This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
-
-
By Patrick Decloitre, RNZ Pacific correspondent French Pacific desk
A leaked “working paper” on New Caledonia’s future political status is causing concern on the local stage and has prompted a “clarification” from the French government’s Minister for Overseas Manuel Valls.
Details of the document, which was supposed to remain confidential, have been widely circulated online over the past few days.
Valls said earlier the confidentiality of the document was supposed to ensure expected results of ongoing talks would not be jeopardised.
- READ MORE: French minister wraps up key talks in New Caledonia, returning late March
- Other Kanaky New Caledonia reports
However, following the leak, Valls said in a release on Friday that, for the time being, it was nothing more than a “working paper”.
The document results from earlier rounds of talks when Valls was in Nouméa during his previous trips in February and March 2025.
Valls is due to return to New Caledonia on April 29 for another round of talks and possibly “negotiations” and more political talks are ongoing behind closed doors.
French Minister of Overseas Manuel Valls (front left) greets the New Caledonian territorial President Alcide Ponga (right) as Senator Georges Naturel looks on during his arrival for a military honours ceremony in Nouméa in February. Image: AFP/RNZ Pacific He has denied that it can be regarded as a “unilateral proposal” from Paris.
The latest roundtable session was on Friday, April 11, held remotely via a video conference between Valls in Paris and all political stakeholders (both pro-France and pro-independence parties) in Nouméa.
All tendencies across the political spectrum have reaffirmed their strong and sometimes “non-negotiable” respective stances.
Parties opposed to independence, who regard New Caledonia as being part of France, have consistently maintained that the results of the latest three referendums on self-determination — held in 2018, 2020 and 2021 — should be respected. They reject the notion of independence.
The last referendum in December 2021 was, however, largely boycotted by the pro-independence movement and indigenous Kanak voters.
On the pro-independence side, the Kanak and Socialist National Liberation Front (FLNKS, dominated by the Union Calédonienne) is announcing a “convention” on April 26 — just three days before Valls’s return — to decide on whether it should now fully engage in negotiations proper.
In a news conference last week, the FLNKS was critical of the French-suggested approach, saying it would only commit if they “see the benefits” and that the document was “patronising”.
Two other pro-independence parties — the PALIKA (Kanak Liberation Party) and the UPM (Union Progressiste en Mélanésie) — have distanced themselves from the FLNKS, which they see as too radical under Union Calédonienne’s influence and dominance) and hold a more moderate view.
PALIKA held a general meeting late last week to reaffirm that, while they too were regarding the path to sovereignty as their paramount goal, they were already committed to participating in future “negotiations” since “all topics have been taken into account” (in the working document).
They are favour an “independence association” pathway.
Carefully chosen words
In his release on Friday, Valls said the main pillars of future negotiations were articulated around the themes of:- “democracy and the rule of law”, a “decolonisation process”, the right to self-determination, a future “fundamental law” that would seal New Caledonia’s future status (and would then, if locally approved, be ratified by French Parliament and later included in the French Constitution);
- the powers of New Caledonia’s three provinces (including on tax and revenue collection matters); and
- a future New Caledonia citizenship (and its conditions of eligibility) with the associated definition of who meets the requirements to vote at local elections.
Citizenship
On acquiring New Caledonia citizenship, a consensus seems to emerge on the minimum time of residence: it would be “10 to 15” years with other criteria such as an “exam” to ascertain the candidate’s knowledge and respect of cultural “values and specificities”.Every person born in New Caledonia, children and spouses of qualified citizens, would also automatically qualify for New Caledonia’s citizenship.
Power-sharing
On power-sharing, the draft also touches on the “sovereign” powers (international relations, defence, law and order, justice, currency) which would remain within the French realm, but in a stronger association for New Caledonia.All other powers, regarded as “non-sovereign”, would remain under direct control of New Caledonia as they have already been transferred, gradually, to New Caledonia, over the past 27 years, under the Nouméa Accord.
New Caledonia would also be consulted on all negotiations related to the Pacific islands region and would get representation at European Union level.
Local diplomats would also be trained under France’s Ministry of Europe and Foreign Affairs.
Under the Nouméa Accord, the training process was already initiated more than 10 years ago with New Caledonian representatives appointed and hosted at French embassies in the region — Fiji, New Zealand, Australia.
A local “strategic committee” would also be set up on defence matters.
However, despite long-time FLNKS demands, this would not allow for a seat at the United Nations.
In terms of currency, the present French Pacific Francs (CFP, XPF) would be abolished for a new currency that would remain pegged to the Euro, provided France’s other two Pacific territories (French Polynesia, Wallis-and-Futuna — which are also using the CFP) agree.
Reinforced provincial powers
A new proposal, in terms of reinforced provincial powers, would be to grant each of New Caledonia’s three provinces (North, South and Loyalty Islands) the capacity — currently held by New Caledonia’s government — to generate and collect its own taxes.Each province would then re-distribute their collected tax revenues to the central government and municipalities.
This is also reported to be a sensitive point during the talks, since about 80 percent of New Caledonia’s wealth is located in the Southern Province, which also generates more than 90 percent of all of New Caledonia’s tax revenues.
This is perceived as a concession to pro-France parties, which are calling for an “internal federation” model for New Caledonia, a prospect strongly opposed by pro-independence parties who are denouncing what they liken to some kind of “partition” for the French Pacific dependency.
In the currently discussed project, the representation at the Congress (Parliament) of New Caledonia would be revised among the three provinces to better reflect their respective weight according to demographic changes.
The representation would be re-assessed and possibly modified after each population census.
Under the proposed text, New Caledonia’s government would remain based on the notion of “collegiality”.
Future referendum — no more just ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to independence
The current working paper, on the right to self-determination, suggests that any future referendum on self-determination no longer has a specified deadline, but should take place after a “stabilisation and reconstruction” phase.It would no longer ask the binary question of “yes” or “no” to independence and full sovereignty, but rather seek the approval of a “comprehensive project”.
To activate a referendum, the approval of at least three fifths of New Caledonia’s 54-seat Congress would be needed.
The Congress’s current makeup, almost equally split in two between pro-France and pro-independence parties, this 3/5th threshold could only be found if there is a consensual vote beyond party lines.
Some of the FLNKS’s earlier demands, like having its president Christian Téin (elected in absentia in August 2024 ) part of the talks, now seem to have been dropped.
Téin was arrested in June 2024 for alleged involvement in the May 2024 insurrectional riots that caused 14 dead (including two French gendarmes), hundreds of injured, thousands of jobless and the destruction of several hundred businesses for a total estimated damage of 2.2 billion euros (NZ$4.3 billion).
Four days after his arrest, Téin was transferred from New Caledonia to mainland France.
Although he is still remanded in custody pending his trial (for alleged involvement in organised criminal-related acts), his case was recently transferred from the jurisdiction of judges in Nouméa to mainland France magistrates.
Union Calédonienne president and pro-independence front man Emmanuel Tjibaou told public broadcaster NC la 1ère yesterday he was in regular contact with Téin from his jail in Mulhouse (northeastern France).
Another recent development that could also be perceived as a concession to the FLNKS is that last week, France announced the replacement of French High commissioner Louis Le Franc, France’s representative and man in charge in Nouméa during last year’s riots.
‘We are facing a decisive moment’, says Valls
Valls said he remained hopeful that despite “all positions remaining at present still far from each other . . . evolutions are still possible”.“I reaffirm the (French) State’s full commitment to pursue this approach, in the spirit of the Matignon and Nouméa Accords (signed respectively in 1988 and 1998) to build together a united, appeased and prosperous New Caledonia,” Valls concluded.
“We are facing a decisive moment for the future of New Caledonia, which is confronted with a particularly grave economic and social situation. Civil peace remains fragile.”
The much sought-after agreement, which has been at the centre of political talks since they resumed in early 2025 after a three-year hiatus, is supposed to replace the Nouméa Accord from 1998.
The 1998 pact, which outlines the notion of gradual transfer of sovereign powers from France to new Caledonia, but also the notion of “common destiny”, stipulates that after three referendums on self-determination resulting in a majority of “no”, then the political partners are to meet and “discuss the situation thus created”.
