radiofree.asia

Category: Featured

  • New minister in ‘rollercoaster’ French politics causes concern in New Caledonia

    By Patrick Decloitre, RNZ Pacific correspondent French Pacific desk

    As part of a never-ending rollercoaster of instability in French politics, the latest appointment of a Minister for Overseas has caused significant concern, including in New Caledonia.

    In the late hours of Sunday, French President Emmanuel Macron approved the latest Cabinet lineup submitted to him by his Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu.

    A week earlier, Lecornu, who was appointed on September 9 to form a new government, made a first announcement for a Cabinet.

    But this only lasted 14 hours — Lecornu resigned on Monday, October 6, saying the conditions to stay as PM were “not met”.

    After yet another round of consultations under the instructions by Macron, Lecornu was finally re-appointed prime minister on Friday, 10 October 2025.

    The announcement of his new Cabinet, approved by Macron, came late on October 12.

    His new team includes former members of his previous cabinet, mixed with a number of personalities described as members of the civil society with no partisan affiliations.

    The new Minister for Overseas is a newcomer to the portfolio.

    Naïma Moutchou, 44, replaces Manuel Valls, who had worked indefatigably on New Caledonia issues since he was appointed in December 2024.

    Valls, a former Socialist Prime Minister, travelled half a dozen times to New Caledonia and managed to bring all rival local politicians (both pro-France and pro-independence) around the same table.

    The ensuing negotiations led to the signing of a Bougival agreement (signed on July 12, near Paris), initially signed by all local parties represented at New Caledonia’s Congress (Parliament).

    The text, which remains to be implemented, provides for the creation of a “State of New Caledonia” within France, as well as a dual French-New Caledonian nationality and the short-term transfer of such powers as foreign affairs from France to New Caledonia.

    However, one of the main components of the pro-independence movement, the FLNKS (Kanak and Socialist National Liberation Front) has since rejected the Bougival deal, saying it was not compatible with the party’s demands of full sovereignty and timetable.

    Since then, apart from the FLNKS, all parties (including several moderate pro-independence factions who split from FLNKS in August 2024) have maintained their pro-Bougival course.

    Manuel Valls, as Minister for Overseas, was regarded as the key negotiator, representing France, in the talks.

    Who is Naïma Moutchou?
    However, Valls is no longer holding this portfolio. He is replaced by Naïma Moutchou.

    A lawyer by trade, she is an MP at the French National Assembly and member of the Horizon party led by former Prime Minister Edouard Philippe.

    She is also a former deputy Speaker of the French National Assembly.

    Unlike Valls, as new Minister for Overseas she is no longer a Minister of State.

    She took part in a Parliamentary mission on New Caledonia’s future status in 2021-2022.

    Valls’s non-reappointment lamented
    In New Caledonia’s political spheres, the new appointment on Monday triggered several reactions, some critical.

    Virginie Ruffenach, leader of the pro-France Rassemblement-Les Républicains (LR, which is affiliated to the National French LR), expressed disappointment at Vall not being retained as Minister for Overseas.

    She said the new appointment of someone to replace Valls, the main actor of the Bougival agreement, did nothing to stabilise the implementation of the deal.

    The implementation is supposed to translate as early as this week with the need to get the French cabinet to endorse the deal and also to put an “organic law” up for debate at the French Senate for a possible postponement of New Caledonia’s local elections from no later than 30 November 2025 to mid-2026.

    Referring to those short-term deadlines, FLNKS president Christian Téin, who is still judicially compelled to remain in metropolitan France pending an appeal ruling on his May 2024 riots-related case, sent an open letter to French MPs, urging them not to endorse the postponement of the local elections.

    Téin said such postponement, although already endorsed in principle by local New Caledonian Congress, would be a “major political regression” and would “unilaterally put an end to the decolonisation process initiated by the (1998) Nouméa Accord”.

    The pro-independence leader insists New Caledonia’s crucial local elections should be held no later than 30 November 2025, as originally scheduled.

    He said any other move would amount to a “passage en force” (forceful passage).

    An earlier attempt, during the first quarter of 2024, was also described at the time as a “passage en force”.

    It aimed at changing the French Constitution to lift earlier restrictions to the list of eligible voters at local elections.

    Following marches and protests, the movement later degenerated and resulted in the worst riots that New Caledonia has seen in recent history, starting on 13 May 2024.

    The riots caused 14 deaths, more than 2 billion euros (NZ$4 billion) in material damage, a drop of 13.5 percent of the French Pacific territory’s GDP and thousands of unemployed.

    “With the current national cacophony. We don’t know what tomorrow will be . . .  but the crucial issue for New Caledonia is to postpone the date of (local) elections to implement the Bougival agreement. Otherwise we’ll have nothing and this will become a no man’s land”, Ruffenach said on Monday.

    “Even worse, there is the nation’s budget and this is crucial assistance for New Caledonia, something we absolutely need, in the situation we are in today.”

    Wallisian-based Eveil Oceanien’s Milakulo Tukumuli told local public broadcaster NC la Première one way to analyse the latest cabinet appointment could be that New Caledonia’s affairs could be moved back to the Prime Minister’s office.

    New Caledonia back to the PM’s desk?
    Under a long-unspoken rule installed by French Prime Minister Michel Rocard (after he fostered the 1988 historic Matignon Accord to bring an end to half a decade of quasi-civil war), New Caledonia’s affairs had been kept under the direct responsibility of the French PM’s office.

    This lasted for more than 30 years, until the special link was severed in 2020, when Lecornu became Minister for Overseas, a position he held for the next two years and became very familiar and knowledgeable on New Caledonia’s intricate issues.

    “Lecornu is now Prime Minister. Does this mean New Caledonia’s case will return to its traditional home, the PM’s office?”, Tukumuli asked.

    During an interview on French public service TV France 2 last week, Lecornu described New Caledonia as a “personal” issue for him because of his connections with the French Pacific territory when he was Minister for Overseas between 2020 and 2022.

    “Some 18,000 kilometres from here, we have an institutional situation that cannot wait”, he said at the time.

    A moderate pro-France politician, Philippe Gomès, for Calédonie Ensemble, on social networks, published an emotional public farewell letter to Valls, expressing his “sadness”.

    “With you, (the French) Overseas enjoyed a consideration never seen before in the French Republic: that of a matter of national priority in the hands of a Minister of State, a former Prime Minister”,” he said.

    Gomès hailed Valls’s tireless work in recent months to a point where “those who were criticising you yesterday were the same who ended up begging for you to be maintained at this position”.

    Valls reacts during handover ceremony
    “Your eviction from the French cabinet, at a vital moment in our country’s history, at a time when we need stability, potentially bears heavy consequences, especially since it now comes as part of a national political chaos for which New Caledonia will inevitably pay the price too”, Gomès said.

    In recent days, as he was still caretaker Minister for Overseas, Valls has published several articles in French national dailies, warning against the potential dangers — including civil war — if the Bougival agreement is dropped or neglected.

    Lecornu also stressed, during interviews and statements over the past week, that New Caledonia, at the national level, was a matter of national priority at the same level as passing France’s 2025 budget.

    Speaking on Monday during a brief handover ceremony with his successor Moutchou, Valls told public broadcaster Outremer la Première that he was “very sad” not being able to “complete” his mission, including on New Caledonia, but that he did not have any regrets or bitterness.

    He said however that he would make a point of “continuing to discuss” with the FLNKS during the month of October to possibly prepare some amendments “without changing the big equilibriums of the Constitutional and the organic laws”.

    Race against time
    As part of the Bougival text’s implementation and legal process, a referendum is also scheduled to be put to New Caledonia’s population no later than end of February 2026.

    Lecornu is scheduled to deliver his maiden speech on general policy before Parliament on Wednesday, October 15 — if he is still in place by then.

    On Monday, two main components of the opposition, Rassemblement National (right) and La France Insoumise (left) have already indicated their intention to each file a motion of no confidence against Lecornu and his new Cabinet.

    Following consultations he held last week with a panel of parties represented in Parliament, Lecornu based his advice to President Macron on the fact that he believed a majority of parties within the House were not in favour of a parliamentary dissolution and therefore snap elections, for the time being.

    Following a former dissolution in June 2024 and subsequent snap elections, the new Parliament had emerged more divided than ever, split between three main blocks — right, left and centre.

    Since last week’s developments and the latest Cabinet announcement on Sunday, more rifts have surfaced even within those three blocks.

    Some LR politicians, who have accepted to take part in Lecornu’s latest Cabinet, have been immediately excluded from the party.

    On the centre-left, the Socialist Party has not yet indicated whether it would also file a motion of no confidence, but this would depend on Lecornu’s position and expected concessions on the very controversial pension scheme reforms and budget cuts issue.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Israeli historian Ilan Pappé: Despite ceasefire, Palestinians still face ‘elimination, genocide’

    Democracy Now!

    AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now! The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman.

    As we’ve reported, the Gaza ceasefire deal is in effect. Phase one of the US.-backed 20-point plan is underway. Hamas has released all 20 living captives. Israel has released almost 2000 Palestinians in Ramallah and now in Khan Younis in Gaza.

    Yesterday, President Trump addressed the Israeli Knesset and then co-chaired a so-called peace summit in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, with President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was not among the 20 or more world leaders who attend. He was invited but said he was not going.

    For more, we’re joined by the Israeli historian, author and professor Ilan Pappé, professor of history and director of the European Centre for Palestine Studies at the University of Exeter and the chair of the Nakba Memorial Foundation. Among his books, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, almost 20 years ago, and Gaza in Crisis, which he co-wrote with Noam Chomsky. His new book, Israel on the Brink: And the Eight Revolutions That Could Lead to Decolonization and Coexistence.

    We thank you so much for being with us. Professor Pappé, if you could start off by responding to what has happened? We’re watching, in Khan Younis, prisoners being released, Palestinian prisoners, up to 2000, and in the occupied West Bank, though there families were told if they dare celebrate the release of their loved ones, they might be arrested.

    And we saw the release of the 20 Israeli hostages as they returned to Israel. Hamas says they’re returning the dead hostages, the remains, over the next few days. Israel has not said they will return the dead prisoners, of which it’s believed there are nearly 200 in Israeli prisons.

    Your response overall, and now to the summit in Egypt?

    ILAN PAPPÉ: Yes. First of all, there is some joy in knowing that the bombing of the people in Gaza has stopped for a while. And there is joy knowing that Palestinian political prisoners have been reunited with their families, and, similarly, that Israeli hostages were reunited with their families.

    But except from that, I don’t think we are in such an historical moment as President Trump claimed in his speech in the Knesset and beforehand. We are not at the end of the terrible chapter that we have been in for the last two years.

    And that chapter is an Israeli attempt by a particularly fanatic, extremely rightwing Israeli government to try and use ethnic cleansing in the West Bank and genocide in Gaza to downsize the number of Palestinians in Palestine and impose Israel’s will in a way that they hope would be at least endorsed by some Arab governments and the world.

    So far, they have an alliance of Trump and some extreme rightwing parties in Europe.

    And now I hope that the world will not be misled that Israel is now ready to open a different kind of page in its relationship with the Palestinians. And what you told us about the way that the celebrations were dealt with in the West Bank and the incineration of the sanitation center shows you that nothing has changed in the dehumanisation and the attitude of this particular Israeli government and its belief that it has the power to wipe out Palestine as a nation, as a people and as a country.

    I hope the world will not stand by, because up to now it did stand by when the genocide occurred in Palestine.

    AMY GOODMAN: We have just heard President Trump’s address to the Israeli Knesset. He followed the Israeli Prime Minister, Netanyahu. I’m not sure, but in listening to Netanyahu, I don’t think he used the word “Palestinian.” President Trump has just called on the Israeli president to pardon Netanyahu.

    Your thoughts on this, and also the possibility of why Netanyahu has not joined this summit that President Trump is co-chairing? Many are speculating for different reasons — didn’t want to anger the right, that’s further right than him. Others are saying the possibility of his arrest, not on corruption charges, but on crimes against humanity, the whole case before the International Criminal Court.

    ILAN PAPPÉ: It could be a mixture of all of it, but I think at the center of it is the nature of the Israeli government that was elected in November 2022, this alliance between a very opportunistic politician, who’s only interested in surviving and keeping his position as a prime minister, alongside messianic, neo-Zionist politicians who really believe that God has given them the opportunity to create the Greater Israel, maybe even beyond the borders of Palestine, and, in the process, eliminate Palestinians.

    I think that his consideration should all — are always about his chances of survival. So, whatever went in his mind, he came to the conclusion that going to Cairo is not going to help his chances of being reelected.

    My great worry is not that he didn’t go to Cairo. My greatest worry is that he does believe that his only chance of being reelected is still to have a war going on, either in Gaza or in the West Bank or against Iran or in the north with Lebanon.

    We are dealing here with a reckless, irresponsible politician, who is even willing to drown his own state in the process of saving his skin and his neck. And the victims will always be, from this adventurous policy, the Palestinians.

    I hope the world understands that, really, the urgent need of — and I’m talking about world leaders rather than societies. You already discussed what is the level of solidarity among civil societies. But I do hope that political elites will understand — especially in the West — their role now is not to mediate between Israelis and Palestinians.

    Their role now is to protect the Palestinians from destruction, elimination, genocide and ethnic cleansing. And nothing of that duty, especially of Europe, that is complicit with what happened, and the United States, that are complicit with what happened in the last two years — nothing that we heard in the speeches so far in the — in preparation for the summit in Egypt, and I have a feeling that we won’t hear anything about it also later on.

    There is a different way in which our civil societies refer to Palestine as a place that has to be saved and protected, and still this irrelevant conversation among our political elites about a peace deal, a two-state solution, all of that, that has nothing to do with what we are experiencing in the way that the Israeli government thinks it has an historical moment to totally de-Arabise Palestine and eliminate and expunge the Palestinians from history and the area.

    AMY GOODMAN: Ilan Pappé, I want to thank you for being with us, Israeli historian, professor of history, director of the European Centre for Palestine Studies at the University of Exeter, chair of the Nakba Memorial Foundation. His new book, Israel on the Brink: And the Eight Revolutions That Could Lead to Decolonization and Coexistence.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Tributes pour in for Matangi Tonga founder Pesi Siale Fonua – ‘a steady voice of truth’

    RNZ Pacific

    Pesi Siale Fonua, a veteran Pacific journalist and the publisher-editor of Tonga’s leading news website Matangi Tonga Online, has died at the age of 78.

    Fonua’s family announced his passing on Monday.

    “It is with profound sadness that we announce the passing of Pesi Siale Fonua (78), well known Pacific Islands journalist, publisher of Matangi Tonga Online, and beloved husband, father and grandfather, who died on 12 October 2025, at Vaiola Hospital in Tonga,” his family stated.

    “Arrangements for the funeral and for friends and family to pay their respects will be shared in the coming days.”

    Fonua and his wife, Mary, started the Vava’u Press Limited in 1979, initially as a quarterly magazine before transitioning to an online news service.

    Matangi Tonga Online is known as an independent news agency that “has no allegiance to government, or to any political body”.

    Tributes are pouring in for the “towering figure in Pacific journalism” from friends and colleagues.

    Mapa Ha’ano Taumalolo said Fonua “was firm, immovable, and impartial” as a journalist.

    “He never feared those in power when it came to asking hard questions. He had a very soft voice, but his questions were hard as a rock. I can’t recall if he was ever sued in court for defamation throughout his media career. Rest in peace, Legend,” Taumalolo wrote in a Facebook post.

    Matangi Tonga journalist Linny Folau described her former boss and mentor for over two decades as “humble and gentle giant with an infectious laugh, funny and always up for a cold beer”.

    ABC Pacific’s Tongan journalist Marian Kupu said Fonua “shaped generations of Tongan journalism”, describing him as “a steady voice of truth and a teacher”.

    “He played a major role in shaping and upholding the foundations of journalism in Tonga, paving the way for many of us who followed,” she said.

    New Zealand journalist and editor of The Pacific Newroom Facebook group Michael Field said Fonua was “a towering figure in Pacific journalism and culture: gracious, funny, always well informed, a proud Tongan and inspiring editor”.

    RNZ Pacific senior jouralist Iliesa Tora said Fonua was a great journalist “who wrote it like it was . . . straight up and uncensored”.

    Tonga Media Association (TMA) also expressed its condolences.

    “Pesi spoke at our class at Queen Salote College (QSC), in 1987, on why, how and the challenges of becoming a journalist,” TMA president Taina Kami Enoka said.

    ‘”I was hooked. I taught at QSC for a year and joined Tonga Chronicle or Kalonikali Tonga in December, 1990. Rest in Peace, Pesi Fonua. You will be dearly missed. ‘Ofa atu, Mary and family.”

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Opposition Israeli lawmakers interrupt Trump and call for recognition of Palestinian statehood

    Asia Pacific Report

    Two leftwing opposition members of the Knesset protested in the middle of US President Donald Trump’s historic and rambling speech praising the Gaza ceasefire and his administration in West Jerusalem today.

    MK Ayman Odeh, a lawyer and chair of the mainly Arab Hadash-Ta’al party, was escorted out of the Knesset plenum after holding up a protest sign calling on Trump to “recognise Palestine”.

    It was a day filled with emotion as Hamas released the 20 last living Israeli captives and the Israeli military began freeing 2000 Palestinian prisoners, many of them held without charge.

    Lawmaker Odeh is a strong advocate for Palestinian statehood, which Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyaho’s government opposes.

    Ofer Cassif, the party’s only Jewish MK, also tried to hold up a protest sign and was removed from the chamber.

    After the interruption, President Trump quipped: “That was very efficient” — and then carried on with his speech.

    Previously, Odeh posted on his X account: “The amount of hypocrisy in the plenum is unbearable.

    ‘Crimes against humanity’
    “To crown Netanyahu through flattery the likes of which has never been seen, through an orchestrated group, does not absolve him and his government of the crimes against humanity committed in Gaza, nor of the responsibility for the blood of hundreds of thousands of Palestinian victims and thousands of Israeli victims.

    “But only because of the ceasefire and the overall deal am I here.

