An exiled Venezuelan human rights activist and a political consultant have been shot and wounded in an apparently targeted attack in Colombia’s capital.
Yendri Omar Velásquez Rodríguez and Luis Alejandro Peche Arteaga were shot on Monday as they left a building in north Bogotá, Colombian police said.
Council of Europe commissioner voices concerns after April’s supreme court ruling on legal definition of a woman
Transgender people risk being excluded from many public spaces as a result of the recent UK supreme court judgment and must be protected from discrimination, a human rights expert has said.
Michael O’Flaherty, the Council of Europe commissioner for human rights, said he had concerns about the climate for transgender people in the UK after April’s supreme court ruling that the legal definition of a woman in the Equality Act 2010 refers to biological sex.
Counter-terror laws being ‘weaponised’ against pro-Palestine groups in UK, US, France and Germany, says FIDH
The right to protest has come under “sustained attack” across the west , according to a report highlighting the growing criminalisation of pro-Palestinian demonstrations.
The study by the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) pays particular attention to the UK, the US, France and Germany, where it says governments have “weaponised” counter-terrorism legislation as well as the fight against antisemitism to suppress dissent and support for Palestinian rights in Gaza and the occupied West Bank.
Keir Starmer is considering Aadhaar as model for UK, but detractors warn of ‘digital coercion’ and security breaches
It is often difficult for people in India to remember life before Aadhaar. The digital biometric ID, allegedly available for every Indian citizen, was only introduced 15 years ago but its presence in daily life is ubiquitous.
Indians now need an Aadhaar number to buy a house, get a job, open a bank account, pay their tax, receive benefits, buy a car, get a sim card, book priority train tickets and admit children into school. Babies can be given Aadhaar numbers almost immediately after they are born. While it is not mandatory, not having Aadhaar de facto means the state does not recognise you exist, digital rights activists say.
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.
A lucrative sector is spreading fast as criminal enterprises force abused and trafficked workers to cheat others
A Chinese court last month sentenced 11 people to death over their roles in a illegal scam empire along the border with Myanmar. But it won’t end a noxious multibillion-dollar industry that devastates the lives of two sets of victims. The first are those cheated out of money, often by people posing as potential romantic or business partners in what are known as “pig‑butchering” schemes. The second are those who are forced to cheat them, working in conditions amounting to modern slavery.
The recent study, Scam: Inside Southeast Asia’s Cybercrime Compounds, by Ivan Franceschini, Ling Li and Mark Bo, paints a terrifying picture of the sector. Workers are trafficked into heavily guarded, prison-like compounds, where they are routinely abused and tortured for failing to meet targets, or extorted for ransoms. Others take the jobs willingly, but find that they cannot repay ruinous charges for food and accommodation. Their work requires them to be connected to the outside world round the clock, yet they are too terrified to seek help because of the surveillance and violence they endure.
This may be so, though such a power will be minuscule, filtered not only by official censorship but by the knowledge that any truly challenging topic will not be broached. The understanding is that performers will not rock the boat, so it seems uncompelling to justify participation on the basis that the boat might be slightly rocked in vague and inoffensive ways.
Canary journalist Alaa Shamali is trying to get his family – of five children – safely out of Gaza, but needs your help to make it happen.
Palestinian journalist Alaa Shamali has written unflinchingly on the countless heinous atrocities Israel has perpetrated in Gaza. A little more than a week before the colonial settler state broke the first 2025 supposed ceasefire in March, Alaa started penning his heart-rending prose for the Canary. Now, seven months on, and at the fragile precipice of another so-called ceasefire, his haunting words continue to echo out in the vacuum of a Western mainstream media still clamouring to cover for genocidal war criminals.
Everything he writes, he does with the harrowing clarity and poignancy that can only come from experience and truly knowing the gut-wrenching reality of life under Israeli bombardment and occupation. Because as he has recounted the horrifying details of Israel’s “strangling siege” leaving three-quarters of children in Gaza malnourished, eating sand and drinking contaminated water, and living displaced in “torn tents”, he has told these stories as a record too of his own family’s devastating reality.
Canary journalist Alaa Shamali: an urgent fundraiser for his family in Gaza
It compels readers to try to imagine the utter heartbreak and struggle of:
spending every day, every night, and every moment in such cramped conditions. They need urgent support to rebuild their home and regain a sense of normalcy.
