” or “incite discord” within the local community.
Speaking to Israeli media, Shaked claimed that her ban was due to her vocal opposition to a Palestinian state, reports Middle East Eye.
She has also previously called for the removal of “all two million” Palestinians from Gaza.
A national New Zealand solidarity movement for Palestine has welcomed the International Criminal Court’s move to issue arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, saying it is a “wake up call” for the coalition government.
“The warrants mean for the first time Israeli leaders face accountability for war crimes which have been live-streamed on social media for the past 13 months” said national chair John Minto of the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA).
“We are waiting for our government to announce it will arrest Netanyahu and Gallant immediately if they set foot in Aotearoa New Zealand.”
Many countries among the 124 members of the ICC have been quick to declare that they would honour the arrest obligations, among them Canada, France and Italy. Also the European Union’s foreign policy chief said all EU countries should abide by the ruling.
“These decisions are binding on all states party to the Rome Statute, which includes all EU member states,” said Joseph Borrell.
On the ICC’s arrest warrants for Israel’s PM Netanyahu and ex-minister Gallant, and Hamas leader Deif, the EU’s foreign policy chief Borrell said: “These decisions are binding on all states party to the Rome Statute, which includes all EU member states.” pic.twitter.com/dK5tyjyKtv
Both Israel and its key backer, United States, refuse to recognise the ICC jurisdiction.
PSNA’s Minto said in a statement today: “It’s a breath of fresh air from the stultifying refusal of New Zealand and other Western governments to act against the perpetrators of industrial-scale slaughter of Palestinian civilians.
“This ICC decision is a wake-up call for our government which can no longer stay silent.
“New Zealand has been a staunch ally of the US/Israel throughout the past 13 months when it should have been a staunch defender of international law.
“Unbelievably, our government still refuses to call for an immediate, permanent ceasefire and while it has condemned every act of Palestinian resistance, it has refused to condemn any of the egregious Israeli war crimes which are the subject of the arrest warrants.”
The ICC warrants are a turning point. The world is uniting behind the rule of international law. pic.twitter.com/dqky1SprqO
In response to the ICC decision, New Zealand should immediately end support for Israel to continue its war crimes such as:
Suspend all satellite launches by Rocket lab for BlackSky Technology, Capella Space, and HawkEye 360. These companies provide imaging data used by Israeli for its targeting of civilian infrastructure in Gaza and Lebanon.
Suspend and independently investigate the export of crystal oscillators from Rakon Industries which end up in bombs used for war crimes in Gaza and Lebanon, and
Impose sanctions against Israel — they are also essential and the ICC decision can be the trigger.
“New Zealand needs to act as we did when the ICC issued arrest warrants against Russian leader Vladimir Putin for the invasion of Ukraine” said Minto.
“New Zealand imposed immediate and wide-ranging sanctions against Russia and must follow through with Israel.”
Independent US Senator Bernie Sanders says he supports the International Criminal Court’s arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, and Hamas military commander Mohammed Deif, saying “all launched indiscriminate attacks against civilians and caused unimaginable human suffering”.
“If the world does not uphold international law, we will descend into further barbarism,” he said in a post on X, alongside a longer statement.
His statement mirrored global reaction in favour of the ICC indictments in contrast to most US and Israeli politicians who condemned the global legal move to see accountability for the repeated and continuous Israeli atrocities in the besieged enclave Gaza.
Netanyahu, Gallant, and Deif have all launched indiscriminate attacks against civilians and caused unimaginable human suffering.
If the world does not uphold international law, we will descend into further barbarism.
The defendants are now internationally wanted suspects and ICC member states are under legal obligation to arrest them. Neither the US nor Israel recognise ICC jurisdiction.
The court said it had issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant for “crimes against humanity and war crimes committed from at least 8 October until at least 20 May, 2024” and which related to the use of starvation and the deliberate targeting of medical facilities.
‘Important precedent’
Dr Francis Boyle, a professor of international law at the University of Illinois, called the ICC’s latest move a “very important precedent”.
“In my opinion, if the ICC had prosecuted Israeli leaders after Operation Cast Lead . . . maybe all of this could have been avoided, if prosecutions were initiated 15 years ago,” Boyle told Al Jazeera.
Boyle said the Biden administration is guilty of “aiding and abetting Israeli war crimes, crimes against humanity, and outright genocide against the Palestinians”.
He said this was a “far more serious genocide against the Palestinians in Gaza than was inflicted on the Bosnians,” referring to the timeframes of each genocide in comparison with the number of people killed.
Israel is now “extending this to Lebanon, and it does appear the [occupied] West Bank is next in its sights,” Boyle said.
“It’s a very serious situation.
Israel ‘never respected rule of law’
An international human rights lawyer, Michael Mansfield, described Israel is an “unjust state that has never respected the rule of law”.
Israel was trying to “deflect responsibility” and its objective had been to destroy Gaza and make it “uninhabitable”, he said.
Netanyahu would not end the war in Gaza, he said, until this objective was met.
“If he ends the war, he is in trouble. He’s in trouble if he leaves the country … and if he stays in Israel . . . he’s awaiting prosecution there,” Mansfield said.
The issuing of the ICC warrants “makes a difference to world opinion, because I don’t think that the regime in Israel have recognised the extent in which they are being isolated — morally isolated”, he said.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: In The Hague, the International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant for crimes against humanity and war crimes committed during Israel’s assault on Gaza.
In a statement, the ICC said the Israeli leaders had, “intentionally and knowingly deprived the civilian population in Gaza of objects indispensable to their survival, including food, water, and medicine and medical supplies, as well as fuel and electricity.”
The ICC also issued an arrest warrant for Hamas military commander Mohammed Deif, although Israel’s military claims it killed Deif in a July airstrike.
AMY GOODMAN: In related news, on Wednesday, the United States vetoed a Gaza ceasefire resolution at the UN Security Council for the fourth time, and the US Senate rejected a resolution brought by Senator Bernie Sanders that sought to block the sale of US tank rounds, bomb kits and other lethal weapons to Israel. Nineteen senators supported blocking the arms.
For more on all of this, we’re joined by Akbar Shahid Ahmed, senior diplomatic correspondent for HuffPost. His latest piece is “Exclusive: White House Says Democrats Who Oppose Weapons to Israel Are Aiding Hamas.”
Ahmed, thank you so much for being with us. As you write your book on the Biden administration in Gaza called Crossing the Red Line, clearly the ICC has ruled that today by issuing arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as well as the former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant.
Can you talk about the significance of this move?
“A Great Day for Justice”: Palestinian Lawyer Raji Sourani on ICC Warrants for Netanyahu & Gallant https://t.co/TEb1VwShfn
AKBAR SHAHID AHMED: Yeah, Amy. This is just an absolutely huge development, and it’s significant for a number of reasons. It’s significant because the ICC has come out and amplified and affirmed the allegations of crimes against humanity, of war crimes. This is one more international body.
These are . . . international charges with a great deal of respect. This is a court that most of the world is a member of. And they’re coming out and saying, “Look, we think there are reasonable grounds to believe that these major international red lines have been crossed by the Israelis.”
What’s really important to remember is that this isn’t just a decision about Israel. By extension, it fundamentally is a decision about the United States, which has been the ultimate enabler of Israel’s offensives in Gaza and Lebanon, which are under consideration by the ICC.
And even in this ICC statement today, they point out that in the situations where Israel has addressed concerns over what it describes as starvation as a method of warfare — right? — depriving civilians, Palestinians, of food, water and medical equipment, Israel has really only done so in an extremely arbitrary and, what the ICC judges call, conditional way in response to the US. So, fundamentally, Amy, what we’re seeing is the ICC is saying yet again that Israel and the US, as its major enabler and backer, are in the dark and will continue to be in the dark for years to come.
This kind of adds to a broader picture in which there are now ICC warrants for the sitting Israeli prime minister and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, who remains a significant politician in Israel. Simultaneously, there’s the genocide case at the ICJ, the International Court of Justice, which is ongoing and will be ongoing for years to come.
And there’s the Geneva Conventions conference underway next year regarding kind of similar issues — right? — violations of international law, laws of war and the Israeli grave abuses that are alleged. So, the US and Israel will be kind of on trial on the international stage for years to come.
‘Wanted for war crimes in Gaza.’ Video: Democracy Now!
NERMEEN SHAIKH: So, Akbar, would you say that this move is mostly a symbolic one? Because, as you pointed out, of course, most countries are members of the International Criminal Court, but in this instance, perhaps most importantly, neither Israel nor the US are.
AKBAR SHAHID AHMED: Right, Nermeen. And that’s something that the ICC judges did get into today — right? — because Israel said, “Look, the International Criminal Court doesn’t have jurisdiction over us.” That said, the state of Palestine is a member of the court, and that’s why this becomes a relevant and interesting thing, because you’ve seen European nations recognise Palestine as a state. You’ve seen Palestine join the United Nations General Assembly over just last year.
So, yes, while the US and Israel continue to reject international scrutiny by the ICC, by the ICJ, of Israel’s conduct in Gaza and the occupied West Bank and Lebanon, there’s a growing international push to kind of challenge that, right?
And I think you will see the Biden administration and the incoming Trump administration assertively push back against the ICC. The Trump administration did actually target the ICC directly when President Trump was last in office, threatening to put sanctions on ICC officials. And we also know from reporting that the Israelis have spied on and threatened the ICC themselves, according to reporting by The Guardian. So, yes, there will be increased pressure.
But I think we’re really in a place that no one thought we would be even a few months ago, right? I think even the prospect of the ICC prosecutor successfully getting these warrants issued, it was initially thought that would be quite quick. It’s taken a long time. The fact that judges were able to issue those warrants suggests that even though it’s an uphill battle to get this international scrutiny, there’s a real determination and clear will.
And we’ve seen a lot of states turn around and say over 13 months, right? Since the October 7 attack by Hamas within Israel that did spark this current round of fighting, there have been calls to say, “We don’t want this to escalate,” right?
The US’s allies, Western countries have said, “We want to resolve this. We don’t want you on trial. Can the US and Israel please change course?” And what you’ve seen is a defiance from Tel Aviv and from Washington to say, “Actually, no, we’re continuing these wars.”
So, that does take it to a different forum to kind of change the policy.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: And, Akbar, could you also — while we’re looking at the way in which international organisations, multilateral ones, are responding to this, what about the latest vote at the Security Council and the fact that the US blocked it for the fourth time, a ceasefire vote?
AKBAR SHAHID AHMED: It’s really striking at this point — right? — to see the Biden administration totally alone. And you see how this develops over the course of the war. Initially, the US was able to get Britain, even France, kind of abstaining, standing with them.
And now, 13 months in, where conduct hasn’t changed, and you still have daily strikes that are killing dozens, sometimes over a hundred civilians, you have a mounting death toll of mostly women and children, the US is totally alone, where it’s shielding Israel on the world stage diplomatically.
And this is really important to see in the context of the Biden administration as an outlier even among American presidents and administrations. When President Barack Obama was in office, after he was in the lame-duck period that Biden is in now, he actually did abstain at the UN Security Council and said, “You know what? Go ahead and pass a resolution that Israel doesn’t like,” because tacitly the US acknowledged there was a basis, there were credible grounds for that resolution, which in that instance was about Israeli settlement activity.
Here, what you’re seeing from the Biden administration, even in their dying days — right? — two months to go, there’s an obstinacy, a defiance, and a real commitment to shielding Israel, even if they are totally alone against now their closest allies — Britain, France and everyone else on the Security Council.
So, I think the context of that veto kind of presages whatever may come in the next two months in terms of the Biden administration allowing any UN scrutiny of the wars.
AMY GOODMAN: Akbar, I want to play Palestine’s envoy to the United Nations, Majed Bamya, speaking yesterday.
MAJED BAMYA: There is no right to mass killing of civilians. There is no right to starve an entire civilian population. There is no right to forcibly displace a people. And there is no right to annexation. This is what Israel is doing in Gaza. …
Maybe for some, we have the wrong nationality, the wrong faith, the wrong skin color. But we are humans! And we should be treated as such. Is there a UN Charter for Israel that is different from the charter we all have? Tell us. Is there an international law for them, an international law for us? Do they have the right to kill, and the only right we have is to die?
The United States has vetoed a UN Security Council ceasefire resolution — for the fourth time — in Israel’s war on Gaza, while Hezbollah demands a complete ceasefire and “protection of Lebanon’s sovereignty” in any deal with Israel. Amid the death and devastation, Joe Hendren reflects on his time in Lebanon and examines what the crisis means for a small country with a population size similar to Aotearoa New Zealand.
SPECIAL REPORT: By Joe Hendren
Since the Israeli invasion of Lebanon I can’t help but think of a friend I met in Beirut.
He worked at the Regis Hotel, where I stayed in February 2015.
At one point, he offered to make me a Syrian dish popular in his hometown of Aleppo. I have long remembered his kindness; I only wish I remembered his name.
At the time, his home city was being destroyed. A flashpoint of the Syrian Civil War, the Battle of Aleppo lasted four long years. He didn’t mention this of course.
I was lucky to visit Lebanon when I did. So much has happened since then.