Determination, anxiety and hope
On all sides of the political landscape, ahead of any outcome for the crucial talks, the current atmosphere is a mix of determination, anxiety and hope, with a touch of disillusionment.The pro-independence movement’s Emmanuel Tjibaou has to manage a sometimes radical base.
He told NC la 1ère that the main objective remained “the path to sovereignty”.
Within the pro-France camp, there is also defiance towards Vall’s approach and expected results.
Among their ranks, one lingering angst, founded or not, is to see an agreement being concluded that would not respond to their expectations of New Caledonia remaining part of France.
This worst-case scenario, in their view, would bring back sad memories of Algeria’s pre-independence process decades ago.
On 4 June 1958, in the midst of its war against Algeria’s National Liberation Front (FLN), French President General De Gaulle, while on a visit to Algiers, shouted a resounding “Je vous ai compris!” (“I have understood you”) to a crowd of cheering pro-France and French Algerians who were convinced at the time that their voice had been heard in favour of French Algeria.
On 19 March 1962, after years of a bloody war, the Evian Accords were signed, paving the way for Algeria’s independence on July 3.
“I had to take precautions, I had to proceed progressively and this is how we made it”, De Gaulle explained to the French daily Le Monde in 1966.
In the meantime, in an atmosphere of fear and violence, an estimated 700,000 French citizens from Algeria were “repatriated” by boat to mainland France.
As an alternative posed to French nationals at the time, FLN’s slogan was “la valise ou le cercueil” (“the suitcase or the coffin”).
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
-
COMMENTARY: By Katrina Mitchell-Kouttab
“Wherever Palestinians have control is barbaric.” These were the words from New Zealand’s Chief Human Rights Commissioner Stephen Rainbow.
During a meeting with Philippa Yasbek from Jewish Voices for Peace, Dr Rainbow allegedly told her that information from the NZ Security Intelligence Services (NZSIS) threat assessment asserted that Muslims were the biggest threat to the Jewish community. More so than white supremacists.
But the NZSIS has not identified Muslims as the greatest threat to national security.
- READ MORE: Stoush breaks out between NZ Human Rights Commissioner and Jewish leader at Parliament
- Baptist Church condemns ‘appalling’ Israeli Palm Sunday attack on hospital
- New chief Human Rights Commissioner Stephen Rainbow’s pro-Israel Facebook posts, ‘transphobia’ accusations
- Other articles by Katrina Mitchell-Kouttab at Asia Pacific Report
In the 2023 threat environment report, NZSIS stated that it: “Does not single out any community as a threat to our country, and to do so would be a misinterpretation of the analysis.
“White Identity-Motivated Violent Extremism (W-IMVE) continues to be the dominant IMVE ideology in New Zealand. Young people becoming involved in W-IMVE is a growing trend.”
Religiously motivated violent extremism (RMVE) did not come from the Muslim community, as Dr Rainbow has also misrepresented.
The more recent 2024 NZSIS report stated: “White identity-motivated violent extremism (W-IMVE) remains the dominant IMVE ideology in New Zealand. Terrorist attack-related material and propaganda, including the Christchurch terrorist’s manifesto and livestream footage, continue to be shared among IMVE adherents in New Zealand and abroad.”
To implicate Muslims as being the greatest threat may highlight Dr Rainbow’s own biases, racist beliefs, and political agenda. These false narratives, that have recently been strongly pushed by the US and Israel, undermine social cohesion and lead to a rise in Islamophobia and anti-Palestinian racism.
It is also deeply troubling that he has framed Muslim and Arab communities as potential sources of violent extremism while failing to acknowledge the very real and documented threats they have faced in Aotearoa.
The Christchurch Mosque attacks — the most horrific act of mass violence in New Zealand’s modern history — were perpetrated not by Muslims, but against them, by an individual radicalised by white supremacist ideology.
Chief Human Rights Commissioner Dr Stephen Rainbow . . . “It is also deeply troubling that he has framed Muslim and Arab communities as potential sources of violent extremism while failing to acknowledge the very real and documented threats they have faced in Aotearoa.” Image: HRC Since that tragedy, there have been multiple threats made against mosques, Arab New Zealanders, and Palestinian communities, many of which have received insufficient public attention or institutional response.
For a Human Rights Commissioner to overlook this context and effectively invert the victim-aggressor dynamic is not only factually inaccurate, but it also risks reinforcing harmful stereotypes and undermining the safety and dignity of communities who are already vulnerable.
Such narratives are inconsistent with the Human Rights Commission’s mandate to protect all people in New Zealand from discrimination and hate.
The dehumanisation of Muslims and Palestinians
As part of Israel’s propaganda, anti-Muslim and Palestinian tropes are used to justify violence against Palestinians by framing us as barbaric, aggressive, and as a threat. We are dehumanised in order to normalise the harm they inflict on our communities which includes genocide, land theft, ethnic cleansing, apartheid policies, dispossession, and occupation.In October 2023, Dan Gillerman, a former Israeli Ambassador to the UN, described Palestinians as “horrible, inhuman animals” and was perplexed with the growing global concern for us.
That same month Yoav Gallant, then Israeli Defence Minister, referred to Palestinians as “human animals” when he announced Israel’s illegal and horrific siege on Gaza that included blocking water, food, medicine, and shelter to an entire population, the majority of which are children.
In making his own remarks about the Muslim community being a “threat” in New Zealand as a collective group, and labelling Palestinians being “barbaric”, Dr Stephen Rainbow has shattered the credibility of the Human Rights Commission. He has made it very clear that he is not impartial nor is he representing and protecting all communities.
Instead, Dr Rainbow is exacerbating divisions within society. This is a worrying trend that we are witnessing around the world; the de-humanising of groups to serve political agendas, retain power, or seek public support for war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Dr Rainbow’s appointment also points a spotlight onto this government’s commitment to neutrality and inclusiveness in its human rights policies. Allowing a high-ranking official to make discriminatory remarks undermines New Zealand’s commitment to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
A high-ranking official should not be allowed to engage in Islamic and Palestinian racist rhetoric without consequence. The public should be questioning the morals, principles, and inclusivity of those currently in power. Our trust is being eroded.
Dr Stephen Rainbow’s comments can also be seen as a breach of human rights principles, as he is supposed to uphold equality and non-discrimination. Yet his beliefs seem to be peppered with racism, often falsely based on religion, ethnicity, and race.
Foreign influence in New Zealand
This incident also shines accountability and concerns for foreign influence and propaganda seeping into New Zealand. The Israel Institute of New Zealand (IINZ) has published articles that some perceive as dehumanising toward Palestinians.In one article written by Dr Rainbow titled “With every chant Israel’s case grows stronger”, he says:
“The Left has found a new underdog to replace the Jews — the Palestinians — in spite of the fact that the treatment of gay people, women, and political opponents wherever Palestinians have control is barbaric.”
By publicising these comments, The Israel Institute of New Zealand signalled its support of these offensive and racist serotypes. Such statements risk reinforcing a narrative that portrays Palestinians as inherently violent, uncivilised, and unworthy of basic rights and dignity.
This kind of rhetoric contributes to what many describe as anti-Arab and anti-Palestinian racism, and it warrants public scrutiny, especially when shared by organisations involved in shaping public discourse.
Importantly, the NZSIS 2024 threat report stated that “Inflammatory and violent language online can target anyone, although most appears directed towards those from already marginalised minority communities, or those affected by globally significant conflicts or events, such as the Israel-Gaza conflict.”