However, it also caveats this with the unfaltering fact that what Alaa’s family has lived through amounts to “unimaginable hardship and loss”.
Because, as for many families in Gaza, this current genocide was not the first time Israel destructively uprooted their lives. The GoFundMe relays how Israel has demolished their home, not once, not twice, but three times in little over the last decade:
Their home in Gaza has been destroyed three times by the wars on Gaza in 2014, 2021, and now again in 2024. Each time they have painstakingly rebuilt their lives and their home, but this time, they have lost not only their home but also any source of income. The compensation for their 2021 home destruction is still pending, and now they face the devastating reality of losing their home once more.
deprived of the most basic right of fatherhood: to see his five children walk to school in Gaza with peace of mind.
He has recounted the hopes and dreams of his five children – currently living in a displacement camp in Gaza. There’s 15-year-old Dima, his eldest who waits in the displacement tent wondering if she will get the chance to return to school. Alaa penned a particularly painful exchange, where Dima has asked her father:
Dad… will I be able to continue my studies?
And he wrote with palpable grief:
I hear her question echoing inside me at night like an absent school bell. I try to smile and tell her, “You will continue,” but my voice betrays me. How can I reassure her when all I have is my pen, while all the roads to school are blocked by rubble?
The crowdfunder adds another tinge of utter anguish over Dima’s desire for the most basic things a young teenager might hope for, simply:
decorating her room with the best furniture and devices, to build a future alongside her four younger siblings.
Israel has forced next eldest 13-year-old Ibada to grow up “before his time”, stealing his childhood so:
His voice, which used to be full of enthusiasm, has become hoarse with waiting.
Alaa wrote that it’s as if he carries:
the burdens of adults while still a child.
Salah, Abdullah, and Lina: playing in the corridors of displacement
Alaa’s 12-year-old son Salah has a “deep love for football” and he:
admires stars like Messi, Ronaldo, and Mohamed Salah.
When the fundraiser started in June 2024, Salah hadn’t watched “a match in nine months”. He had already missed an entire school year. Well over a year on, Alaa wrote how Salah and ten-year-old son Abdullah:
were the mirror of childhood in my home. Their laughter on the way to school and their running on the way back gave me the feeling that life was still possible despite the war.
Today, he says:
that innocence has been stolen from them, and they play in the corridors of displacement instead of schoolyards.
However, what “breaks” Alaa’s heart “the most” is his “little girl”, his youngest, 6-year-old Lina:
When I look at her, I feel that her entire childhood is being silently assassinated. She is growing up outside of school, like a flower without water, and her pain alone is enough to fill a thousand news reports. But all I can do is carry her silence and broadcast it to the world.
In her own words, Lina has captured the plaintive tragedy of a child growing up under constant genocidal siege:
Bombing over our heads and such. Nothing but missiles above us. We get hit a lot. Leave behind our childhood. I’m still a little girl.
And Lina has expressed the most simple hope of all children in Gaza:
End the war – we are children – we want to live.
Support Alaa’s family to seek safety and rebuild their lives
Now, Gaza has entered another ceasefire – but Lina’s wish still goes unanswered. Predictably, and as last time, Israel continues to violate it with impunity. It’s still bombing, still murdering, and still maiming Palestinians in refugee camps.
And all the while, it is maintaining the key ingredients of its engineered famine, namely, its blockades severing access to sorely-needed aid. The UNRWA has detailed that 6,000 trucks loaded with food, tents, and medicines enough for the entire population of Gaza for three months:
remain stuck at the Gaza border, waiting to be allowed in.
It’s why Alaa’s family needs your help to move to Egypt, where:
they can find safety and begin to rebuild their lives. Every donation, no matter the amount, can make a significant difference. Please donate to help this family escape the horrors of war and start anew.
As Alaa himself has written, Gaza:
does not ask for pity, but for justice. It does not ask only for aid, but for the right to live like others. It asks to sleep without fear, to open a school, or to light a small lamp at night without it being considered a luxury.
For his family and others from Gaza to live safe, secure, fulfilling lives once more, is a powerful act of resistance after two years of genocide. In the spirit of mutual aid and solidarity, the Canary implores readers, wherever they can, to continue supporting Palestinians’ crowdfunders.
Alaa has been supporting his family as he writes full-time for the Canary. But amid the immense costs of essentials in Gaza, and the enormous expenses of them leaving the Strip for a new life, his wages can only go so far. You can donate to Alaa’s family’s fundraiser here.