Economic crisis and a tragic port explosion Mass protests took over Lebanese streets in October 2019 in response to government plans to tax WhatsApp calls. The scope of the protests soon widened, as Lebanese people voiced their frustrations with ongoing economic turmoil and corruption.
A few months later, the covid-19 pandemic arrived, deepening the economic crisis and claiming 10,000 lives.
On 4 August 2020, the centre of Beirut was rocked by one of the largest non nuclear explosions in history when a large amount of ammonium nitrate stored at the Port of Beirut detonated. The explosion killed 218 people and left an estimated 300,000 homeless. The government of Hassin Diab resigned but continued in a “caretaker” capacity.
Tens of thousands of protesters returned to the streets demanding accountability and the downfall of Lebanon’s political ruling class. While some protesters threw stones and other projectiles, an Al Jazeera investigation found that security forces violated international standards on the use of force. The political elite were protected.
“The Lebanon financial and economic crisis is likely to rank in the top 10, possibly top three, most severe crises episodes globally since the mid-nineteenth century. This is a conclusion of the Spring 2021 Lebanon Economic Monitor (LEM) in which the Lebanon crisis is contrasted with the most severe global crises episodes as observed by Reinhart and Rogoff (2014) over the 1857–2013 period.
“In fact, Lebanon’s GDP plummeted from close to US$ 55 billion in 2018 to an estimated US$ 33 billion in 2020, with US$ GDP/capita falling by around 40 percent. Such a brutal and rapid contraction is usually associated with conflicts or wars.”
The Lebanon Poverty and Equity Assessment, produced by the World Bank in 2024, found the share of individuals in Lebanon living under the poverty line more than tripled, rising from 12 percent to 44 percent. The depth and severity of poverty also increased over the decade between 2012 and 2022.
To make matters worse, the port explosion destroyed Lebanon’s strategic wheat reserves at a time when the war in Ukraine drove significant increases in global food prices. Annual food inflation in Lebanon skyrocketed from 7.67 percent in January 2019 to a whopping 483.15 percent for the year ending in January 2022. While food inflation has since declined, it remains high, sitting just below 20 percent for the year ending September 2024. The World Bank said:
“The sharp deterioration of the Lebanese pound, which lost 98 percent of its pre-crisis value by December 2023, propelled inflation to new heights. With imports constituting about 60 percent of the consumption basket (World Bank, 2022), the plunging currency led to triple-digit inflation which rose steeply from an annual average of 3 percent between 2011 and 2018, to 85 percent in 2019, 155 percent in 2020, and 221 percent in 2023 . . .
“Faced with falling foreign exchange reserves, the government withdrew subsidies on medication, fuel, and wheat further fuelling rising costs of healthcare and transport (Figure 1.2). Rapid inflation acted effectively as a highly regressive tax, striking hardest at the poor and those with fixed, lira-denominated incomes.”
The ongoing crisis of the Lebanese economy has amplified the power of Hezbollah, a paramilitary group formed in 1982 in response to Israel’s invasion and occupation of Lebanon.
“Hezbollah is famous for entrenching its power in an elaborate social infrastructure of Islamic welfare. The social grip of those structures and services is increased by the ongoing crisis of the Lebanese economy. When the medical service fails, desperate families turn to the Hezbollah-run health service,” says Adam Tooze
As banks imposed capital controls, many Lebanese lost confidence in the financial system. The financial arm of Hezbollah, the al-Quad al-Hassan Association (AQAH), experienced a significant increase in clients, despite being subject to US Treasury sanctions since 2007.
The US accuses Hezbollah of using AQAH as a front to manage its financial activities. When a 28-year-old engineer, Hassan Shoumar, was locked out of his dollar accounts in late 2019, he redirected his money into his account at AQAH: “What I care about is that when I want my money, I can get it.”
While Hezbollah portrays itself as “the resistance”, as a member of the governing coalition in Lebanon, it also forms an influential part of the political elite. Adam Tooze gives an example of how the political elite is still looking after itself:
“[T]he Lebanese Parliament in a grotesque act of self-dealing in January 2024 passed a budget that promised to close the budget deficit of 12.8 of GDP by raising regressive value-added tax while decreasing the progressive taxes levied on capital gains, real estate and investments.
“For lack of reforms, the IMF [International Monetary Fund] is refusing to disburse any of the $3bn package that are allocated to Lebanon.”
While the protest movement called for a “technocratic” government in Lebanon, the experiences of Greece and other countries facing financial difficulties suggest such governments can pose their own risks, especially when they involve unelected “experts” in prominent positions.
One example is the political reaction to the counterproductive austerity programme imposed on Greece by the European Commission, European Central Bank and IMF in the aftermath of the 2007-2008 financial crisis. This demonstrates how the demands of international investors can conflict with the needs of the local population.
Lebanon carries more than its fair share of refugees Lebanon currently hosts the largest number of refugees per capita in the world, despite its scarce resources. This began as an overflow from the Syrian conflict in 2011, with nearly 1.2 million ‘displaced’ Syrians in Lebanon registered with UNHCR by May 2015.
When I visited Lebanon in 2015, I tried to grasp the scale of the refugee issue. In terms of population, Lebanon is comparable to New Zealand, with both countries having just over 5 million people.
I imagined what New Zealand would be like if it attempted to host a million refugees in addition to its general population. Yet in terms of land area Lebanon is only 10,400 square kilometres — about the size of New Zealand’s Marlborough region at the top of the South Island.
Now, imagine accommodating a population of over 5 million in such a small space, with more than a fifth of them being refugees.
While it was encouraging to see New Zealand increase its refugee quota to 1500 places in July 2020, we could afford to do much more in the current situation. This includes creating additional visa pathways for those fleeing Gaza and Lebanon.
#BREAKING
United States VETOES Security Council draft resolution that would have demanded an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, and the release of all hostages
On top of all that – Israeli attacks and illegal booby traps Since the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, and the ongoing Israeli invasion of Gaza, Israel and Hezbollah have exchanged fire across Lebanon’s southern border.
Israel makes much of the threat of rocket attacks on Israel from Hezbollah. However, data from US based non-profit organisation Armed Conflict Location and Event Data (ACLED) shows Israel carried out 81 percent of the 10,214 attacks between between the two parties from October 7, 2023, and September 20, 2024.
These attacks resulted in 752 deaths in Lebanon, including 50 children. In contrast, Hezbollah’s attacks, largely centred on military targets, killed at least 33 Israelis.
Hezbollah continues to offer an immediate ceasefire, so long as a ceasefire also applies to Gaza, but Israel has refused these terms.
While the Israeli Defence Force (IDF) disputed these figures as an “oversimplification”, the IDF do not appear to dispute the reported number of Lebanese casualties. Hezbollah continues to offer an immediate ceasefire, so long as a ceasefire also applies to Gaza, but Israel has refused these terms.
In a further escalation, thousands of handheld pagers and walkie-talkies used in both civilian and military contexts in Lebanon and Syria suddenly exploded on September 17 and 18.
Israel attempted to deny responsibility, with Israeli President Isaac Herzog claiming he “rejects out of hand any connection” to the attack. However, 12 defence and intelligence officials, briefed on the attack, anonymously confirmed to The New York Times that Israel was behind the operation.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu later boasted during a cabinet meeting that he had personally approved the pager attack. The New York Times described the aftermath:
“Powered by just a few ounces of an explosive compound concealed within the devices, the blasts sent grown men flying off motorcycles and slamming into walls, according to witnesses and video footage. People out shopping fell to the ground, writhing in agony, smoke snaking from their pockets.”
The exploding devices killed 42 people and injured more than 3500, with many victims losing one or both of their hands or eyes. At least four of the dead were children.
Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Mikatri called the explosions “a serious violation of Lebanese sovereignty and a crime by all standards”.
While around eight Hezbollah fighters were among the dead, most of those killed worked in administration roles and did not take partin hostilities. Under international humanitarian law targeting non-combatants is illegal.
Additionally, the UN Protocol on Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices also prohibits the use of “booby-traps or other devices in the form of apparently harmless portable objects which are specifically designed and constructed to contain explosive material”. Israel is a signatory to this UN Protocol.
Israel’s decision to turn ordinary consumer devices into illegal booby traps could backfire. While Israel frequently stresses the importance of its technology sector to its economy, who is going to buy technology associated with Israel now that the IDF have demonstrated its ability to indiscriminately weaponise consumer devices at any time?
International industry buyers will source elsewhere. Such a “silent boycott” could give greater momentum to the call from Palestinian civil society for boycotts, divestments and economic sanctions against Israel.
The booby trap pagers are also likely to affect the decisions of foreign airlines to service Israel on the grounds of safety. Since the war began in October 2023, the number of foreign airlines calling on Ben Gurion Airport in Israel has fallen significantly. Consequently, the cost of a round-trip ticket from the United States to Tel Aviv has risen sharply, from approximately $900 to $2500.
Israel targets civilian infrastructure in Lebanon Israel has also targeted civilian organisations linked to Hezbollah, such emergency services, hospitals and medical centres operated by the Islamic Health Society (IHS). Israel claims Hezbollah is “using the IHS as a cover for terrorist activities”. This apparently includes digging people out of buildings, as search and rescue teams have also been targeted and killed.
Israel accuses the microloan charity AQAH of funding “Hezbollah’s terror activities”, including purchasing weapons and making payments to Hezbollah fighters. On October 20, Israel attacked 30 branches of AQAH across Lebanon, drawing condemnation from both Amnesty International and the United Nations.
Ben Saul, UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Counter-terrorism maintains AQAH is not a lawful military target: “International humanitarian law does not permit attacks on the economic or financial infrastructure of an adversary, even if they indirectly sustain its military activities.”
Where the author ate his Za’atar man’ousheh – Pigeon’s Rock, Corniche, Beiruit. Image: Joe Hendren
On top of all that — an Israeli invasion In 1982, Israel attempted to use war to alter the political situation in Lebanon, with counterproductive results, including the creation of Hezbollah. In 2006, Hezbollah used the hilly terrain of southern Lebanon to beat Israel to a stalemate. Israel risks similar counterproductive outcomes again, at the cost of many more lives.
Yet on 1 October 2024, Israel launched a ground invasion of Lebanon, alongside strikes on Beirut, Sidon and border villages. The IDF confirmed the action on Twitter/X, promising a “limited, localised and targeted” operation against “Hezbollah terrorist targets” in southern Lebanon. One US official noted that Israel had framed its 1982 invasion as a limited incursion, which eventually turned into an 18-year occupation.
Israeli strikes have since expanded all over the country. According to figures provided by the Lebanese Ministry of Public Heath on November 13, Israel is responsible for the deaths of at least 3365 people in Lebanon, including 216 children and 192 health workers. More than 14,000 people have been wounded, and more than one million have been displaced from their homes.
Since September 30, 47 Israeli troops have been killed in combat in Southern Lebanon. Around 45 civilians in northern Israel have died due to rocket fire from Lebanon.
So, on top of an economic crisis, runaway inflation, unaffordable food, increasing poverty, the port explosion and covid-19, the Lebanese people now face a war that shows little signs of stopping.
Analysts suggest there is little chance of a ceasefire while Israel retains its “maximalist” demands, which include a full surrender of Hezbollah and allowing Israel to continue to attack targets in southern Lebanon.
A senior fellow at the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut, Mohanad Hage Ali, believes Israel is feigning diplomacy to push the blame on Hezbollah. The best chance may come alongside a ceasefire in Gaza, but Israel shows little signs of negotiating meaningfully on that front either.
On September 26, the Lebanese Foreign Minister Abdallah BouHabib summarised the mood of the country in the wake of the pager attack:
“[N]obody expected the war to be taken in that direction. We Lebanese—we’ve had enough war. We’ve had fifteen years of war. . . .We’d like to live without war—happily, as a tourist country, a beautiful country, good food—and we are not able to do it. And so there is a lot of depression, especially with the latest escalation.”
In Aotearoa New Zealand, the Māori phrase “Kia kaha” means “stand strong”. If I could send a message from halfway across the world, it would be: “Kia kaha Lebanon. I look forward to the day I can visit you again, and munch on a yummy Za’atar man’ousheh while admiring the view from the beautiful Corniche Beirut.”
Joe Hendren holds a PhD in international business from the University of Auckland. He has more than 20 years of experience as a researcher, including work in the New Zealand Parliament, for trade unions and on various research projects. This is his first article for Asia Pacific Report. His blog can be found at http://joehendren.substack.com
Where I ate my Za’atar man’ousheh – Pigeon’s Rock, Corniche Beiruit
New Zealand’s leading daily newspaper has joined the debate about the haka that stunned Parliament and the nation last week, defending the youngest MP for her actions, saying she is a “product of her forebears” and “shining a light” on the new national conversation about the 1840 Treaty of Waitangi.
That haka has been criticised by some conservative politicians and civic leaders as “appalling behaviour” and led to Te Pāti Māori’s 22-year-old Hana-Rāwhiti Maipi-Clarke being “named” by the Speaker and suspended from the House for 24 hours.
However, among many have rallied to her support across the nation, with The New Zealand Herald declaring in an editorial on Tuesday that her haka “shines the light on a new conversation growing louder daily and describing where many Māori are at politically”.
