In a report Amnesty International released Thursday 18 September 2025, the human rights organisation has accused countries, public institutions, and major companies around the world of enabling Israel to commit genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, and to entrench the apartheid regime and illegal occupation of the occupied Palestinian territory.
Amnesty International report: countries and companies are propping up Israel’s genocide in Gaza
The organisation said that these entities profit from the violations by supplying weapons and technology. They do this through settlement projects, or by remaining silent and failing to hold Israel accountable.
The illegal occupation would not have lasted 57 years, the apartheid regime would not have been entrenched for decades, and the genocide in Gaza would not have continued for months on end, had it not been for the continuous flow of weapons and preferential trade relations. Human dignity is not a commodity. While Palestinian mothers and children are dying of hunger, arms and technology companies are reaping huge profits.
Significantly, the briefing singled out 15 companies Callamard condemned as:
responsible for sustaining a government that has engineered famine and mass killing of civilians and denied Palestinians fundamental rights for decades. Every economic sector, the vast majority of states, and many private entities have knowingly contributed to or benefited from Israel’s genocide in Gaza, and its brutal occupation and apartheid in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
Corporations ‘contributing to Israel’s unlawful occupation’
Unsurprisingly, multiple major arms companies cropped up in Amnesty’s catalogue of shame. It included the following corporations profiting from the military industrial complex.
Boeing
The company has supplied Israel with bombs and guidance systems Israel uses in illegal airstrikes in Gaza. This includes for instance the Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM) and GBU-39 small-diameter bombs, which has killed dozens of civilians, including children.
Lockheed Martin
It provides supply and maintenance services for Israel’s fleet of F-16 and F-35 aircraft, the backbone of the Israeli Air Force bombing Gaza.
Elbit Systems
Infamously supplies drones, loitering munitions, and surveillance systems to the Israeli military. It is one of the main beneficiaries of Israel’s military operations.
Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI)
The firm supplies Israel with missile systems, drones, and military technologies the occupier has used in attacks on Gaza.
Technology and surveillance companies complicit in genocide
Amnesty’s briefing also named a number of technology and surveillance companies, highlighting how:
Many surveillance, AI, and cloud infrastructure companies supply equipment and services to Israel related to its surveillance of the Palestinian population and its security and military activities within the OPT.
Hikvision
It supplies Israel with video surveillance technology that supports the apartheid system against Palestinians. Notably, it identified that Israel uses the company’s biometric surveillance products, including facial recognition technology “extensively” to maintain its “continued domination and oppression” of Palestinians in the occupied territory.
Corsight
Corsight also develops facial recognition software used by the Israeli military in its attacks and security operations in Gaza. The briefing highlighted how the firm’s technology has “powered Israel’s surveillance operations in the Gaza Strip” since the start of its genocide.
Palantir Technologies
An American company specialising in artificial intelligence and data analysis, it provides the Israeli military and intelligence agencies with systems linked to military operations in Gaza.
Infrastructure and services companies wrapped up in apartheid
Besides arms and technology companies, Amnesty drew up a list of other notably complicit corporations. Companies operating infrastructure and services across occupied Palestine featured heavily among the worst offenders.
Mekorot
The Israeli government water company manages water networks in the West Bank in a discriminatory manner that deprives Palestinians and serves settlements.
Construcciones E Oxicarril (CAF)
A Spanish company building the light rail project in Jerusalem that serves and expands settlements.
HD Hyundai
A South Korean company that provides heavy equipment used in the demolition of homes in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, as well as maintenance services.
Online travel companies were also among those Amnesty called out in no uncertain terms. These included the likes of Airbnb, Booking.com, Expedia, and TripAdvisor. Despite warnings, these companies continue to list illegal settlements in the West Bank and occupied Jerusalem, thereby contributing to their economic support.
Amnesty International said these companies represent just a “small sample” of a vast network of companies and industries that have profited from the occupation and apartheid.
Urgent calls to suspend all ties to Israel
Amnesty International called on companies to suspend all sales and contracts that support Israeli violations. Otherwise, it warned they face potential civil and criminal liability for complicity in international crimes. The organisation’s call included:
Imposing a comprehensive ban on arms, security, military, and technological equipment destined for Israel.
Halting investments and purchases from implicated companies.
Preventing these companies from participating in exhibitions, contracts, and government grants.
Imposing sanctions such as asset freezes and travel bans on those involved.
Callamard concluded by saying:
It is unacceptable for companies to profit from the death and suffering of Palestinians. The economic complicity that perpetuates the occupation and genocide must end immediately.
Columbia University has officially opened the application process for the 2026–2027 Human Rights Advocates Program (HRAP), a globally recognized initiative that supports human rights defenders from around the world.