    “Only ending the occupation, and only recognising the State of Palestine alongside Israel, will bring justice, peace, and security to all.”

    The brief interruption did not deflect from Trump’s speech that was effusive in its praise for Israel, the country’s leadership, the hostages and their families, and its military and so-called “victory” in Gaza.

    Trump claimed the region was poised for a “historic dawn of a new Middle East” and referred to Palestinians, without addressing their decades-old fight for self-determination and statehood.

    “The choice for Palestinians could not be more clear,” the US president argued.

    “This is their chance to turn forever from the path of terror and violence — it’s been extreme — to exile the wicked forces of hate that are in their midst, and I think that’s going to happen,” Trump said.

    Palestinians welcome the release of prisoners
    Palestinians welcome the release of prisoners. Image: AJ screenshot APR

    Tear gas fired
    An Israeli armoured vehicle fired tear gas and rubber bullets at Palestinians gathered near Ofer Prison in the occupied West Bank, where hundreds had assembled to await the release of prisoners,

    Earlier, the Israeli military, in a post on X, reported that the International Red Cross had transferred the final 13 captives held by Hamas to Shin Bet forces in the Gaza Strip, after an earlier group of seven had been released.

    Al Jazeera Arabic, citing Palestinian sources, also reported that the handover of all 20 living captives had now been completed.

    Al Jazeera’s Nour Adeh reported from Amman, Jordan, because Al Jazeera is banned from reporting from Israel and the Occupied West Bank, that the Israeli Broadcasting Authority had confirmed that the Red Cross had received the remaining 13 living Israeli captives.

    “They will soon be handed over to the custody of the Israeli military, which, of course, is still present in 53 percent of Gaza,” she said.

    “That means that we are in the process of concluding the release of all living Israeli captives, and that is all happening as US President Trump arrived in Israel.

    “These are important developments, and the choreography is not coincidental.”

    Remaining in Gaza were the bodies of 28 Israeli captives, and it was not clear how many of them will be released today.

    As part of the ceasefire, the Israeli military were releasing almost 2000 Palestinian prisoners — including 1700 who had been kidnapped from Gaza, and 250 Palestinians serving life or long sentences.

    President Trump was due to fly to the Sharm el-Sheikh respirt in Egypt later today for a summit aimed at advancing Washington’s plans for Gaza and the region.

    Palestinians being held in Israeli prisons in harsh conditions
    Palestinians being held in Israeli prisons in harsh conditions. Graphic: Al Jazeera/Creative Commons

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • After Gaza ceasefire, ‘massive political pressure’ needed to prevent Israel from restarting war

    Democracy Now!

    AMY GOODMAN: Israel’s government has approved the first phase of the Gaza ceasefire deal, that includes a pause in Israeli attacks and the release of the remaining hostages held by Hamas in exchange for Palestinians detained in Israeli prisons — 20 living hostages were freed today coinciding with President Trump’s visit to Israel and Egypt.

    According to the deal, 250 Palestinian prisoners serving life sentences and another 1700 people from Gaza detained in the last two years — and described as “forcibly disappeared” by the UN — would be released.

    Hamas has demanded the release of prominent Palestinian political prisoner Marwan Barghouti, but his name was reportedly secretly removed from the prisoner exchange list by Israel.

    Meanwhile, the US is sending about 200 troops to Israel to monitor the ceasefire deal.

    The Israeli military on Friday confirmed the ceasefire had come into effect as soldiers retreated from parts of Gaza. Tens of thousands of Palestinians, including families that had been forced to the south, began their trek back to northern Gaza after news that Israeli forces were withdrawing.

    Returning Gaza City residents made their way through mounds of rubble and destroyed neighborhoods, searching for any sign of their homes and belongings. Among them, Fidaa Haraz.

    FIDAA HARAZ: [translated] I came since the morning, when they said there was a withdrawal, to find my home. I’m walking in the street, but I do not know where to go, due to the extent of the destruction.

    I swear I don’t know where the crossroads is or where my home is. I know that my home was leveled, but where is it? Where is it? I cannot find it.

    What is this? What do we do with our lives? Where should we live? Where should we stay? A house of multiple floors, but nothing was left?

    AMY GOODMAN: Al Jazeera reports Israel’s army said it would allow 600 humanitarian aid trucks carrying food, medical supplies, fuel and other necessities daily into Gaza, through coordination with the United Nations and other international groups.

    On Thursday, the exiled Hamas Gaza chief Khalil al-Hayya declared an end to the war.

    KHALIL AL-HAYYA: [translated] Today, we announced that we have reached an agreement to end the war and aggression against our people and to begin implementing a permanent ceasefire, the withdrawal of the occupation forces, the entry of aid, the opening of the Rafah crossing in both directions and the exchange of prisoners.

    AMY GOODMAN: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke today in Israel.

    PRIME MINISTER BENJAMIN NETANYAHU: [translated] Today, we mark one of the greatest achievements in the war of revival: the return of all of our hostages, the living and the dead as one. …

    This way, we grapple Hamas. We grapple it all around, ahead of the next stages of the plan, in which Hamas is disarmed and Gaza is demilitarised.

    If this can be achieved the easy way, very well. If not, it will be achieved the hard way.

    AMY GOODMAN: In the United States, President Trump hailed his administration’s ceasefire plan during a Cabinet meeting on Thursday as concerns mount regarding potential US and foreign intervention in the rebuilding of Gaza.

    PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Gaza is going to be slowly redone. You have tremendous wealth in that part of the world by certain countries, and just a small part of that, what they — what they make, will do wonders for — for Gaza.

    AMY GOODMAN: For more, we’re joined by two guests. Diana Buttu, Palestinian human rights attorney and a former adviser to the negotiating team of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO). She has just recently written a piece for The Guardian. It is headlined “A ‘magic pill’ made Israeli violence invisible. We need to stop swallowing it.” And Amjad Iraqi is a senior Israel-Palestine analyst at the International Crisis Group, joining us from London.

    We welcome you both to Democracy Now! Diana Buttu, let’s begin with you. First, your response to the ceasefire-hostage deal that’s just been approved by the Israeli government and Hamas?

    DIANA BUTTU: Well, first, Amy, it’s really quite repulsive that Palestinians have had to negotiate an end to their genocide. It should have been that the world put sanctions on Israel to stop the genocide, rather than forcing Palestinians to negotiate an end to it. At the same time, we’re also negotiating an end to the famine, a famine that Israel, again, created.

    Who are we negotiating with? The very people who created that famine. And so, it’s really repugnant that this is the position that Palestinians have been forced to be in.

    And so, while people here are elated, happy that the bombs have stopped, we’re also at the same time worried, because we’ve seen that the international community, time and again, has abandoned us.

    Everybody is happy that the Israelis are going home, but nobody’s talking about the more than 11,000 Palestinians who are currently languishing in Israeli prisons, being starved, being tortured, being raped. Many of them are hostages picked up after October 2023, being held without charge, without trial, and nobody at all is talking about them.

    So, while people are happy that the bombs have stopped, we know that Israel’s control has not at all stopped. And Israel has made it clear that it’s going to continue to control every morsel of food that comes into Gaza. It’s going to control every single construction item that comes into Gaza.

    And it’s going to continue to maintain a military occupation over Gaza.

    This is not a peace agreement. This is not an end to the occupation. And I think it’s so important for us that we keep our eyes on Gaza and start demanding that Israel be held to account, not only for the genocide, but for all of these decades of occupation that led to this in the first place.

    AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about the exchange of hostages, Israeli hostages, dead and alive, and Palestinian prisoners? According to the Hamas Gaza chief, I believe they’re saying all women and children, Palestinian women and children, picked up over these last two years — or is it beyond? — are going to be released. And then, of course, there are the well over 1000 prisoners who are going to be released.

    DIANA BUTTU: No, not quite. So, there are 250 who are political prisoners who are going to be released, and that list just came out about a little over an hour ago.

    But there are also 1700 Palestinians, solely from Gaza, who are going to be released. And these were people — these are doctors, these are nurses, these are journalists and so on, who were — who Israel picked up after 7 October, 2023, and has been holding as hostages.

    These are the people that are going to be released. There are still thousands more, Amy, that are from the West Bank, that we do not know what is going to happen to them.

    And so, while the focus is just on the people in Gaza — and again, there is no path for freeing all of those thousands of Palestinians who are languishing in Israeli prisons, being starved, being tortured, being raped.

    What’s going to happen to them? Who’s going to be focusing on them? I don’t think that it’s going to be this US administration.

    AMY GOODMAN: I want to talk about the West Bank in a minute. More than a thousand Palestinians have been killed in the West Bank just over the last two years. But I first want to get Amjad Iraqi’s response to this deal that has now been signed off on.

    I mean, watching the images of tens of thousands, this sea of humanity, of Palestinians going south to north, to see what they can find of their homes in places like Gaza City, not to mention who’s trapped in the rubble. We say something — well over 60,000 Palestinians have been killed, but we don’t know the real number. It could be hundreds of thousands?

    AMJAD IRAQI: Indeed, Amy. And to kind of continue off of Diana’s points, this is a deal that really should have been made long, long time ago. We’ve known that the parameters of this truce have been on the table for well over a year, if not since the very beginning of the war, what they used to define as an all-for-all deal, the idea that Hamas would release all hostages in exchange for a permanent ceasefire.

    And the reasons for the constant foiling of it are quite evident. And it’s important to recognise this not for the sake of just lamenting the lives, the many lives, that have been lost and the massive destruction that could have been averted, but it needs to really inform the next steps going forward.

    The biggest takeaway of what’s happening right now is that in order for a ceasefire to be sustained, in order for Gaza to be saved from further military assault, you need massive political pressure.

    And we’ve seen this really build up in the past weeks and months. You saw this, for example, from European governments, which, even through the symbolic recognition of Palestinian statehood, was very much venting their frustration with the Israeli conduct in the war, the fact that the EU was actually starting to contemplate more punitive measures against Israel, such as partial trade suspensions, potential sanctions against Israel.

    We saw this building up over the past few weeks. Arab states have started to use much of their leverage, especially after Israel’s strike on Doha or on Hamas’s offices in Doha. We started seeing Gulf and other Arab and Muslim states come forward to President Trump at the UN saying that Israel aggression cannot continue like this.

    And most crucially is, of course, President Trump himself and Washington finally saying that it needs to put its foot down to stop this war, which we’ve heard repeatedly from Trump himself.

    But this is really the first time since the January ceasefire agreement where Trump has really insisted that this come to an end.

    Now, this — now there’s much to be sort of debated about the Trump plan itself, but this aspect of the truce cannot continue, and certainly cannot save Palestinian lives, unless that pressure is maintained.

    The concern now is that that pressure will recede or alleviate, because there’s now a deal that’s signed. But, actually, in order to enforce it, that pressure really needs to be maintained.

    AMY GOODMAN: What do you think was the turning point, Amjad? The bombing of Qatar?

    Now, I mean, The New York Times had an exposé that Trump knew before, not just in the midst of the bombing, that Israel was bombing their ally to try to kill the Hamas leadership. But do you think that was the turning point?

    AMJAD IRAQI: It certainly might have expedited, I think, a lot of factors that were already building up. As I said, pressure had been mounting against Israel for quite a while.

    There was really outrage, not just at the continuance of the military assaults, but the policy of starvation, which was very evident on the ground, and Israel’s complete refusal to let in aid, its failed project with the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation.

    So, this had all been building, but I do think the strike on Doha really pushed Arab states to say that enough is enough. To see them really meet all together with President Trump and create a bit more of a united position to insist that this really couldn’t go on, I think, has really signalled that Israel really crossed a certain line geopolitically.

    Now, of course, that line should have been recognised as being crossed well before because of the facts on the ground in Gaza, but I do think that this has helped to kind of push things over the edge a bit more assertively.

    There are also speculations about Trump, of course, trying to have his name in for the Nobel Peace Prize, and potentially other factors. But I do think that the timing of this, again, regardless of what ended up pushing it over the line, it is unfortunate that it has really taken this long.

    And it’s really up to global powers and foreign governments to recognise that in order to make sure that this stays, that they really need to keep that pressure up.

    AMY GOODMAN: And, Amjad Iraqi, the core demand of the ceasefire is that Hamas disarm and end its rule. What security guarantees is Hamas seeking for its own members to lay down their arms and not face a wave of arrests or assassinations?

    How is this going to work? And talk about who you see running Gaza.

    AMJAD IRAQI: So, these things are still a bit unclear. So, throughout the ceasefire talks, Hamas has kept insisting about the idea of US guarantees that Israel will not end the war.

    But there’s never really any clear, concrete way to prove this. And as we’ve seen before, like in the January ceasefire deal and in much of the ceasefire talks, even if President Trump expresses his desire to see an end to the war, oftentimes he would still hand the steering wheel to Prime Minister Netanyahu.

    And if Netanyahu decided that he wanted to thwart the ceasefire talks, if he wanted to relaunch military assaults, and the Israeli military and the government would back it, then Trump and Washington would fall into line and amplify those calls, and even President Trump himself would sort of cheer on the military assaults.

    And so, this factor has certainly weighed a lot on Hamas, but I do think there’s a culmination of pressure, the fact that Arab states have insisted on Hamas to try to show, at least signal, certain flexibility, even though many of its demands have been quite consistent throughout the war.

    But the fact that I think Hamas is now feeling that there’s also a bit more pressure on Israel to actually ensure that they at least try to take the gamble that they will not return to war.

    And in regards to decommissioning and disarmament, publicly Hamas has placed a red line around this right to bear arms. But historically, and even recently, they do say that they are willing to have conversations about decommissioning, as long as it’s tied to a political framework, especially one that’s tied to the establishment of a Palestinian state.

    Now, one can really debate how much this process is actually quite feasible, and obviously the Israeli government and much of the Israeli public is quite adamant in its opposition against Palestinian statehood, but Hamas may at least offer some space for those conversations to be had.

    There are discussions about it potentially giving up what it might describe as its larger or more offensive weaponry, like rockets or anti-tank missiles. And there’s bigger questions around firearms.

    But I think it’s important to put this question not as a black-and-white issue, as something that has to come first in the political process, as Israel is demanding, but one that requires trust building and confidence building in the rubric of a process of Palestinian self-determination.

    This is important not just in the case of Palestine, but across many conflicts around the world where the question of decommissioning, about establishing one rule, one gun, one government for a society, requires that kind of process. So, it shouldn’t just be a policy of destroying and military assaults and so on. You do need to engage in these questions in good faith.

    AMY GOODMAN: There are so many questions, Diana Buttu, in this first stage of the ceasefire-hostage deal, is really the only one that Netanyahu addressed in his speech.

    You’re usually in Ramallah. You spend a lot of time in the West Bank. Where does this leave the Palestinian Authority? I don’t think the West Bank is talked about in this deal.

    And what about the fact that we’re looking at pictures of Netanyahu surrounded by Steve Witkoff on one side and Jared Kushner, who has talked about — as we know — famously referred to Gaza as “very valuable” waterfront property?

    DIANA BUTTU: Well, I think that this plan was really an Israeli plan, and it was repackaged and branded as a Trump plan. And you can see just in the text of it and the way that all of the guarantees were given to the Israelis, and none given to the Palestinians, it’s really an Israeli plan.

    But beyond that, it’s important to keep in mind that when Trump was going around and talking about this plan, that he consulted with everybody but Palestinians. He didn’t talk to Mahmoud Abbas. He didn’t even let Mahmoud Abbas go to the UN to deliver his speech before the UN.

    I’m pretty certain he didn’t speak to the UN representative, Palestine’s representative to the UN. And so, this is — once again, we’ve got a plan in which people are talking about Palestinians, but never talking to Palestinians. So, again, this is very much an Israeli plan repackaged as a Trump plan and branded as a Trump plan.

    In terms of them looking at Gaza as being prime real estate, this is not at all different from the way that they’ve done it in the past, and this is not at all the way that Israel has looked at Palestine.

    And this is because this is the way that colonisers look at land that isn’t theirs. They ignore the history of the place.

    Gaza has an old history. It has some of the oldest churches, I think the second-oldest church in the world. It has some of the oldest mosques. It has an old civilization.

    We want Gaza to be Gaza. We don’t want it to be Dubai or any other place. We want it to be Gaza. And so, the idea of somehow turning it into prime real estate, this is the mentality of somebody who’s coming from outside.

    This is the way that colonisers think. This isn’t the way that the Indigenous think. And so, you can see in this plan that it’s not only the idea of the outside coming in, but they certainly didn’t consult Palestinians at all.

    As for what’s going to happen to the Palestinian Authority, it’s clear that they don’t want the Palestinian Authority in the Gaza Strip, and it’s clear that they do want to have a foreign authority in the Gaza Strip.

    But once again, Amy, when is it that Palestinians get to decide our own future? Are we really going back to the era of colonialism, when other people get to decide our future? And that’s what this plan is really all about.

    AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to be continuing to cover this story. President Trump is going to be there for the signing of the ceasefire in Sharm El-Sheikh in Egypt on Monday, and the hostages and prisoners are expected to be released on Monday or Tuesday.

    Diana Buttu, I want to thank you for being with us, Palestinian human rights attorney, former adviser to the negotiating team of the Palestine Liberation Organisation, and Amjad Iraqi, Israel-Palestine analyst at the International Crisis Group.

    Republished from Democracy Now! under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States Licence.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Durgapur ‘gang rape’: Mamata Banerjee falsely claims crime occurred at 12:30 am; asks why victim stepped out so late

    While speaking to reporters at the Kolkata airport on October 12 on the alleged ‘gang rape’ of a medical student in Durgapur, West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee claimed that the alleged assault took place at 12.30 am and asked why the victim was out of the campus so late.

    The second-year MBBS student, originally from Odisha, was allegedly gang-raped on Friday, October 10, evening outside the institute campus in Durgapur, about 170 km from Kolkata. At the time of this report being written, three individuals were arrested in the case, identified as Apu Bauri (21), Firdous Shiekh (23), and Sheikh Riazuddin (32).