The haka protest came as thousands joined a massive nine-day Te Hīkoi mō te Tiriti that marched the 1600km length of the country from north and south ending at Parliament in an impressive show of solidarity against the unpopular bill.
“Culturally, haka is the ability to express thoughts and views in a way that provides clarity with the thoughts of those who deliver it. Haka can be delivered and invoked in many different ways and many different times,” said The Herald.
“It can be delivered at the beginning of a kaupapa (cause) — like the All Blacks’ pre-match haka — or delivered near the end as a tangi when a tūpāpaku (body) is being taken to its final destination.”
The newspaper said that when Maipi-Clarke broke into that haka in Parliament, it was her way of expressing her “absolute disgust and loathing of David Seymour’s Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill”.
Unapologetically Māori “Toitū Te Tiriti, the kōhanga reo generation and unapologetically Māori whānau are intertwined. Their whakapapa is the same,” The Herald said.
“Toitū Te Tiriti says Te Tiriti will endure no matter what. The first of the kōhanga reo generation – the babies brought up in kōhanga reo over 40 years ago, like Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi – and casting their leadership across te ao Māori.
“They have been in the workforce for 20+ years, using te reo Māori and mātauranga Māori (Māori intelligence) as their north compass.
“Maipi-Clarke is part of all three groups. She is a product of her forebears.
“Maipi-Clarke looks at the world through a kaupapa Māori lens. The things which drive her are Māori-centric, first and foremost. That is who she is and what defines her. The new Māori Queen, Nga wai hono i te po, is of the same ilk.
“Unapologetically Māori is a statement that serves as a declaration to the world about who Maipi-Clarke and those of her generation are, their truth and how to act from a holistic Māori world view.”
‘Their very identity threatened’
The newspaper said Maipi-Clarke, her Te Pāti Māori colleagues and other politicians in the House “reacted when they felt their very identity was threatened”.
“They acted the only way they believed was appropriate, with class and with mana.”
The Herald said Maipi-Clarke, like many Māori and non-Māori, were angry with the progression of this bill.
“She responded to it as she was taught by her predecessors and peers with a haka,” the paper said.
“That’s the way Māori of the kōhanga reo generation were brought up to voice their concerns.”
An overview for our international readers of Asia Pacific Report.
BACKGROUNDER:By Sarah Shamim
A fight for Māori indigenous rights drew more than 50,000 protesters to the New Zealand Parliament in the capital Wellington yesterday.
A nine-day-long Hīkoi, or peaceful march — a Māori tradition — was undertaken in protest against a bill that seeks to “reinterpret” the country’s 184-year-old founding Treaty of Waitangi, which was signed between British imperial colonisers and the Indigenous Māori tangata whenua (people).
Some had also been peacefully demonstrating outside the Parliament building for nine days before the protest concluded yesterday.
On November 14, the controversial Treaty Principles Bill was introduced in Parliament for a preliminary first reading vote. Māori parliamentarians staged a haka (a traditional ceremonial dance) to disrupt the vote, temporarily halting parliamentary proceedings.
So, what was the Treaty of Waitangi, what are the proposals for altering it, and why has it become a flashpoint for protests in New Zealand?
Thousands of marchers protesting government policies that affect the Māori cross the Auckland Harbour Bridge on day three of the nine-day journey to Wellington. Image: AJ
Who are the Māori?
The Māori people are the original residents of the two large main islands now known as New Zealand, having lived there for several centuries.
The Māori came to the uninhabited islands of New Zealand from East Polynesia on canoe voyages betweemn 1200 and 1300. Over hundreds of years of isolation, they developed their own distinct culture and language. Māori people speak te reo Māori and have different tribes, or iwi, spread throughout the country.
The two islands were originally called Aotearoa by the Māori. The name New Zealand was adopted by the colonisers who took control under the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840.
While Dutch explorer Abel Tasman was the first European to “discover” New Zealand in 1642, calling it Staten Land, three years later Dutch cartographers renamed the land Nova Zeelandia after the Dutch province of Zeeland.
British explorer James Cook later anglicised the name to New Zealand.
New Zealand became a “dominion” under the British crown in 1907 after being a colony.
It gained full independence from Britain in 1947 when it adopted the Statute of Westminster.
However, for a century the Māori people had suffered mass killings, land grabs and cultural erasure at the hands of colonial settlers.
There are currently 978,246 Māori in New Zealand, constituting around 19 percent of the country’s population of 5.3 million. They are partially represented by Te Pāti Māori — the Māori Party — which currently holds six of the 123 seats in Parliament.
New Zaland Māori demographics. Graphic: AJLabs/Al Jazeera/CC
What was the Treaty of Waitangi?
On February 6, 1840, the Treaty of Waitangi, also called Te Tiriti o Waitangi or just Te Tiriti in te reo, was signed between the British Crown and around 500 Māori chiefs, or rangatira. The treaty was the founding document of New Zealand and officially made New Zealand a British colony.
While the treaty was presented as a measure to resolve differences between the Māori and the British, the English and te reo versions of the treaty actually feature some stark differences.
The te reo Māori version guarantees “rangatiratanga” to the Māori chiefs. This translates to “self-determination” and guarantees the Māori people the right to govern themselves.
However, the English translation says that the Maori chiefs “cede to Her Majesty the Queen of England absolutely and without reservation all the rights and powers of Sovereignty”, making no mention of self-rule for the Maori.
The English translation does guarantee the Māori “full exclusive and undisturbed possession of their Lands and Estates Forests Fisheries”.
“The English draft talks about the British settlers having full authority and control over Māori in the whole country,” Kassie Hartendorp, a Māori community organiser and director at community campaigning organisation ActionStation Aotearoa, told Al Jazeera.
Hartendorp explained that the te reo version includes the term “kawanatanga”, which in historical and linguistic context “gives British settlers the opportunity to set up their own government structure to govern their own people but they would not limit the sovereignty of Indigenous people”.
“We never ceded sovereignty, we never handed it over. We gave a generous invitation to new settlers to create their own government because they were unruly and lawless at the time,” said Hartendorp.
In the decades after 1840, however, 90 percent of Māori land was taken by the British Crown. Both versions of the treaty have been repeatedly breached and Māori people have continued to suffer injustice in New Zealand even after independence.
In 1975, the Waitangi Tribunal was established as a permanent body to adjudicate treaty matters. The tribunal attempts to remedy treaty breaches and navigate differences between the treaty’s two texts.
Over time, billions of dollars have been negotiated in settlements over breaches of the treaty, particularly relating to the widespread seizure of Māori land.
However, other injustices have also occurred. Between 1950 and 2019, about 200,000 children, young people and vulnerable adults were subjected to physical and sexual abuse in state and church care, and a commission found Māori children were more vulnerable to the abuse than others.
On November 12 this year, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon issued an apology to these victims, but it was criticised by Māori survivors for being inadequate. One criticism was that the apology did not take the treaty into account.
While the treaty’s principles are not set in stone and are flexible, it is a significant historical document that upholds Māori rights.
Generation Kohanga Reo . . . making a difference at the Hīkoi. Image: David Robie/APR
What does the Treaty Principles Bill propose? The Treaty Principles Bill was introduced by Member of Parliament David Seymour, leader of the libertarian ACT Party, a minor partner in New Zealand’s rightwing coalition government. Seymour himself is of Māori heritage.
The party launched a public information campaign about the bill on February 7 this year.
The ACT Party asserts that the treaty has been misinterpreted over the decades and that this has led to the formation of a dual system for New Zealanders, where Māori and pākehā (white) New Zealanders have different political and legal rights. Seymour says that misinterpretations of the treaty’s meaning have effectively given Māori people special treatment.
The bill calls for an end to “division by race”.
Seymour said that the principle of “ethnic quotas in public institutions”, for example, is contrary to the principle of equality.
The bill seeks to set specific definitions of the treaty’s principles, which are currently flexible and open to interpretation. These principles would then apply to all New Zealanders equally, whether they are Māori or not.
According to Together for Te Tiriti, an initiative led by ActionStation Aotearoa, the bill will allow the New Zealand government to govern all New Zealanders and consider all New Zealanders equal under the law.
Activists say this will effectively disadvantage indigenous Māori people because they have been historically oppressed.
Many, including the Waitangi Tribunal, say this will lead to the erosion of Māori rights. A statement by ActionStation Aotearoa says that the bill’s principles “do not at all reflect the meaning” of the Treaty of Waitangi.
Why is the bill so controversial? The bill is strongly opposed by political parties in New Zealand on both the left and the right, and Maori people have criticised it on the basis that it undermines the treaty and its interpretation.
Gideon Porter, a Maori journalist from New Zealand, told Al Jazeera that most Maori, as well as historians and legal experts, agree that the bill is an “attempt to redefine decades of exhaustive research and negotiated understandings of what constitute ‘principles’ of the treaty”.
Porter added that those critical of the bill believe “the ACT Party within this coalition government is taking upon itself to try and engineer things so that Parliament gets to act as judge, jury and executioner”.
In the eyes of most Maori, he said, the ACT Party is “simply hiding its racism behind a facade of ‘we are all New Zealanders with equal rights’ mantra”.
The Waitangi Tribunal released a report on August 16 saying that it found the bill “breached the Treaty principles of partnership and reciprocity, active protection, good government, equity, redress, and the … guarantee of rangatiratanga”.
Another report by the tribunal seen by The Guardian newspaper said: “If this bill were to be enacted, it would be the worst, most comprehensive breach of the Treaty … in modern times.”
Treaty Principles Bill . . . submissions. Image: APR screenshot
What process must the bill go through now? For a bill to become law in New Zealand, it must go through three rounds in Parliament: first when it is introduced, then when MPs suggest amendments and finally, when they vote on the amended bill. Since the total number of MPs is 123, at least 62 votes are needed for a bill to pass, David MacDonald, a political science professor at the University of Guelph in Canada, told Al Jazeera.
Besides the six Māori Party seats, the New Zealand Parliament comprises 34 seats held by the Labour Party; 14 seats held by the Green Party of Aotearoa; 49 seats held by the National Party; 11 seats held by the ACT Party; and eight seats held by the New Zealand First Party.
“The National Party leaders including the PM and other cabinet ministers and the leaders of the other coalition party [New Zealand] First have all said they won’t support the bill beyond the committee stage. It is highly unlikely that the bill will receive support from any party other than ACT,” MacDonald said.
When the bill was heard for its first round in Parliament last week, Māori party lawmaker Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke tore up her copy of the legislation and led the haka.
Is the bill likely to pass? The chances of the bill becoming law are “zero”, Porter said.
He said the ACT’s coalition partners had “adamantly promised” to vote down the bill in the next stage. Additionally, all the opposition parties will also vote against it.
“They only agreed to allow it to go this far as part of their ‘coalition agreement’ so they could govern,” Porter said.
New Zealand’s current coalition government was formed in November 2023 after an election that took place a month earlier. It comprises the National Party, ACT and New Zealand First.
While rightwing parties have not given a specific reason why they will oppose the bill, Hartendorp said New Zealand First and the New Zealand National Party would likely vote in line with public opinion, which largely opposes it.
Why are people protesting if the bill is doomed to fail? The protests are not against the bill alone.
“This latest march is a protest against many coalition government anti-Māori initiatives,” Porter said.
Many believe that the conservative coalition government, which took office in November 2023, has taken measures to remove “race-based politics”. The Māori people are not happy with this and believe that it will undermine their rights.
These measures include removing a law that gave the Maori a say in environmental matters. The government also abolished the Maori Health Authority in February this year.
Despite the bill being highly likely to fail, many believe that just by allowing the bill to be tabled in Parliament, the coalition government has ignited dangerous social division.
For example, former conservative Prime Minister Jenny Shipley has said that just putting forth the bill is sowing division in New Zealand, and she warned of potential “civil war”.
Sarah Shamim is a freelance writer and assistant producer at Al Jazeera Media Network, where this article was first published.
International media coverage of Aotearoa New Zealand’s national Hīkoi to Parliament has largely focused on the historic size of the turnout in Wellington yesterday and the wider contention between Māori and the Crown.
Some, including The New York Times, have also pointed out the recent swing right with the election of the coalition government as part of the reason for the unrest.
The Times article said New Zealand had veered “sharply right”, likening it to Donald Trump’s re-election.
“New Zealand bears little resemblance to the country recently led by Jacinda Ardern, whose brand of compassionate, progressive politics made her a global symbol of anti-Trump liberalism.”
The challenging of the rights of Māori was “driving a wedge into New Zealand society”, the article said.
“However, it has prompted widespread anger among the public, academics, lawyers and Māori rights groups who believe it is creating division, undermining the treaty, and damaging the relationship between Māori and ruling authorities,” it said.
‘Critical moment’
Turkey’s public broadcaster TRT World said New Zealand “faces a critical moment in its journey toward reconciling with its Indigenous population”.
New Zealand MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke performed a haka in a powerful speech during her first appearance in parliament.
Maipi-Clarke is Aotearoa’s youngest MP since 1853 and is seen as representing the ‘kohanga reo’ generation of young Māori. pic.twitter.com/sWwbS1FsBI
While Al Jazeera agreed it was “a contentious bill redefining the country’s founding agreement between the British and the Indigenous Māori people”.