Other statements and reposts published online by the IINZ on their X account include:
“Muslims are getting killed, is Israel involved? No. How many casualties? Under 100,00, who cares? Why is this even on the news? Over 100,000. Oh, that’s too bad, what’s for dinner?” (12 February 2024)
“Fact. Gaza isn’t ‘ancestral Palestinian land’. We’ve been here long before them, and we’ll still be here long after the latest propaganda campaign.” (12 February 2024)
Palestinian society was also described as being “a violent, terror-supporting, Jew-hating society with genocidal aspirations.” (16 February 2025)
The “estimate of Hamas casualties, the civilian-to-combat death ratio could be as low as 1:1. This could be historically low for urban warfare.” (21 February 2025)
“There has never been a country called Palestine.” (25 February 2025)
Even showing a picture of Gaza before Israel’s bombing campaign with a caption saying, “Open air prison”. Next to it a picture of a completely destroyed Gaza with a caption that says “Victory.” (23 February 2025)
“Palestinian society in Gaza is in my eyes little more than a death loving cult of murderers and criminals of the lowest kind.” (28 February 2025)
Anti-Palestinian bias and racism
Portraying Muslims and Palestinians as a threat and extremist reflects both Islamophobia and anti-Palestinian bias and potential racism. These statements risk dehumanising Palestinians and are typical of the settler colonial narrative used to erase indigenous populations by denying our history, identity and legal claim.The IINZ has published content that many see as mocking the deaths of Palestinian Muslims and Christians, which is not only ethically questionable but can be seen as a complete lack of empathy.
And posting the horrific images of a completely destroyed Gaza, appears to revel in the suffering of others and contradicts basic ethical norms, such as decency and compassion.
There also appears to be a common theme among pro-Israeli organisations, not just the IINZ, that cast negative connotations on our national symbols including our Palestinian flag and keffiyeh.
In an article on the IINZ webpage, titled “A justified war”, they write “chorus of protesters wearing keffiyehs, waving their Palestinian and terrorist flags, and shouting about Israel’s alleged war crimes.”
It seemingly places the Palestinian flag — an internationally recognised national symbol– alongside so-called “terrorist flags,” suggesting an equivalence between Palestinian identity and terrorism. Many view this language as dehumanising and inflammatory, erasing the legitimate national and cultural characteristics of Palestinians and feeding into harmful stereotypes.
The Palestinian flag represents a people, their identity, and national aspirations.
There is nothing wrong with our keffiyeh, it is part of our national dress. The negative connotations of Palestinian cultural symbols have to stop, including vilifying other MPs or supporters who wear it in solidarity.
This is happening all too often in New Zealand and must be called out and addressed. Our keffiyeh is not just a scarf — it is a symbol of our Palestinian identity, our resistance, and our rich, historic and deeply rooted cultural heritage.
Pro-Israeli groups attack it because they aim to delegitimise Palestinian identity and resistance by associating it with violence, terrorism, or extremism.
In 2024, ISESCO and UNESCO both recognised the keffiyeh as an essential part of their Intangible Cultural Heritage lists as a way of safeguarding Palestinian cultural heritage and reinforcing its historical and symbolic importance.
As a safeguarded cultural artifact, much like indigenous dress and other traditional attire, attempts to ban or demonize it are acts of cultural erasure and need to be called out as such and dealt with accordingly.
In the same IINZ article titled “A Justified War”, the authors present arguments that appear to defend Israel’s military actions in Gaza, including the targeting of civilians.
Many within the community (most of us have been affected), including survivors and those with direct ties to the region, have found the article deeply distressing and feel that it lacks compassion for the victims of the ongoing violence, and the framing and tone of the piece have raised serious ethical concerns, especially as some statements are factually incorrect.
The New Zealand Palestinian communities affected by this unimaginable genocide are suffering. Our family members are being killed and are at threat daily from Israel’s aggression and illegal war.
Unfortunately, much rhetoric from this organisation aligns with Israeli state narratives and includes statements that some view as racist or immoral, warranting further scrutiny from the government.
There is growing public concern over the association of Human Rights Commissioner Dr Stephen Rainbow with the IINZ, which promotes itself as a research and advocacy body.
A Human Rights Commissioner requires neutrality and a commitment to protecting all communities from discrimination; aligning with Israel and publishing harmful rhetoric may lead to bias in policy decisions and discrimination.
It is also important to remember that we are not a monolithic group. Christian Palestinians exist (I am one) as well as Muslim and historically Jewish Palestinians. Christian communities have lived in Palestine for two thousand years.
This is also not a religious conflict, as many pro-Israeli groups wish the world to believe, and it is not complex. It is one of colonialism, dispossession, and human rights. A history that New Zealand is all too familiar with.
“A Human Rights Commissioner requires neutrality and a commitment to protecting all communities from discrimination; aligning with Israel and publishing harmful rhetoric may lead to bias in policy decisions and discrimination.” Image: HRC screenshot APR The need for accountability
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith’s inaction and disrespectful response, claiming that a staunchly pro-Israeli supporter can be impartial and will be “very careful” from now on, hints that he may also support some forms of racism, in this case against Muslims and Palestinians.
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith . . . “There needs to be accountability for Goldsmith. Why has he not removed Dr Rainbow from office and acted appropriately?” Image: NZ Parliament You cannot address only some groups who are discriminated against but then ignore others, or accept excuses for racist, intolerable actions or statements. This is not justice.
This is the application of selective principles, enforced and underpinned by political agendas, foreign influence, and racism. Does Goldsmith understand that justice is as much about human rights, fairness and accountability as it is about laws?
Without accountability, there is no justice at all, or perhaps he too is confused or uncertain about his role, as much as Dr Rainbow seems oblivious to his?
There needs to be accountability for Goldsmith. Why has he not removed Dr Rainbow from office and acted appropriately? If Dr Rainbow had said that Jews were the biggest threat to Muslims or that Israelis were the biggest threat to Palestinians, would this government and Goldsmith have sat back and said, “he didn’t mean it, it was a mistake, and he has apologised”?
Questions New Zealanders should be asking are, what kind of Human Rights Commissioner speaks of entire peoples this way? What kind of minister, like Paul Goldsmith, looks at that and does very little?
What kind of Government claims to champion justice, while turning a blind eye to genocide? This is betraying the very idea of human rights itself.
Although we are a small country here in New Zealand, we have remained strong by upholding and standing by our principles. We said no to apartheid in South Africa. We said no to nuclear weapons in the Pacific. We said no to the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
And we must now say no to dehumanisation — anywhere. Are we a nation that upholds justice or do we sit on the sidelines while the darkest times in modern history envelopes us all?
The attacks against Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims must stop. We have already faced horrific acts of violence against us here in New Zealand and currently in Palestine. We need support and humanity, not dehumanisation, demonisation and cruelty. This is not what New Zealand is about, we must do better together.
There needs to be a formal enquiry and policy review to see if structural biases exist in New Zealand’s Human Rights institutions. This should also be done across some government bodies, including the Ministry of Education and Immigration NZ, to determine if there has been discrimination or inequality in the handling of humanitarian visas and how the Education Ministry has handled the complaints of anti-Palestinian discrimination at schools.
Communities have particular concern at how the curriculum in many schools deals with the creation of the state of Israel but is silent on Palestinian history.
Public figures should be held to a higher standard, with consequences for spreading racially charged rhetoric.
The Human Rights Commission needs to rebuild trust in our multicultural New Zealand society. The only way this can be done is through fair and just measures that include enforcement of anti-discrimination laws, true inclusivity and action when there is an absence of these.
We are living in a moment where silence is complicity. Where apathy is betrayal.
This is a test of whether New Zealand, Minister Goldsmith and this government truly uphold human rights for all, or only for some.
Katrina Mitchell-Kouttab is a New Zealand Palestinian advocate and writer.
This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.
-
Former UNSCOM weapons inspector Scott Ritter usually provides excellent analysis of geopolitical events and places them in a morally centered framework. However, in a recent X post, Ritter defends a controversial stance blaming Iran for US and Israeli machinations against Iran.
Ritter opened, “I have assiduously detailed the nature of the threat perceived by the US that, if unresolved, would necessitate military action, as exclusively revolving around Iran’s nuclear program and, more specifically, that capacity that is excess to its declared peaceful program and, as such, conducive to a nuclear weapons program Iran has admitted is on the threshold of being actualized.”