    Coming close on the heels of the rape and murder of a trainee doctor at the RG Kar Medical College in Kolkata in August 2024 and the alleged rape of a student at the South Calcutta Law College in June this year, the Durgapur incident saw all Opposition parties coming down heavily on the Mamata Banerjee-government.

    When asked to comment about the incident before she boarded a flight for flood-hit north Bengal, Banerjee urged private colleges to take responsibility of their students’ safety. Her words, which immediately triggered an outrage from the Opposition, were as follows:

    “….if in Bengal anything happens to women, we do not allow anything to be considered as a casual case. It’s a serious case we consider. And that girl.. it’s shocking.. she was studying in a private medical college. So all the private medical college.. whose responsibility? How they came out in the night at 12.30? And it happens in the… so far I know… in the forest area. At 12.30… I do not know what happened. Investigation is on. I am shocked to see the incident. But private medical colleges also should take care for their students. And specially the girl child… at night time… they should not be allowed to come out in the outside. They have to protect themselves also…” (sic)

    She also said, “Nobody will be excused. Whoever is guilty will be strictly punished.”

    Did the Alleged Crime Occur at 12:30 am?

    Multiple sources confirm that the alleged gang rape occurred between 8 and 9.30 pm on October 10.

    1. Press Release by the medical college:

    The institute where the survivor was a second-year MBBS student published a press note detailing the timing of the incident based on CCTV footage available with them.

    According to the statement, the survivor left the campus for dinner with another student around 7:58 pm. Following this, “One of them returned at 8:42 pm, but after loitering around the main exit area for around 5-6 minutes, he stepped out again at about 8:48 pm. The two then returned together at 9:29 p.m. The female student proceeded toward the Girls Hostel at around 9:31 pm. Later, it came to light that the female student, while she was outside campus, bad endured an assault — an occurrence she has herself claimed and reported.”

    2. Police complaint by survivor’s father

    Alt News accessed the police complaint submitted by the student’s father at New Township police station under Asansol-Durgapur Commissionerate on October 11, on the basis of which a case (No. 131/25 dated 11.10.2025) under section 70(1)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita was lodged. The complaint was signed as ‘Received’ by an officer at the station.

    According to the complaint, the alleged assault took place a little after 8 pm on October 10. Alt News is in possession of the document but we won’t publish it in the interest of the survivor and the investigation.

    3. In an interview, the survivor’s father mentioned that time of the incident as around 9-9:30 pm. He said a friend of her daughter took her near the gate for eating ‘gupchup’ (panipuri) when two or three more people arrived. “Seeing this, the friend fled leaving the girl alone. She was raped after this.”

     

    To sum up, the claim by West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee that the victim had stepped out of the college campus at 12.30 in the night is false. In a conversation with media persons on October 12, she mentioned at least twice that the alleged assault had taken place at 12.30 am.

    The post Durgapur ‘gang rape’: Mamata Banerjee falsely claims crime occurred at 12:30 am; asks why victim stepped out so late appeared first on Alt News.


    This content originally appeared on Alt News and was authored by Shinjinee Majumder.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Eugene Doyle: The Nobel Peace laureate who calls for US bombing of her own country

    COMMENTARY: By Eugene Doyle

    Within hours of being named the Nobel Peace laureate for 2025, María Corina Machado called on President Trump to step up his military and economic campaign against her own country — Venezuela.

    The curriculum vitae of the opposition leader hardly lines up with what one would typically associate with a Peace Maker.  Nor would those who nominated her, including US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and recent US national security advisor Mike Waltz, both drivers of violent policies towards Venezuela.

    “The Nobel Peace Prize for 2025 goes to a brave and committed champion of peace, to a woman who keeps the flame of democracy burning amidst a growing darkness,”  said the Nobel Committee statement.

    Let’s see if María Corina Machado passes that litmus test and is worthy to stand alongside last year’s winners, Nihon Hidankyo, representing the Japanese hibakusha, the survivors of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, “honoured for their decades-long commitment to nuclear disarmament and their tireless witness against the horrors of nuclear war”.

    Machado supports Israel, would move embassy
    Machado is a passionate Zionist and supporter of both the State of Israel and Benjamin Netanyahu personally.  She has not been silent on the genocide; indeed she has actively called for Israel to press ahead, saying Hamas  “must be defeated at all costs, whatever form it takes”.

    >If Machado achieves power in Venezuela, among her first long-promised acts will be the ending of Venezuela’s support for Palestine and the transfer of the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

    Machado is a signatory of a cooperation agreement with Israel’s Likud Party.

    The smiling face of Washington regime change
    The Council on American-Islamic Relations, US’s largest Muslim civil rights organisation, called Machado a supporter of anti-Muslim fascism and decried the award as “insulting and unacceptable”.

    2025 Nobel Peace Prize laureate María Corina Machado
    2025 Nobel Peace Prize laureate María Corina Machado . . . “It is really a disaster. It’s laying the groundwork and justifying greater military escalation,” warns a history professor. Image: Cristian Hernandez/ Anadolu Agency

    Venezuelan activist Michelle Ellner wrote in the US progressive outlet Code Pink:

    “She’s the smiling face of Washington’s regime-change machine, the polished spokesperson for sanctions, privatisation, and foreign intervention dressed up as democracy.

    “Machado’s politics are steeped in violence. She has called for foreign intervention, even appealing directly to Benjamin Netanyahu, the architect of Gaza’s annihilation, to help ‘liberate’ Venezuela with bombs under the banner of ‘freedom.’

    She has demanded sanctions, that silent form of warfare whose effects – as studies in The Lancet and other journals have shown – have killed more people than war, cutting off medicine, food, and energy to entire populations.”

    Legitimising US escalation against Venezuela
    Ellner said she almost laughed at the absurdity of the choice, which I must admit was my own reaction.  Yale professor of history Greg Grandin was similarly shocked.

    “It is really a disaster. It’s laying the groundwork and justifying greater military escalation.”

    What Grandin is referring to is the prize being used by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the Trump administration to legitimise escalating violence against Venezuela — an odd outcome for a peace prize.

    Grandin, author of America, América: A New History of the New World says Machado “has consistently  represented a more hardline in terms of economics, in terms of US relations. That intransigence has led her to rely on outside powers, notably the United States.

    “They didn’t give it to Donald Trump, but they have given it to the next best thing as far as Marco Rubio is concerned — if he needs justification to escalate military operations against Venezuela.”

    The Iron Lady wins a peace prize?
    Rubio has repeatedly referred to Machado as the “Venezuelan Iron Lady” — fair enough, as she bears greater resemblance to Margaret Thatcher than she does to Mother Teresa.

    This illogicality brought back graffiti I read on a wall in the 1970s: “Fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity”.  Yet someone at the Nobel Committee had a brain explosion (fitting as Alfred Nobel invented dynamite) when they settled on Machado as the embodiment of Alfred Nobel’s ideal recipient — “the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.”

    Machado, a recipient of generous US State Department funding and grants, including from the National Endowment for Democracy (the US’s prime soft power instrument of regime change) is praised for her courage in opposing the Maduro government, and in calling out a slide towards authoritarianism.

    Conservatives could run a sound argument in terms of Machado as an anti-regime figure but it is ludicrous to suggest her hard-ball politics and close alliances with Trump would in any way qualify her for the peace prize. Others see her as an agent of the CIA, an agent of the Monroe Doctrine, and as a mouthpiece for a corrupt elite that wants to drive a violent antidemocratic regime change.

    She has promised the US that she would privatise the country’s oil industry and open the door to US business.

    “We’re grateful for what Trump is doing for peace,” the Nobel winner told the BBC. Trump’s recent actions include bombing boatloads of Venezuelans and Colombians — a violation of international law — as part of a pressure campaign on the Maduro government.

    Machado says she told Trump “how grateful the Venezuelan people are for what he’s doing, not only in the Americas, but around the world for peace, for freedom, for democracy”.  The dead and starving of Gaza bear witness to a counter narrative.

    Rigged elections or rigged narratives?
    Peacemakers aren’t normally associated with coup d’etats but Machado most certainly was in 2002 when democratically elected President Hugo Chavez was briefly overthrown.  Machado was banned from running for President in 2024 because of her calls for US intervention in overthrowing the government.

    Central to both Machado’s prize and the US government’s regime change operation is the argument that the Maduro government won a “rigged election” in 2024 and is running a narco-trafficking government; charges accepted as virtually gospel in the mainstream media and dismissed as rubbish by some scholars and experts on the country.

    Alfred de Zayas, a law professor at the Geneva School of Diplomacy who served as a UN Independent Expert on International Order, cautions against the standard Western narrative that the Venezuelan elections “were rigged”.

    The reality is that the Maduro government, like the Chavez government before it, enjoys popularity with the poor majority of the country.  Delegitimising any elected government opposed to Washington is standard operating procedure by the great power.

    Professor Zayas led a UN mission to Venezuela in 2017 and has visited the country a number of times since. He has spoken with NGOs, such as Fundalatin, Grupo Sures, Red Nacional de Derechos Humanos, as well as people from all walks of life, including professors, church leaders and election officials.

    “I gradually understood that the media mood in the West was only aiming for regime change and was deliberately distorting the situation in the country,” he said in an article in 2024.

    I provide those thoughts not as proof definitive of the legitimacy of the elections but as  stimulant to look beyond our tightly curated mainstream media. María Machado is Washington’s “guy” and that alone should set off alarm bells.

    Michelle Ellner: “Anyone who knows what she stands for knows there’s nothing remotely peaceful about her politics.”

    “Beati pacifici quoniam filii Dei vocabuntur.  Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called children of God”. Matthew 5:9.

    Amen to that.

    Eugene Doyle is a writer based in Wellington. He has written extensively on the Middle East, as well as peace and security issues in the Asia Pacific region. He contributes to Asia Pacific Report and Café Pacific, and hosts the public policy platform solidarity.co.nz

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • IFJ condemns Australian lobby censorship bids to ‘silence’ reporting on Gaza

    Pacific Media Watch

    The global peak journalism body has condemned the targeting, harassment, and censorship by lobby groups of Australian journalists for reporting critically on Israel’s war on Gaza.

    The Brussels-based International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) and its Australian affiliate, the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA), said in a statement they were attempts to silence journalists and called on media outlets and regulatory bodies to ensure the fundamental rights to freedom of expression and access to information were upheld.

    In a high-profile case, Australia’s Federal Court found on June 25 that Lebanese-Australian journalist Antoinette Lattouf was unlawfully dismissed by the national public broadcaster, Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), for sharing a social media post by Human Rights Watch relating to violations by Israel in Gaza, reports IFJ.

    Lattouf was removed from a five-day radio presenting contract in Sydney in December 2023, with the judgment confirming her dismissal was made to appease pro-Israel lobbyists.

    On Seotember 24, the ABC was ordered to pay an additional $A150,000 in compensation on top of A$70,000 already awarded.

    In a separate incident, Australian cricket reporter Peter Lalor was dropped from radio coverage of Australia’s Sri Lanka tour by broadcaster SEN in February after he reposted several posts on X regarding Israeli attacks in Gaza and the release of Palestinian prisoners in Israel.

    “I was told in one call there were serious organisations making complaints; in another I was told that this was not the case,” said Lalor in a statement.

    Kostakidis faces harassment
    Prominent journalist and former SBS World News Australia presenter Mary Kostakidis has also faced ongoing harassment by the Zionist Federation of Australia, with a legal action filed in the Federal Court under Australia’s Racial Discrimination Act for sharing two allegedly “antisemitic” posts on X.

     

    Kostakidis said the case failed to identify which race, ethnicity or nationality was offended by her posts, with a verdict currently awaited on a strikeout order filed by Kostakidis in July.

    The MEAA said: “MEAA journalists are subject to the code of ethics, who in their professional capacity, often provide critical commentary on political warfare.

    “These are the tenets of democracy. We stand with our colleagues in their workplaces, in the courtrooms, and in their deaths to raise our voices against the silence.”

    The IFJ said: “Critical and independent journalism in the public interest is more crucial than ever in the face of incessant pressure from partisan lobby groups.

    “IFJ stands in firm solidarity with journalists globally facing harassment and censorship for their reporting.”

    Journalist killed in Gaza City

    Killed Palestinian journalist Saleh Aljafarawi
    Killed Palestinian journalist Saleh Aljafarawi . . . gained prominence for his videos covering Israel’s two-year war on Gaza Image: Abdelhakim Abu Riash/AJ file

    Meanwhile, gunmen believed to be part of Israeli-linked militia, have killed Palestinian journalist Saleh Aljafarawi, south of Gaza City, after the ceasefire, reports Al Jazeera.

    Social media posts showed people bidding farewell to the 28-year-old who had been bringing news about the war over the last two years through his widely watched videos, the channel said.

    Several people accused of attacking returnees to Gaza City by colluding with Israeli forces were killed during clashes in the area where Aljafarawi was shot dead, sources told Al Jazeera.

    Al Jazeera said that more than 270 Palestinian journalists had been killed in Gaza since the war began in October 2023.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • The fake Gaza ‘peace agreement’ versus real peace with justice

    COMMENTARY: By Dr Mazin Qumsiyeh

    A temporary ceasefire and release of some Palestinians in a prisoner exchange is not a “peace agreement” and it is far from what is needed — ending colonisation; freedom for the >10,000 political prisoners still in Israeli gulags (also tortured, nearly 100 have died under torture in the last two years); return of the millions of refugees; and accountability for genocide, ethnic cleansing and apartheid.

    That is why this global uprising (intifada) will not stop until freedom, justice, and equality are attained.

    Here are brief answers I gave to questions about the agreement for Gaza:

    Professor Mazin Qumsiyeh
    Professor Mazin Qumsiyeh during his visit to Aotearoa New Zealand last year . . . “what is needed — ending colonisation, freedom for the >10,000 political prisoners still in Israeli gulags , return of the millions of refugees, and accountability for genocide, ethnic cleansing and apartheid. Image: David Robie/APR

    1. How has life in the West Bank changed for you and your community during the past two years of conflict?
    The West Bank has been illegally occupied since 1967 (ICJ ruling) but it was not merely an occupation but intensive colonisation and ethnic cleansing. The attacks on our people accelerated in the last two years with over 60,000 made homeless in the West Bank and denial of freedom of movement (including hundreds of new gates installed in these two years separating the remaining concentration camps/ghettos of the West Bank ).

    2. What is your assessment of the new peace deal that brought an end to the fighting in Gaza?
    It is not a peace deal. It is an agreement to pause the genocide which will not work because the belligerent occupier — “Israel” — has not respected a single agreement it signed since its founding. Even the agreement to join the United Nations was conditional on respecting the UN Charter and UN resolutions issued before and after 1949.

    This continued to even breaking the signed ceasefire agreement of last year. I have 0 percent confidence that this latest agreement would be respected even on the simple aspect of “pausing” the genocide and ethnic cleansing going on since 1948.

    3. In your view, why did war drag on for two years despite multiple ceasefire attempts?
    Simply put because colonisation can only be done with violence. And the war on our people has gone on not for two years but for 77 years without ending (sustained by Western government support). Israel as a colonisation entity is the active face of colonisation. The USA for example broke similar agreements for “pauses” in colonisation with natives in North America and broke every single one of them.


    Israeli military occupation on the environment.        Video: Greenpeace

    4. What kind of humanitarian and environmental toll has the conflict taken on Palestinian society?
    It is now well documented from UN agencies, human rights groups (like Amnesty, Human Rights Watch, Physicians for Human Rights, even the Israeli group B’Tselem). In brief it is genocide, ecocide, scholasticide, medicide,
    and veriticide. (More at: ongaza.org )

    5. Why do you think it took the IDF so long to rescue all the hostages?
    The terrorist organisation that deceptively calls itself “IDF” (Israeli Defence Forces) was not interested in rescuing their captives (not “hostages”) and they only got people back via exchange of prisoners (not rescue).

    The IGF (Israeli Genocide Forces) actually killed many of their own soldiers and civilians
    on 7 October 2023 by activating the Hannibal directive to prevent their capture. The resistance was aiming to capture colonisers (living on stolen Palestinian lands) to exchange for some of the more than 11,000 political prisoners illegally held in Israeli jails. (Again see ongaza.org )

    6. How significant was international involvement — particularly from the US — in reaching the final agreement?
    This is the first genocide in human history that is not executed by one government. It is executed by a number of governments directly supporting and aiding (participating). This includes the USA, UK, France, Egypt, Germany, Australia etc. Many of these countries have governments dominated or highly influenced by the Zionist agenda.

    Under the influence of a growing popular protest against the genocide around the world, some of those countries are trying to wiggle out from pressure in an effort to save
    “Israel” from growing global isolation. Trump was blackmailed via videos/files collected by Jeffrey Epstein and Ghiseline Maxwell (Mossad agents). He is simply a narcissistic collaborator with genocide!

    7. What concrete steps do you think are necessary now to turn this peace deal into a sustainable, lasting solution?
    Again not a “peace deal”. What needs to be done is apply boycotts, divestments, sanctions (BDS) on this rogue state that violates the international conventions (Geneva Convention, Conventions against Apartheid and Genocide). BDS was used against apartheid South Africa and needs to be applied here also. (For more: bdsmovement.net )

    8. How do you see the Palestine Museum of Natural History contributing to rebuilding and healing efforts in the aftermath of war?
    Our institute (PIBS, palestinenature.org) which includes museums, a botanic garden, and many other sections is focused on “sustainable human and natural communities” Our motto is respect: for ourselves (empowerment), for others (regardless of religious or other background), and for nature.

    Conflict, colonisations, oppression are obviously areas we challenge and work on in JOINT struggle with all people of various background.

    9. Looking ahead, what gives you optimism—or concern—about the future relationship between Palestinians and Israelis?
    What gives me optimism first and foremost is the heroic resilience and resistance (together making sumud) of our Palestinian people everywhere and the millions of other people mobilising for human rights and for justice (including the right of refugees to return and also environmental justice).

    What gives me concern is the depth of depravity that greedy individuals in power go to destroying our planet and our people and profiting from colonisation and genocide.