The Washington Post pointed out that the “bill is deeply unpopular, even among members of the ruling conservative coalition”.
“While the bill would not rewrite the treaty itself, it would essentially extend it equally to all New Zealanders, which critics say would effectively render the treaty worthless,” the article said.
The Hīkoi, and particularly the culmination of more than 42,000 people at Parliament, was covered in most of the mainstream international media outlets including Britain’s BBC and CNN in the United States, as well as wire agencies, including AFP, AP and Reuters.
Across the Ditch, the ABC headline called it a “flashpoint” on race relations. While the article went on to say it was “a critical moment in the fraught 180-year-old conversation about how New Zealand should honour the promises made to First Nations people when the country was colonised”.
Aotearoa New Zealand’s capital Wellington Pōneke turned into a sea of black, white and red today, as more than 42,000 people supporting te Hīkoi mō te Tiriti overflowed Parliament’s lawn and onto the streets.
Supporters then headed to Waitangi Park, where a post-hīkoi concert took place.
Thousands of supporters already at Parliament greeted the hīkoi when it entered the gates, with haka and the sound of the pūtātara (Māori shell trumpet) ringing out across the lawn.
42,000 people at Parliament during Hīkoi. Video: RNZ News
Among the dignitaries towards the front of the hīkoi was Māori Queen Nga wai hono i te po, who stood alongside Hone Harawira, Tuku Morgan and Te Pati Māori MP Hana-Rāwhiti Maipi-Clarke.
Fireworks were let off several times at Parliament.
One kuia told RNZ she was happy the Hīkoi stayed peaceful and did not end up like the anti-mandate protest at Parliament more than two years ago.
Horomona Horo travelled from Waikato in opposition to the Treaty Principles Bill.
“The purpose of it is to stand up against the atrocities of not just this government, but governments of the past as well, and the discrepancies that have happened over the years.”
When asked what he thought of Treaty Principles Bill architect David Seymour’s short appearance on the forecourt, Horo said the day was not about him, but more about everyone coming together and uniting.
The national Hīkoi converges at Parliament Grounds. Image: Reece Baker/RNZ
“At the end of the day, if you speak for your people, you need to show up. And not show up to blink an eye or two, but to actually show up in good times and bad times and in celebration as well as in times like today, where he knows he’s done wrong and he knows the things that need to happen.
“He cannot turn his words back on what he’s already said,” Horo said.
The Hikoi against the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill reaches Parliament. Image: VNP/Phil Smith
‘Kill the Bill!’ Seymour and his caucus were escorted by several police officers when they briefly ventured out to Parliament’s forecourt, and were greeted by the crowd chanting “kill the Bill”.
The ACT Party leader said yesterday that he would assess the mood of the crowd first before deciding whether or not to engage with them.
Te Pati Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi was speaking to the crowd at the time Seymour came out and encouraged them to chant “kill the Bill” to give a clear message for the ACT leader.
After five minutes, Seymour turned and headed back inside the building.
The crowd chants”kill the Bill”. Video: RNZ News
Later this afternoon, the official ACT instagram page posted a video with Seymour saying this was a speech he had hoped to deliver to Hīkoi supporters who had marched from all across the motu.
“They’d see that I’m actually a New Zealander like them — in fact, one who is whakapapa Māori, who would like to see a better world with more homes being built, more infrastructure, better jobs, better health and education.
“That would be a constructive discussion to have, but sadly not one that is possible when you see New Zealand as a compact of two collectives defined by ancestry.
“It may be that we find New Zealand is not mature enough to have this discussion, I suspect that’s wrong,” Seymour said.
In response to the crowd chanting “kill the Bill”, he said he encouraged Hīkoi supporters to read the Bill.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon was asked before Question Time whether he would prefer the bill to be disposed of before Waitangi Day commemorations in Feburary.
“[The bill] is not something I like or support, but we have come to a compromise.
“Now, it’s in the hands of Parliament, it’s now in the hands of the select committee, they work through the timing from here on through, as they should.”
Meanwhile, Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters called the Hīkoi a “waste of time” as the Treaty Principles Bill was “dead on arrival”.
The Bill was fatally flawed and never going to work, he said, and Hīkoi attendees should know that.
‘I’m not worried about sales’ While the Hīkoi made its way to Parliament, business owners and staff watched and filmed from their doorways as the masses went past.
The Hīkoi protesting against the Treaty Principles Bill in Wellington on 19 November 2024. Image: RNZ/Reece Baker
Every store RNZ visited at the time the Hīkoi was passing through was empty, but several business owners on Willis Street said they did not mind the disruption and supported the cause.
Capricorn Spirit owner Susan Cameron said the Hīkoi was for a good cause.
“I’m not worried about sales,” she said. “We’ve got to tell Parliament as a whole country that we do not stand for this.”
To those on the Hīkoi, she said: “Good on you. Well done. I wish I could be with you, but at this moment I can’t, I need to be here, but I support everything you’re standing for here.”
Meanwhile, Dixon Street coffee shop Swimsuit had to call in back-up as customer numbers were similar to the store’s busiest Saturdays.
Barista Sarah Green said five staff were on deck for 320 orders — many of which were for multiple coffees.
Flags fly high in Waitangi Park The meeting point for the hīkoi this morning was at Waitangi Park, which was dominated by either tino rangatiratanga flags, toitu te tiriti flags or the flag for the United Tribes.
RNZ spoke to a few people on their thoughts about Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill.
“I think he’s a very arrogant man, at the end of the day he says he’s got Māori in him, he still uses white rules to try and rule the rest of the country. Well, it ain’t his land, it belongs to us. We were the first ones here so we own it. And our tipuna, they were good people but now he’s trying to do this to us and it’s not fair,” said Kathleen Mihaere.
“I don’t like him, okay? He needs to wake up and realise this is our whenua, we own this. You fellas are visitors and if you are one of us, be one of us,” said Sheena Tonihi.
“What’s good for Māori is good for everyone, we come here as peace, we love everyone no matter who you are, where you come from. But yeah, what’s good for Māori is good for everyone,” said Henare Karepe.
Thoughts on David Seymour voxies. Video: RNZ News
Before the hīkoi got underway, singer Stan Walker also went out and sang for the crowd.
The hīkoi later returned to the park from Parliament for an evening concert.
Marching before dawn More than 2000 people set off from the Hutt Valley at about 4am this morning and met with another group coming from Porirua on Wellington’s waterfront before they marched to Parliament.
Some Hīkoi participants arriving on horseback. Image: RNZ/Pokere Paewai
When the hīkoi reached a third of the way through the 14km journey to Wellington train station, it was met with lots of toots from passing traffic, mostly trucks at that time of the morning.
People on a passing train were videoing the hīkoi as it went by.
There were babies and elderly and hundreds of tino rangatiratanga flags flying.
Damian from Naenae said today’s hīkoi was hugely significant.
He said even though the Treaty Principles Bill was unlikely to make it past the second reading, the fact it was before Parliament at all was an injustice, and people felt that in their wairua.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
An alleged plot involving firearms and threatening the life of New Zealand pilot Philip Mehrtens when held hostage in Papua this year is being investigated by the Australian Federal Police.
The case involves “advancing a political cause by the separation of West Papua from Indonesia . . . with the intention of coercing by intimidation the governments of New Zealand and Indonesia”.
Named in the AFP search warrant seen by MWM is research scholar Julian King, 63, who has studied and written extensively about West Papuan affairs.
He has told others his home in Coffs Harbour, Queensland, was raided violently earlier this month by police using a stun grenade and smashing a door.
During the search, the police seized phones, computers and documents about alleged contacts with the West Papua rebel group Organisasi Papua Merdeka, OPM (Free Papua Organisation) and a bid to seek weapons and ammunition.
However, no arrests are understood to have been made or charges laid.
King, a former geologist and now a PhD student at Wollongong University, has been studying Papuan reaction to the Indonesian takeover since 1963. He has written in a research paper titled “A soul divided: The UN’s misconduct over West Papua” that West Papuans:
‘live under a military dictatorship described by legal scholars and human rights advocates as systemic terror and alleged genocide.’
Also named in the warrant alongside King is Amatus Dounemee Douw, confirmed by MWM contacts to be Australian citizen Akouboo Amatus Douw, who chairs the West Papua Diplomatic and Foreign Affairs Council, an NGO that states it seeks to settle disputes peacefully.
Risk to Australia-Indonesia relations The allegations threaten to fragment relations between Indonesia and Australia.
It is widely believed that human rights activists and church organisations are helping Papuan dissidents despite Canberra’s regular insistence that it officially backs Jakarta.
Earlier this year, Deputy PM Richard Marles publicly stressed: “We, Australia, fully recognise Indonesia’s territorial sovereignty. We do not endorse any independence movement.”
When seized by armed OPM pro-independence fighters in February last year, Mehrtens was flying a light plane for an Indonesian transport company.
He was released unharmed in September after being held for 593 days by the West Papua National Liberation Army (Tentara Pembebasan Nasional Papua Barat – TPNPB), the military wing of the OPM.
AFP is investigating alleged firearms plot which threatened the life of New Zealand pilot Philip Mehrtens when held hostage in West Papua this year #auspolhttps://t.co/8ZXFIB1fre
Designated ‘terrorist’ group, journalists banned OPM is designated as a terrorist organisation in Indonesia but isn’t on the Australian list of proscribed groups. Jakarta bans foreign journalists from Papua, so little impartial information is reported.
After Mehrtens was freed, TPNPB spokesman Sebby Sambom alleged that a local politician had paid a bribe, a charge denied by the NZ government.
However, West Papua Action Aotearoa spokesperson Catherine Delahunty told Radio NZ the bribe was “an internal political situation that has nothing to do with our government’s negotiations.”
Sambom, who has spent time in Indonesian jails for taking part in demonstrations, now operates out of adjacent Papua New Guinea — a separate independent country.
Australia was largely absent from the talks to free Mehrtens that were handled by NZ diplomats and the Indonesian military. The AFP’s current involvement raises the worry that information garnered under the search warrants will show the Indonesian government where the Kiwi was hidden so that locations can be attacked from the air.
At one stage during his captivity, Mehrtens appealed to the Indonesian military not to bomb villages.
It is believed Mehrtens was held in Nduga, a district with the lowest development index in the Republic, a measure of how citizens can access education, health, and income. Yet Papua is the richest province in the archipelago — the Grasberg mine is the world’s biggest deposit of gold and copper.
OPM was founded in December 1963 as a spiritual movement rejecting development while blending traditional and Christian beliefs. It then started working with international human rights agencies for support.
Indigenous Papuans are mainly Christian, while almost 90 percent of Indonesians follow Islam.
Chief independence lobbyist Benny Wenda lives in exile in Oxford. In 2003 he was given political asylum by the UK government after fleeing from an Indonesian jail. He has addressed the UN and European and British Parliaments, but Jakarta has so far resisted international pressure to allow any form of self-determination.
Questions for new President Prabowo Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto is in the UK this week, where Papuans have been drumming up opposition to the official visit. In a statement, Wenda said:
‘Prabowo has also restarted the transmigration settlement programme that has made us a minority in our own land.’
“For West Papuans, the ghost of (second president) Suharto has returned — (his) New Order regime still exists, it has just changed its clothes.”
Pleas for recognition of Papuan’s concerns get minimal backing in Indonesia; fears of balkanisation and Western nations taking over a splintered country are well entrenched in the 17,000-island archipelago of 1300 ethnic groups where “unity” is considered the Republic’s foundation stone.
Duncan Graham has a Walkley Award, two Human Rights Commission awards and other prizes for his radio, TV and print journalism in Australia. He now lives in Indonesia. He has been an occasional contributor to Asia Pacific Report and this article was first published by Michael West Media.
More than 35,000 people today gathered as Aotearoa New Zealand’s Hīkoi mō te Tiriti overflowed from Parliament’s grounds and onto nearby streets in the capital Wellington Pōneke.
Eru Kapa-Kingi told the crowd “Māori nation has been born” today and that “Te Tiriti is forever”.
ACT leader David Seymour was met with chants of “Kill the bill, kill the bill” when he walked out of the Beehive for a brief appearance at Parliament’s forecourt, before waving to the crowd and returning into the building.
The Treaty Principles Bill architect, Seymour, said he supported the right to protest, but thought participants were misguided and had a range of different grievances.
Interviewed earlier before Question Time, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said it was up to Parliament’s justice committee to decide whether the select committee process on the Treaty Principles Bill should be shortened.
The select committee will receive public submissions until January 7, and intends to complete hearings by the end of February.
Waitangi Day uncertainty
It means the Prime Minister will head to Waitangi while submissions on the bill are still happening.
Luxon was asked whether he would prefer if the bill was disposed of before Waitangi Day commemorations on February 6
“It’ll be what it will be.
“Let’s be clear — there is a strong depth of emotion on all sides of this debate.
“Yes, [the bill] is not something I like or support, but we have come to a compromise.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
We go now to Deir al-Balah in Gaza, where we’re joined by Arwa Damon, founder of INARA, a nonprofit currently providing medical and mental healthcare to children in Gaza. She previously spent 18 years at CNN, including time as a senior international correspondent.