Threats perceived by the US. These threats range from North Korea, Viet Nam, Grenada, Panama, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Iran, China, and Russia. Question: Which of the aforementioned countries is about to — or ever was about to — attack the US? None. (Al Qaeda is not a country) So why does Ritter imply that military action would be necessitated? Is it a vestige of military indoctrination left over from his time as a marine? In this case, why is Ritter not focused on his own backyard and telling the US to butt out of the Middle East? The US, since it is situated on a continent far removed from Iran, should no more dictate to Iran what its defense posture should be in the region than Iran should dictate what the US’s defense posture should be in the northwestern hemisphere.
Ritter: “In short, I have argued, the most realistic path forward regarding conflict avoidance would be for Iran to negotiate in good faith regarding the verifiable disposition of its excess nuclear enrichment capability.”
Ritter places the onus for conflict avoidance on Iran. Why? Is Iran seeking conflict with the US? Is Iran making demands of the US? Is Iran sanctioning the US? Moreover, who gets to decide what is realistic or not? Is what is realistic for the US also realistic for Iran? When determining the path forward, one should be aware of who and what is stirring up conflict. Ritter addresses this when he writes, “Even when Trump alienated Iran with his ‘maximum pressure’ tactics, including an insulting letter to the Supreme Leader that all but eliminated the possibility of direct negotiations between the US and Iran…” But this did not alter Ritter’s stance. Iran must negotiate — again. According to Ritter negotiations are how to solve the crisis, a crisis of the US’s (and Israel’s) making.
Iran had agreed to a deal — the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) — with the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States) and Germany — collectively known as the P5+1 — with the participation of the European Union. The JCPOA came into effect in 2016. During the course of the JCPOA, Iran was in compliance with the deal. Nonetheless, Trump pulled the US out of the deal in 2018.
Backing out of agreements/deals is nothing new for Trump (or for that matter, the US). For example, Trump pulled out of the Paris Agreement on climate, the Trans-Pacific Partnership on trade, the United Nations cultural organization UNESCO, and the North American Free Trade Agreement, which was subsequently renegotiated under Trump to morph into the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Trade Agreement, which is now imperilled by the Trump administration’s tariff threats, as is the World Trade Organization that regulates international trade.
Should Iran, therefore, expect adherence to any future agreement signed with the US?
Ritter insists that he is promoting a reality-based process providing the only viable path toward peace. Many of those who disagree with Ritter’s assertion are lampooned by him as “the digital mob, comprised of new age philosophers, self-styled ‘peace activists’, and a troll class that opposes anything and everything it doesn’t understand (which is most factually-grounded argument), as well as people I had viewed as fellow travelers on a larger journey of conflict avoidance—podcasters, experts and pundits who did more than simply disagree with me (which is, of course, their right and duty as independent thinkers), traversing into the realm of insults and attacks against my intelligence, integrity and character.”
Ritter continued, “The US-Iran crisis is grounded in the complexities, niceties and formalities of international law as set forth in the nuclear nonproliferation treaty (NPT), which Iran signed in 1970 as a non-nuclear weapons state. The NPT will be at the center of any negotiated settlement.”
Is it accurate to characterize the crisis as a “US-Iran crisis”? It elides the fact that it is the US imposing a crisis on Iran. More accurately it should be stated as a “US crisis foisted on Iran.”
Ritter argues, “… the fact remains that this crisis has been triggered by the very capabilities Iran admits to having—stocks of 60% enriched uranium with no link to Iran’s declared peaceful program, and excessive advanced centrifuge-based enrichment capability which leaves Iran days away from possessing sufficient weapons grade high enriched uranium to produce 3-5 nuclear weapons.”
So, Ritter blames Iran for the crisis. This plays off Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu who has long accused Iran of seeking nukes. But it ignores the situation in India and Pakistan. Although the relations between the two countries are tense, logic dictates that open warring must be avoided lest it lead to mutual nuclear conflagration. And if Iran dismantles its nuclear program? What happened when Libya dismantled its nuclear program? Destruction by the US-led NATO. As A.B. Abrams wrote, Libya paid the price for
… having ignored direct warnings from both Tehran and Pyongyang not to pursue such a course [of unilaterally disarming], Libya’s leadership would later admit that disarmament, neglected military modernisation, and trust in Western good will proved to be their greatest mistake–leaving their country near defenceless when Western powers launched their offensive in 2011. (Immovable Object: North Korea’s 70 Years at War with American Power, Clarity Press, 2020: p 296)
And North Korea has existed with a credible deterrence against any attack on it since it acquired nuclear weapons.
Relevant background to the current crisis imposed on Iran
- The year 1953 is a suitable starting point. It was in this year that the US-UK (CIA and MI6) combined to engineer a coup against the democratically elected Iranian government under prime minister Mohammad Mossadegh. Mossadegh had committed the unpardonable sin of nationalizing the British-owned Anglo-Iranian Oil Company.
- What to replace the Iranian democracy with? A monarchy. In other words, a dictatorship because monarchs are not elected, they are usually born into power. Thus, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi would rule as the shah of Iran for 26 years protected by his secret police, the SAVAK. Eventually, the shah would be overthrown in the 1979 Iranian Revolution.
- In an attempt to force Iran to bend knee to US dictate, the US has imposed sanctions, issued threats, and fomented violence.
- Starting sometime after 2010, it is generally agreed among cybersecurity experts and intelligence leaks that the Iranian nuclear program was a target of cyberwarfare by the US and Israel — this in contravention of the United Nations Charter Article 2 (1-4):
1. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.
2. All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter.
3. All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.
4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
- The Stuxnet virus caused significant damage to Iran’s nuclear program, particularly at the Natanz uranium enrichment facility.
- Israel and the United States are also accused of being behind the assassinations of several Iranian nuclear scientists over the past decade.
- On 3 January 2020, Trump ordered a US drone strike at Baghdad International Airport in Iraq that assassinated Iranian General Qasem Soleimani as well as Soleimani ally Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, a top Iraqi militia leader.
- On 7 October 7 2023, Hamas launched a resistance attack against Israel’s occupation. Since then, Israel has reportedly conducted several covert and overt strikes targeting Iran and its proxies across the region.
- Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has accused Iran of seeking nukes for nearly 30 years, long before Iran reached 60% enrichment in 2021. In Netanyahu’s book Fighting Terrorism (1995) he described Iran as a “rogue state” pursuing nukes to destroy Israel. Given that a fanatical, expansionist Zionist map for Israel, the Oded-Yinon plan, draws a Jewish territory that touches on the Iranian frontier, a debilitated Iran is sought by Israel.
Oded Yinon Plan
Says Ritter, “This crisis isn’t about Israel or Israel’s own undeclared nuclear weapons capability. It is about Iran’s self-declared status as a threshold nuclear weapons state, something prohibited by the NPT. This is what the negotiations will focus on. And hopefully these negotiations will permit the verifiable dismantling of those aspects of its nuclear program the US (and Israel) find to present an existential threat.”
Why isn’t it about Israel’s nuclear weapons capability? Why does the US and Ritter get to decide which crisis is preeminent?
It is important to note that US intelligence has long said that no active Iranian nuclear weapon project exists.
It is also important to note that Arab states have long supported a Middle East Zone Free of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDFZ), particularly nuclear weapons, but Israel and the US oppose it.
It is also important to note that, in 2021, the U.S. opposed a resolution demanding Israel join the NPT and that the US, in 2018, blocked an Arab-backed IAEA resolution on Israeli nukes. (UN Digital Library. Search: “Middle East WMDFZ”)
As far as the NPT goes, it must be applied equally to all signatory states. The US as a nuclear-armed nation is bound by Article VI which demands:
Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.
Thus, hopefully negotiations will permit the verifiable dismantling of those aspects of the Iranian, US, and Israeli nuclear programs (as well as the nuclear programs of other nuclear-armed nations) that are found to present an existential threat.
Ritter warns, “Peace is not guaranteed. But war is unless common sense and fact-based logic wins out over the self-important ignorance of the digital mob and their facilitators.”
A peaceful solution is not achieved by assertions (i.e., not fact-based logic) or by ad hominem. That critics of Ritter’s stance resort to name-calling demeans them, but to respond likewise to one’s critics also taints the respondent.