    About 8.5 million Palestinians are refugees and displaced people thanks to Zionism and Western collusion with it. A collusion intent on transforming Palestine from multi-ethnic, multi-cultural, multireligious, and multilingual society to a racist Jewish state (monolithic).

    Dr Mazin Qumsiyeh is a Bedouin in cyberspace; a villager at home; professor, founder and (volunteer) director of the Palestine Museum of Natural History and Palestine Institute of Biodiversity and Sustainability at Bethlehem University, Occupied Palestine.

    Notes:
    World Court Findings on Israeli Apartheid a Wake-Up Call: International Court of Justice Makes Clear Call for Reparations

    The 7 October 2023 reminded us of the 1943 Warsaw Ghetto Uprising

    7 October 1944! Prisoner Revolt at Auschwitz-Birkenau

    The 2025 Nobel Peace Prize as before was not given to the any of the hundreds of deserving nominees but given instead to rightwing pro-genocide María Corina Machado. She dedicated her prize to Donald Trump and had previously aligned with the worst rightwing parties throughout Latin America as well as the genocidal regime of Netanyahu (and even asked them for help to topple her own elected government).

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Sara Awad: Why Gaza still looks to the freedom flotillas for true peace

    COMMENTARY: By Sara Awad

    On October 10, a ceasefire in Gaza was officially announced. International news media were quick to focus on what they now call “the peace plan”.

    US President Donald Trump, they announced, would go to Cairo to oversee the agreement signing and then to Israel to speak at the Knesset.

    The air strikes over Gaza, they reported, have stopped.

    KIA ORA GAZA
    KIA ORA GAZA

    The bombs have indeed stopped, but our suffering continues. Our reality has not changed. We are still under siege.

    Israel still has full control over our air, land and sea; it is still blocking sick and injured Palestinians from leaving and journalists, war crimes investigators and activists from going in.

    It is still controlling what food, what medicine, and essential supplies enter.

    The siege has lasted more than 18 years, shaping every moment of our lives. I have lived under this blockade since I was just three years old. What kind of peace is this, if it will continue to deny us the freedoms that everyone else has?

    ‘Deal’ overshadowed flotilla kidnap
    The news of the ceasefire deal and “the peace plan” overshadowed another, much more important development.

    Israel raided another freedom flotilla in international waters loaded with humanitarian aid for Gaza, kidnapping 145 people on board — a crime under international law. This came just days after Israel attacked the Global Sumud Flotilla, detaining more than 450 people who were trying to reach Gaza.

    These flotillas carried more than just humanitarian aid. They carried the hope of freedom for the Palestinian people. They carried a vision of true peace — one where Palestinians are no longer besieged, occupied and dispossessed.

    Many have criticised the freedom flotillas, arguing that they cannot make a difference since they are doomed to be intercepted.

    I myself did not pay much attention to the movement. I was deeply disappointed, having lost hope in seeing an end to this war.

    But that changed when Brazilian journalist Giovanna Vial interviewed me. Giovanna wrote an article about my story before setting sail with the Sumud Flotilla. She then made a post on social media saying: “for Sara, we sail”. Her words and her courage stirred something in me.

    Afterwards, I kept my eyes on the flotilla news, following every update with hope. I told my relatives about it, shared it with my friends, and reminded anyone who would listen how extraordinary this movement was.

    ‘Treated like animals’ – NZer activists detained by Israeli forces arrive home

    ‘She became the light’
    I kept wondering — how is it possible that, in a world so heavy with injustice, there are still people willing to abandon everything and put their lives in danger for people they had never met, for a place, most of them had never visited.

    I stayed in touch with Giovanna.

    “Until my last breath, I will never leave you alone,” she wrote to me while sailing towards Gaza. In the midst of so much darkness, she became the light.

    This was the first time in two years I felt like we were heard. We were seen.

    The Sumud Flotilla was by far the biggest in the movement’s history, but it was not about how many boats there were or how many people were on board or how much humanitarian aid they carried. It was about putting a spotlight on Gaza — about making sure the world could no longer look away.

    “All Eyes on Gaza,” read one post on the official Instagram account of the flotilla. It stayed with me, I read it on a very heavy night when the deafening sound of bombs in Gaza City was relentless. It was just before I had to flee my home due to the brutal Israeli onslaught.

    Israel stopped flotillas, aid
    Israel stopped the flotillas. They abused and deported the participants. They seized the aid. They may have prevented them from reaching our shores, but they failed to erase the message they carried.

    A message of peace. A message of freedom. A message we had been waiting to hear for two long, brutal years. The boats were captured, but the solidarity reached us.

    I carry so much gratitude in my heart for every single human being who took part in the freedom flotillas. I wish I could reach each of them personally — to tell them how much their courage, their presence, and their solidarity meant to me, and to all of us in Gaza.

    We will never forget them. We will carry their names, their faces, their voices in our hearts forever.

    To those who sailed toward us: thank you. You reminded us that we are not alone.

    And to the world: we are clinging to hope. We are still waiting — still needing — more flotillas to come. Come to us. Help us break free from this prison.

    The bombing has stopped now, and I can only hope that this time it does not resume in a few weeks. But we still do not have peace.

    Governments have failed us. But the people have not.

    One day, I know, the freedom flotilla boats will reach the shore of Gaza and we will be free.

    Sara Awad is an English literature student, writer, and storyteller based in Gaza. Passionate about capturing human experiences and social issues, Sara uses her words to shed light on stories often unheard. Her work explores themes of resilience, identity, and hope amid war. This article was first published by Al Jazeera.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Gerard Otto: Low turnout and rates pressure drive down Māori wards in NZ local elections

    COMMENTARY: By Gerard Otto of G News

    Of 42 referendums, 17 voted to retain Māori Wards in Aotearoa New Zealand’s local elections yesterday, which suggests something about where we are at as a nation — but you already knew that right?

    We all know that it’s only recently that we’ve been attempting to teach New Zealand history in our schools.

    As a consequence few people understand it — and even less understand Te Tiriti, and our obligations to it — and things like “active protection” not being based on race, but being based on a constitutional foundation which protects the interests of our indigenous.

    They are not just the same as some other minority.

    There’s a special status to this and we would like to think we can independently maintain it in a so called “liberal democracy” but, as you know, the guardrails are shaky and under neoliberal attack.

    We know Education Minister Erica Stanford is working with Atlas plants and one-eyed folk to dilute that effort, and we know history and social sciences are under attack under this government.

    They pull the funding for the humanities. That’s the fact.

    Not always equitable
    While the electoral system may be formally equal (one person, one vote), it does not always lead to equitable outcomes for groups with distinct cultural, historical, and political status — such as Māori.

    You try to talk fairness to your average rightwing, under-educated Act voter and they will tell you about fairness based on their own victimhood and “equality” not “equity”.

    While Māori are guaranteed representation through the Māori electoral roll at the national level — Māori seats in Parliament — Māori wards are the local government equivalent to me.

    Without Māori wards, Māori communities often lack meaningful say in local decisions affecting their lands, resources, and wellbeing, especially given the legacy of colonisation and ongoing disparities.

    Nobody at Hobson’s Pledge cares much about that because it does not effect them. Self interest is their bottom line.

    Without dedicated representation, Māori voices are often sidelined or overruled as we all have seen, many times and here we go again — as Code Brown is rife in Auckland and celebrations begin with no real mandate after such a low turnout.

    Code Brown will tell you otherwise that these results are all about the public voting for “doing a good job” and not “just a pretty face” but in reality it’s about disconnection and the cost of living crisis and double digit rates increases in 18 councils, and who bothers to vote?

    Many new mayors
    In 18 councils which gave ratepayers a double digit rate increase, 13 elected new mayors — just like that!

    Overall, out of 66 mayoral races, 31 councils elected a new mayor

    Māori wards ensure there are elected representatives directly accountable to Māori constituents, strengthening democracy, but we’ve seen the erosion of it under this government.

    We have all seen how they are pushing all things Māori backwards in a dedicated ideological push to clear the way for foreign investment — and that’s the battle.

    Act picked up 10 candidates — but much of that is about who votes, and rather than a swing to the right it’s about rates and low turnout.

    Ratepayers tend to get out and vote more than renters, according to Code Brown as we stare at voter turnout in 2025 which appears significantly down compared to 2022 in major cities.

    Auckland dropped from about 35.5 percent to about 23 percent. Wellington dropped from 45 percent to around 36 percent. Christchurch also dropped, though somewhat less sharply — and while that’s preliminary, it’s a statement.

    Nationwide turnout drops
    Overall, the nationwide turnout is looking lower — around 36 percent preliminary results for the 2025 local elections, and offical counts will be known on Friday, October 17.

    So in the end, we need to vote out the central government which gave us upward pressure on rates with unaffordable water infrastructure reform — while trying to blame councils —  attacked Māori on many fronts; and eroded progress towards a proper constitutional transformation .

    After a recent byelection and now this result — there’s a message to people who do not vote . . . and it’s about the outcomes. You either vote or you get screwed.

    I’m sure you already can see the need as some suggest voting should be compulsory like in Australia – and we all saw the gerrymandering by Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith about enrolment dates.

    Gerard Otto is a digital creator and independent commentator on politics and the media through his G News column and video reports. Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Ken Laban makes history as Pasifika candidates win across Aotearoa

    By Mary Afemata, of Local Democracy Reporting

    Fauono Ken Laban has been elected Mayor of Lower Hutt, making history as Aotearoa New Zealand’s first Pasifika mayor.

    Fauono secured 8704 votes, comfortably ahead of Brady Dyer (6974), Karen Morgan (5529), and Prabha Ravi (3608).

    His victory marks a historic milestone for Pacific representation in local government.

    LOCAL DEMOCRACY REPORTING

    A long-time broadcaster, sports commentator, and former councillor, Fauono has been a visible advocate for inclusion, youth opportunity, and safer communities across the Wellington region.

    He is also the only Pasifika mayoral candidate to have been successfully elected in this year’s local elections.

    Also in Hutt City, Mele Tonga-Grant won a council seat in the at-large race by a margin of just one vote, 7759 to 7758 over independent candidate Kath McGuinness, one of the tightest results in the country.

    The result remains provisional, with preliminary results due on Monday and the final count, including special votes, to be confirmed on Friday.

    In the Hutt Valley, Pacific representation also continues at the community level. In the Wainuiomata Community Board election, Lesa Bingley (Independent) received 2264 votes, followed by Vatau Sagaga with 2097 and Lahraine Sagaga (Independent) with 1914.

    Their results reflect a strong Pacific presence among local candidates contributing to grassroots leadership across the Wellington region.

    Poriua
    In neighbouring Porirua, Kylie Wihapi (Māori Ward) and Izzy Ford (Onepoto General Ward) have both been re-elected as city councillors, the incumbent councillors from the previous term. Their wins add to Porirua’s long tradition of strong Pasifika and Māori civic leadership. Both are community advocates known for their work in health, housing, and youth empowerment.

    Dunedin
    In Ōtepoti, Marie Laufiso (Building Kotahitaka) has been re-elected to the Dunedin City Council. First elected in 2016, Laufiso has chaired several council committees, including Community Services, Grants, and the Social Wellbeing Advisory Group. A strong advocate for social equity, sustainability and collective care, she continues to ensure Pacific and community perspectives remain part of local decision-making in Dunedin.

    Nelson
    In Nelson, Matty Anderson (Independent), who is of Niuean and Pākehā heritage, has been re-elected to the Central Ward alongside Lisa Austin, Pete Rainey and James Hodgson. A former Navy serviceman and community advocate, Anderson has worked across disability, youth, Pacific, migrant and homelessness support. He continues to promote inclusion, grassroots engagement and positive civic participation across the city.

    Waitaki
    In Ōamaru, Mata’aga Hana Melania Fanene-Taiti has been elected to the Waitaki District Council, representing the Ōamaru Ward. A New Zealand-born Samoan with family ties to Vaiee, Moata’a and Saleimoa in Samoa, she holds the matai title Mata’aga from her mother’s village of Vaiee. Fanene-Taiti’s election reflects a new generation of Pasifika voices stepping into civic leadership in smaller centres, with a focus on inclusion, wellbeing and community representation beyond the main cities.

    National significance
    The 2025 local elections have seen a rise in Pasifika representation across Aotearoa, with both returning leaders and new candidates elected to councils nationwide.

    Fauono’s election as New Zealand’s first Pacific mayor marks a significant milestone in local government, reflecting the growing participation of Pasifika communities in civic life.

    Saturday’s progress results indicate a tight race for several seats. Preliminary results will be released on Monday, with final results confirmed on Friday once the special votes have been counted.

    Mary Afemata is a reporter with Pacific Media Network. LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air. Asia Pacific Report is a member of LDR.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Think, click, share – making media literacy fun for Filipinos

    By Anthea Grape in Manila

    Media and Information Literacy (MIL) is vital to nation-building. It empowers Filipinos to make informed decisions by fostering critical thinking, strengthening media awareness and encouraging responsible digital use.

    This call was echoed last week when United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) and MediaQuest’s THINKaMuna campaign representatives came together for a small but meaningful gathering.

    The event underscored their shared commitment, with discussions centering on projects to push MIL forward in the Philippines.

    “Most young people today turn to social media as their first source of news,” said UNESCO Jakarta director Maki Katsuno-Hayashikawa.

    “With AI making it harder to tell what’s fake from what’s true, it’s even more important for all generations to think critically and share information responsibly.”

    They are making this happen in several ways.

    Explainer videos
    The UNESCO-THINKaMuna partnership has rolled out three of six digital episodes so far —  Cognitive Biases in July, Critical Thinking in August and Tech Addiction in September.

    Each is short, visually appealing and easy to understand, perfect for audiences with short attention spans.

    “Most MIL materials are very academic because they were made for schools,” shared MediaQuest corporate communications consultant Ramon Isberto.

    “We want ours to be different — playful and something people can casually talk about in their neighbourhoods.”

    This approach has brought the digital episodes closer to audiences, helping them reach nearly five million views.

    “In the Philippines, MediaQuest is our first media partner piloting media literacy in different ways and integrating it,” added UNESCO Jakarta program specialist Ana Lomtadze.

    “Our mission is really about reaching out in new, innovative ways and showing audiences how and why they should discern information and check their sources.”

    Taking MIL to classrooms
    While UNESCO provides guidance, Katsuno-Hayashikawa noted that implementation depends on local, on-the-ground initiatives.

    THINKaMuna recognises this, which is why they are distributing 1000 MIL journals to schools across the country.

    “A substantial percentage of grade school and high school students are not functional readers – they can read, but don’t fully understand what they’re reading,” explained Isberto.

    To address this, the journals are filled with visuals to ensure the message comes across. Workshops for senior journalists and the MILCON 2025 are also in the works to complete the offline component of the collaboration.

    “Society exists because we communicate and learn from each other,” Isberto said.

    “Today, media and information literacy is our way of continuing that conversation.”

    Anthea Grape is a Philippine Star reporter.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Genocide two years on: It is the West, not Gaza, that must be deradicalised

    This brutal war on Palestinians has not just unleashed Israel’s demons. It has unmasked our own regimes, as they crack down on humanitarian activism. Jonathan Cook reflects on Israel’s war on Gaza as the fragile ceasefire takes hold.

    ANALYSIS: By Jonathan Cook

    Anniversaries are often a cause for celebration. But who could have imagined back in October 2023 that we would now be marking the two-year anniversary of a genocide, documented in the minutest detail on our phones every day for 24 months? A genocide that could have been stopped at any point, had the US and its allies made the call.

    This is an anniversary so shameful that no one in power wants it remembered. Rather, they are actively encouraging us to forget the genocide is happening, even at its very height.

    Israel’s relentless crimes against the people of Gaza barely register in our news any longer.

    There is a horrifying lesson here, one that applies equally to Israel and its Western patrons. A genocide takes place — and is permitted to take place — only when a profound sickness has entered the collective soul of the perpetrators.

    For the past 80 years, Western societies have grappled with — or, at least, thought they did — the roots of that sickness.

    They wondered how a Holocaust could have taken place in their midst, in a Germany that was central to the modern, supposedly “civilised”, Western world.

    They imagined — or pretended to — that their wickedness had been extirpated, their guilt cleansed, through the sponsorship of a “Jewish state”. That state, violently established in 1948 in the immediate aftermath of the Second World War, served as a European protectorate on the ruins of the Palestinian people’s homeland.

    Desperate to control
    The Middle East, let us note, just happened to be a region that the West was desperate to keep controlling, despite growing Arab demands to end more than a century of brutal Western colonialism.

    Why? Because the region had recently emerged as the world’s oil spigot.

    Israel’s very purpose — enshrined in the ideology of Zionism, or Jewish supremacism in the Middle East — was to act as a proxy for Western colonialism. It was a client state planted there to keep order on the West’s behalf, while the West pretended to withdraw from the region.

    This big picture — the one Western politicians and media refuse to acknowledge — has been the context for events there ever since, including Israel’s current, genocidal endgame in Gaza.

    Two years in, what should have been obvious from the start is becoming ever-harder to ignore: the genocide had nothing to do with Hamas’s one-day attack on Israel on 7 October 2023. The genocide was never about “self-defence”. It was preordained by the ideological imperatives of Zionism.

    Hamas’s break-out from Gaza — a prison camp into which Palestinians had been herded decades earlier, after their expulsion from their homeland — provided the pretext. It all too readily unleashed demons long lurking in the soul of the Israeli body politic.

    And more importantly, it released similar demons — though better concealed — in the Western ruling class, as well as parts of their societies heavily conditioned to believe that the interests of the ruling class coincide with their own.

    Bubble of denial
    Two years into the genocide, and in spite of this week’s fragile ceasefire negotiated by US President Donald Trump and the three mediators, Egypt, Qatar and Türkiye, the West is still deep in its self-generated bubble of denial about what has been going on in Gaza – and its role in it.

    “History repeats itself,” as the saying goes, “first as tragedy, then as farce.”

    The same could be said of “peace processes”. Thirty years ago, the West force-fed Palestinians the Oslo Accords with the promise of eventual statehood.