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.
הוציאו אותי מהמליאה רק כי העליתי את הדרישה הפשוטה ביותר, דרישה שכל הקהילה הבינלאומית מסכימה עליה:
“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. 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. Graphic: Al Jazeera/Creative Commons
Mary Lawlor, UN special rapporteur for human rights defenders, accuses US, UK and other governments of paying lip service to climate goals while criminalizing activists
Human rights defenders organizing to prevent climate catastrophe are facing a surge in reprisals, as governments around the world denigrate, delegitimize and criminalize activists in spite of worsening global heating, a top United Nations official has told the Guardian.
Mary Lawlor, the UN special rapporteur for human rights defenders since 2020, has documented hundreds of cases where states have sought to smear and silence climate defenders engaged in peaceful protest, non-violent civil disobedience and litigation.
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.
In August, the State Department released its annual Human Rights Report on Bahrain. The report highlights human rights developments in Bahrain in the previous year, 2024. It is the first of the reports from the Trump administration. By comparing and contrasting this report with the last report from the Biden administration, the Bahrain 2023 Human Rights Report, one can gain valuable insights into the differences between the two administrations’ human rights priorities.
A Shift in Tone and Length
The first notable difference between the two reports is the differing lengths of the two reports. The Biden-era report is 50 pages long while the most recent Trump-era is only 20 pages. Some of this can be explained by editing choices and the grouping of certain topics into condensed paragraphs. For example, while the 2023 report lists the libel laws in its own section, the newest report makes a passing mention of it in its opening paragraph on press freedoms.
New sections have been added to the newest report and sections have been renamed. The 2024 report is condensed into three main sections all of which have new names. The 2024 report’s “Life” section covers topics found in the 2023 report’s “Respect for the Integrity of the Person” section. The other two new sections are called “Liberty” and “Security of the Person”; both include subtopics covered by the 2023 report as well.
Excluded Topics
The most interesting differences between the reports are not the topics that both covered, albeit with differing terminology, but rather what was excluded from the newest report. The 2023 report mentions several topics not found in the newest report. Unfair trial proceedings, statelessness, gender-based violence and discrimination, and the lack of democratic participation were just some of the topics excluded in the 2024 report. There is not a single mention of the words woman, women, or gender in the 2024 report at all.
Conclusion
It would be irresponsible for the author of this piece to assume the rationale for what is and is not in both reports. What is clear is there are clear differences between the two reports. These two reports were written under the direction of vastly different presidential administrations. A close reading of the two documents can perhaps help shed light on the differing human rights considerations of both administrations.
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.
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 . . . “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
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 . . . 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.
BREAKING: Prominent Palestinian journalist Saleh Aljafarawi has been killed by gunmen in Gaza City’s al-Sabra neighbourhood, making him one of more than 270 journalists killed since Israel’s war began in 2023.
As part of its efforts to sell Digital ID to the public, the UK government has frequently drawn attention to Estonia. People have now highlighted that the Estonian scheme actually suffered one of the issues which critics have warned about:
Keir Starmer keeps saying the UK needs a digital ID system and that we should “look at Estonia.”
Ok, let’s look at Estonia
In 2021, a hacker stole 286,000 IDs from the Estonian government database.
In Estonia, digital ID has revolutionised parents’ lives by enabling access to child benefits, health records and applications for nursery places seamlessly, never having to provide the same information twice.
As reported by the Record in 2021, a hacker breached Estonia’s systems. By exploiting a vulnerability, this hacker was able to download the photos of 286,438 citizens.
The risk of hacking was the third point on Big Brother Watch’s ‘key arguments’ against any such scheme:
Keir Starmer is planning to force every adult in the UK to have a state-mandated digital ID to work.
While the UK government has said the scheme will prevent ‘shadow economies’ of illegal labour, they also highlighted an already-implemented Digital ID scheme in Estonia. This proved controversial, as Estonia’s shadow economy is more than twice the size of the UK’s:
Digital ID isn’t the only sphere in which critics say Keir Starmer’s Labour are creating an opportunity for hackers. As we reported on 20 October, a massive leak of user data from the messaging app Discord was linked to age verification checks which were implemented in response to the Online Safety Act.
The Discord breach is worse than expected!