Thanks so much for being with us, Arwa. This is your fourth trip back to Gaza since October 7, 2023. Tell us what you see there:
ARWA DAMON: You know, Amy, you think you can’t get worse, and then it does. You think people, quite simply, could never cope with these deteriorating conditions, and yet somehow they do. It’s a situation that they have been forced into.
Arguably, the conditions when it comes to access of humanitarian organisations and our ability to distribute aid, aid actually getting into the strip, we’re talking about the lowest levels yet. And this is exactly during the timeframe that the US had given to Israel to actually improve the situation. We’ve seen it getting significantly worse.
We’re not just talking about a shortage in things like flour, food, water, fresh vegetables, you know, hygiene kits. We’re also talking about shortages in what’s available on the commercial market. So, even if you somehow had money to be able to go buy what you need, it quite simply isn’t here.
These hospitals that we keep talking about as being partially functioning, what does that actually mean? It means that if you show up bleeding, someone inside is going to try to stop the bleed, but do they actually have what they need to save your life? No. I was inside visiting some kids here at Al-Aqsa earlier today and over the weekend.
There’s a little 2-year-old boy here whose brain you can see pulsing through his skin. His skull bone was removed. This little boy was not stabilising properly because the ICU was missing a pediatric-sized tracheostomy tube. Now, luckily, we were able to, you know, source some of them, and he has now stabilised, and he is off the ventilator.
Palestinians feel they are being ‘slowly exterminated’. Video: Democracy Now!
But this really gives you an idea of just how serious the situation here is.
People are gathering to demonstrate for things like flour, for bread, for whatever it is that you can imagine. Winter is coming. The rains are coming. This means flooding is coming.
And on top of just, you know, water flooding, we’re also anticipating that the sewage sites are going to be flooding, as well. Aid organizations need to be able to have the capacity and the ability to, you know, shift those sites to areas where they’re not going to pose even more of a health hazard to the community.
So, I mean, it’s a complete and total nightmare. It’s beyond being a nightmare.
AMY GOODMAN: If you can talk about this latest report? The special UN committee says Israel’s actions in Gaza are “consistent with the characteristics of genocide,” coming at the same time as a Human Rights Watch report, and UNRWA talks about famine being imminent in northern Gaza.
ARWA DAMON: So, if we’re talking specifically about the north, the northern province of Gaza, this is an area where Israel launched its military operation there nearly four weeks ago. We have seen people repeatedly being forcibly displaced from their homes. There is very little access to medical assistance there.
There has been absolutely no humanitarian assistance delivered there for about the last month. People are starving. They are dying. And it’s not just bombs that are killing people, it’s also disease.
‘Bombs kill quickly, but disease and starvation, they are slow killers. And that is what a lot of people are facing here.’
— Arwa Damon, founder of INARA,
So, when we look at the nature of what is happening in Gaza, you can’t spend a day here, Amy, and not come away with the notion that you are witnessing a population that is being slowly exterminated. And I say “slowly” because, yes, bombs kill quickly, but disease and starvation, they are slow killers. And that is what a lot of people are facing here.
And talk to anybody in Gaza, and there’s absolutely no doubt in their mind that, one, they are living through their own annihilation, and, two, what Israel is doing in the northern part is going to be repeated elsewhere.
And this is also part of why you see a reluctance among the population to want to evacuate, because Gazans know, Palestinians know that when they leave, they’re not going to be able to go back home. This is what history has taught them.
And there is this very real, ingrained fear among the population here right now that what they’re going through at this moment is not the end. There is actually a real sense that the worst is yet to come.
And they feel completely and totally abandoned by the international community, by global leaders, not to mention the United States. And everyone is convinced that right now Israel is going to have even more free rein to do whatever it is that it wants here.
When you talk to people about what it is that they’re going through, they do feel as if every single aspect of trying to survive here has been carefully orchestrated by Israel so that it is able to sort of meet America’s bare minimum of standards, to allow America sufficient cover to say, “Oh, no, there’s improvement that’s happening.”
And yet, actually, at the core of it is just another way to continue to kill the population.
AMY GOODMAN: And as you talk about the United States, which has given tens of billions of dollars in military aid to Israel, they did recently set a 30-day deadline to increase the flow of food and humanitarian aid into Gaza, but the US has decided to keep arming Israel despite this and despite the number of officials in the State Department and other parts of the US government who have quit over this.
ARWA DAMON: Yeah, and let’s just look at the numbers. Let’s just look at what happened when the US started the clock for that 30-day deadline to improve humanitarian assistance. We saw, very shortly afterwards, the number of trucks accessing Gaza dip significantly, down to 30 a day, keeping in mind that one of the key demands that the US had was that aid be increased to at least 350 trucks.
So we saw this, you know, decrease consistent of roughly 30 trucks a day for most of the month of October. Now, in November, that number did go up to around 60-70, but we’re still talking about, you know, falling extraordinarily short, providing barely 20% of what it is that the population here needs.
We saw less access to these besieged areas in the north, where people are effectively trapped or having to basically risk their lives. We’ve had numerous instances where aid has been delivered to the Kamal Adwan Hospital in the north, for example, where, shortly after medical evacuation teams have arrived there, there have been strikes.
You have this very ingrained fear that exists among people right now, especially in the north, where some of them are saying, “Don’t deliver anything, because right after you’re delivering, strikes are happening.”
And just to illustrate how it is that we try to move, so if we’re moving from south to north, for example, or even if we’re moving within the northern areas, those movement requests have to be approved by Israel. And aid organisations are increasingly wary of moving around with what we call soft-skin cars, which is basically your normal vehicle that we use to move around in, because of the increasing frequency of instances at Israeli checkpoints where aid convoys have been shot at by IDF troops after receiving the green light.
The OK to cross through, which means that for a lot of aid organizations, movement is limited to those who have access to armoured vehicles, vehicles that are more secure. And those don’t really exist in Gaza in high numbers at all. And we’re not allowed to bring in more to sort of beef up our capacity to be able to move around safely.
I mean, no matter which way you look at it, Amy, you’re constantly faced by numerous obstacles that don’t need to be there. It feels very deliberate, not to mention the complete and total breakdown of security. Now we have numerous looting instances of aid trucks.
We’ve repeatedly asked the Israeli side to be able to use alternative routes, to be able to use secured routes. Those requests are not being met.
I mean, it’s just — it’s such an impossible situation to operate in. I feel like I keep saying the same thing over and over and over again each time I come in. And the words to demonstrate how much worse it’s getting, quite simply, lack in our vocabulary.
AMY GOODMAN: You also wrote a piece recently, “The Devastation of Lebanon,” for New Lines. And we had this headline, The Washington Post reporting a close aide to Netanyahu told Donald Trump and his son-in-law Jared Kushner that Israel is rushing to advance a ceasefire deal in Lebanon as a gift to Trump ahead of his January inauguration. Your response to the significance of Trump’s election and what it means to the people of Lebanon and Gaza?
ARWA DAMON: You know, first of all, anyone who lives in the Middle East and anyone who’s kind of been focusing on the Middle East knows very well that it really doesn’t matter who’s in the White House. Whether it’s Republican or Democrat, that really is not going to change significantly US policy towards this region.
But the thing that we’ve been hearing, specifically when it comes to the re-election of Donald Trump, is at least he’s not lying to us. At least whatever America is going to let Israel do, it’s going to be done faster. So, if our end is coming, at least it’s going to come faster.
Whereas when it comes to, you know, specifically the Biden administration, the sense is that the Democrats are far more willing to allow this slower, more painful death. But the end result, no matter who it is, people are fully convinced, is exactly the same.
And all people really want right now is for this to end. People are suffocated. They’re crushed. They cannot keep going like this. And they very much feel as if, you know, no matter what it is, no matter who it is, Arabs are viewed by the United States and by the Western world as somehow being less than . . . their lives are not that valuable.
You constantly hear people in Gaza — and we were hearing the same thing in Lebanon — making comments like, “Well, you know, America, it doesn’t care if we live or die. It doesn’t care how much we suffer. Our lives don’t matter to them.” And that is not really a perspective that changes all that much, no matter who is sitting in Washington.
AMY GOODMAN: We just have 30 seconds, Arwa. Why did you give up journalism for humanitarian work? What do you think you can accomplish at INARA that you couldn’t do as a journalist?
ARWA DAMON: There’s a certain sort of privilege of being able to spend extensive periods of time with people and really get to know who they are. And I feel as if, you know, moving around in the humanitarian sphere, I’m getting a different understanding of sort of people’s emotional journeys, what it actually takes to be able to provide them with assistance.
And it’s provided me a different way of being able to continue to sort of share people’s stories and experiences, but also be able to immediately at least try to provide assistance. You know, the challenge that we have when we’re out in the field as journalists is that you don’t always see the impact.
But when you’re in the humanitarian space, there’s a certain kind of magic when you’re able to just bring a smile to a child’s face. And I needed that.
AMY GOODMAN: Arwa Damon, we thank you so much for being with us. Stay safe. An award-winning journalist, she was with CNN for 18 years but now has founded INARA, a nonprofit currently providing medical and mental healthcare to children in Gaza, speaking to us from Deir al-Balah in Gaza outside Al-Aqsa Hospital.
This article is republished under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States Licence.
ACT leader David Seymour has spoken out on Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke’s haka in Parliament as a Hīkoi against his controversial Treaty Principles Bill converges on Wellington.
Seymour told reporters the haka “was designed to get in other people’s faces”, to stop the people who represent New Zealanders from having their say, particularly because those doing it left their seats.
The action was a serious matter, and if a haka was allowed one time, it left the door open for other disruptions in Parliament at other times.
Labour’s vote against the decision to suspend Maipi-Clarke from the House was an indication it thought such behaviour was appropriate.
People should be held accountable for their actions, Seymour added.
Asked by reporters if Seymour should speak to the Hīkoi, Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer said his voice had already been heard, and described Māori feeling “a sense of betrayal”.
The bill should never have come into the House, she said.
A ferry carrying protesters from the South Island is now on its way across the Cook Strait as final preparations are made in the capital for tomorrow’s gathering at the Beehive.
In Wellington, commuters are being warned to allow extra time for travel, and add one or even two hours to their trips to work on Tuesday even as extra buses and train carriages are put on.
Māori Queen to join Hīkoi
A spokesperson for the Kiingitanga movement said although this was a period of mourning in the wake of the death of her late father, the Māori Queen would be joining the Hīkoi in Wellington.
Te Arikinui Kuini Nga Wai Hono i te Po confirmed late last night she planned to be at Parliament tomorrow.
Speaking to RNZ’s Midday Report, spokesperson Ngira Simmonds said while it was uncommon for a Māori monarch to break the period of mourning, Kuini Nga Wai Hono i te Po would be there to advocate for more unity between Māori and the Crown.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Thousands of supporters were then welcomed at Takapūwāhia Marae, in Porirua, north of Wellington.
They will have a rest day in Porirua today before gathering at Wellington’s Waitangi Park on tomorrow morning, and converging on Parliament.
“There is likely to be some disruption to roads and highways,” the council said in a statement.
‘Plan ahead’ call
“Please plan ahead if travelling by road or rail on Tuesday, November 19, as delays are possible.”
The Hīkoi will start at 6am, travelling from Porirua to Waitangi Park, where it will arrive at 9am.
It will then depart the park at 10am, travelling along the Golden Mile to Parliament, where it will arrive at midday.
The Hīkoi will return to Waitangi Park at 4pm for a concert, karakia, and farewell.
State Highways 1 and 2 busier than normal.
Police said no significant issues had been reported as a result of the Hīkoi.
A traffic management plan would be in place for its arrival into Wellington, with heavier than usual traffic anticipated, particularly in the Hutt Valley early Tuesday morning, and on SH2 between Lower Hutt and Wellington city.
Anyone living or working in the city should plan accordingly, Wellington District Commander Superintendent Corrie Parnell said.
Police ‘working with Hikoī’
“Police have been working closely with iwi and Hīkoi organisers, and our engagement has been positive.
“The event as it has moved down the country has been conducted peacefully, and we have every reason to believe this will continue.
“In saying that, disruption is expected through the city centre as the hīkoi makes its way from Waitangi Park to Parliament.
“We’ve planned ahead with NZTA, Wellington City Council, Greater Wellington Regional Council, local schools, retailers and other stakeholders to mitigate this as best possible, but Wellingtonians should be prepared for Tuesday to look a little different.”
Riders on horseback have joined the Hīkoi along the route. Image: RNZ/Pokere Paewai
Wellington Station bus hub will be closed, with buses diverted to nearby locations.
Metlink has also added extra capacity to trains outside of peak times (9am-3pm).
Police said parking was expected to be extremely difficult on Tuesday, especially around the bus hub, Lambton Quay and Parliament grounds.
Wellingtonians were being to exercise patience, particularly on busy roads, Parnell said.
“We ask you to allow more time than normal to get where you are going. Plan ahead by looking at how road closures and public transport changes might affect you, and expect that there will be delays at some point throughout the day.”