    Oslo was the tragedy. It led to an ideological rupture in the Palestinian national movement; to a deepening geographic split between an imprisoned population in the occupied West Bank and an even more harshly imprisoned population in Gaza; to Israel’s increasing use of new technologies to confine, surveil and oppress both sets of Palestinians; and finally, to Hamas’s brief break-out from the Gaza prison camp, and Israel’s genocidal “response”.

    Now, President Trump’s 20-point “peace plan” offers the farce: unapologetic gangsterism masquerading as a “solution” to the Gaza genocide. Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair — a war criminal who, alongside his US counterpart George W Bush, destroyed Iraq more than two decades ago — will issue diktats to the people of Gaza on Israel’s behalf.

    Gaza, not just Hamas, faced an ultimatum: “Take the deal, or we will put you in concrete boots and sink you in the Mediterranean.”

    Surrender document
    Barely veiled by the threat was the likelihood that, even if Hamas felt compelled to sign up to this surrender document, Gaza’s people would end up in concrete boots all the same.

    Gaza’s population has been so desperate for a respite from the slaughter that it would accept almost anything. But it is pure delusion for the rest of us to believe a state that has spent two years carrying out a genocide can be trusted either to respect a ceasefire or to honour the terms of a peace plan, even one so heavily skewed in its favour.

    The farce of Trump’s peace plan — his “deal of the millennium” — was evident from the first of its 20 points: “Gaza will be a deradicalised terror-free zone that does not pose a threat to its neighbours.”

    The document’s authors no more wonder what might have “radicalised” Gaza than Western capitals did when Hamas, which is proscribed as a terrorist group in the UK and other countries, broke out of the prison enclave with great violence on 7 October 2023.

    Were the people of Gaza simply born radical, or did events turn them radical? Were they “radicalised” when Israel ethnically cleansed them from their original lands, in what is now the self-declared “Jewish state” of Israel, and dumped them in the tiny holding pen of Gaza?

    Were they “radicalised” by being surveilled and oppressed in a dystopian, open-air prison, decade upon decade? Was it the experience of living for 17 years under an Israeli land, sea and air blockade that denied them the right to travel or trade, and forced their children on to a diet that left them malnourished?

    Or maybe they were radicalised by the silence from Israel’s Western patrons, who supplied the weaponry and lapped up the rewards: the latest confinement technologies, field-tested by Israel on the people of Gaza.

    Gaza most extreme
    The truth ignored in the opening point of Trump’s “peace plan” is that it is entirely normal to be “radicalised” when you live in an extreme situation. And there are no places on the planet more extreme than Gaza.

    It is not Gaza that needs “deradicalising”. It is the West and its Israeli client state.

    The case for deradicalising Israel should hardly need stating. Poll after poll has shown Israelis are not just in favour of the annihilation their state is carrying out in Gaza; they believe their government needs to be even more aggressive, even more genocidal.

    This past May, as Palestinian babies were shrivelling into dry husks from Israel’s blockade on food and aid, 64 percent of Israelis said they believed “there are no innocents” in Gaza, a place where around half of the population of two million people are children.

    The figure would be even higher were it reporting only the views of Israeli Jews. The survey included the fifth of the Israeli population who are Palestinians — survivors of mass expulsions in 1948 during Israel’s Western-sponsored creation. This much-oppressed minority has been utterly ignored throughout these past two years.

    Another survey conducted earlier this year found that 82 percent of Israeli Jews favoured the expulsion of Palestinians from Gaza. More than half, 56 percent, also supported the forced expulsion of Palestinian citizens of Israel — even though that minority has kept its head bowed throughout the genocide, for fear of reaping a whirlwind should it speak up.

    In addition, 47 percent of Israeli Jews approved of killing all the inhabitants of Gaza, even its children.

    Netanyahu’s crimes
    The crimes overseen by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is so often held up by outsiders as some kind of aberration, are entirely representative of wider public sentiment in Israel.

    The genocidal fervour in Israeli society is an open secret. Soldiers flood social media platforms with videos celebrating their war crimes. Teenage Israelis make funny videos on TikTok endorsing the starvation of babies in Gaza. Israeli state TV broadcasts a child choir evangelising for Gaza’s annihilation.

    Such views are not simply a response to the horrors that unfolded inside Israel on 7 October 2023. As polls have consistently shown, deep-seated racism towards Palestinians is decades old.

    It is not former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant who started the trend of calling Palestinians “human animals”. Politicians and religious leaders have been depicting them as “cockroaches”, “dogs”, “snakes” and “donkeys” since Israel’s creation. It is this long process of dehumanisation that made the genocide possible.

    In response to the outpouring of support in Israel for the extermination in Gaza, Orly Noy, a veteran Israeli journalist and activist, reached a painful conclusion last month on the +972 website: “What we are witnessing is the final stage in the nazification of Israeli society.”

    And she noted that this problem derives from an ideology with a reach far beyond Israel itself: “The Gaza holocaust was made possible by the embrace of the ethno-supremacist logic inherent to Zionism. Therefore it must be said clearly: Zionism, in all its forms, cannot be cleansed of the stain of this crime. It must be brought to an end.”

    As the genocide has unfolded week after week, month after month — ever-more divorced from any link to 7 October 2023 — and Western leaders have carried on justifying their inaction, a much deeper realisation is dawning.

    Demon in the West
    This is not just about a demon unleashed among Israelis. It is about a demon in the soul of the West. It is us — the power bloc that established Israel, arms Israel, funds Israel, indulges Israel, excuses Israel — that really needs deradicalising.

    Germany underwent a process of “denazification” following the end of the Second World War — a process, it is now clear from the German state’s feverish repression of any public opposition to the genocide in Gaza, that was never completed.

    A far deeper campaign of deradicalisation than the one Nazi Germany was subjected to, is now required in the West — one where normalising the murder of tens of thousands of children, live-streamed to our phones, can never be allowed to happen again.

    A deradicalisation that would make it impossible to conceive of our own citizens travelling to Israel to help take part in the Gaza genocide, and then be welcomed back to their home countries with open arms.

    A deradicalisation that would mean our governments could not contemplate silently abandoning their own citizens — citizens who joined an aid flotilla to try to break Israel’s illegal starvation-siege of Gaza — to the goons of Israel’s fascist police minister.

    A deradicalisation that would make it inconceivable for British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, or other Western leaders, to host Israel’s President, Isaac Herzog, who at the outset of the slaughter in Gaza offered the central rationale for the genocide, arguing that no one there — not even its one million children — were innocent.

    A deradicalisation that would make it self-evident to Western governments that they must uphold the World Court’s ruling last year, not ignore it: that Israel must be forced to immediately end its decades-long illegal occupation of the Palestinian territories, and that they must carry out the arrest of Netanyahu on suspicion of crimes against humanity, as specified by the International Criminal Court.

    A deradicalisation that would make it preposterous for Shabana Mahmood, Britain’s Home Secretary, to call demonstrations against a two-year genocide “fundamentally un-British” — or to propose ending the long-held right to protest, but only when the injustice is so glaring, the crime so unconscionable, that it leads people to repeatedly protest.

    Eroding right to protest
    Mahmood justifies this near-death-knell erosion of the right to protest on the grounds that regular protests have a “cumulative impact”. She is right. They do: by exposing as a sham our government’s claim to stand for human rights, and to represent anything more than naked, might-is-right politics.

    A deradicalisation is long overdue — and not just to halt the West’s crimes against the people of Gaza and the wider Middle East region.

    Already, as our leaders normalise their crimes abroad, they are normalising related crimes at home. The first signs are in the designation of opposition to genocide as “hate”, and of practical efforts to stop the genocide as “terrorism”.

    The intensifying campaign of demonisation will grow, as will the crackdown on fundamental and long-cherished rights.

    Israel has declared war on the Palestinian people. And our leaders are slowly declaring war on us, whether it be those protesting the Gaza genocide, or those opposed to a consumption-driven West’s genocide of the planet.

    We are being isolated, smeared and threatened. Now is the time to stand together before it is too late. Now is the time to find your voice.

    Jonathan Cook is a writer, journalist and self-appointed media critic and author of many books about Palestine. Winner of the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. Republished from the author’s blog with permission. This article was first published by the Middle East Eye and is republished with the author’s permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • ‘Treated like animals’ – NZer activists detained by Israeli forces arrive home

    RNZ News

    Three New Zealanders, who were detained in Israel, after taking part in an international flotilla heading to Gaza, claim they were treated like animals.

    Rana Hamida, Youssef Sammour and Samuel Leason arrived at Auckland International Airport this afternoon, and were greeted by a crowd of supporters and loved ones.

    Among the supporters were Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson and MP Ricardo Menéndez March.

    Members of the Global Sumud Flotilla, who were detained and deported from Israel last week, reported allegations of physical and psychological abuse by Israeli forces.


    Video: RNZ News

    Israel’s foreign ministry said the claims were “complete lies”, and the detainees rights were upheld, but Hamida and Sammour claimed conditions were harsh.

    “We were there for almost a week, more or less, and we were treated like crap, to be honest,” Sammour said. “We were treated like animals.”

    Hamida said: “It was a violation of what humanitarian law is.”

    Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson and Green MP Ricardo Menéndez March at Auckland Airport.
    Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson and Green MP Ricardo Menéndez March at Auckland Airport today. Image: RNZ/Marika Khabazi

    Guards refused medicine
    Sammour said one of their fellow prisoners was diabetic, but the guards refused to give him his insulin, but Hamida admitted the hardship they faced was just a fraction of that experienced by the occupants of Gaza.

    People gathered at Auckland Airport to welcome home the New Zealanders who were on the flotilla to Gaza.
    People gathered at Auckland Airport to welcome home the New Zealanders who were on the flotilla to Gaza. Image: RNZ/Marika Khabazi

    The flotilla, a group of dozens of boats carrying 500 people — including Swedish climate campaigner Greta Thunberg — had been trying to break Israel’s blockade.

    Leason’s father, Adi Leason, earlier told RNZ’s Midday Report he was “immensely proud” of his 18-year-old son.

    Samuel Leason hugging his father Adi Leason.
    Samuel Leason hugging his father Adi Leason. Image: Marika Khabazi/RNZ

    “We’ve been going to mass every Sunday for 18 years with Samuel, and he must have been listening and taking something of that formation on board. It’s lovely to see a young man with a deep conscience caring so deeply about people who he will never meet and to put himself in harm’s way for them.”

    Samuel Leason felt a mix of relief and anger upon returning to New Zealand. He said it was amazing to see his family again, but he felt frustrated that the New Zealand government did not do more to intervene.

    The trio said they had not been discouraged and planned to mobilise more than ever.

    More than 67,000 Palestinians — mostly women and children — have been killed since Israel launched its retaliation for Hamas’ 2023 attack, which killed about 1200 Israelis.

    The first stage of a Gaza ceasefire came into force today.

    Rana Hamida greeting loved ones and supporters.
    Rana Hamida greeting loved ones and supporters. Image: Marika Khabazi/RNZ
    Samuel Leason with his family.
    Samuel Leason with his family. Image: Marika Khabazi/RNZ
    Youssef Sammour, is one of the three New Zealanders who returned on Friday.
    Youssef Sammour, one of the three New Zealanders who returned to Auckland today. Image: Marika Khabazi/RNZ

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Amnesty International wants NZ visa for climate-hit Pacific islanders

    By Caleb Fotheringham, RNZ Pacific journalist

    Amnesty International is asking the New Zealand government to create a new humanitarian visa for Pacific people impacted by climate change.

    Kiribati community leader Charles Kiata said life on Kiribati was becoming extremely hard as sea levels rose and the country was hit by more severe storms, higher temperatures and drought.

    “Every part of life, food, shelter, health, is being affected and what hurts the most is that our people feel trapped. They love their home, but their home is slowly disappearing,” Kiata said.

    Crops are dying and fresh drinking water is becoming increasingly scarce for the island nation.

    Kiata said in New Zealand, overstayers were anxious they would be sent back home.

    “Deporting them back to flooded lands or places with no clean water like Kiribati is not only cruel but it also goes against our shared Pacific values.”

    Amnesty International is also asking the government to stop deporting overstayers from Kiribati and Tuvalu, who would be returning to harsh conditions.

    Duty of care
    The organisation’s executive director, Jacqui Dillon said she wanted New Zealand to acknowledge its duty of care to Pacific communities.

    “We are asking the New Zealand government to create a new humanitarian visa, specifically for those impacted by climate change and disasters. Enabling people to migrate on their terms with dignity.”

    She said current Pacific visas New Zealand offered, such as the Recognised Seasonal Employers (RSE) and the Pacific Access Category (PAC), were insufficient.

    “Those pathways are in effect nothing short of a discriminatory lottery, so they don’t offer dignity, nor do they offer self-agency.”

    Dillon said current visa schemes were also discriminatory because people could only migrate if they had an acceptable standard of health.

    The organisation interviewed Alieta — not her real name — who has a visual impairment. She decided to remove her name from the family’s PAC application to enable her husband and six-year-old daughter to migrate to New Zealand in 2016.

    It has meant Alieta has only seen her daughter once in the past 11 years.

    “I would urge all of us to think about that and say, if our feet were in those shoes, would we think that that was right? I don’t think we would,” Dillon said.

    Tuvalu comparison
    Tuvaluan community leader Fala Haulangi, based in Aotearoa, wants the country to adopt something like the Falepili Union Treaty which the leaders of Tuvalu and Australia signed in 2023.

    It creates a pathway for up to 280 Tuvalu citizens to go to Australia each year to work, live, and study.

    This year over 80 percent of the population applied to move under the treaty.

    Haulangi said the PAC had too many restrictions.

    “PAC (Pacific Access Category Visa) still comes with conditions that are very, very strict on my people, so if [New Zealand has] the same terms and conditions that Australia has for the Falepili Treaty, to me that is really good.”

    In the past, Pacific governments have been worried about the Recognised Seasonal Employer Scheme causing a brain drain.

    Samoa paused scheme
    In 2023, Samoa paused the scheme, partially because of the loss of skilled labour, including police officers leaving to go fruit picking.

    Haulangi said it’s not up to her to tell people to stay if a new and more open visa is available to Pacific people.

    “Who am I to tell my people back home ‘don’t come, stay there’ because we need people back home.”

    Dillon said some people will stay.

    “All we’re simply saying is give people the opportunity and the dignity to have self-agency and be able to choose.”

    Charles Kiata from Kiribati said a visa established now would mean there would be a slow migration of people from the Pacific and not people being forced to leave as climate refugees.

    He said people from Kiribati had strengths they could be proud of and could partner with New Zealand.

    “It’s a win-win for both of us; our people come to New Zealand to contribute economically and to society.”

    RNZ Pacific has approached New Zealand’s Minister of Immigration Erica Stanford for comment.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Misleading ‘justification’ column on Peters and Palestine panned

    COMMENTARY: By Gerard Otto of G News

    This morning New Zealand Herald columnist and political commentator Matthew Hooton was paid to write an article justifying Foreign Minister Winston Peters’ position on denying Palestinian Statehood on the eve of the first phase of Donald Trump’s 20 point plan while in tandem Peters was interviewed by Ryan Bridge as the justifications continued and propaganda glazed the land.

    Hooton wrongly suggested an out of date way of viewing international law justified Peters as he emphasised the horror endured by Israel and did not recount the genocide with at least 67,000 Palestinians killed, mostly women and children, unfolding as the mind conditioning of New Zealanders continued along the same path we’ve been sleeping under.

    Hooton neglected to mention the failure of NZ First to include official advice in their cabinet paper, the secrecy and delay over the decision, and the words of the Israeli Finance Minister just this morning.

    Bezalel Smotrich said the liberation movement Hamas must be destroyed after the return of Israeli hostages and recently he said this was a real estate bonanza opportunity for Israel.

    He also said in August 2025 that plans to build more than 3000 homes in a controversial settlement project in the occupied West Bank will “bury the idea of a Palestinian state”.

    The so-called E1 project between Jerusalem and the Maale Adumim settlement has been frozen for decades amid fierce opposition internationally. Building there would effectively cut off the West Bank from occupied East Jerusalem, the planned capital for the state of Palestine.

    Smotrich is not welcome in New Zealand — but travel bans is all Christopher Luxon’s coalition government will do as they bow low before the US and Israel — calling that “Sucking up” . . .  “Independence”.

    We suck up independently and clap ourselves – or at least Act do.

    Japan threatens sanctions
    As reported yesterday, Japan has threatened to sanction Israel if they mess with the possibility of Palestinian Statehood, but back in New Zealand we are busy festering over whether it is okay to protest outside a house — be it — an apartment block which houses a political party office and residential apartments in the same building or not.

    Sticking points include a hefty 3 month prison sentence and $2000 fine but some say that this is all a distraction from our obligations to act against an unfolding genocide and from the dire state of the economy for those who are not wealthy and sorted.

    Khalil al-Hayya, the head of Hamas’s negotiating team, has said the group has received guarantees from the US and mediators that an agreement on a first phase of a ceasefire agreement means the war in Gaza “has ended completely”.

    We will see how Israel plays this — but levels of scepticism are sky high and many have no faith in Netanyahu because he had been offered the return of hostages a year ago and chose to ignore it.

    Perhaps Israel will “behave while International Eyes” are on it but time will tell . . . whether spots have changed on the leopard.

    In the meantime vote in your local elections — you only have one day to go — and when it comes to the next General Election – you know what to do.

    This article is extracted from Gerard Otto’s Friday Morning Coffee column with permission. Matthew Hooton visited Israel and Palestine in 2017 as a guest of the Australia/Israel and Jewish Affairs Council. The Australian news site Crikey publishes a list of politicians and journalists who have travelled to Israel on junkets.

    In the first phase of the Gaza ceasefire plan, Israel is required to withdraw to the agreed "yellow line"
    In the first phase of the Gaza ceasefire plan, Israel is required to withdraw to the agreed “yellow line” within 24 hours, after which a 72-hour period will begin for the handover of Israeli 48 captives (20 believed to be still alive) in exchange for 2000 Palestinian prisoners. Image: CC Al Jazeera

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Netanyahu claims ceasefire ‘success’ but Israeli public sees him as obstacle

    By Hamdah Salhut of Al Jazeera

    Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has released a flurry of statements in the last couple of hours, claiming that the announced agreement over the first phase of the ceasefire in the war on Gaza is because of Israel’s military pressure.