– 1.5 TB of data
– Over 2 million government ID photos
– Threat actor publishes some user data due to Discord’s inaction
— International Cyber Digest (@IntCyberDigest) October 8, 2025
Tony Blair and his Tony Blair Institute are key proponents of the scheme. The billionaire Larry Ellison is a key financial supporter of Blair’s, and has also backed it. This has proven controversial as Ellison stands to benefit from the global roll out of Digital ID because he owns the software company Oracle:
Well this isn’t terrifying at all. Here’s Blair talking to Oracles Larry Ellison.
“Citizens will be on their best behavior because we’re constantly watching & recording everything that’s going on.”
Now you can see why Starmer is so keen on digital ID
The war of death has ended, but it has not taken its tools with it. The drones have mostly fallen silent, but the silence they have left behind is louder than the bombing. In Gaza today, no one fears death, because everyone has experienced it up close. What people truly fear is life itself: a life without homes, hospitals, schools, electricity, water, or security.
After two years of genocide, when the Israeli army withdrew and people began to return to their cities, they did not return to their homes, but to piles of rubble. Entire neighbourhoods have disappeared, and street landmarks no longer mean anything.
Gaza, once bustling with life, had become a faceless city, as if it had just emerged from the heart of a never-ending earthquake.
The siege on Gaza may have ended, but the battle for survival continues
Those who survived the bombing have found themselves in a new battle: the battle for survival.
Men sleep in the streets because Israel has reduced their homes to ashes, and mothers try to protect their children from the cold and darkness in torn tents.
The nights in Gaza are long, without electricity or peace of mind. They are interrupted only by the sound of a child crying because they are hungry or afraid, or because the light had completely disappeared and only darkness remained in their view.
In some hospitals that are still functioning, patients crowd together on the floor, waiting their turn in rooms without medicine or light. Doctors are working under pressure beyond their capacity, performing operations by the light of mobile phones or without anaesthesia. They face an impossible equation: who to save first? The wounded or the children? Those they can save or those who are about to die? Yet, in the midst of this devastation, life is being reborn.
In every destroyed street, there are those who are trying to build something, stone by stone, or a tent that can withstand the wind. Because the war that ended militarily has not ended humanely. Now, a war of a different kind has begun, a war to redefine the meaning of life in a city destroyed to its very foundations, a war without truce, fought by an unarmed people with all their remaining determination.
To live is an act of resistance
Gaza today does not ask for pity, but for justice. It does not ask only for aid, but for the right to live like others. It asks to sleep without fear, to open a school, or to light a small lamp at night without it being considered a luxury.
The war of death ended when the rockets stopped, but the war of life began, a daily war against poverty, against darkness, against oblivion, against the injustice and silence of the world.
The war of death ended, but the war of life began: a war that is not fought by an army or managed by political decisions, but led by a defenceless people who only want to live.
This war is the most difficult, because it is not measured by the number of martyrs, but by the number of those who continue to try to survive every day. In Gaza, life is not just a stolen right, it is resistance.
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 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.
The Palestinian National Campaign to Retrieve the Bodies of Martyrs and Disclose the Fate of the Missing said on Friday 10 October that Israel continues to hold the bodies of hundreds of Palestinians, in flagrant violation of international humanitarian law. It confirmed that among the bodies held are children, women, and detainees.
Israel holding the bodies of Palestinian martyrs, including children
The campaign explained in a press statement, seen by the Canary, that Israel is holding the bodies of 735 martyrs, including 67 children and 10 women. Moreover, it noted that 256 of these bodies are located in what are known as ‘cemeteries of numbers‘. These are simple, secret graves where the occupation places numbered metal plates instead of names. Israeli authorities surround each grave with stones without headstones, and assigns each number a security file.
The statement added that since the beginning of 2025, the occupation has held the bodies of 479 Palestinians. This included 86 detainees it martyred in prisons, or shortly after their release.
In the same context, the campaign referred to a report published by the Hebrew newspaper Haaretz on 16 July. This revealed that Israel is holding about 1,500 bodies of Palestinians from the Gaza Strip inside the Sde Teiman military camp, which the campaign described as:
an unprecedented moral and humanitarian crime that represents another form of collective punishment.
Violating international law amid the ceasefire agreement
This comes at a time when hundreds of thousands of Palestinians have begun returning to northern Gaza after the gradual withdrawal of Israeli forces. This is as part of the first phase of the ceasefire agreement. However, Palestinians returning have been shocked by the extent of Israel’s widespread destruction of residential neighbourhoods, hospitals, schools, and infrastructure.