Logic dictates that peace is more-or-less guaranteed if UN member states adhere to the United Nations Charter. The US, Iran, and Israel are UN member states. A balanced and peaceful solution is found in the Purposes and Principles as stipulated in Article 1 (1-4) of the UN Charter:
The Purposes of the United Nations are:
1. To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;
3. To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion; and
4. To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.
It seems that only by refusing to abide by one’s obligations laid out the UN Charter and NPT that war looms larger.
In Ritter’s reality, the US rules the roost against smaller countries. Is such a reality acceptable?
It stirs up patriotism, but acquiescence is an affront to national dignity. Ritter will likely respond by asking what god is dignity when you are dead. Fair enough. But in the present crisis, if the US were to attack Iran, then whatever last shred of dignity (is there any last shred of dignity left when a country is supporting the genocide of human beings in Palestine?) that American patriots can cling to will have vanished.
By placing the blame on Iran for a crisis triggered by destabilizing actions of the US and Israel, Ritter asks for Iran to pay for the violent events set in motion by US Israel. If Iran were to cave to Trump’s threats, they would be sacrificing sovereignty, dignity, and self-defense.
North Korea continues on. Libya is still reeling from the NATO offensive against it. Iran is faced with a choice.
The Mexican revolutionary Emiliano Zapata knew his choice well: “I’d rather die on my feet, than live on my knees.”
The post Should Iran Bend Knee to Donald Trump? first appeared on Dissident Voice.
This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Kim Petersen.This post was originally published on Radio Free.
-
Applications to register to vote by young people are at less than half their level twelve months ago. Analysis from pressure group Unlock Democracy shows that for 2024 local elections nearly 160,000 applications were made by people under the age of 25. However, in 2025 that figure is only just above 50,000.
That means applications by young people have halved compared to 12 months ago.
However, researchers also found that whilst under 25s had the most marked drop in registering to vote in elections, all age groups also dropped in number.
Total daily applications have practically halved compared to in the regulated period last year (53%), with overall numbers for 2025 also down on each of the last two years.
This news comes on the last day on which people can register to vote. Some of the drop-off in registrations can be explained by elections being held in fewer areas this year. But, campaigners are concerned that the huge number of unregistered voters combined with widespread dissatisfaction at the state of politics, may see turnout levels fall even lower.
Elections are no longer a functioning democracy
Tom Brake, director of Unlock Democracy, said:
It should be uncontroversial that in a democracy, we want as many people as possible to vote – and to be able to vote.
Brake expressed concern that under 25s are a crucial voting bloc in elections:
Young people, many of them students and/or dealing with insecure housing, are likely to make up a disproportionate share of unregistered voters. So it’s concerning to see such a sharp decline in applications among young people.
In 2023, the Canary reported that everyone the Electoral Commission lists as being at risk of not having photo ID are all the more likely to be poor people. It’s not an accident that young people, queer people, disabled people, and people of colour are the ones at risk of voter suppression.
Brake also cited voter ID as an unnecessary barrier:
At a time when turnout is already worryingly low, and trending down, we should be making it easier for people to vote. Voter ID is one unnecessary barrier; the dysfunctional registration system is another.
Unlock Democracy says the government should introduce a system of automatic voter registration (AVR) that would allow electoral authorities to use existing data to verify and register voters automatically, saving both time and money, and ensuring the maximum number of eligible voters are able to cast their ballot.
Featured image via the Canary
By The Canary
This post was originally published on Canary.
-
Asia Pacific Report
The Baptist Church in Jerusalem and the Middle East has condemned Israeli’s Palm Sunday attack on al-Ahli Arab Hospital, the last functioning hospital in Gaza City.
It said in a statement the Israeli forces had destroyed the two-storey Genetic Laboratory, damaged the pharmacy and emergency department buildings, and caused damage to surrounding structures, including St Philip the Evangelist Chapel.
The hospital can no longer function with staff and patients being forced to flee in the dead of night after a military warning at 2am to evacuate the hospital.
- READ MORE: Israeli forces bomb al-Ahli Hospital in Gaza, forcing patients to flee
- Health workers call for NZ government to join global demands for ambulance massacre inquiry
- Other Israeli war on Gaza reports
The bombing of the hospital began minutes later. It was hit by at least two missiles, the Gaza Health Ministry said.
At least three people were reported killed.
“The Diocese of Jerusalem is appalled,” the church statement said, adding that the Baptist hospital had been bombed “for the fifth time since the beginning of the war in 2023 — and this time was on the morning of Palm Sunday and the beginning of Holy Week.”
It added: “We call upon all governments and people of goodwill to intervene to stop all kinds of attacks on medical and humanitarian institutions.”
Qatar says attack a ‘horrific massacre’
The Qatar government described the Israeli attack as a “horrific massacre and a heinous crime against civilians” that constituted a grave violation of international humanitarian law.Qatar’s Foreign Ministry warned about the collapse of the health system in Gaza and the expansion of the cycle of violence across the region.
It said the international community must assume its responsibilities in protecting civilians.
It reaffirmed Qatar’s backing of the establishment of an independent Palestinian state on the 1967 borders with occupied East Jerusalem as its capital.
Israel has repeatedly attacked hospitals in the Palestinian enclave with impunity throughout its devastating war, said the Gaza Government Media Office.
Attacks on 36 hospitals
According to Al Jazeera, Israeli attacks on 36 hospitals since October 2023 include:- In November 2023, Israeli tanks surrounded the Indonesian Hospital in Beit Lahiya and fired artillery at the complex, killing at least 12 Palestinians.
- Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City was subjected to a prolonged Israeli siege starting in March 2024. By early April last year, the World Health Organisation reported that the facility, Gaza’s largest medical complex, was “in ruins” and no longer functional. Dozens of bodies were later recovered from the hospital grounds and surrounding areas, indicating that patients and medical staff had been killed and placed in mass graves.
- In March 2024, an Israeli nighttime attack on Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis killed two Palestinians, including a 16-year-old boy who had undergone surgery two days earlier.
- At least 50 people were injured in the same month in an Israeli drone attack next to the entrance of the al-Helal al-Emirati Maternity Hospital in the Tal as-Sultan area of Rafah city.
- In May, Rafah’s Kuwaiti Speciality Hospital was forced to shut down after an Israeli attack just outside the gates of the hospital killed two of its medical staff.
- In December, Israeli soldiers stormed Kamal Adwan Hospital in Beit Lahiya, torching large sections, ordering hundreds of people to leave and kidnapping its director, Dr Hussam Abu Safiya — who is still detained by the Israeli military without charge — and other medical staff.
- In March 2025, Israel blew up the Turkish-Palestinian Friendship Hospital, destroying Gaza’s specialised cancer treatment facility as well as an adjacent medical school.
This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.
-
ANALYSIS: By Jane McAdam, UNSW Sydney
The details of a new visa enabling Tuvaluan citizens to permanently migrate to Australia were released this week.
The visa was created as part of a bilateral treaty Australia and Tuvalu signed in late 2023, which aims to protect the two countries’ shared interests in security, prosperity and stability, especially given the “existential threat posed by climate change”.
The Australia–Tuvalu Falepili Union, as it is known, is the world’s first bilateral agreement to create a special visa like this in the context of climate change.
Here’s what we know so far about why this special visa exists and how it will work.
Why is this migration avenue important?
The impacts of climate change are already contributing to displacement and migration around the world.As a low-lying atoll nation, Tuvalu is particularly exposed to rising sea levels, storm surges and coastal erosion.
As Pacific leaders declared in a world-first regional framework on climate mobility in 2023, rights-based migration can “help people to move safely and on their own terms in the context of climate change.”
And enhanced migration opportunities have clearly made a huge difference to development challenges in the Pacific, allowing people to access education and work and send money back home.
As international development expert Professor Stephen Howes put it,
Countries with greater migration opportunities in the Pacific generally do better.
While Australia has a history of labour mobility schemes for Pacific peoples, this will not provide opportunities for everyone.
Despite perennial calls for migration or relocation opportunities in the face of climate change, this is the first Australian visa to respond.