    It’s because of Israel’s continuous military activity. It’s because of the objectives that Netanyahu had outlined at the beginning of the war — that’s why they reached this point.

    But the reality on the ground shows a much different story.

    Most of the captives who were released from the Gaza Strip were done through diplomatic means, through these ceasefire deals or through direct negotiations with the Americans.

    It wasn’t really due to these advanced military operations that the army and the government alike were touting.

    Netanyahu is not just under pressure internationally but domestically from the family members of those captives who have been held for two years and a day, and who have been advocating for their release every week – protesting, taking to the streets, saying they have no faith in their own leadership.

    If you look on social media and if you see the statements from their family members, if you see anything relating to the captives and their families from the last week or so, it has all been thanks to President Trump. It’s all thanks to the US envoy, Steve Witkoff.

    There has been no praise or thanks to the prime minister because this is a population that believes Netanyahu got in the way of many deals — such as back in July 2024, when mediators said they were at the finish line.

    But at the 11th hour, Netanyahu decided to insert new conditions and essentially reneged on the entire ceasefire agreement.

    Jubilation in Gaza over the ceasefire deal is announced
    Jubilation in Gaza over the ceasefire deal is announced. Image: AJ screenshot APR

    Salhut reported later:

    “In a few hours time, the Israeli government is going to convene and they are going to vote on this ceasefire agreement.

    “After they vote, the Israeli military will then withdraw to one of those lines that were presented in the map that President Trump posted on his social media.

    “Then, 72 hours after that, the captives are going to be released by Hamas. We are hearing from the Americans that it could take place on Monday.

    “President Trump has been talking about Israel’s international isolation, about how they’ve become a pariah state. But they are not just isolated on a political level; it is also economic. It is also through cultural forums. It’s also a lot of different spaces in the world.”

    Al Jazeera is reporting from Amman, Jordan, because it has been banned from Israel and the occupied West Bank.

     

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • PSNA cautiously welcomes Gaza ceasefire and hostage release deal

    Asia Pacific Report

    New Zealand advocacy and protest group Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) has “cautiously welcomed” the Gaza ceasefire and proposed exchange of hostages between Israel and the liberation movement Hamas.

    At least 7000 Palestinians are being held in detention without trial by Israel while about 20 Israeli soldiers are held by Hamas.

    PSNA co-chair Maher Nazzal said the deal was a reprieve from Israel’s genocidal attacks on Palestinians in Gaza.

    “It’s been two years of mass bombing and starvation. It’s the worst atrocity of the 21st century,” he said in a statement.

    “The real tragedy is that the main elements of this ceasefire deal were already agreed to nine months ago in January. Israel was forced to let Palestinians return to Gaza City, and lower the intensity of its attacks.

    “Within a few weeks, the Israelis scuttled the agreement, shut off all food and intensified their attacks and are now ethnically re-cleansing Gaza City.

    “Expulsion is still the Israeli government’s aim. Netanyahu must be disappointed that Trump is no longer advocating for removal of Palestinians from Gaza, but Netanyahu usually gets his way with Trump in the end.”

    Called on support
    Nazal said PSNA especially noted that the Hamas acceptance statement called on countries supporting the deal — New Zealand included — to make sure Israel abided by the few specific conditions imposed on the Zionist state in the agreement.

    “Israel has broken every peace deal it has ever signed on Palestine, right from occupying more than half of what was allocated by the United Nations as a Palestinian state in 1948,” Nazzal said.

    “In the 1993 Oslo peace deal, which the US also brokered, there was meant to be a Palestinian state within five years. Israel made sure this never happened.

    “This time, there is no mention of the Occupied West Bank. Nothing about return of refugees. There is no commitment in the Trump deal for a Palestinian state, for Winston Peters to eventually recognise.

    “There’s just a vague pathway with no timelines and it’s all conditional on Israeli approval,” Nazzal said.

    “So we have a message for Winston Peters, who is demanding PSNA and other protesters applaud the Trump deal as ‘case solved’.

    “Ceasefire or not, our campaign to isolate the apartheid state of Israel will continue to grow until all Palestinians are liberated.”

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Two years after October 7: Israel’s war, Gaza’s ashes, and the collapse of moral authority

    ANALYSIS: By Elijah J Magnier

    Two years ago, Israel suffered what was perhaps the most jarring day in its modern history. The events of October 7, 2023, weren’t just a military failure or an intelligence lapse — they were a national humiliation. Police stations were stormed and overrun. Military posts were taken. Soldiers and officers, including from elite units, were killed or captured. The Gaza Division of the Israeli army, a symbol of Israel’s long-standing dominance over the Strip, fell into chaos.

    Israel invoked the Hannibal Doctrine — a policy that allows military forces to prevent the capture of soldiers even at the cost of their lives, by opening fire on both Hamas and the kidnapped Israelis. That day, it wasn’t theory — it was execution.

    In the fog of panic, Israeli fire turned on its own, and the thin line between protecting society and sacrificing civilians for strategic ends evaporated.

    But October 7 was just the opening act. What followed was a war unlike anything Israel had fought in fifty years — brutal, relentless, and devastating in scale and ambition. Gaza was not merely targeted; it was systematically dismantled. What began as retaliation became something else entirely: an erasure.

    The illusion of military supremacy
    Two years into the war, one fact is undeniable: Israel, backed by some of the most powerful military alliances in the world, has failed to conquer a territory smaller than half of New York City. 365 square kilometers — that’s all Gaza is. Yet despite overwhelming force, technological advantage, and political cover, the Israeli army has been unable to fully occupy it.

    This failure is especially glaring given the scale of destruction. Over 200,000 tons of explosives have been dropped on Gaza — the equivalent of 20 nuclear bombs without radiation. That’s not metaphor. That’s the measure of how far Israel was willing to go and is not willing to stop yet: flattening entire towns, turning hospitals, schools, mosques, residential towers, universities, even cemeteries into rubble.

    Gaza has endured more concentrated bombing than any territory since the Second World War.

    Indeed, what Gaza has endured over the past two years dwarfs even some of the most infamous wartime bombardments of the twentieth century. In February 1945, Allied forces dropped roughly 3,900 tons of explosives on Dresden in a three-day firestorm that killed an estimated 25,000 to 35,000 people and obliterated much of the city. Where Dresden became a symbol of wartime excess, Gaza is witnessing destruction on a scale so vast it makes Dresden look like a prelude.

    And unlike Dresden, Gaza’s devastation has been broadcast live, in real time, to a world that cannot claim it did not know.

    But Israel was never alone and had every advantage and complicity: real-time intelligence from the United States and Britain, precision munitions from Germany, satellite targeting, drone supremacy, complete air dominance. And still, two years on, it cannot claim control over this tiny strip of land.

    The problem was never firepower. It was urban warfare — a terrain where bombs are blunt tools and conquest requires something far more difficult: boots on the ground, close-quarters control, and the ability to hold territory without hemorrhaging soldiers or sparking endless insurgency.

    The Israeli army, trained for dominance but not for urban occupation, found itself caught in a repetitive, grinding cycle: enter, level, retreat, repeat.

    Neighborhoods were captured and declared “secured,” only to be abandoned and recontested days later. Troops rotated in and out of ruined zones, unable to maintain sustained presence. For every area leveled, resistance either moved underground or regrouped elsewhere. The war turned into a grim spectacle of destruction without achievement.

    This revealed a contradiction at the heart of Israel’s military doctrine: it can destroy almost anything, but it cannot hold what it destroys. Air supremacy means nothing when the battlefield is a bombed-out maze. Gaza’s density, devastation, and defiance turned every advantage into a liability.

    So while the Strip lies in ruins, it is not conquered. And that truth — buried under declarations of “strategic success” — is the defeat Israel cannot admit.

    The real objective: Not security—territory
    Israel’s war was not, as officially claimed, about eliminating Hamas or rescuing hostages. That narrative collapsed quickly under the weight of Israel’s own actions. From the beginning, hostage negotiations were treated as peripheral. Every time progress was made on potential ceasefires, it was Netanyahu’s office that pulled the plug — because every hostage released made the war harder to justify. Every ceasefire threatened to slow the campaign just enough for the world to ask uncomfortable questions.

    This was never about hostages. It was about Gaza. More specifically: it was about removing Gaza as an obstacle to territorial ambition.

    Netanyahu, cornered by political instability, corruption trials, and a fragile coalition held together by the far-right, saw in October 7 a chance to do what had always been unspoken: clear Gaza. Not of Hamas, but of Palestinians. Permanently. Not by announcement, but by attrition — bombing, starvation, siege, trauma.

    Gaza’s civilian population wasn’t collateral damage. It was the target.

    Destroying Gaza wasn’t a means to defeat an enemy. It was a means to reshape a demographic reality. This wasn’t defense. It was a conquest dressed up as security.

    When the mask falls
    In war, the first casualty is truth. But in this war, truth didn’t die quietly — it was dragged into the open, exposed by the very actors trying to hide it. Israeli soldiers live streamed brutality. Government officials made genocidal statements on public platforms. Civilian infrastructure was not accidentally struck — it was deliberately annihilated.

    At first, the world made excuses. Israel had been attacked and was “entitled to defend itself”. But over time, the scale, duration, and clarity of its actions stripped away any remaining ambiguity. When every hospital (38 in total) becomes a target, when entire neighborhoods are turned to rubble, when starvation is used as a weapon — it becomes impossible to speak of “defence” without insulting reason.

    And so the global tide turned. Governments hesitated, but people didn’t. From Berlin to Boston, from Sydney to Cape Town, millions marched — not for Hamas, but for the principle that no state, however victimised, has the right to massacre an entire population in response.

    Israel didn’t just lose global support. It lost the moral framing that had shielded, or it had hid behind, it for decades.

    It had positioned itself as a democracy surrounded by enemies. But democracies don’t bomb refugee camps, don’t livestream the deaths of children, don’t cut off water to two million people and don’t hold hostages’ lives hostage to political calculus.

    Israel’s loss over the last two years hasn’t been military — it’s been existential. The myth of invincibility is broken. The image of moral exceptionalism, cultivated so carefully for decades, has shattered. Netanyahu, once a master manipulator of global opinion, now finds himself isolated, distrusted, even among allies.

    What October 7 exposed was the weakness of Israel in the one arena it believed itself untouchable: control. It wasn’t just a border breach. It was a rupture of the entire apparatus that had kept Gaza contained for years. Fences, drones, AI, intelligence, surveillance — all of it failed.

    And when the mask of control slipped, the response wasn’t strategic — it was criminally vengeful. It was rage mixed with blood thirst. But rage isn’t a strategy, rage destroys. And over two years, rage has destroyed Gaza — and with it, Israel’s future.

    Netanyahu’s calculus: Eternal war
    The war served Netanyahu well—at least at first. It silenced his critics. It unified a fractured public. It postponed trials. It gave him relevance again. But the deeper logic was more disturbing: war is the only environment where his political survival is guaranteed.

    Peace, by contrast, is a threat. Peace requires compromise. Peace requires vision. Netanyahu offers neither.

    Each time a ceasefire neared, his government collapsed it. Each time hostages were close to freedom, the process was torpedoed. To free the hostages would be to end the war. To end the war would be to lose power. This is the twisted loop that has defined Israel’s leadership for two years. Hostages weren’t bargaining chips — they were leverage. They were the excuse for ongoing brutality.

    And the world saw it. Every broken deal, every last-minute sabotage, made it harder to pretend this was about security. By the end of the second year, no serious government believed Netanyahu was acting in good faith. Even allies began to distance themselves, not out of principle — but out of shame. What’s remarkable isn’t that Israel committed war crimes — it’s that it did so while assuming the world would look away.

    For decades, that assumption held. But this time was different.

    Technology turned every phone into a witness. Every child pulled from rubble was broadcast in real time. Every lie was challenged within seconds. The world saw the crimes as they happened — and watched as Israel confirmed them with its own footage.

    No state can withstand that level of exposure and retain legitimacy.

    Even in the US, the last bastion of unconditional support, the consensus cracked. Young people rejected the old narratives. Jewish voices joined Palestinian ones. The streets filled with dissent, not just from the fringe but from the center. Israel’s status as a protected partner is no longer guaranteed.

    In Europe, traditional guilt-driven loyalty gave way to disgust. Governments clung to old alliances, but the public broke ranks. Supporting Israel was no longer an expression of Western solidarity — it became a political liability.

    Ceasefire, but not peace
    Now, with pressure mounting, ceasefire talks are back — this time in Egypt, under the bizarre influence of Donald Trump, whose re-entry into international politics has added a surreal dimension to an already surreal conflict. But few believe the talks will produce anything lasting. Netanyahu has built his power on conflict. He has no incentive to end it.

    Even if a deal is signed, it’s unlikely to hold. The machinery of occupation, the logic of dispossession, the appetite for dominance — it remains intact. This war may pause. But the ideology that fueled it still governs Israel.

    And that’s the real crisis: not the bombs, not the destruction, not even the deaths — but the belief that this can go on forever.

    Israel may declare victory over Hamas. It may claim strategic success in degrading enemy capabilities. But that’s not what the world sees.

    What the world sees is a nation that responded to horror with horror. A nation that lost its soul in pursuit of a war it could never truly win. A nation that allowed vengeance to become policy, and policy to become annihilation.

    Two years later, Gaza lies in ruins. But so does Israel’s credibility. So does the illusion of a “moral army.” So does the narrative of self-defence that once made its case persuasive to the world.

    Hamas lit the match. But Israel poured the fuel, struck the steel, and claimed the fire was purification.

    In the end, what remains isn’t security. It’s ash.

    Elijah J Magnier is a veteran war zone correspondent and political analyst with over 35 years of experience covering the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). He specialises in real-time reporting of politics, strategic and military planning, terrorism and counter-terrorism; his strong analytical skills complement his reporting. His in-depth experience, extensive contacts and thorough political knowledge of complex political situations in Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Sudan and Syria provide his writings with insights balancing the routine misreporting and propaganda in the Western press. He also comments on Al Jazeera.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • The Pukpuk Treaty and the future of Papua New Guinea-Australia relations

    ANALYSIS: By Scott Waide, RNZ Pacific PNG correspondent

    The signing of the Papua New Guinea-Australia Mutual Defence Treaty — officially known as the Pukpuk Treaty — marks a defining moment in the modern Pacific order.

    Framed as a “historic milestone”, the pact re-casts security cooperation between Port Moresby and Canberra while stirring deeper debates about sovereignty, dependency, and the shifting balance of power in the region.

    At a joint press conference in Canberra, PNG Prime Minister James Marape called the treaty “a product of geography, not geopolitics”, emphasising the shared neighbourhood and history binding both nations.

    “This Treaty was not conceived out of geopolitics or any other reason, but out of geography, history, and the enduring reality of our shared neighbourhood,” Marape said.

    Described as “two houses with one fence,” the Pukpuk Treaty cements Australia as PNG’s “security partner of choice.” It encompasses training, intelligence, disaster relief, and maritime cooperation while pledging full respect for sovereignty.

    “Papua New Guinea made a strategic and conscious choice – Australia is our security partner of choice. This choice was made not out of pressure or convenience, but from the heart and soul of our coexistence as neighbours,” Marape said.

    For Canberra, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese cast the accord as an extension of “family ties” – a reaffirmation that Australia “will stand shoulder-to-shoulder with PNG to ensure a peaceful and secure Pacific family.”

    Intensifying competition
    It comes amid intensifying competition for influence across the Pacific, where security and sport now intersect in Canberra’s broader regional strategy.

    The Treaty promises to bolster the Papua New Guinea Defence Force (PNGDF) through joint training, infrastructure upgrades, and enhanced maritime surveillance. Marape conceded that the country’s forces have long struggled with under-resourcing.

    “The reality is that our Defence Force needs enhanced capacity to defend our sovereign territorial integrity. This Treaty will help us build that capacity – through shared resources, intelligence, technology, and training,” he said.

    Yet, retired Major-General Jerry Singirok, former PNGDF commander, has urged caution.

    “Signing a Defence Pact with Australia for the purposes of strengthening our military capacity and capabilities is most welcomed, but an Act of Parliament must give legal effect to whatever military activities a foreign country intends,” Singirok said in a statement.

    He warned that Sections 202 and 206 of PNG’s Constitution already define the Defence Force’s role and foreign cooperation limits, stressing that any new arrangement must pass parliamentary scrutiny to avoid infringing sovereignty.

    The sovereignty debate
    Singirok’s warning reflects a broader unease in Port Moresby — that the Pukpuk Treaty could re-entrench post-colonial dependency. He described the PNGDF as “retarded and stagnated”, spending just 0.38 percent of GDP on defence, with limited capacity to patrol its vast land and maritime borders.

    “In essence, PNG is in the process of offloading its sovereign responsibilities to protect its national interest and sovereign protection to Australia to fill the gaps and carry,” he wrote.

    “This move, while from face value appeals, has serious consequences from dependency to strategic synergy and blatant disregard to sovereignty at the expense of Australia.”

    Former leaders, including Sir Warren Dutton, have been even more blunt: “If our Defence Force is trained, funded, and deployed under Australian priorities, then whose sovereignty are we defending? Ours — or theirs?”

    Cooperation between the two forces have increased dramatically over the last few years.

    Canberra’s broader strategy: Defence to rugby league
    The Pukpuk Treaty coincides with Australia’s “Pacific Step-up,” a network of economic, security, and cultural initiatives aimed at deepening ties with its neighbours. Central to this is sport diplomacy — most notably the proposed NRL Pacific team, which Albanese and Marape both support.

    Canberra views the NRL deal not simply as a sporting venture but as “soft power in action” — embedding Australian culture and visibility across the Pacific through a sport already seen as a regional passion.

    Marape called it “another platform of shared identity” between PNG and Australia, aligning with the spirit of the Pukpuk Treaty: partnership through shared interests.