Since October 2023, Israel has committed unprecedented genocide, leaving, according to official Palestinian figures, more than 67,200 martyrs and 169,900 wounded. Most of these martyrs are women and children. This is in addition to severe famine and a complete collapse of humanitarian services Israel has engineered in the Strip.
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.
‘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.
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.
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.
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.
On Friday, Venezuela’s ambassador to the United Nations, Samuel Moncada, alerted the UN Security Council that Venezuela strongly believes a US military attack is imminent. He characterized the situation as the latest aggression in decades-long attempts to oust first President Hugo Chávez and now President Nicolás Maduro.
“The plan is clear,” he said during an emergency meeting. “It is once again about executing the operation that already failed: overthrowing the legitimate and constitutional President of Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro Moros, to install a puppet regime and turn our country into a colony.”
When questioned by the press, Moncada elaborated on the sense of urgency.
Dr Munir Al-Barsh, director general of the Ministry of Health in Gaza, warned that the health system in the Strip is facing its “most dangerous moment” after two years of Israel’s genocide, stressing that what is happening:
is not just a humanitarian crisis, but a total collapse of the human right to life.
Dr Munir Al-Barsh: Gaza in a ‘race against time’ as people die ‘in the streets’
Dr Munir Al-Barsh told the Canary:
The health sector has been completely destroyed and is suffering greatly after two years of genocide.
He stressed that what is required from the international community is “justice, not pity”.
Al-Barsh added:
The world must now stand by our wounded and our collapsed hospitals, not just issue statements of sympathy.
He explained that the Ministry of Health has developed a comprehensive plan to revive the sector in cooperation with the World Health Organization (WHO), noting that:
medical personnel in Gaza are ready to implement it as soon as basic support and resources arrive.
According to Al-Barsh, Israel has completely destroyed 38 hospitals, leaving only 12 partially functioning amid shortages of fuel, electricity, water and vital medical supplies. He said:
We are in a race against time. People are dying in the streets, and operating rooms are at a standstill due to a lack of electricity and equipment.
Watching patients ‘slowly die before our eyes’
He called for the opening of direct supply corridors and the dispatch of urgent medical missions including surgeons, paediatricians, psychiatrists and physiotherapists. Significantly, he highlighted that there are more than 17,000 patients in urgent need of medical treatment who the WHO has approved for travel.
Dr Munir Al-Barsh also called for the rapid establishment of field hospitals in the north, centre, and south of the Strip to ease the pressure on the remaining medical facilities. Alongside this, he urged for the repair of water and sewage networks:
to prevent the spread of epidemics such as cholera, skin diseases and diarrhoea.
He pointed out that thousands of children suffer from chronic diseases, cancer and congenital malformations. Meanwhile women face deteriorating health conditions in the absence of medical care.
Al-Barsh concluded with an urgent call to support prosthetic limb and wheelchair programmes, and to provide urgent operational resources for health graduates and technicians:
to ensure the continuation of the remaining medical services.
He added in an emotional tone:
Gaza is not asking for the impossible… We just want to live, and not see our patients slowly die before our eyes.
Drone and artillery strikes by RSF paramilitary group hit Dar al-Arqam shelter in western city, says resistance committee
Militia drone and artillery strikes have killed at least 60 people at a displacement shelter in the besieged city of El Fasher in western Sudan, a local activist group has said.
The Resistance Committee for El Fasher said the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) paramilitary group hit the Dar al-Arqam displacement centre, which is in the grounds of a university.
Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper has confirmed that the government is looking to force the widely and rightly hated Digital ID “mass surveillance and digital control” scheme onto UK children from thirteen years of age, bringing to mind a dystopian children’s TV series.
The Unlisted: where fiction meets reality
In The Unlisted, schools collaborate with governments and corporations to force mind-control devices onto children through implantation sessions in their classrooms, leaving only a few who have managed to avoid implantation able to fight the evil plan.
Cooper defended the Orwellian scheme, claiming that the UK needs a ‘standardised’ process that encompasses children as well as adults. Supposedly, the government’s rationale for the plan is to prevent people working if they’re not entitled to, but its real applications are far darker and effectively the government intends to force all working-age people – and now children – to submit to it. The scheme will also reportedly make billions for the corporations who will implement it – and for former PM and war criminal Tony Blair.