PM: ‘We’ll wait and see’ Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said he was playing his approach to the Hīkoi “by ear”.
He has been at his first APEC meeting in Peru, but will arrive back in New Zealand today.
He said he was open to speaking with members of the Hīkoi on Tuesday, but no plans had been made as yet.
“We haven’t made a decision. We’ll wait and see, but I’m very open to meeting, in some form or another.
“It’s obviously building as it walks through the country and gets to Wellington, and we’ll just wait and see and take it as it comes.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Indonesia’s plan to convert over 2 million ha of conservation and indigenous lands into agriculture will cause long-term damage to the environment, create conflict and add to greenhouse gas emissions, according to a feasibility study document for the Papua region mega-project.
The 96-page presentation reviewed by Radio Free Asia was drawn up by Sucofindo, the Indonesian government’s inspection and land surveying company.
Dated July 4, it analyses the risks and benefits of the sugar cane and rice estate in Merauke regency on Indonesia’s border with Papua New Guinea and outlines a feasibility study that was to have been completed by mid-August.
Though replete with warnings that “comprehensive” environmental impact assessments should take place before any land is cleared, the feasibility process appears to have been a box-ticking exercise. Sucofindo did not respond to questions from RFA, a news service affiliated with BenarNews, about the document.
Even before the study was completed, then-President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo participated in a ceremony in Merauke on July 23 that marked the first sugar cane planting on land cleared of forest for the food estate, the government said in a statement.
Jokowi’s decade-long presidency ended last month.
Excavators destroy villages
In late July, dozens of excavators shipped by boat were unloaded in the Ilyawab district of Merauke where they destroyed villages and cleared forests and wetlands for rice fields, according to a report by civil society organisation Pusaka
Hipolitus Wangge, an Indonesian politics researcher at Australian National University, told RFA the feasibility study document does not provide new information about the agricultural plans.
But it makes it clear, he said, that in government there is “no specific response on how the state deals with indigenous concerns” and their consequences.
The plan to convert as much as 2.3 million ha of forest, wetland and savannah into rice farms, sugarcane plantations and related infrastructure in the conflict-prone Papua region is part of the government’s ambitions to achieve food and energy self-sufficiency.
Previous efforts in the nation of 270 million people have fallen short of expectations.
Echoing government and military statements, Sucofindo said increasingly extreme climate change and the risk of international conflict are reasons why Indonesia should reduce reliance on food imports.
Taken together, the sugarcane and rice projects represent at least a fifth of a 10,000 square km lowland area known as the TransFly that spans Indonesia and Papua New Guinea and which conservationists say is an already under-threat conservation treasure.
Military leading role
Indonesia’s military has a leading role in the 1.9 million ha rice plan while the government has courted investors for the sugar cane and related bioethanol projects.
The likelihood of conflict with indigenous Papuans or of significant and long-term environmental damage applies in about 80 percent of the area targeted for development, according to Sucofindo’s analysis.
The project’s “issues and challenges,” Sucofindo said, include “deforestation and biodiversity loss, destruction of flora and fauna habitats and loss of species”.
It warns of long-term land degradation and erosion as well as water pollution and reduced water availability during the dry season caused by deforestation.
Sucofindo said indigenous communities in Merauke rely on forests for livelihoods and land conversion will threaten their cultural survival. It repeatedly warns of the risk of conflict, which it says could stem from evictions and relocation.
“Evictions have the potential to destabilize social and economic conditions,” Sucofindo said in its presentation.
If the entire area planned for development is cleared, it would add about 392 million tons of carbon to the atmosphere in net terms, according to Sucofindo.
That is about equal to half of the additional carbon emitted by Indonesia’s fire catastrophe in 2015 when hundreds of thousands of acres of peatlands drained for pulpwood and oil palm plantations burned for months.
Then-President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo participates in a sugar-cane planting ceremony in the Merauke regency of South Papua province in July. Image: Indonesian presidential office handout/Muchlis Jr
Indonesia’s contribution to emissions that raise the average global temperature is significantly worsened by a combination of peatland fires and deforestation. Carbon stored in its globally important tropical forests is released when cut down for palm oil, pulpwood and other plantations.
In a speech last week to the annual United Nations climate conference COP29, Indonesia’s climate envoy, a brother of recently inaugurated president Prabowo Subianto, said the new administration has a long-term goal to restore forests to 31.3 million acres severely degraded by fires in 2015 and earlier massive burnings in the 1980s and 1990s.
Indonesia’s government has made the same promise in previous years including in its official progress report on its national contribution to achieving the Paris Agreement goal of keeping the rise in average global temperature to below 2 degrees Celsius.
“President Prabowo has approved in principle a program of massive reforestation to these 12.7 million hectares in a biodiverse manner,” envoy Hashim Djojohadikusumo said during the livestreamed speech from Baku, Azerbaijan.
“We will soon embark on this programme.”
Prabowo’s government has announced plans to encourage outsiders to migrate to Merauke and other parts of Indonesia’s easternmost region, state media reported this month.
Critics said such large-scale movements of people would further marginalise indigenous Papuans in their own lands and exacerbate conflict that has simmered since Indonesia took control of the region in the late 1960s.
A media studies professor at Qatar’s Doha Institute for Graduate Studies has completed empirical studies examining Western media coverage of Israel’s war on Gaza — and his findings have been highly critical.
Professor Mohamad Elmasry found that Western media have failed to do much more than “parrot Israeli propaganda regarding al-Shifa Hospital [in Gaza City] and the war more generally”.
Western news outlets, such as BBC, CNN, Sky News, MSNBC, Fox News — and others that are frequent sources of news in New Zealand — “tended to rely overwhelmingly on Israeli and pro-Israeli sources,” he told Al Jazeera.
“Palestinian sources were mostly neglected as were pro-Palestinian sources.
“It’s not a conspiracy; it’s not as though journalists are showing up to work and saying, ‘we’re really going to make the Israelis look good today’.
“But there is a structural problem [in the media] today,” Dr Elmasry added.
“Western news organisations simply do not get Israel-Palestine right.”
US ‘scoffs’ at international law
In a separate interview yesterday, Dr Elmasry blamed the United States for ignoring international law to lead the world to “where we are” over the ongoing Gaza genocide with no end in sight.
“About 95 percent of Israel’s weapons come from the United States and Germany, so as long as those countries scoff at the idea of international law, we won’t get anywhere with the calls for an arms embargo against Israel,” Dr Elmasry said.
Professor Mohamad Elmasry on why there is a stalemate over Gaza genocide. Video: Al Jazeera
“There has been a suggestion that there might be a draft resolution put forward at the United Nations Security Council,” he added.
“There is no question in my mind that nearly all of the countries on the Security Council would support that resolution”.
All countries except for the US, Dr Elmasry added.
“There is also no question in my mind that the United States would veto it, so one of the reasons why we are where we are is because of the United States.”
A West Papuan advocacy group for self-determination for the colonised Melanesians has appealed to the United Kingdom government to cancel its planned reception for new Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto.
“Prabowo is a blood-stained war criminal who is complicit in genocide in East Timor and West Papua,” claimed an exiled leader of the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP), Benny Wenda.
He said he hoped the government would stand up for human rights and a “habitable planet” by cancelling its reception for Prabowo.
“Prabowo has also restarted the transmigration settlement programme that has made us a minority in our own land. He wants to destroy West Papua,” the UK-based Wenda said in a statement.
‘Ghost of Suharto’ returns
“For West Papuans, the ghost of Suharto has returned — the New Order regime still exists, it has just changed its clothes.
“It is gravely disappointing that the UK government has signed a ‘critical minerals’ deal with Indonesia, which will likely cover West Papua’s nickel reserves in Tabi and Raja Ampat.
“The UK must understand that there can be no real ‘green deal’ with Indonesia while they are destroying the third largest rainforest on earth.”
Wenda said he was glad to see five members of the House of Lords — Lords Harries, Purvis, Gold, Lexden, and Baroness Bennett — hold the government to account on the issues of self-determination, ecocide, and a long-delayed UN fact-finding visit.
“We need this kind of scrutiny from our parliamentary supporters more than ever now,” he said.
Prabowo is due to visit Oxford Library as part of his diplomatic visit.
“Why Oxford? The answer is clearly because the peaceful Free West Papua Campaign is based here; because the Town Hall flies our national flag every December 1st; and because I have been given Freedom of the City, along with other independence leaders like Nelson Mandela,” Wenda said.
This visit was not an isolated incident, he said. A recent cultural promotion had been held in Oxford Town Centre, addressed by the Indonesian ambassador in an Oxford United scarf.
The people of West Papua have spoken.
Just today (15/11/24), rallies against Indonesia’s settler-colonial Transmigration plan were held in:
Takeover of Oxford United
“There was the takeover of Oxford United by Anindya Bakrie, one of Indonesia’s richest men, and Erick Thohir, an Indonesian government minister.
“This is not about business — it is a targeted campaign to undermine West Papua’s international connections. The Indonesian Embassy has sponsored the Cowley Road Carnival and attempted to ban displays of the Morning Star, our national flag.
“They have called a bomb threat in on our office and lobbied to have my Freedom of the City award revoked. Indonesia is using every dirty trick they have in order to destroy my connection with this city.”
Wenda said Indonesia was a poor country, and he blamed the fact that West Papua was its poorest province on six decades of colonialism.
“There are giant slums in Jakarta, with homeless people sleeping under bridges. So why are they pouring money into Oxford, one of the wealthiest cities in Europe?” Wenda said.
“The UK has been my home ever since I escaped an Indonesian prison in the early 2000s. My family and I have been welcomed here, and it will continue to be our home until my country is free and we can return to West Papua.”
15/11/24 Jayapura, West Papua
Another angle showing that the rally against Transmigration was peaceful, but the police forcibly dispersed it.
A former New Zealand prime minister, Dame Jenny Shipley, has warned the ACT Party is “inviting civil war” with its attempt to define the principles of the 1840 Te Tiriti o Waitangi in law.
National has said its MPs will vote against it at the second reading, after only backing it through the first as part of the coalition agreement with ACT.
Voting on the bill was interrupted when Te Pāti Māori’s Hauraki Waikato MP Hana-Rāwhiti Maipi-Clarke tore up a copy of the bill and launched into a haka, inspiring other opposition MPs and members of the public gallery to join in.
Dame Jenny, who led the National Party from 1997 until 2001 and was prime minister for two of those years, threw her support behind Maipi-Clarke.
“The Treaty, when it’s come under pressure from either side, our voices have been raised,” she told RNZ’s Saturday Morning.
“I was young enough to remember Bastion Point, and look, the Treaty has helped us navigate. When people have had to raise their voice, it’s brought us back to what it’s been — an enduring relationship where people then try to find their way forward.
“And I thought the voices of this week were completely and utterly appropriate, and whether they breach standing orders, I’ll put that aside.
“The voice of Māori, that reminds us that this was an agreement, a contract — and you do not rip up a contract and then just say, ‘Well, I’m happy to rewrite it on my terms, but you don’t count.’
Te Pāti Māori MP Hana-Rāwhiti Maipa-Clarke led a haka in Parliament and tore up a copy of the Treaty Principles Bill at the first reading in Parliament on Thursday . . . . a haka is traditionally used as an indigenous show of challenge, support or sorrow. Image: RNZ/Samuel Rillstone
“I would raise my voice. I’m proud that the National Party has said they will not be supporting this, because you cannot speak out of both sides of your mouth.
“And I think any voice that’s raised, and there are many people — pākeha and Māori who are not necessarily on this hikoi — who believe that a relationship is something you keep working at. You don’t just throw it in the bin and then try and rewrite it as it suits you.”
Her comments come after Prime Minister Christopher Luxon called the bill “simplistic” and “unhelpful”, and former Treaty Negotiations Minister Chris Finlayson — who negotiated more settlements than any other — said letting it pass its first reading would do “great damage” to National’s relationship with Māori.
The Treaty Principles Bill reading vote. Video: RNZ News
Dame Jenny said past attempts to codify Treaty principles in law had failed.
“While there have been principles leaked into individual statutes, we have never attempted to — in a formal sense — put principles in or over top of the Treaty as a collective. And I caution New Zealand — the minute you put the Treaty into a political framework in its totality, you are inviting civil war.
“I would fight against it. Māori have every reason to fight against it.
“This is a relationship we committed to where we would try and find a way to govern forward. We would respect each other’s land and interests rights, and we would try and be citizens together — and actually, we are making outstanding progress, and this sort of malicious, politically motivated, fundraising-motivated attempt to politicise the Treaty in a new way should raise people’s voices, because it is not in New Zealand’s immediate interest.
“And you people should be careful what they wish for. If people polarise, we will finish up in a dangerous position. The Treaty is a gift to us to invite us to work together. And look, we’ve been highly successful in doing that, despite the odd ruction on the way.”
She said New Zealand could be proud of the redress it had made to Māori, “where we accepted we had just made a terrible mess on stolen land and misused the undertakings of the Treaty, and we as a people have tried to put that right”.