    However, critics argue the twin announcements — a defence pact and an NRL team — reveal a coordinated Australian effort to strengthen influence at multiple levels: security, economy, and society.

    The US factor and overall strategy
    The Pukpuk Treaty follows last year’s Defence Cooperation Agreement (DCA) signed between Papua New Guinea and the United States, which grants US forces access to key PNG military facilities, including Lombrum Naval Base on Manus Island.

    That deal drew domestic protests over transparency and the perception of external control.

    The Marape government insisted the arrangement respected PNG’s sovereignty, but combined with the new Australian treaty, it positions the country at the centre of a US-led security network stretching from Hawai’i to Canberra.

    Analysts say the two pacts complement each other — with the US providing strategic hardware and global deterrence, and Australia delivering regional training and operational partnership.

    Together, they represent a deepening of what one defence analyst called “the Pacific’s most consequential alignment since independence”.

    PNG’s deepening security ties with the United States also appear to have shaped its diplomatic posture in the Middle East.

    As part of its broader alignment with Washington, PNG in September 2023 opened an embassy in Jerusalem — becoming one of only a handful of states to do so, and signalling strong support for Israel.

    In recent UN votes on Gaza, PNG has repeatedly voted against ceasefire resolutions, siding with Israel and the US. Some analysts link this to evangelical Christian influence in PNG’s politics and to the strategic expectation of favour with major powers.

    China’s measured response
    Beijing has responded cautiously. China’s Embassy in Port Moresby reiterated that it “respects the independent choices of Pacific nations” but warned that “regional security frameworks should not become exclusive blocs.”

    China has been one of PNG’s longest and most consistent diplomatic partners since formal relations began in 1976.

    China’s role in Papua New Guinea is not limited to diplomatic signalling — it remains a major provider of loans, grants and infrastructure projects across the country, even as the strategic winds shift. Chinese state-owned enterprises and development funds have backed highways, power plants, courts, telecoms and port facilities in PNG.

    In recent years, PNG has signed onto China’s Belt and Road Initiative, and observers count at least 40 Chinese SOEs currently operating in Papua New Guinea, many tied to mining, construction, and trade projects.

    While Marape has repeatedly said PNG “welcomes all partners,” the growing web of Western defence agreements has clearly shifted regional dynamics. China views the Pukpuk Treaty as another signal of Canberra and Washington’s determination to counter its influence in the Pacific — even as Port Moresby maintains that its foreign policy is one of “friends to all, enemies to none”.

    A balancing act
    For Marape, the Treaty is not about choosing sides but strengthening capacity through trust.

    “Our cooperation is built on mutual respect, not dominance; on trust, not imposition. Australia never imposed this on us – this was our proposal, and we thank them for walking with us as equal partners,” he said.

    He stressed that parliamentary ratification under Section 117 of the Constitution will ensure accountability.

    “This is a fireplace conversation between neighbours – Papua New Guinea and Australia. We share this part of the earth forever, and together we will safeguard it for the generations to come,” he added.

    The road ahead
    Named after the Tok Pisin word for crocodile — pukpuk, a symbol of endurance and guardianship — the Treaty embodies both trust and caution. Its success will depend on transparency, parliamentary oversight, and a shared understanding of what “mutual defence” means in practice.

    As PNG moves to ratify the agreement, it stands at a delicate crossroads — between empowerment and dependency, regional cooperation and strategic competition.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • NZ flotilla members arrive in Jordan, state news agency says

    RNZ News

    More than 100 people who were part of the intercepted flotilla to Gaza — including those from New Zealand — have entered Jordan.

    The country’s state news agency said the 131 people entered through the King Hussein Bridge after arrangements to ensure their safe passage.

    They reportedly included people from several countries including New Zealand, Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom.

    The father of Samuel Leason — one of the three from New Zealand held by Israel — told RNZ his son, Rana Hamida and Youssef Sammour had been released.

    The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade has confirmed the three New Zealanders detained by Israel have been released.

    An MFAT spokesperson said on Wednesday morning that the trio were on board buses containing other deportees which have now crossed into Jordan.

    The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFAT) said on Tuesday night it did not respond to non-urgent queries after hours, and would respond on Wednesday morning.

    Initially in disbelief
    Adi Leason said he was initially in disbelief when his son Samuel called him late on Tuesday night. He said it was a quick call and it was fantastic to hear the teenager’s voice.

    “It was little taste, just a little moment where the connection’s made and you don’t know … someone’s okay until they tell you themselves. And Samuel’s told us in no uncertain terms — he’s back.”

    Leason said his son sounded surprisingly good.

    “He sounded really buoyant and hopeful and he just kept saying, ‘I’ve got so many stories dad, I’ve got so many stories.’

    “He said he’d been incarcerated in a cage with Nelson Mandela’s grandson, and they’d become buddies.”

    Leason said he understood the flotilla participants had spent time in a big hall, “kinda being paraded and berated by the authorities”.

    “Then the other times when they were crammed in … Samuel mentioned 11 crammed into a cell at one time.”

    Fellow New Zealanders
    He said Samuel confirmed that he was with fellow New Zealanders, Rana Hamida and Youssef Sammour, “that they were together, that they were free”.

    Leason said his son was hoping to be back in the county by the end of the week.

    Earlier, Leason said he thought the New Zealanders and Australians were being kept together.

    “And they are being put up in a hotel at their — just to stress this — at their own expense … so, no cost to the taxpayer.”

    He understood the New Zealanders’ passports had been returned to them, but their other personal belongings had not.

    “We don’t know the exact details on that. Their passports are in their possession which is going to speed up the ability to book flights and get home as soon as possible.”

    A welcome home celebration was being planned for Saturday, Leason said.

    Relieved ordeal is over
    Meanwhile, the partner of a New Zealand doctor detained by Israel is relieved the ordeal is over after confirmation of her release.

    New Zealand-born Bianca Webb-Pullman was part of the aid flotilla to Gaza and was counted officially as Australian because she was using an Australian passport.

    She and other participants are now in Jordan.

    Stephen Rowe said it had been a sleepless week.

    “It was terrible, there was no way we could really contact her, we were left completely in the dark.

    “And of course we were aware of reports coming out of conditions in the prison and how bad they were, so yeah, it was incredibly worrying.”

    He said he was “extremely relieved” last night to learn of her release and said Webb-Pullman had since managed to call her mother.

    ‘Obviously shaken’
    “She’s obviously shaken . . .  But as far as I know, she’s okay.”

    Rowe said he planned to fly to Melbourne to meet Webb-Pullman at the end of the week.

    “It’s been just a horrible experience but that part of it is over and I know that she and the rest of the people on the flotilla don’t really want this to be about them.

    “They really want this to be much more about the people of Gaza and ending their suffering.

    “I know that the reason Bianca was on the flotilla was that she’d just finally had enough.”

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Bougainville president sworn in after landslide re-election, names caretaker government

    By Margot Staunton, RNZ Pacific

    Bougainville’s re-elected President Ishmael Toroama has announced a caretaker government following a formal swearing-in ceremony on Monday in the capital Buka.

    The former Bougainville Revolutionary Army (BRA) commander won more than 90,000 votes in a landslide victory after the election on September 5-6.

    The interim Bougainville Executive Council (BEC) will consist of the President, the Vice President Ezekiel Masatt and the Member of Parliament for Atolls Amanda Masono.

    In his address, Toroama said the occasion marked an important step in Bougainville’s democratic process, signifying a time of transition, continuity and renewed commitment, according to a statement on the Autonomous Bougainville Government (ABG) Facebook page.

    “During this caretaker period, our priority is to safeguard good governance and maintain the trust and confidence of our people,” Toroama said.

    The interim BEC will oversee government operations until the full Cabinet of the Bougainville Executive Council is formed.

    The president will choose four cabinet ministers, while the remaining 10 will be selected by regional committees.

    Assigning portfolios
    However, Toroama will assign portfolios to each of them.

    This will take place after the swearing-in of the 5th Bougainville House of Representatives on Friday, October 10.

    Toroama added that Bougainvilleans had expressed concern over the conduct of some losing candidates, saying their actions undermine Bougainville’s democratic values.

    “It is disappointing that several have chosen to express their dissatisfaction in premature and disorderly ways. Such conduct mocks the democratic values enshrined in the Bougainville Constitution and insults the people of Bougainville, who have spoken with unity and purpose through the ballot box,” he said.

    “The people have made their choice, they have elected leaders whom they trust to guide Bougainville through the next phase of our political journey, particularly toward our aspiration for independence.

    “Leadership is not about personal ambition. It is about service, humility, and accountability to the people who have placed their faith in us.”

    He also called on elected representatives to unite as Bougainville enters a new political chapter.

    ‘Set aside differences’
    “Let us set aside personal differences and work together for the greater good of Bougainville. Our people deserve leadership that is mature, united, and focused on building a future that is peaceful, prosperous, and independent.

    “The strength of our democracy lies not in how we win elections, but in how we respect their outcomes and continue to serve our people with humility and purpose,” he wrote.

    Meanwhile, the Office of the Bougainville Electoral Commission (OBEC) returned the writs for 45 seats on Monday.

    Electoral commissioner Desmond Tsianai handed them to the outgoing Speaker Simon Pentanu, marking the end of the electoral process.

    The writs included the presidency, 38-single-member constituencies and six reserved regional seats for women and former combatants.

    Tsianai said the democratic spirit of the people of Bougainville was a testament to their unity and resilience.

    “To every voter who stood in line with patience, dignity, and determination, we say thank you. You have proven once again that the heart of Bougainville beats strong with a belief in peaceful democratic choice and representation,” said.

    More women candidates
    “We recorded a total of 408 candidates, including a growing and welcome number of women candidates. Some 21 women contested constituency seats, up from 14 in 2020.”

    The presidential race featured seven candidates, reflecting a vibrant and competitive democratic environment, he said.

    He said the final electoral role included 238,625 registered voters, the most inclusive and comprehensive roll in the history of the autonomous region.

    Notably, he added, 14.3 percent of enrolled voters were aged 18 to 24, a significant increase from 8.9 percent in 2020.

    “This shows that our youth are claiming their place in shaping Bougainville’s future. Our systems of verification, oversight, and accountability were tested and they held firm.”

    Officials will now begin their post-election review, listening to lessons from this election, to improve the next.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • John Hobbs: Why New Zealand’s repugnant stance over Palestine damages our global standing

    New Zealanders deserve to know how the country’s foreign policy is made, writes John Hobbs.

    ANALYSIS: By John Hobbs

    The New Zealand government remains unwilling to support Palestinian statehood recognition at the United Nations General Assembly.

    This is a disgraceful position which gives support for Israel’s genocide in Gaza and seriously undermines our standing. Of the 193 states of the UN, 157 have now provided statehood recognition. New Zealand is not one of them.

    The purpose of this opinion piece is to highlight the troubling lack of transparency in how the government deliberates on its foreign policy choices.

    Government decisions and calculations on foreign policy are being made behind closed doors with limited public scrutiny, unlike other areas of policy, where at least a modicum of transparency occurs.

    The government has, over the past two years, exceeded itself in obscuring the process it goes through, without explaining its approach to the question of Palestine.

    New Zealand still inconceivably lauds the impossible goal of a two-state solution, the hallmark of successive governments’ foreign policy positions on the question of Palestine, but does everything to not bring about its realisation.

    To try to understand the basis for New Zealand’s approach to Gaza and the risks generated by the government’s lack of direct action against Israel, I placed an Official Information Request (OIA) with the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Winston Peters. I requested copies of advice that had been received on New Zealand’s obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 1948.

    Plausible case against Israel
    My initial OIA request was placed in January 2024, after the International Court of Justice had determined there was a plausible case that Israel was committing genocide in Gaza. At that point, about 27,000 people in Gaza had been killed, mainly women and children. My request was denied.

    I put the same OIA request to the minister in June 2025. By this time, nearly 63,000 people had been killed by Israel. At the time of my second request there was abundant evidence reported by UN agencies of Israel’s tactics. Again, my request for information was denied.

    I appealed the refusal by the minister of foreign affairs to the Office of the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman reviewed the case and accepted that the minister of foreign affairs was within his right to refuse to provide the material.

    The basis for the decision was that the advice given to the minister was subject to legal professional privilege, and that the right to protect legally privileged advice was not outweighed by the public interest in gaining access to that advice.

    The refusal by the minister and the Ombudsman to make the advice available is deeply worrying. Although I am not questioning the importance of protecting legal professional privilege, I cannot imagine an example that could be more pressing in terms of “public interest” than the complicity of nation states in genocide.

    Indeed, the threshold of legal professional privilege was never meant to be absolute. Parliament, in designing the OIA regime, had this in mind when it deemed that legal professional privilege could, under exceptional circumstances, be outweighed by the public interest.

    The Office of the Ombudsman has ruled in the past that legal professional privilege is not an absolute; it accepted that legal advice received by the Ministry of Health on embryo research had to be released, for example, as it was in the public interest to do so, even though it was legally privileged.

    Puzzling statement
    The Ombudsman concludes his response to my request with the puzzling statement that the “general public interest in accountability and transparency in government decision-making on this issue is best reflected in the decisions made after considering the legal advice, rather than what is contained in the legal advice.”

    The point I was trying to clarify is whether the government is acting in a manner that reflects the advice it has received. If it has received advice that New Zealand must take particular steps to fulfil its obligations under the Genocide Convention, and the government has chosen to ignore that advice, then surely New Zealanders have a right to know.

    The content of the advice is extremely relevant: it would identify any contradictions between the advice the government received and its actions. Through public access to such information, governments can be held to account for the decisions they make.

    The Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem and Israel, concluded on September 16 that Israeli authorities and security forces committed four out of the five underlying acts of genocide. Illegal settlers have been let loose in the West Bank under the protection of the Israeli army to harass and kill local Palestinians and occupy further areas of Palestinian land.

    At the UN General Assembly, the New Zealand government took a stance that is squarely in support of the Israeli genocide, also supported by the United States. International law clearly forbids the act of genocide, in Gaza as much as anywhere else, including the attacks on Palestinian civilians living under occupation in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

    In 2015-16, New Zealand co-sponsored a UN Security Council resolution that condemned the illegality of Israel’s actions in the Occupied West Bank, with the intention of supporting a Palestinian state. New Zealand’s recent posture at the General Assembly undermines this principled precedent.

    That New Zealand could not bring itself to offer the olive branch of statehood recognition is morally repugnant and severely damages our standing in the international community. The New Zealand public has the right to demand transparency in its government’s decision-making.

    The advice from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade to the minister cannot be hidden behind the veil of legal professional privilege.

    John Hobbs is a doctoral student at the National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, University of Otago. This article was first published by the Otago Daily Times and is republished with the author’s permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Australia’s National Press Club blocks Hedges’ Gaza media talk, lines up former Israeli officer

    One Path Network

    The National Press Club of Australia has abruptly cancelled a scheduled address by renowned journalist and Pulitzer Prize–winning author Chris Hedges, who was set to deliver a talk titled “The Betrayal of Palestinian Journalists”.

    The event, planned for October 20, was to expose how Western media amplify Israeli propaganda while silencing voices documenting Israel’s atrocities in Gaza.

    Instead, the Press Club is reportedly considering Israel’s ambassador, retired IDF lieutenant-colonel Amir Maimon, as a replacement speaker, a move critics say perfectly illustrates the very censorship and bias Hedges intended to discuss.

    Amid an ongoing genocide in Gaza, where more than 278 Palestinian journalists have been killed, many deliberately targeted, the Press Club’s decision to silence a veteran war correspondent while platforming a representative of the Israeli occupation underscores a disturbing alignment with state propaganda.

    It signals a betrayal of journalistic ethics and Australia’s public right to hear unfiltered truths about Israel’s war crimes.

    Rather than promoting balance, the National Press Club has chosen complicity, showing that press freedom ends where Israeli interests begin.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • ‘We want legitimate leaders’: Bougainvilleans head to the polls amid push for independence

    By Margot Staunton, RNZ Pacific senior journalist

    Bougainvilleans went to the polls today, keen to elect a leader who will continue their fight for independence.

    “There’s a mood of excitement among the people here,” said Electoral Commissioner Desmond Tsianai.

    “It is important that this election is successful and credible, because we want legitimate leaders in the government, who will continue discussions with Papua New Guinea over independence,” he said.

    Tsianai said there were more than 239,000 registered voters in the autonomous PNG region and he expects a better turnout than the 67 percent during the 2020 election.

    “We anticipate voter turnout will increase due to the importance of this election in the political aspirations of Bougainville.”

    Tsianai said his office had been proactive, encouraging voters to enrol and reaching out through schools to first-time voters aged 18 and over.

    He is adamant Bougainville could achieve a one-day poll, despite the election being rescheduled at the last minute.

    Polling pushed back
    Polling was scheduled to begin on Thursday but was pushed back a day to allow time to dispatch ballot papers.

    In addition, he said, there were some quality control issues concerning serial numbers.

    “These are an important safeguard against fraud. We, therefore, took measures to ensure that these issues were rectified, so that electoral integrity was assured.”

    The final shipment of ballot papers, which was scheduled for delivery on August 23, finally arrived on September 2, he said.

    This did not allow enough time for packing and distribution to enable polling to take place on Thursday.

    “The printing of the ballot papers and the delay afterwards was out of our hands, however we’ve taken the necessary steps to ensure the integrity of the process.

    The polling period for the elections was from September 2-8, and the office had discretion to select any date within that period based on election planning, he said.

    “Rescheduling allowed sufficient time to resolve ballot delivery delays and to ensure that polling teams are ready to serve voters.”

    Preventing risk
    He said that the rescheduling was done in the interest of voters, candidates and stakeholders, to prevent any risk of disenfranchisement.

    “We remain fully committed to delivering a credible election and will continue to provide regular updates to maintain transparency and confidence in the electoral process,” he said.

    “We have taken the necessary steps and anticipated that some wards within constituencies have a larger voting population so extra teams had been allocated to those wards so polling can be conducted in a day.”

    The dominant issue going into the election remained the quest for independence.