What could possibly go wrong? Well, a huge amount according to Big Brother Watch, which fights the rampant spread of the surveillance state. The group’s director Silkie Carlo described it as ‘chilling’ and opening the way to mass abuses and authoritarianism:
The prospects of enrolling even children into this sprawling biometric ID system is sinister, unjustified and prompts the chilling question of just what Starmer’s government think the digital ID will be used for in the future.
At a time when parents are taking a critical view of whether children should have smartphones, it is shocking that the government is considering enrolling children into this digital ID app.
So sinister is the scheme that even the Lib Dems, never usually shy about going along with the government’s attacks on ordinary people, are spooked, saying that the extension of the scheme to kids shows their warnings about “mission creep” were correct and adding:
It is frankly sinister, unnecessary, and a clear step towards state overreach.
Digital ID: mission creep
The state’s other supposed ‘safeguarding’ and security measures have quickly been exposed as tools for control. The so-called ‘Online Safety Act’ was touted as a means to protect children but has only been used to enable the government to suppress information it doesn’t like – a tool so nefarious that cybersecurity expert Alan Woodward described it as a “technically dangerous and ethically questionable” measure that makes mass state surveillance “almost an inevitability”.
The Starmer government’s order to Apple to create a ‘back door’ for the UK state to snoop on users of its handsets that Amnesty International said.
severely harms the privacy rights of users in the UK and worldwide
And Starmer’s policy of allowing facial recognition to be rolled out is supposedly to catch ‘high harm offenders’ but is being seized upon by police forces to snoop on ordinary people as they go about their business and has already led to wrongful arrests and abuse of people misidentified by AI systems. The Ada Lovelace Institute, which aims to ensure AI and technology work for people and is not used against them, warned that there are no adequate safeguards against even greater abuses – like the illegal police use of everyone’s passport photos to train AI facial recognition against us, which is already happening.
And of course, the government has awarded access to our health data to companies run by Israel fanatics, like the notorious Palantir, whose CEO has said his firm exists to:
scare [US and Israel’s] enemies and on occasion kill them.
Which makes it all the more concerning that the Foreign Secretary of the UK’s genocide-denying, child-slaughterer–enabling government, Yvette Cooper, is the figure rolled out by that government to defend the plan to impose its sinister scheme on children.
The campaigner, who spent more than a decade in an Egyptian ‘vortex of incarceration’, wants to join his son in the UK while he reflects on the fight for freedom
Alaa Abd el-Fattah said he feared his mother might have died on hunger strike during the 12 years he spent in what he described as a “vortex of incarceration”.
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.
“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.
The Nobel Committee has frequently given the peace prize to major war makers, and frequently to do-gooders whose work in a variety of fields has been unrelated to abolishing war. It has also often given the prize to opponents and victims of the Western empire. But it has never given the prize to open advocates of war and fascistic government. Trump was never going to be given the prize directly.
Trump is not the right type of warmonger. Nobody could do it with a straight face. Zelensky was saying he’d support Trump for the peace prize if Trump were to send him long-range missiles with which to start World War III. Norway has been worried about what horrible things Trump might do upon failing to be given the prize. Trump has pushed NATO members into unprecedented levels of military spending, while fueling wars in Ukraine and Palestine, supporting Israeli warmaking around Western Asia, murdering the occupants of fishing boats, and declaring his right to attack Venezuela, and proclaiming his intention to practice for more wars using U.S. cities as training grounds. The Nobel Committee could not risk having him show up to accept its peace prize and denounce them for having some non-“white” people in the room or for having given the prize to someone he hates.
But the Nobel Committee did the next best thing, and must be hoping in vain that Trump manages to understand that. It gave the prize to an opponent of “the Venezuelan regime” and practically insisted on the Trumpian overthrow and takeover of Venezuela in the name of “democracy.” María Corina Machado may be a perfectly wonderful person. Her rights may have been horribly abused. The Venezuelan government, like most, may be deeply flawed. But only the slightest pretense was even made on Friday that Machado had anything to do with the cause for which the Nobel Peace Prize had been created. Instead, the presentation focused on demonizing the government of Venezuela. The drug-cartel excuse was missing. The oil explanation was missing. (Machado wants to privatize Venezuela’s oil for capitalist profiteers.) There was no direct advocacy for an invasion. But “democracy” was championed as having no greater hurdle before it than the existence of the current president of Venezuela. Machado has supported deadly sanctions against her own country and advocated for intervention.