Fresh details emerge on Australia’s new climate migration visa for Tuvalu residents. I explain here … https://t.co/EvPJkDUxEa via @ConversationEDU
— Jane McAdam (@profjmcadam) April 10, 2025
How does the new visa work?
The visa will enable up to 280 people from Tuvalu to move to Australia each year.On arrival in Australia, visa holders will receive, among other things, immediate access to:
- education (at the same subsidisation as Australian citizens)
- Medicare
- the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS)
- family tax benefit
- childcare subsidy
- youth allowance.
They will also have “freedom for unlimited travel” to and from Australia.
This is rare. Normally, unlimited travel is capped at five years.
According to some experts, these arrangements now mean Tuvalu has the “second closest migration relationship with Australia after New Zealand”.
Reading the fine print
The technical name of the visa is Subclass 192 (Pacific Engagement).The details of the visa, released this week, reveal some curiosities.
First, it has been incorporated into the existing Pacific Engagement Visa category (subclass 192) rather than designed as a standalone visa.
Presumably, this was a pragmatic decision to expedite its creation and overcome the significant costs of establishing a wholly new visa category.
But unlike the Pacific Engagement Visa — a different, earlier visa, which is contingent on applicants having a job offer in Australia — this new visa is not employment-dependent.
Secondly, the new visa does not specifically mention Tuvalu.
This would make it simpler to extend it to other Pacific countries in the future.
Who can apply, and how?
To apply, eligible people must first register their interest for the visa online. Then, they must be selected through a random computer ballot to apply.
The primary applicant must:
- be at least 18 years of age
- hold a Tuvaluan passport, and
- have been born in Tuvalu — or had a parent or a grandparent born there.
People with New Zealand citizenship cannot apply. Nor can anyone whose Tuvaluan citizenship was obtained through investment in the country.
This indicates the underlying humanitarian nature of the visa; people with comparable opportunities in New Zealand or elsewhere are ineligible to apply for it.
Applicants must also satisfy certain health and character requirements.
Strikingly, the visa is open to those “with disabilities, special needs and chronic health conditions”. This is often a bar to acquiring an Australian visa.
And the new visa isn’t contingent on people showing they face risks from the adverse impacts of climate change and disasters, even though climate change formed the backdrop to the scheme’s creation.
Settlement support is crucial
With the first visa holders expected to arrive later this year, questions remain about how well supported they will be.The Explanatory Memorandum to the treaty says:
Australia would provide support for applicants to find work and to the growing Tuvaluan diaspora in Australia to maintain connection to culture and improve settlement outcomes.
That’s promising, but it’s not yet clear how this will be done.
A heavy burden often falls on diaspora communities to assist newcomers.
For this scheme to work, there must be government investment over the immediate and longer-term to give people the best prospects of thriving.
Drawing on experiences from refugee settlement, and from comparative experiences in New Zealand with respect to Pacific communities, will be instructive.
Extensive and ongoing community consultation is also needed with Tuvalu and with the Tuvalu diaspora in Australia. This includes involving these communities in reviewing the scheme over time.
Dr Jane McAdam is Scientia professor and ARC laureate fellow, Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, UNSW Sydney. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.
-
Donald Trump and Elon Musk have been making a right old mess of the US government. While there was always much to criticise about the country, Musk and his so called ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ (DOGE) haven’t been going after the programmes which make people’s live worse; they’ve been going after the ones which make things borderline tolerable. Now, Nigel Farage is threatening to do the same thing to councils across the UK.
Nigel Farage tells #bbclaurak "that we probably need a DOGE for every single county council in England.."#bbclaurak: Like Elon Musk's slashing bureau?
NF: Yes pic.twitter.com/hydoCf8bVc
— Haggis_UK
(@Haggis_UK) April 13, 2025DOGE: the slashing bureau
If you listened to Musk (like Nigel Farage seemingly has) you’d believe he genuinely wanted to improve government efficiency. If you listened to anyone who wasn’t a billionaire, you’d know that DOGE was a spite-driven machine designed to cut services for regular people.
CNN rounded up several ways Musk “misled” Americans, including:
- Lying about a USAID-paid celebrity trip to Ukraine designed to “boost Zelensky’s popularity among Americans” (the trip never happened).
- Sharing misinformation spread by random X users, including a graph which suggested an increase in tax credits was some sort of nefarious welfare scheme (it was actually a scheme that Trump signed into power and Joe Biden later allowed to expire).
- Musk also claimed “They took money from FEMA [the Federal Emergency Management Agency], meant for helping Americans in distress, and sent that money to luxury hotels for illegal immigrants in New York” (the money was from a separate scheme and the hotels weren’t luxury).
Don’t get us wrong – we’re not saying the US government was doing good work with any of the above. USAID did benefit many people around the world, but at the same time it existed primarily to push American soft power abroad. Biden should have continued the tax credits scheme, too, and New York and the US government would actually save money by using permanent housing instead of temporary solutions like hotels.
DOGE isn’t slashing these services to implement something better, though, it’s slashing them because Musk and other billionaires despise anything which doesn’t benefit themselves. This is why Musk is very happy to take government “contracts, loans, subsidies and tax credits” for his own companies, but cries bloody murder when government money is directed anywhere else.
Incompetent
And let’s not forget the incompetence (something Nigel Farage needs no lessons in).
In February, DOGE had to rush to rehire crucial workers in fields like nuclear weapons. As the Standard reported:
Federal workers responsible for America’s nuclear weapons are being rehired after being accidentally fired in President Donald Trump’s rush to slash government waste in a whirlwind of new policies since he returned to the White House.
Scientists trying to fight a worsening outbreak of bird flu and officials responsible for supplying electricity are also being given their jobs back after being among the tens of thousands of workers axed by Trump’s administration.
“This shows a level of absolute incompetence in the firing process,” said Don Moynihan, a professor at the Ford School of Public Policy at the University of Michigan.
“They are taking a chainsaw to public services without any kind of careful review of the people being removed and the tasks they are employed for.”
You might not agree with nuclear weapons existing, but you probably think that as long as we do have them they should at least be secure.
Attacking MAGA
Another element we should mention is that the promise of DOGE to Trump voters was that it would go after the enemies of the Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement. But do you know who it actually attacked?
That’s right – Trump voters themselves.
In the 2024 election, nearly two thirds of veteran voters opted for Trump. How did Trump and Musk repay them? Well, as The Week reported:
A “climate of fear” has enveloped the Department of Veterans Affairs, said Sonner Kehrt in Mother Jones. Guided by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, the Trump administration has cut 2,400 jobs at the agency over the past month. And last week, VA Secretary Doug Collins announced plans to ax 80,000 more employees this year—about 17 percent of the department’s entire workforce. Despite repeated claims from administration officials that the layoffs will not affect the 9 million vets who rely on the agency for medical care and other services, VA workers say the cuts are “already hurting” patients. Suicide prevention trainings have been canceled, and therapists who work with PTSD patients have been fired. Some vets have seen mammograms and other crucial exams delayed for months because of staff shortages. Meanwhile, VA workers are struggling to focus on providing care as they worry about whether they’ll even have a job tomorrow. “Honestly, the last time I felt this level of fear was in combat,” said one decorated veteran turned veterans’ therapist.
One thing Musk and the Trump movement have raged against is the the idea of ‘DEI hires’, with DEI standing for ‘Diversity, Equality, and Inclusion’. As it turned out, many of the veterans employed in the federal government were hired as part of DEI initiatives to provide support for American soldiers after they return from combat. Now, these soldiers are going from an environment which provided next-to-no-support to one which is actively hostile towards them.
And all because the guy they supported won.
Does this sound like something we want to import to the UK? Nigel Farage clearly thinks so.
Musk’s finger puppet Nigel Farage being fingered by Laura Kuenssberg
On her Sunday morning politics show, Laura Kuenssberg suggested the upcoming council elections could be a “big breakthrough” for Nigel Farage and his Reform Party, asking him:
councils have been strapped for cash for a long, long time. We know that. And there are many issues. Let’s look at a couple of them.
There’s already an overspend of £3bn for children with special needs. Councils aren’t able to give people the help that they need. They haven’t got enough money to meet it. So if Reform was to be running any council, would you increase Council Tax, or would you cut back services even further?