“I just despise people who want to use a treasure — which is what the Treaty is to me — and use it as a political tool that drives people to the left or the right, as opposed to inform us from our history and let it deliver a future that is actually who we are as New Zealanders . . . I condemn David Seymour for his using this, asking the public for money to fuel a campaign that I think really is going to divide New Zealand in a way that I haven’t lived through in my adult life. There’s been flashpoints, but I view this incredibly seriously.”
‘Equal enjoyment of the same fundamental human rights’ In response, David Seymour said the bill actually sought to “solve” the problem of “treating New Zealanders based on their ethnicity”.
“Te Pāti Māori acted in complete disregard for the democratic system of which they are a part during the first reading of the bill, causing disruption, and leading to suspension of the House.
“The Treaty Principles Bill commits to protecting the rights of everyone, including Māori, and upholding Treaty settlements. It commits to give equal enjoyment of the same fundamental human rights to every single New Zealander.
“The challenge for people who oppose this bill is to explain why they are so opposed to those basic principles.”
On Thursday, following the passing of the bill’s first reading, he said he was looking forward to seeing what New Zealanders had to say about it during the six-month select committee process.
“The select committee process will finally democratise the debate over the Treaty which has until this point been dominated by a small number of judges, senior public servants, academics, and politicians.
“Parliament introduced the concept of the Treaty principles into law in 1975 but did not define them. As a result, the courts and the Waitangi Tribunal have been able to develop principles that have been used to justify actions that are contrary to the principle of equal rights. Those actions include co-governance in the delivery of public services, ethnic quotas in public institutions, and consultation based on background.
“The principles of the Treaty are not going away. Either Parliament can define them, or the courts will continue to meddle in this area of critical political and constitutional importance.
“The purpose of the Treaty Principles Bill is for Parliament to define the principles of the Treaty, provide certainty and clarity, and promote a national conversation about their place in our constitutional arrangements.”
He said the bill in no way would alter or amend the Treaty itself.
“I believe all New Zealanders deserve tino rangatiratanga — the right to self-determination. That all human beings are alike in dignity. The Treaty Principles Bill would give all New Zealanders equality before the law, so that we can go forward as one people with one set of rights.”
The Hīkoi today was in Hastings, on its way to Wellington, where it is expected to arrive on Monday.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Te Pāti Māori’s extraordinary display of protest — interrupting the first vote on the Treaty Principles Bill — has highlighted the tension in Aotearoa New Zealand between Māori tikanga, or customs, and the rules of Parliament.
When called on to cast Te Pāti Māori’s vote, its MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke instead launched into a haka, ripping a copy of the legislation in half.
She was joined by other opposition MPs and onlookers, prompting Speaker Gerry Brownlee to temporarily suspend Parliament and clear out the public gallery.
Brownlee subsequently censured Maipi-Clarke, describing her conduct as “appallingly disrespectful” and “grossly disorderly”.
Maipi-Clarke was named and suspended, barring her from voting or entering the debating chamber for a 24-hour period. She also had her pay docked.
Te Pāti Māori about to record their vote. Video: RNZ/Parliament
‘Ka mate, ka mate’ – when is it appropriate to perform haka?
The Ngāti Toa haka performed in Parliament was the well-known “Ka mate, Ka mate,” which tells the story of chief Te Rauparaha who was being chased by enemies and sought shelter where he hid. Once his enemies left he came out into the light.
Ngāti Toa chief executive and rangatira Helmut Modlik told RNZ the haka was relevant to the debate. He said the bill had put Māori self-determination at risk – “ka mate, ka mate” – and Māori were reclaiming that – “ka ora, ka ora”.
Haka was not governed by rules or regulation, Modlik said. It could be used as a show of challenge, support or sorrow.
“In the modern setting, all of these possibilities are there for the use of haka, but as an expression of cultural preferences, cultural power, world view, ideas, sounds, language – it’s rather compelling.”
Modlik acknowledged that Parliament operated according to its own conventions but said the “House and its rules only exist because our chiefs said it could be here”.
“If you’re going to negate . . . the constitutional and logical basis for your House being here . . . with your legislation, then that negates your right to claim it as your own to operate as you choose.”
He argued critics were being too sensitive, akin to “complaining about the grammar being used as people are crying that the house is on fire”.
“The firemen are complaining that they weren’t orderly enough,” Modlik said. “They didn’t use the right words.”
Robust response expected
Modlik said Seymour should expect a robust response to his own passionate performance and theatre: “That’s the Pandora’s Box he’s opening”.
Following the party’s protest yesterday, Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi told reporters “everyone should be proud to see [the haka] in its true context.”
“We love it when the All Blacks do it, but what about when the ‘blackies’ do it?” he said.
Today, speaking to those gathered for the Hīkoi mō te Tiriti in Rotorua, Waititi said the party used “every tool available to us to use in the debates in that House”.
“One of those tools are the Māori tools we take from our kete, which is haka, which is waiata, which is pōkeka — all of those things that our tīpuna have left us. Those are natural debating tools on the marae.”
What does Parliament’s rulebook have to say? Parliament is governed by its own set of rules known as Standing Orders and Speakers’ Rulings. They endow the Speaker with the power and responsibility to “maintain order and decorum” in the House.
The rules set out the procedures to be followed during a debate and subsequent vote. MPs are banned from using “offensive or disorderly words” or making a “personal reflection” against another member.
MPs can also be found in contempt of Parliament if they obstruct or impede the House in the performance of its functions.
Examples of contempt include assaulting, threatening or obstructing an MP, or “misconducting oneself” in the House.
Under Standing Orders, Parliament’s proceedings can be temporarily suspended “in the case of any grave disorder arising in committee”.
The Speaker may order any member “whose conduct is highly disorderly” to leave the chamber. For example, Brownlee ejected Labour MP Willie Jackson when he refused to apologise for calling Seymour a liar.
The Speaker may also “name” any member “whose conduct is grossly disorderly” and then call for MPs to vote on their suspension, as occurred in the case of Maipi-Clarke.
Members of the public gallery can also be required to leave if they interrupt proceedings or “disturb or disrupt the House”.
‘Abusing tikanga of Parliament’
Seymour has previously criticised Te Pāti Māori for abusing the “the tikanga of Parliament,” and on Thursday he called for further consequences.
“The Speaker needs to make it clear that the people of New Zealand who elect people to this Parliament have a right for their representative to be heard, not drowned out by someone doing a haka or getting in their face making shooting gestures,” Seymour said.
Former Speaker Sir Lockwood Smith told RNZ the rules existed to allow rational and sensible debate on important matters.
“Parliament makes the laws that govern all our lives, and its performance and behaviour has to be commensurate with that responsibility.
“It is not just a stoush in a pub. It is the highest court in the land and its behaviour should reflect that.”
Sir Lockwood said he respected Māori custom, but there were ways that could be expressed within the rules. He said he was also saddened by “the venom directed personally” at Seymour.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
An estimated 10,000 people have marched through Rotorua today as part of Hīkoi mō te Tiriti protesting against the controversial Treaty Principles Bill.
Due to the size of the group, Fenton Street was blocked temporarily as the Hīkoi went through, police said.
It is anticipated that this afternoon the main Hīkoi will travel via Taupō to Hastings, where participants will stay overnight.
Tuesday, November 19 will mark day 10 of the Hīkoi mō te Tiriti and kotahitanga o Ngā Iwi ki Waitangi Park — everyone will meet at Waitangi Park on Wellington’s waterfont before walking to the steps of the parliamentary Beehive.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Hīkoi treaty bill protest heads south from Rotorua. Video: RNZ News
With the protest hīkoi from the Far North moving through Rotorua on its way to Wellington, it might be said ACT leader David Seymour has been granted his wish of generating an “important national conversation about the place of the Treaty in our constitutional arrangements”.
Timed to coincide with the first reading of the contentious Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill yesterday — it passed with a vote of 68-55, the hīkoi and other similar protests are a response to what many perceive as a fundamental threat to New Zealand’s fragile constitutional framework.
With no upper house, nor a written constitution, important laws can be fast-tracked or repealed by a simple majority of Parliament.
As constitutional lawyer and former prime minister Geoffrey Palmer has argued about the current government’s legislative style and speed, the country “is in danger of lurching towards constitutional impropriety”.
Central to this ever-shifting and contested political ground is te Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi. For decades it has been woven into the laws of the land in an effort to redress colonial wrongs and guarantee a degree of fairness and equity for Māori.
There is a significant risk the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill would undermine these achievements, as it attempts to negate recognised rights within the original document and curtail its application in a modern setting.
But while the bill is almost guaranteed to fail because of the other coalition parties’ refusal to support it beyond the select committee, there is another danger. Contained in an explanatory note within the bill is the following clause:
The Bill will come into force if a majority of electors voting in a referendum support it. The Bill will come into force 6 months after the date on which the official result of that referendum is declared.
Were David Seymour to argue his bill has been thwarted by the standard legislative process and must be advanced by a referendum, the consequences for social cohesion could be significant.
The referendum option While the bill would still need to become law for the referendum to take place, the option of putting it to the wider population — either as a condition of a future coalition agreement or orchestrated via a citizens-initiated referendum — should not be discounted.
One recent poll showed roughly equal support for and against a referendum on the subject, with around 30 percent undecided. And Seymour has had success in the past with his End of Life Choice Act referendum in 2020.
He will also have watched the recent example of Australia’s Voice referendum, which aimed to give a non-binding parliamentary voice to Indigenous communities but failed after a heated and divisive public debate.
The lobby group Hobson’s Pledge, which opposes affirmative action for Māori and is led by former ACT politician Don Brash, has already signalled its intention to push for a citizens-initiated referendum, arguing: “We need to deliver the kind of message that the Voice referendum in Australia delivered.”
The Treaty and the constitution ACT’s bill is not the first such attempt. In 2006, the NZ First Party — then part of a Labour-led coalition government — introduced the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Deletion Bill.
That bill failed, but the essential argument behind it was that entrenching Treaty principles in law was “undermining race relations in New Zealand”. However, ACT’s current bill does not seek to delete those principles, but rather to define and restrain them in law.
This would effectively begin to unpick decades of careful legislative work, threaded together from the deliberations of the Waitangi Tribunal, the Treaty settlements process, the courts and Parliament.
would reduce the constitutional status of the Treaty/te Tiriti, remove its effect in law as currently recognised in Treaty clauses, limit Māori rights and Crown obligations, hinder Māori access to justice, impact Treaty settlements, and undermine social cohesion.
If this Bill were to be enacted, it would be the worst, most comprehensive breach of the Treaty/te Tiriti in modern times. If the Bill remained on the statute book for a considerable time or was never repealed, it could mean the end of the Treaty/te Tiriti.
Social cohesion at risk
Similar concerns have been raised by the Ministry of Justice in its advice to the government. In particular, the ministry noted the proposal in the bill may negate the rights articulated in Article II of the Treaty, which affirms the continuing exercise of tino rangatiratanga (self-determination):
Any law which fails to recognise the collective rights given by Article II calls into question the very purpose of the Treaty and its status in our constitutional arrangements.
The government has also been advised by the Ministry of Justice that the bill may lead to discriminatory outcomes inconsistent with New Zealand’s international legal obligations to eliminate discrimination and implement the rights of Indigenous peoples.
All of these issues will become heightened if a referendum, essentially about the the removal of rights guaranteed to Māori in 1840, is put to the vote.
Of course, citizens-initiated referendums are not binding on a government, but they carry much politically persuasive power nonetheless. And this is not to argue against their usefulness, even on difficult issues.
But the profound constitutional and wider democratic implications of the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill, and any potential referendum on it, should give everyone pause for thought at this pivotal moment.
As thousands take to the streets this week to “honour” the country’s 1840 Treaty of Waitangi, the largest daily newspaper New Zealand Herald says the massive event is “redefining activism”.
The Hīkoi mō te Tiriti has been underway since Sunday, with thousands of New Zealanders from all communities and walks of life traversing the more than 2000 km length of the country from Cape Reinga to Bluff and converging on the capital Wellington.
The marches are challenging the coalition government Act Party’s proposed Treaty Principles Bill, introduced last week by co-leader David Seymour.
The Bill had its first reading in Parliament today as a young first time opposition Te Pāti Māori MP, Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke, was suspended for leading a haka and ripping up a copy of the Bill disrupting the vote, and opposition Labour Party’s Māori Development spokesperson Willie Jackson was also “excused” from the chamber for calling Seymour a “liar” against parliamentary rules.
After a second attempt at voting, the three coalition parties won 68-55 with all three opposition parties voting against.
In its editorial today, hours before the debate and vote, The New Zealand Herald said supporters of Toitū te Tiriti, the force behind the Hīkoi, were seeking a community “reconnection” and described their kaupapa as an “activation, not activism; empowerment, not disruption; education, not protest”.
“Many of the supporters on the Hīkoi don’t consider themselves political activists. They are mums and dads, rangatahi, professionals, Pākehā, and Tauiwi (other non-Māori ethnicities),” The Herald said.
‘Loaded, colonial language’ “Mainstream media is often accused of using ‘loaded, colonial language’ in its headlines. Supporters of Toitū te Tiriti, however, see the movement not as a political protest but as a way to reconnect with the country’s shared history and reflect on New Zealand’s obligations under Te Tiriti.