Last year, the prize was a rare one in that it was actually related to peace. Hypocrisy and obliviousness are the norms. Alfred Nobel’s will, written in 1895, left funding for a prize to be awarded to “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.” No mention was made of Machado having done any of those things at all.
Most winners in recent years have either been people who did nice things that had nothing whatsoever to do with the relevant work (Kailash Satyarthi and Malala Yousafzai for promoting education, Liu Xiaobo for protesting in China, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and Albert Arnold (Al) Gore Jr. for opposing climate change, Muhammad Yunus and Grameen Bank for economic development, etc.) or people who actually engaged in militarism and would have opposed the abolition or reduction of standing armies if asked, and one of whom said so in his acceptance speech (the European Union, Barack Obama, etc.). Of course, Henry Kissinger is remembered as a Nobel Peace laureate, while Gandhi never measured up.
The Nobel Committee outraged Trump because it gave the prize to U.S. President Barack Obama, who, after delivering the only pro-war Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech ever, went to Hiroshima and told everyone there, including the survivors of the nuclear bombs who would later get the prize, that nuclear weapons would not be eliminated in his lifetime. He then proceeded to peddle familiar pro-war myths.
Two years ago, the Nobel Committee awarded a peace prize that had Iran in the role of Venezuela. Since then, we have seen Iran bombed and threatened by the upholders of Western civilization.
There is no question that advocating for human rights is a good thing, or that doing so under an oppressive government is a courageous thing, or that doing so without hypocritically using violence is a wise thing. But the Nobel Peace Prize was created to support war abolition, not a random selection of good issue advocacy. And the practice of selectively awarding the prize to victims of the governments targeted by the U.S. military supports, rather than reduces, militarism.
Of the most oppressive governments on Earth, there are only a few not armed, trained, and supplied by the U.S. military, and only one with which the U.S. government had recently torn up an agreement that stalled the drive toward war in Washington.
The recipient of the 2023 prize, Narges Mohammadi, like her colleague and previous recipient Shirin Ebadi, opposed both abuses by the Iranian government and sanctions and threats of war from the U.S. government. But the awarding of the prize did not serve peace, and only strengthened senseless global division. Everyone knows that no Western political journalist prisoner, such as Julian Assange, would ever be given such a prize.
In 2022, with its eyes on the news of the day, there was no question that the Committee would find some way to focus on Ukraine. But it steered clear of anyone seeking to reduce the risk of the at-the-time relatively minor war escalating or creating a nuclear apocalypse. It avoided anyone opposing both sides of the war, or anyone advocating for a ceasefire, negotiations, or disarmament. It did not even make the choice one might have expected of picking an opponent of Russian warmaking in Russia and an opponent of Ukrainian warmaking in Ukraine. Instead, the Nobel Committee chose advocates for human rights and democracy in Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine. But the group in Ukraine was recognized for having “engaged in efforts to identify and document Russian war crimes against the Ukrainian civilian population,” with no mention of war as a crime or of the possibility that the Ukrainian side of the war was committing atrocities. The Nobel Committee may have learned from Amnesty International’s experience of being widely denounced for documenting war crimes by the Ukrainian side.
In 2021, the prize went to advocates for human rights in Russia and in the Philippines. In 2020, the prize went to the World Food Programme. In 2019, the prize went to the President of Ethiopia and claimed some relationship to peace as he had been part of a peace agreement. But he was a president and commander of a military and not in any need of funding or support. He had engaged in all sorts of violence and human rights abuses, so that an advocate for human rights in his country could be given the prize if the U.S. government’s relationship to that country changes.
The 2018 prize did not go after war itself, but did go after sexual violence in wars. Not bad, relatively speaking. The 2013 prize went after chemical weapons. But stretching back through the years, we see a common practice of most often awarding a peace prize to either actual warmakers or to advocates for good causes that are not peace, as well as the practice of using the prize for Western political purposes that are hostile to peace. Although virtually every topic can be tangentially connected to war and peace, the avoidance of actual peace activism intentionally misses the point of the prize’s creation by Alfred Nobel and the influence of Bertha von Suttner.
The Nobel Peace Prize has largely devolved into a prize for random good things that don’t offend a culture dedicated to endless war. It has been awarded for journalism, for working against hunger, for protecting children’s rights or women’s rights, for teaching about climate change, and for opposing poverty. These are all good causes and can all be connected to war and peace. But these causes should go find their own prizes.