You could argue these are the only two options, sure; you could also argue that Reform could use their growing electoral heft to bully Labour into sending more money to councils (money we’d like to see them generate through wealth taxes). Kuenssberg doesn’t even consider this to be an option, of course, because she’s one of the many ideology-brained austerity psychos that make up the British media.
Farage responded:
I’ve looked at the numbers. We did thousands of FOI requests to have a look where money was being spent. I’m gonna say this. We probably need a DOGE for every single county council in England.
Yep, because DOGE is working out great in America.
It’s really making people’s lives better.
It isn’t just a scam to funnel more money to the rich.
Nigel Farage blamed the shortages on things like councils spending money on ergonomic chairs. Undoubtedly there are instances of excessive spending which you could point at, but let us be clear – when a politician rises to power with a focus on what they can cut and not what they can improve, they really have no intention of improving anything.
Kuenssberg did push back, saying:
if you look properly at how local councils spend their money, nearly 80% of it is on education, police, children and adults social care, and the vast majority of it does not go on things like ergonomic chairs in the office. There are serious shortages.
The problem is that she’s not saying this because she thinks the point about chairs is silly; she’s saying it because she wants Farage to commit to cutting things like education and adult social care.
Little America, thanks to Nigel Farage
With America fucking up so fantastically right now, you’d think UK politicians would want to distance themselves from the ongoing catastrophe. Sadly, it seems like our political class want to go down with the Titanic success Trump is having – with Nigel Farage cheering the pack on.
Featured image via BBC and Wikimedia (Gage Skidmore – background removed from image)
By The Canary
This post was originally published on Canary.
-
Asia Pacific Report
Health workers spoke out at a rally condemning Israel’s genocide in Gaza and the latest atrocity against Palestinian aid workers today, calling on the New Zealand government to join global demands for an independent investigation.
They were protesting over last month’s massacre of 15 Palestinian rescue workers and the destruction of their ambulances in Gaza’s Rafah district under heavy fire.
The Palestinian Red Crescent Society (PRCS) has called for an independent international inquiry into the “deliberate killing” of 8 ambulance medics, 6 civil defence workers and 1 UN worker reportedly executed by the Israeli forces on March 23.
- READ MORE: Survivor of Rafah ambulance massacre exposes Israeli army atrocities
- Red Crescent demands international probe into Israel killing of Gaza medics
- Caitlin Johnstone: Israel’s innocent oopsie-poopsie medical massacre mistake
- Other Israeli war on Gaza reports
Their ambulances were destroyed and buried together with the bodies of the victims in a shallow grave a week after the crews went missing.
One PRCS paramedic, Assaad al-Nassasra, was reported to be still missing.
Among the speakers in the rally in Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland’s Te Komititanga Square, Amnesty International’s Audrey Van Ryn said: “These killings must be independently and impartially investigated and the perpetrators held to account.
“Medical personnel carrying out their humanitarian duties most be respected and protected in all circumstances.”
Health worker Jason Brooke read out a message from the secretary-general of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Jagan Chapagain, in response to the killing of the Palestinian first-responders.
‘Their ambulances were clearly marked’
“I am heartbroken. These dedicated ambulance workers were responding to wounded people. They were humanitarians. They wore emblems that should have protected them; their ambulances were clearly marked,” said Chapagain.“They should have returned to their families; they did not.”
Fourteen of the Palestinian aid workers killed by Israel last month. The 15th is still missing. Graphic: Al Jazeera/Creative Commons Their bodies were discovered a week later by fellow workers. A video from one of the slain Palestinian Red Crescent medics contradicting the lies propagated by Israel’s military that the vehicles were “advancing suspiciously toward IDF troops without headlights or emergency signals”
These first responders were not mistakenly misidentified. They were travelling, clearly visible in red crescent marked ambulances with their lights on. They posed no threat.
According to the United Nations, at least 1060 healthcare workers have been killed in the 18 months since Israel launched its genocidal offensive in Gaza.
“Whether it’s first-responders and medics, health workers or reporters, not only are these workers being targeted with impunity by the IOF, but their deaths seem to barely cause a ripple,” said Brooke, who was greeted with cries of shame.
“Where is the condemnation of our politicians? Our media?”
‘Dehumanisation of Palestinian life’
“As the Palestinian poet and author Mohammed El-Kurd suggests, what we are witnessing is the dehumanisation of Palestinian life.“Israel only has to mention the word ‘Hamas’ and the indoctrinated look-away. As if resistance to genocide itself were a crime — the punishment a life predetermined for death.
“Genocide does not distinguish between civilian, aid worker, health worker, reporter and militant. All are condemned.”
Medical personnel, medical transport, hospitals and other medical facilities, the injured and sick are all specifically protected under international humanitarian law.
The devastating Gaza massacre represents the single most deadly attack on Red Cross or Red Crescent workers anywhere in the world since 2017.
Secretary-general Chapagain said: “The number of Palestine Red Crescent volunteers and staff killed since the start of this conflict is now 30.
“We stand with Palestine Red Crescent and the loved ones of those killed on this darkest of days.”
PSNA advocate Janfrie Wakim . . . “We mourn those thousands of innocent people . . . who made the ultimate sacrifice with their lives.” Image: Asia Pacific Report ‘Palestine wants freedom to live’
Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) advocate Janfrie Wakim called on the crowd to give each other “high fives” in recognition of their solidarity in turning up for the protest in the 79th week since the war began.“I like the sign in front of me: ‘Palestine wants the freedom to live while Israel has the freedom to kill!’ she said.
“We mourn those thousands of innocent people — some with families here and in Gaza and the West Bank — who made the ultimate sacrifice with their lives, and the thousands unaccounted for in rubble and over 100,000 injured.
“Palestine wants the freedom to live while Israel has the freedom to kill!” . . . a placard at today’s Auckland solidarity rally. Image: Asia Pacific Report “Mostly women and children.
“The humanitarian workers who have been murdered serving humanity.”
Wakim said the genocide had been enabled by the wealthiest countries in the world and Western media — “including our own with few exceptions”.
“Without its lies, its deflections, its failure to report the agonising reality of Palestinians suffering, Israel would not have been able to commit its atrocities.”
All fatalities women and children
Meanwhile, the United Nations reports Palestinian women and children were the only fatalities in at least three dozen Israeli air strikes on Gaza since mid-March, as it warned that Israel’s military offensive threatened Palestinians’ “continued existence as a group”.Ravina Shamdasani, spokeswoman for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, said on Friday that the office had documented 224 Israeli strikes on residential buildings and tents for displaced people in the Gaza Strip between March 18 and April 9.
“In some 36 strikes about which the UN Human Rights Office corroborated information, the fatalities recorded so far were only women and children,” she said.
The findings come as Israel’s attacks on Gaza have killed more than 1500 Palestinians since the Israeli military broke a ceasefire in March, according to figures from the Palestinian Ministry of Health, reports Al Jazeera.
A German official was the latest to call for an independent probe over Israel’s killing of the 15 medical aid workers.
An investigation into Israel’s killing of paramedics must be carried out independently, said German Federal Government Commissioner for Human Rights Policy and Humanitarian Assistance Luise Amtsberg.
“This alleged violation of international law must not go unpunished,” Amtsberg said in a message on social media platform Bluesky.
Israel’s ‘distortion’ straining ties
“The investigation must be carried out quickly and independently, and the perpetrators must be brought to justice as soon as possible. The Israeli government and judiciary have a duty here,” she said.Israel’s distortion of the event was “once again” straining ties between Germany and Israel, she added.
Myriam Laaroussi, an emergency coordinator with Doctors Without Borders, known by its French initials MSF, told Al Jazeera from al-Mawasi, an area west of Khan Younis that houses thousands of displaced Gaza families, that the health system had been destroyed.
Due to the Israeli blockade, the supplies needed to treat patients were lacking and had left children in Gaza vulnerable to disease, she said.
The desalination unit was not functioning any more due to Israel’s decision to cut electricity, which had decreased the capacity to retain good hygiene and was leading to outbreaks of polio and scabies.