“While some will support the initiative, many Pākehā New Zealanders are responding to it with unequivocal anger; others feel discomfort about suggestions of colonial guilt or inherited privilege stemming from historical injustices.”
“Seymour argues he is fighting for respect for all, but when multiculturalism is wielded as a political tool, it can obscure indigenous rights and maintain colonial dominance. For many, it’s an unsettling ideology to contemplate,” the newspaper said.
“A truly multicultural society would recognise the unique status of tangata whenua, ensuring Māori have a voice in decision-making as the indigenous people.
“However, policies framed under ‘equal rights’ often silence Māori perspectives and undermine the principles of Te Tiriti.
“Seymour’s proposed Treaty Principles Bill prioritises Crown sovereignty, diminishing the role of hapū (sub-tribes) and excluding Māori from national decision-making. Is this the ‘equality’ we seek, or is it a rebranded form of colonial control?”
Te Pāti Māori MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke . . . led a haka and tore up a copy of Seymour’s Bill in Parliament. Image: TVNZ screenshot APR
Heart of the issue
The heart of the issue, said The Herald, was how “equal” was interpreted in the context of affirmative action.
“Affirmative action is not about giving an unfair advantage; it’s about levelling the playing field so everyone has equal opportunities.
“Some politicians sidestep the real work needed to honour Te Tiriti by pushing for an ‘equal’ and ‘multicultural’ society. This approach disregards Aotearoa’s unique history, where tangata whenua hold a constitutionally recognised status.
“The goal is not to create division but to fulfil a commitment made more than 180 years ago and work towards a partnership based on mutual respect. We all have a role to play in this partnership.
“The Hīkoi mō te Tiriti is more than a march; it’s a movement rooted in education, healing, and building a shared future.
“It challenges us to look beyond superficial equality and embrace a partnership where all voices are heard and the mana (authority) of tangata whenua is upheld.”
The first reading of the bill was advanced in a failed attempt to distract from the impact of the national Hikoi.
RNZ reports that more than 40 King’s Counsel lawyers say the Bill seeks to “rewrite the Treaty itself” and have called on Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and the coalition government to “act responsibly now and abandon” the draft law.
The Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) has written to the Minister for Space Judith Collins and Rocket Lab CEO Peter Beck to warn that satellites being launched from the Māhia Peninsula are “highly likely” to conduct surveillance for Israel.
And also to assist in the commission of war crimes in Gaza and in Lebanon, said PSNA national chair John Minto.
“Three companies are of particular concern to us: BlackSky Technology, Capella Space, and HawkEye 360,” Minto said in a statement.
“In particular, BlackSky has a US$150 million contract to supply high temporal frequency images and analysis to Israel,” Minto said.
“We believe it is highly likely that BlackSky provides data to Israel which it uses to target civilian infrastructure across Gaza and Lebanon.”
Minto said that PSNA understood that Rocket Lab had launched satellites for BlackSky since 2019.
The advocacy group also aware that by the end of 2024, Rocket Lab was expected to begin deploying BlackSky’s constellation of next generation earth observation satellites, with improved capability.
Asking for suspension
“We are asking the minister and Rocket Lab to suspend all further satellite launches for BlackSky, full stop,” Minto said.
“For Capella Space and HawkEye 360, we are asking that the minister suspend satellite launches from the Māhia Peninsula until an investigation has taken place to assure New Zealanders that further launches will not put us in breach of our commitments under international law.
“New Zealanders don’t want our country used to support war crimes committed by Israel or any other country”, he said.
“If we are serious about our responsibilities under international law, including the Genocide Convention, then we must act now.”
Stopping the satellite launches was the “least we can do”.
A PSNA support lawyer, Sam Vincent, said: “New Zealand has solemn responsibilities under international law which must trump any short-term profit for Rocket Lab or the convenience of our government.”
He said that all three companies were sponsors of a geospatial intelligence conference in Israel taking place in January 2025 [Ramon GeoInt360], of which the Israel Ministry of Defence and BlackSky were “leading partners” and HawkEye 360 and Capella Space were sponsors.
Minto added: “All the alarm bells are ringing. These companies are up their eyeballs in support for Israel.”
This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.
Thousands of people are continuing their North Island hīkoi as the legislation they are protesting against, the Treaty Principles Bill, gets its first reading in Parliament today.
The hīkoi enters day four and headed off from Huntly, destined for Rotorua today, after it advanced through Auckland Tāmaki Makaurau yesterday.
Traffic was at a standstill in Kirikiriroa Hamilton and the hīkoi has filled the road from one side to the other.
Meanwhile, members of the King’s Counsel, some of New Zealand’s most senior legal minds, say the controversial bill “seeks to rewrite the Treaty itself” and are calling on the prime minister and the coalition government to “act responsibly now and abandon” it.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Hundreds of former employees of Israel lobbying groups such as AIPAC, StandWithUs and CAMERA are working in top newsrooms across the United States, writing and producing America’s news — including on Israel-Palestine, reports a new investigation.
These outlets include MSNBC, The New York Times, CNN and Fox News, says the MintPress News inquiry written by Alan MacLeod.
“Some of these former lobbyists are responsible for producing content on Israel and Palestine — a gigantic and undisclosed conflict of interest,” MacLeod writes.
“Many key US newsroom staff were also formerly Israeli spies or intelligence agents, standing in stark contrast to journalists with pro-Palestine sentiments, who have been purged en masse since October 7, 2023.”
This MintPress News investigation is part of a series detailing Israel’s influence on American media.
An earlier report exposed the former Israeli spies and military intelligence officials working in US newsrooms.
“The fight for control over the Israel-Palestine narrative has been as intense as the war on the ground itself,” writes MacLeod.
Criticised for ‘distinct bias’
“US media have been widely criticised for displaying a distinct bias towards the Israeli perspective.”
However, MacLeod said this new investigation had revealed “not only is the press skewed in favour of Israel, but it is also written and produced by Israeli lobbyists themselves”.
“This investigation unearths a network of hundreds of former members of the Israel lobby working at some of America’s most influential news organisations, helping to shape the public’s understanding of events in the Middle East.
“In the process, it helps whitewash Israeli crimes and manufacture consent for continued US participation in what a wide range of internationalorganisations have described as a genocide.”
The report author, Alan MacLeod, is senior staff writer for MintPress News. After completing his PhD in 2017, he published two books, Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent and writes for a range of publications.
An exiled West Papuan leader has called on supporters globally to show their support by raising the Morning Star flag — banned by Indonesia — on December 1.
“Whether in your house, your workplace, the beach, the mountains or anywhere else, please raise our flag and send us a picture,” said United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) interim president Benny Wenda.
“By doing so, you give West Papuans strength and courage and show us we are not alone.”
The plea came in response to a dramatic step-up in military reinforcements for the Melanesian region by new President Prabowo Subianto, who was inaugurated last month, in an apparent signal for a new crackdown on colonised Papuans.
“The situation in occupied West Papua is on a knife edge,” said the UK-based Wenda in a statement on the ULMWP website.
He added that President Prabowo had announced the return of a “genocidal transmigration settlement policy”.
Indigenous people a minority
“From the 1970s, transmigration brought hundreds of thousands of Javanese settlers into West Papua, ultimately making the Indigenous people a minority in our own land,” Wenda said.
“At the same time, Prabowo [is sending] thousands of soldiers to Merauke to safeguard the destruction of our ancestral forest for a set of gigantic ecocidal developments.
“Five million hectares of Papuan forest are set to be ripped down for sugarcane and rice plantations.
“West Papuans are resisting Prabowo’s plan to wipe us out, but we need all our supporters to stand beside us as we battle this terrifying new threat.”
The Morning Star is illegal in West Papua and frequently protesters who have breached this law have faced heavy jail sentences.
“If we raise [the flag], paint it on our faces, draw it on a banner, or even wear its colours on a bracelet, we can face up to 15 or 20 years in prison.
“This is why we need people to fly the flag for us. As ever, we will be proudly flying the Morning Star above Oxford Town Hall. But we want to see our supporters hold flag raisings everywhere — on every continent.
‘Inhabiting our struggle’
“Whenever you raise the flag, you are inhabiting the spirit of our struggle.”
Wenda appealed to everyone in West Papua — “whether you are in the cities, the villages, or living as a refugee or fighter in the bush” — to make December 1 a day of prayer and reflection on the struggle.
“We remember our ancestors and those who have been killed by the Indonesian coloniser, and strengthen our resolve to carry on fighting for Merdeka — our independence.”
Wenda said the peaceful struggle was making “great strides forward” with a constitution, a cabinet operating on the ground, and a provisional government with a people’s mandate.
“We know that one day soon the Morning Star will fly freely in our West Papuan homeland,” he said.
“But for now, West Papuans risk arrest and imprisonment if we wave our national flag. We need our supporters around the world to fly it for us, as we look forward to a Free West Papua.”
Members of the King’s Counsel, some of New Zealand’s most senior legal minds, say the controversial Treaty Principles Bill “seeks to rewrite the Treaty itself” and are calling on the prime minister and the coalition government to “act responsibly now and abandon” it.
More than 40 KCs have written to the prime minister and attorney-general outlining their “grave concerns” about the substance of the Treaty Principles Bill and its wider implications for the country’s constitutional arrangements.
“I can see why they don’t like the Treaty Principles Bill. Everyone gets a say, even if you’re not a KC,” Seymour said in a statement.
“The debate over the Treaty has until this point been dominated by a small number of judges, senior public servants, academics, and politicians.”
He said the select committee process would finally “democratise” the debate.
Co-governance, ethnic quotas “The courts and the Waitangi Tribunal have been able to develop principles that have been used to justify actions that are contrary to the principle of equal rights. Those actions include co-governance in the delivery of public services and ethnic quotas in public institutions.
“The Treaty Principles Bill provides an opportunity for New Zealanders — rather than the courts and the Waitangi Tribunal — to have a say on what the Treaty means. Did the Treaty give different rights to different groups, or does every citizen have equal rights? I believe all New Zealanders deserve to have a say on that question,” Seymour said.
The senior members of the independent bar view the introduction of the bill (and the intended referendum) as “wholly inappropriate as a way of addressing such an important and complex constitutional issue”.
The letter states the existing principles (including partnership, active protection, equity and redress) are “designed to reflect the spirit and intent of the Treaty as a whole and the mutual obligations and responsibilities of the parties”. They say the principles now represent “settled law”.
The letter said the coalition’s bill sought to “redefine in law the meaning of te Tiriti, by replacing the existing ‘Treaty principles’ with new Treaty principles which are said to reflect the three articles of te Tiriti”.
The hīkoi passing through Dargaville yesterday. Image: Layla Bailey-McDowell/RNZ
The lawyers say those proposed principles do not reflect te Tiriti, and, by “imposing a contested definition of the three articles, the bill seeks to rewrite the Treaty itself”.
The Treaty Principles Bill, they say, would have the “effect of unilaterally changing the meaning of te Tiriti and its effect in law, without the agreement of Māori as the Treaty partner”.
Historical settlements
The proposed principle 2 “retrospectively limits Māori rights to those that existed at 1840”, they said, and the bill states that “if those rights ‘differ from the rights of everyone’, then they are only recognised to the extent agreed in historical Treaty settlements with the Crown”.
The lawyers said that erased the Crown’s Article 2 guarantee to Māori of tino rangatiratanga.
“By recognising Māori rights only when incorporated into Treaty settlements with the Crown, this proposed principle also attempts to exclude the courts, which play a crucial role in developing the common law and protecting indigenous and minority rights.”
They also explained the proposed principle 3 did not “recognise the fundamental Article 2 guarantee to Māori of the right to be Māori and to have their tikanga Māori (customs, values and customary law) recognised and protected in our law”.
They said it was not for the government of the day to “retrospectively and unilaterally reinterpret constitutional treaties”.
“This would offend the basic principles which underpin New Zealand’s representative democracy.”
They added that the bill would cause significant legal confusion and uncertainty, “inevitably resulting in protracted litigation and cost”, and would have the “opposite effect of its stated purpose of providing certainty and clarity”.
In regards to the wider process and impact of the bill, they pointed to a lack of meaningful engagement as well as the finding by the Waitangi Tribunal that the Bill was a breach of the Treaty.
The ACT Party has long argued the original articles have been interpreted by the courts, the Waitangi Tribunal and successive governments — over decades — in a way that has amplified their significance and influence beyond the original intent.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Thousands of supporters of Aotearoa New Zealand’s hīkoi mō te Tiriti — a march traversing the length of Aotearoa in protest against the Treaty Principles Bill and government policies impacting on Māori — have crossed the Auckland Harbour Bridge.
RNZ reporters with the march said it was swaying and rocking as the protesters descended on the Westhaven side of the bridge.
Earlier, Auckland commuters were advised to plan ahead as the hīkoi makes its way over the Harbour Bridge.
Waka Kotahi and police say the two outer northbound lanes closed from 8.30am on Wednesday and would not re-open until around 11am. Some other on- and off-ramps will also be closed until further notice.
The hīkoi begins the Harbour Bridge crossing. Video: RNZ News
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.
New Zealand MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke performed a haka in a powerful speech during her first appearance in parliament.
Michael West (@MichaelWestBiz) 