The Nobel Peace Prize is so devoted to awarding powerful officials and avoiding peace activism that it is often awarded to the wagers of wars, including Abiy Ahmed, Juan Manuel Santos, the European Union, and Barack Obama, among others. At times, the prize has gone to opponents of some aspect of war, advancing the idea of reforming even while maintaining the institution of war. These awards have come closest to the purpose for which the prize was created, and include the 2017, 2018, and 2024 prizes.
The prize has also been used to advance the propaganda of some of the world’s major war makers. Awards like that of 2023 have been used to denounce violations of human rights in non-Western nations targeted in the weapons-funding propaganda of Western nations. This record allows Western media outlets each year to speculate before the prize announcement on whether it will go to favorite propaganda topics, such as Alexei Navalny. The awarding of the prize has done nothing in recent years to diminish warmaking, and has perhaps done the opposite, with prizes going to opponents of the Russian government prior to escalations of the war in Ukraine.
In 2021, at a moment when the world’s largest weapons dealer, most frequent launcher of wars, dominant deployer of troops to foreign bases, greatest enemy of the International Criminal Court and the rule of law in international affairs, and supporter of oppressive governments — the U.S. government — was trumpeting a division between so-called democracies and non-democracies, the Nobel Committee chose to throw gas on the fire, declaring:
“Since its start-up in 1993, Novaja Gazeta has published critical articles on subjects ranging from corruption, police violence, unlawful arrests, electoral fraud, and ‘troll factories’ to the use of Russian military forces both within and outside Russia. Novaja Gazeta’s opponents have responded with harassment, threats, violence, and murder.”
Also, given the prize that year was a journalist from the Philippines, already funded by CNN and by the U.S. government, in fact by a U.S. government agency often involved in funding military coups.
That there are always numerous candidates who plausibly meet the criteria of Alfred Nobel’s will each year and could have been appropriately awarded a Nobel Peace Prize has been established by the late great Norwegian peace activist Fredrik Heffermehl and by the War Abolisher Awards. World BEYOND War has created the War Abolisher Awards to fill the gap left by the Nobel Committee’s frequent abandonment of the cause of ending war.
UPDATE October 10, 2025:
Here are two videos of this year’s peace laureate asking for military invasion of her own country:
Here’s a letter from this year’s peace laureate asking for help from Israel’s military in overthrowing her government:
Link to original, World BEYOND War: https://worldbeyondwar.org/nobel-committee-tried-its-best-to-give-trump-a-peace-prize/
This week on CounterSpin: In the immediate wake of the Hamas-led attacks on Israel in October 2023 that killed some 1,200 people, the Washington Post editorial board was warning that it was unacceptable to suggest that the attack “should be considered in context with previous actions by Israel”—those actions including decades of occupation, dispossession, deprivation, harassment and fatal violence.
Even now, two years on, as NBC News’ “What to Know” feature includes the information that Israel’s actions, denoted as “in retaliation” for October 7, have killed more than 67,000 people in Gaza—with many more wounded and maimed—US corporate media still twist themselves in knots trying to say that, yes, something very wrong is happening in Gaza—but somehow trying to stop it is worse than enabling and prolonging it. They do this in part by saving respectful space for someone like Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton to flatly declare there is “no famine in Gaza,” that “Palestine is a made-up fiction,” and that there is an “international media and political chorus…try[ing] to bully Israel into submission.”
Academic and writer Gregory Shupak, author of The Wrong Story:Palestine, Israel and the Media, has been looking at the tactics major media deploy to suggest that we use something other than our own eyes and judgment and humanity to assess the situation, and how to act in the face of it. We hear from him this week on CounterSpin.
Plus Janine Jackson takes a quick look at CBS‘s coverage of the Supreme Court’s Amy Coney Barrett.
The ruinous result of the US approach to freedom of information and media has made anti-democratic contagion impossible to ignore
Past/Present is a new column which places current events in historical context
For a generation of liberal democratic leaders shaped by the verities of the 1990s, the prospect that new media and communications technologies would deliver their citizens to fascism and war has seemed, until recently, unthinkable.
Today, waves of racist violence facilitated by mass-scale misinformation have finally invited the beginnings of some response. The fate of the US, and the poisonous entente of corporate media monopoly and far-right leadership, has made the prospect of anti-democratic contagion now impossible to ignore. Measures to protect the young have taken shape with relative speed, with Australia extolling its pioneering (and unproven) initiatives on age-verification and social network restriction due to take effect on 10 December.