    In 2020, there were strong expectations that the autonomous region would soon achieve that, given the result of an historic referendum.

    A 97.7 percent majority voted for independence in a referendum which began in November 2019.

    However, that has not happened yet, and Port Moresby has yet to concede much ground.

    Toroama not pressured
    Bougainville’s 544 polling stations will open from 8am to 4pm local time (9am-5pm NZT) in what is the first time the Autonomous Bougainville Government has planned a single day poll.

    Some 404 candidates are contesting for 46 seats in the Bougainville Parliament, including a record 34 women.

    Six men are challenging Ishmael Toroama for his job.

    Toroama recently told RNZ Pacific that he was not feeling any pressure as he sought a second five-year term in office.

    “I’m the kind of man that has process. They voted me for the last five years. And if the people wish to put me, the decision, the power to put people, it is democracy. They will vote for me.” he said.

    Counting will take place on September 9-21, and writs will be returned to the Speaker of the House the following day.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Prisoner transfer sparks new human rights concerns in West Papua

    By Susana Suisuiki, RNZ Pacific Waves presenter/producer

    A West Papuan activist says the transfer of four political prisoners by Indonesian authorities is a breach of human rights.

    In April, the men were arrested on charges of treason after requesting peace talks in the city of Sorong in southwest Papua. They were then transferred to Makassar city in Eastern Indonesia and are awaiting trial.

    Last week, protesters gathered in front of Sorong City Municipal Police HQ opposing the transferral, but the demonstrations turned violent. as protests about civil rights swept across Indonesia.

    Police had reportedly used “heavy-handed” attempts to disrupt the protest but was met with riotous responses, with tyres set on fire and government buildings being attacked.

    A 28-year-old man was seriously injured when police shot him in the abdomen.

    Seventeen people were arrested for property damage, while police are still search for former political prisoner Sayan Mandabayan accused of being the “organiser” of the protest.

    West Papuan activist Ronny Kareni told RNZ Pacific Waves the protest was initially meant to be peaceful.

    He said the four political prisoners being far from their home city had raised concerns.

    ‘Raises many concerns’
    “What the transfer really transpired, is it raises many concerns from human rights defenders and many of us arguing that the transfer violates the principles of the Article 85 of the Indonesian Procedure Code which requires trials to be held where the alleged offence occured.”

    Kareni said the transfer isolated prisoners from their families, community support and legal counsel.

    Indonesian authorities say the group were transferred due to security concerns for the trial.

    Kareni said the movement to liberate West Papua from Indonesia would continue to be seen as “treason”, even if there was peaceful dialogue.

    “There is no space for exercising your right to determine your future or determine what you feel that matters to you,” he said.

    “Just talking peace, just to kind of like come to the table to offer peace talks, is seen as treason.”

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • UN chief to address PNG parliament today during ‘historic’ visit

    RNZ Pacific

    The United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres will address Papua New Guinea’s national Parliament today.

    The UN chief is in Papua New Guinea on a four-day official state visit September 2-5.

    Prime Minister James Marape has held bilateral discussions with Guterres at his Melanesian House Office in Port Moresby yesterday.

    “We remain fully committed to the United Nations Charter and to the principles of peace and cooperation among nations,” Marape said.

    Marape said Guterres’ visit during PNG’s 50th anniversary celebrations “is historic” and “affirms our place in the global family of nations and our shared responsibility to work together”.

    He also assured the UN boss that his government is committed to implementing the outcome of the Bougainville referendum. Bougainville head to the polls on Thursday to elect their next government.

    Guterres said PNG has chosen the path of wisdom and peace when it came to their autonomous region of Bougainville.

    He said the way the government has managed the Bougainville referendum demonstrates its commitment to democracy and dialogue.

    PNG Foreign Minister Justin Tkatchenko said the country recognises the crucial role of the UN through collective action and cooperation among member states.

    “We have always stood firm with our colleague of member nations, as we believe in and will continue to promote bilateralism,” he wrote in a post on his official Facebook page.

    “While we also continue to be an active contributor to global dialogue, we continue to support the role of the UN as provider of humanitarian aid, and facilitator of agreements on worldwide issues such as poverty, climate change, and disease,” he added.

    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.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Chris Hedges: The betrayal of Palestinian journalists

    Western reporters are full partners in the genocide. They amplify Israeli lies, which they know are lies, betraying Palestinian colleagues who are slandered, targeted and killed by Israel.

    ANALYSIS: By Chris Hedges

    There are two types of war correspondents. The first type does not attend press conferences. They do not beg generals and politicians for interviews. They take risks to report from combat zones.

    They send back to their viewers or readers what they see, which is almost always diametrically opposed to official narratives. This first type, in every war, is a tiny minority.

    Then there is the second type, the inchoate blob of self-identified war correspondents who play at war. Despite what they tell editors and the public, they have no intention of putting themselves in danger.

    They are pleased with the Israeli ban on foreign reporters into Gaza. They plead with officials for background briefings and press conferences. They collaborate with their government minders who impose restrictions and rules that keep them out of combat.

    They slavishly disseminate whatever they are fed by officials, much of which is a lie, and pretend it is news. They join little jaunts arranged by the military — dog and pony shows — where they get to dress up and play soldier and visit outposts where everything is controlled and choreographed.

    The mortal enemy of these poseurs are the real war reporters, in this case, Palestinian journalists in Gaza. These reporters expose them as toadies and sycophants, discrediting nearly everything they disseminate. For this reason, the poseurs never pass up a chance to question the veracity and motives of those in the field.

    I watched these snakes do this repeatedly to my colleague Robert Fisk.

    Took huge hit
    When war reporter Ben Anderson arrived at the hotel where journalists covering the war in Liberia were encamped — in his words getting “drunk” at bars “on expenses,” having affairs and exchanging “information rather than actually going out and getting information” — his image of war reporters took a huge hit.

    “I thought, finally, I’m amongst my heroes,” Anderson recalls. “This is where I’ve wanted to be for years. And then me and the cameraman I was with — who knew the rebels very well — he took us out for about three weeks with the rebels.

    “We came back to Monrovia. The guys in the hotel bar said, ‘Where have you been? We thought you’d gone home.’ We said, ‘We went out to cover the war. Isn’t that our job? Isn’t that what you’re supposed to do?’

    “The romantic view I had of foreign correspondents was suddenly destroyed in Liberia,” he went on. “I thought, actually, a lot of these guys are full of shit. They’re not even willing to leave the hotel, let alone leave the safety of the capital and actually do some reporting.”

    You can see an interview I did with Anderson here.

    This dividing line, which occurred in every war I covered, defines the reporting on the genocide in Gaza. It is not a divide of professionalism or culture. Palestinian reporters expose Israeli atrocities and implode Israeli lies. The rest of the press does not.

    Palestinian journalists, targeted and assassinated by Israel, pay — as many great war correspondents do — with their lives, although in far greater numbers.

    Israel has murdered 245 journalists in Gaza by one count and more than 273 by another. The goal is to shroud the genocide in darkness.

    No other war close
    No war I covered comes close to these numbers of dead. Since October 7, Israel has killed more journalists “than the US Civil War, World Wars I and II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War (including the conflicts in Cambodia and Laos), the wars in Yugoslavia in the 1990s and 2000s, and the post-9/11 war in Afghanistan, combined.” Journalists in Palestine leave wills and recorded videos to be read or played at their death.

    A funeral for Palestine TV correspondent Mohammed Abu Hatab
    A funeral for Palestine TV correspondent Mohammed Abu Hatab. Hatab was killed, along with his family members, in an airstrike on his home in Khan Yunis, Gaza. Image: Abed Zagout/Anadolu via Getty Images

    The colleagues of these Palestinian journalists in the Western press broadcast from the border fence with Gaza decked out in flak jackets and helmets, where they have as much chance of being hit by shrapnel or a bullet as being struck by an asteroid. They scurry like lemmings to briefings by Israeli officials. They are not only the enemies of truth, but also the enemies of journalists doing the real work of war reporting.

    When Iraqi troops attacked the Saudi border town of Khafji during the first Gulf War, Saudi soldiers fled in panic. Two French photographers and I watched frantic soldiers commandeering fire trucks and racing south. US Marines pushed the Iraqis back.

    But in Riyadh, the press was told of our gallant Saudi allies defending their homeland. Once fighting ended, the press bus stopped a few miles down the road from Khafji. The pool reporters clambered out, escorted by military minders. They did stand-ups with the distant sound of artillery and smoke as a backdrop and repeated the lies the Pentagon wanted to tell.

    Meanwhile, the two photographers and I were detained and beaten by enraged Saudi military police, furious that we had documented the panicked flight of Saudi forces, as we tried to leave Khafji.

    My refusal to abide by press restrictions in the first Gulf War saw the other New York Times reporters in Saudi Arabia write a letter to the foreign editor saying I was ruining the paper’s relationship with the military. If not for the intervention of R.W. “Johnny” Apple, who had covered Vietnam, I would have been sent back to New York.

    I do not fault anyone for not wanting to go into a war zone. This is a sign of normality. It is rational. It is understandable. Those of us who volunteer to go into combat — my colleague Clyde Haberman at The New York Times once quipped “Hedges will parachute into a war with or without a parachute” — have obvious personality defects.

    Pretend war correspondents
    But I fault those who pretend to be war correspondents. They do tremendous damage. They peddle false narratives. They mask reality. They serve as witting — or unwitting — propagandists. They discredit the voices of the victims and exonerate the killers.

    When I covered the war in El Salvador, before I worked for The New York Times, the paper’s correspondent dutifully regurgitated whatever the embassy fed her. This had the effect of making my editors — as well as editors of the other correspondents who did report the war– question our veracity and “impartiality.”

    It made it harder for readers to understand what was happening. The false narrative neutered and often overpowered the real one.

    The slander used to discredit my Palestinian colleagues — claiming they are members of Hamas — is sadly familiar. Many Palestinian reporters I know in Gaza are, in fact, quite critical of Hamas. But even if they have ties with Hamas, so what?

    Israel’s attempt to justify targeting journalists from the Hamas-run al-Aqsa media network is also a violation of Article 79 of the Geneva Convention.

    I worked with reporters and photographers who had a wide variety of beliefs, including Marxist-Leninists in Central America. This did not prevent them from being honest. I was in Bosnia and Kosovo with a Spanish cameraman, Miguel Gil Moreno, who was later killed with my friend Kurt Schork.

    Miguel was a member of the right-wing Catholic group Opus Dei. He was also a journalist of tremendous courage, great compassion and moral probity, despite his opinions about Spain’s fascist ruler Francisco Franco. He did not lie.

    Seeking to crush
    In every war I covered, I was attacked as supporting or belonging to whatever group the government, including the US government, was seeking to crush. I was accused of being a tool of the Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front in El Salvador, the Sandinistas in Nicaragua, the Guatemalan National Revolutionary Unity, the Sudanese People’s Liberation Army, Hamas, the Muslim-led government in Bosnia and the Kosovo Liberation Army.

    John Simpson of the BBC, like many Western reporters, argues that the “world needs honest, unbiased eyewitness reporting to help people make up their minds about the major issues of our time. This has so far been impossible in Gaza.”

    The assumption that if Western reporters were in Gaza the coverage would improve is risible. Trust me. It would not.

    Israel bans the foreign press because there is a bias in Europe and the United States in favour of reporting by Western reporters. Israel is aware that the scale of the genocide is too vast for Western outlets to hide or obscure, despite all the ink and airtime they give to Israeli and US apologists.

    Israel also cannot continue its systematic campaign of annihilation of journalists in Gaza if it has to contend with foreign media in its midst.

    Israeli lies amplified by Western media outlets, including my former employer The New York Times, are worthy of Pravda. Beheaded babies. Babies cooked in ovens. Mass rape by Hamas. Errant Palestinian rockets that cause explosions at hospitals and massacre civilians. Secret command tunnels and command centers in schools and hospitals. Journalists who direct Hamas rocket units. Protesters of the genocide on college campuses who are antisemites and supporters of Hamas.

    Israel ‘lies like it breathes’
    I covered the conflict between the Palestinians and Israelis, much of that time in Gaza, for seven years. If there is one indisputable fact, it is that Israel lies like it breathes. The decision by Western reporters to give credibility to these lies, to give them the same weight as documented Israeli atrocities, is a cynical game.

    The reporters know these lies are lies. But they, and the news outlets that employ them, prize access — in this case access to Israeli and US officials — above truth. The reporters, as well as their editors and publishers, fear becoming targets of Israel and the powerful Israel lobby.

    There is no cost for betraying the Palestinians. They are powerless.

    Call those lies out and you will swiftly find your requests for briefings and interviews with officials rebuffed. You won’t be invited by press officers to participate in staged visits to Israeli military units. You and your news organisation will be viciously attacked.

    You will be left out in the cold. Your editors will terminate your assignment or your employment. This is not good for careers. And so, the lies are dutifully repeated, no matter how absurd.

    It is pathetic watching these reporters and their news outlets, as Fisk writes, fight “like tigers to join these ‘pools’ in which they would be censored, restrained and deprived of all freedom of movement on the battlefield”.

    When Middle East Eye journalists Mohamed Salama and Ahmed Abu Aziz, along with Reuters photojournalist Hussam al-Masri, and freelancers Moaz Abu Taha, and Mariam Dagga — who had worked with several media outlets, including the Associated Press — were killed in a “double tap” strike — designed to kill first responders arriving to treat casualties from initial strikes — at Nasser Medical Complex, how did Western news agencies respond?

    ‘Hamas camera’
    “Israeli military says strikes on Gaza hospital targeted what it says was a Hamas camera,” the Associated Press reported.

    “IDF claims hospital strike was aimed at Hamas camera,” announced CNN.

    “Israel army says six ‘terrorists’ killed in Monday strikes on Gaza hospital,” the AFP headline read.

    “Initial inquiry says Hamas camera was target of Israeli strike that killed journalists,” Reuters said.

    “Israel claims troops saw Hamas camera before deadly hospital attack,” Sky News explained.

    Just for the record, the camera belonged to Reuters, which said Israel was “fully aware” the news agency was filming from the hospital.

    When Al Jazeera correspondent Anas al-Sharif and three other journalists were killed on August 10 in their media tent near al-Shifa Hospital, how was it reported in the Western press?

    Pulitzer prize-winner
    “Israel Kills Al Jazeera Journalist It Says Was Hamas Leader,” Reuters titled its story, despite the fact al-Sharif was part of a Reuters team that won a 2024 Pulitzer Prize.

    The German newspaper Bild, published a front page story headlined: “Terrorist disguised as a journalist killed in Gaza.”

    The barrage of Israeli lies amplified and given credibility by the Western press violates a fundamental tenet of journalism, the duty to transmit the truth to the viewer or reader.

    It legitimizes mass slaughter. It refuses to hold Israel to account. It betrays Palestinian journalists, those reporting and being killed in Gaza. And it exposes the bankruptcy of Western journalists, whose primary attributes are careerism and cowardice.

    Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist who was a foreign correspondent for 15 years for The New York Times, where he served as the Middle East bureau chief and Balkan bureau chief for the paper. He is the host of show “The Chris Hedges Report”. This article is republished from his X account.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Walden Bello on Gaza and the media silence: ‘It isn’t fear of the Zionists. It is far worse’

    Israel is boosting its Zionist influence in the Pacific. Australia has exposed such media influence. The media in the Philippines is now under scrutiny. And Aotearoa New Zealand?

    COMMENTARY: By Walden Bello

    When the Flores and Velasco articles and posts whitewashing Israel’s genocidal policies in Gaza first came out a few days ago, I was waiting for people in the Philippine media to criticise and denounce them since they were so obviously hack pieces that did not meet the minimal standards of decent journalism.

    I waited and waited, until I realised that there were no media people or organisations that were going to speak up.

    Where were the progressive and liberal voices, apart from those of Richard Heydarian and Inday Espina Varona?

    Walden Bello's earlier article in Asia Pacific Report on August 31
    Walden Bello’s earlier article in Asia Pacific Report on August 31 exposing “hack propaganda”. Image: APR screenshot

    This was the reason I felt compelled to issue the statement condemning the sordid reporting of Flores and Velasco.

    I was not out to do an expose, but that’s what it effectively became. In my subsequent posts, I raised the question of what was the reason just two journalists were willing to challenge the stories.

    Was it a case of circling the wagons to protect errant colleagues? Was it fear of ties with the Israeli state being exposed by the Israelis in retaliation? Was it fear of physical or political reprisals by the Israelis?

    These may have played a part, but the deafening silence meant there was something bigger at work.

    This morning I received a long text from a prominent media practitioner that provided the answer. It’s not fear. It’s actually worse: agreement with Zionist ideology and policies, including genocide.

    That the person asked me not to divulge his name for fear of suffering retribution from his colleagues stunned me. OMG, is this how deep the rot is with our media? ? Here is his disconcerting revelation to me:

    ‘Most are prejudiced’
    “Yes some are scared, but honestly most of them actually are prejudiced against Muslims and side with the Zionists anytime.

    “Most believe in the US religious fascist Zionist narrative, and also cannot accept that the world has changed — that the US is no longer the unipower it was decades ago, and that Russia, China, India and BRICS are on the rise.

    “And also, you should hear them talk about how Filipino Muslims should be wiped off the face of the earth.

    “These are college graduates from UP [University of the Philippines], UST [University of Santo Tomas], Ateneo who studied media.

    “Whenever I would voice empathy for the Muslim minority here, or Palestinians, I’d be called stupid. Same also because I refused to join in the corruption.

    “Oh, and also they have the same prejudice against China and the Chinese and mistake the Japanese imperial army atrocities as something China did to us!

    “Also this is not limited to media. I have batchmates from UP Diliman, medical doctors, lawyers, engineers who also have the same prejudices.”

    He added: “Some of these journalists have won awards abroad.”

    Walden Bello is a Filipino academic and analyst of Global South issues who was awarded Amnesty International Philippines’ Most Distinguished Defender of Human Rights Award in 2023. He has also served as a member of the House of Representatives of the Philippines.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.