“We see that it’s a ‘slow death’ for many Palestinians, with shortages of food and water leading to a loss of weight and medical issues,” she said.
The ceasefire had been an opportunity to scale up the capacity of the different health facilities, but it had been too short to have enough effect, and now health facilities were being attacked again.
A “Free free Palestine” placard at today’s Auckland solidarity rally. Image: Asia Pacific Report This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.
-
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.This post was originally published on Radio Free.
-
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.This post was originally published on Radio Free.
-
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.This post was originally published on Radio Free.
-
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.This post was originally published on Radio Free.
-
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.This post was originally published on Radio Free.
-
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.This post was originally published on Radio Free.
-
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.This post was originally published on Radio Free.
-
A feature film about life in the occupied West Bank, The Teacher, opens in New York tonight and in theaters across the U.S. next week. The film, which is inspired by true events, centers a Palestinian schoolteacher who struggles to reconcile his commitment to political resistance with supporting his student. “It’s a fiction narrative, this film, but it is deeply, deeply rooted in reality,” says Farah Nabulsi, director of The Teacher, which is partially based on the 2011 prisoner exchange deal between Hamas and Israel, in which one Israeli soldier was exchanged for over 1,000 Palestinian prisoners. Nabulsi and Saleh Bakri, the acclaimed Palestinian actor who stars in The Teacher, speak to Democracy Now! about the resonance of the film in the midst of Israel’s genocide in Gaza. “The occupation wants us separated,” Bakri says. “I want to dismantle these checkpoints … I dream of Palestinians coming together again.”
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.This post was originally published on Radio Free.
-
A feature film about life in the occupied West Bank, The Teacher, opens in New York tonight and in theaters across the U.S. next week. The film, which is inspired by true events, centers a Palestinian schoolteacher who struggles to reconcile his commitment to political resistance with supporting his student. “It’s a fiction narrative, this film, but it is deeply, deeply rooted in reality,” says Farah Nabulsi, director of The Teacher, which is partially based on the 2011 prisoner exchange deal between Hamas and Israel, in which one Israeli soldier was exchanged for over 1,000 Palestinian prisoners. Nabulsi and Saleh Bakri, the acclaimed Palestinian actor who stars in The Teacher, speak to Democracy Now! about the resonance of the film in the midst of Israel’s genocide in Gaza. “The occupation wants us separated,” Bakri says. “I want to dismantle these checkpoints … I dream of Palestinians coming together again.”
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.This post was originally published on Radio Free.
-
Microsoft fired two workers who protested the company’s ties to Israel’s assault on Gaza at its 50th anniversary celebration last Friday. The workers protested after leaked documents revealed that Microsoft supplies the Israeli military with AI and cloud technology, as well as an Air Force unit known as the Ofek, to build “kill lists.” “We wanted everyone to know that Microsoft’s cloud and AI are the bombs and bullets of the 21st century,” says Vaniya Agrawal, No Azure for Apartheid organizer and a former Microsoft employee who was fired after disrupting an April 4 discussion between current and former Microsoft CEOs, including Bill Gates.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.This post was originally published on Radio Free.
-
Microsoft fired two workers who protested the company’s ties to Israel’s assault on Gaza at its 50th anniversary celebration last Friday. The workers protested after leaked documents revealed that Microsoft supplies the Israeli military with AI and cloud technology, as well as an Air Force unit known as the Ofek, to build “kill lists.” “We wanted everyone to know that Microsoft’s cloud and AI are the bombs and bullets of the 21st century,” says Vaniya Agrawal, No Azure for Apartheid organizer and a former Microsoft employee who was fired after disrupting an April 4 discussion between current and former Microsoft CEOs, including Bill Gates.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.This post was originally published on Radio Free.
-
A lawyer who represents a pro-Palestinian student protester in Michigan was detained Sunday at the Detroit Metro Airport on his way back from a family vacation. Dearborn attorney Amir Makled was separated from his wife and children and asked to surrender his cellphone by Border Patrol agents. “This wasn’t something that was random,” says Makled. “They had a whole profile about me.” He was eventually released after 90 minutes of questioning and refusing to provide sensitive client information to the agents. Makled believes he was targeted due to his involvement in cases that challenge the current administration of President Donald Trump.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
-
In a unanimous ruling, the Supreme Court has ordered the Trump administration to “facilitate” the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia to the United States, after the Maryland resident was denied due process rights and deported to the notorious CECOT prison in El Salvador. But the court remains vague on how exactly this would happen, and the Trump administration has claimed it has no way of ensuring his safe return. Elsewhere, a federal immigration judge in Louisiana is set to rule today on whether the Trump administration has grounds to deport Mahmoud Khalil, a permanent resident of the United States who was involved in a campus protest at Columbia University. Ahead of today’s ruling, Secretary of State Marco Rubio filed a short memo that concedes Khalil has no criminal history, and argues he should be deported as part of U.S. efforts to combat antisemitism. We speak to attorney Ramzi Kassem, who is part of Khalil’s legal team, about the cases of Abrego Garcia and Khalil. Kassem says the Supreme Court decision on Abrego Garcia’s case is “a step in the right direction and will hopefully lead to his return home.”
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.This post was originally published on Radio Free.
-
In a unanimous ruling, the Supreme Court has ordered the Trump administration to “facilitate” the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia to the United States, after the Maryland resident was denied due process rights and deported to the notorious CECOT prison in El Salvador. But the court remains vague on how exactly this would happen, and the Trump administration has claimed it has no way of ensuring his safe return. Elsewhere, a federal immigration judge in Louisiana is set to rule today on whether the Trump administration has grounds to deport Mahmoud Khalil, a permanent resident of the United States who was involved in a campus protest at Columbia University. Ahead of today’s ruling, Secretary of State Marco Rubio filed a short memo that concedes Khalil has no criminal history, and argues he should be deported as part of U.S. efforts to combat antisemitism. We speak to attorney Ramzi Kassem, who is part of Khalil’s legal team, about the cases of Abrego Garcia and Khalil. Kassem says the Supreme Court decision on Abrego Garcia’s case is “a step in the right direction and will hopefully lead to his return home.”
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.This post was originally published on Radio Free.
-
Democracy Now! Friday, April 11, 2025
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! Audio and was authored by Democracy Now!.This post was originally published on Radio Free.
-
- China Hikes Up Tariffs Against U.S. to 125% Amid Escalating Trade War
- Democrats to Investigate Trump Allies for Insider Trading over Tariffs
- SCOTUS Orders Trump Admin to Return Kilmar Abrego Garcia to U.S. from El Salvador's CECOT Prison
- Avelo Airlines Faces Protests, Boycotts After Agreeing to Use Planes for Deportations
- U.S. Admits It's Seeking to Deport Mahmoud Khalil for His Beliefs Ahead of Key Ruling
- Israel Kills More Palestinians in Gaza, Including Children, as It Presses Ahead with Rafah Seizure
- Ahmad Manasra, Jailed by Israel When He Was 13, Freed After Decade Behind Bars
- Activists Protest Travis Air Base; Greenpeace UK Activists Dye U.S. Embassy Pond Blood Red
- Sudan Tells World Court the UAE Is Abetting Genocide as Civil War Nears 2nd Anniversary
- Ukraine's Allies Gather to Rally Military Support for Kyiv Amid Stalled Ceasefire
- House GOP Passes Voter ID Bill That Critics Say Would Disenfranchise Millions
- "Guilty of Treason": Trump Orders DOJ Probe into Two Former Officials Who Criticized Him
- Democrats Attempt to Push Elon Musk Out of Trump Administration by May 30
- House GOP Passes Budget Bill to Slash Federal Spending and Taxes on the Wealthy
- Death Toll in Dominican Republic Nightclub Disaster Rises to 221
- New Zealand Lawmakers Reject Bill to Roll Back Māori Rights
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
-
Friday Democracy Now! show for rebroadcast – HD
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! for Broadcasters – HD MP4 and was authored by Democracy Now! for Broadcasters – HD MP4.This post was originally published on Radio Free.
-
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.This post was originally published on Radio Free.
-
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