The program provides a unique opportunity for experienced human rights advocates to enhance their knowledge, strengthen their networks, and build critical skills through academic and professional development in New York City.
A Legacy of Supporting Human Rights Defenders
Established in 1989, the Human Rights Advocates Program has a long-standing history of empowering frontline activists. Over the years, HRAP has become a vital platform for practitioners working in some of the most challenging and marginalized communities worldwide.
By leveraging the vast academic and institutional resources available at Columbia University and within New York City—home to a dense network of international organizations and non-governmental organizations (NGOs)—HRAP provides advocates with a transformative experience that amplifies their voices and accelerates the impact of their work.
Program Structure and Opportunities
Participants in HRAP engage in a comprehensive program that combines academic study, skill-building workshops, mentoring, and networking. The curriculum is designed to be both rigorous and practical, offering a space for reflection and growth.
Advocates attend seminars specifically tailored to the challenges and strategies of the human rights field. They also have the opportunity to enroll in courses across Columbia University’s schools and departments, further enriching their understanding of legal, political, social, and economic issues related to their advocacy work.
One of the key features of the program is the series of workshops led by staff from leading human rights organizations. These sessions cover topics such as advocacy strategies, digital security, media engagement, organizational development, and fundraising. Participants also attend meetings with policymakers, funders, academics, and fellow advocates, fostering long-term professional relationships and collaborative opportunities. Mentoring is another cornerstone of the program, offering one-on-one guidance from experienced professionals who help participants refine their goals and campaign strategies.
Since its inception, more than 350 human rights advocates from over 100 countries have completed the program.
Application Process and Deadline
Applicants interested in joining the 2026–2027 cohort are encouraged to visit the official HRAP Admissions page for detailed information on eligibility criteria, application requirements, and program expectations.
The selection process is competitive and seeks individuals with a strong track record of human rights advocacy, demonstrated leadership potential, and a clear vision for how participation in HRAP will advance their work.
The deadline to apply is Monday, December 1, 2025. Late applications will not be considered, so prospective participants are advised to begin the process early to ensure all required materials are submitted on time.
On Friday 19 September, groups standing in solidarity with the Congolese people against blood minerals, human rights abuses, and genocide will bring dissent and disruption to Apple’s front door. Coinciding with the company’s release day for the new iPhone 17, Stand For Congo UK, Friends of the Congo, and other groups, will pitch up outside the Apple Store on Regents Street in London.
Together, they will call on the public to boycott Apple. And crucially, they’re asking the public to join them in resisting exploitation in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).
DRC’s critical mineral scramble: a colonial cocktail of human rights abuses and conflict
The DRC is the world’s largest producer of cobalt – containing more than half the world’s reserves of the critical mineral. In 2024, the DRC produced 220,000 metric tons of cobalt, accounting for approximately 84% of global production.
It’s also a major producer of coltan, the main ore of tantalum, as well as tin, and tungsten ores. Notably, these three together make up the so-called ‘3T’ minerals – prized for their use in electronic devices like computers and mobile phones. The DRC generates at least 40% of the world’s supply of the key tantalum ore, and significant amounts of the other two minerals.
As a result, the DRC has been at the centre of big companies’ global scramble to plunder these mineral resources. The result has been the fueling of violence and genocide in central African country. Armed groups have fought over mines and natural resources to fund their operations. They’ve left a harrowing trail of death and destruction in their wake.
As the Business and Human Rights Resource Centre has detailed:
The DRC government, civil society and UN experts report that large quantities of tin, tungsten, and tantalum (known as the 3T minerals) exported from Rwanda as “conflict-free” in fact originate in conflict-affected areas of the DRC and are illegally smuggled across the border. This trade is reportedly linked to the financing of armed groups and serious human rights abuses amid the ongoing conflict between the government and the M23 rebel group, allegedly backed by Rwanda, for control over the mineral-rich Kivu provinces.
Toxic pollution decimating Congolese communities
What’s more, alongside violent land-grabs for these conflict minerals, the mining itself is threatening the lives and livelihoods of local communities.
In 2024, non-profit RAID released a damning report on the devastating toxic pollution toll cobalt mining was having on communities and the environment in the DRC. It has contributed to staggering levels of gynecological and reproductive health problems for women and girls in communities living nearby to the world’s largest cobalt mines. Plummeting crop yields had decimated people’s incomes. The confluence of medical care costs and falling incomes had led to ever declining living standards. Communities have scrabbled to afford food, education costs, and healthcare as a result.
Meanwhile, mining companies are exploiting Congolese mine workers with paltry pay amid dangerous working conditions. A separate report RAID and Kolwezi-based Centre d’Aide Juridico-Judiciaire (CAJJ) put out in June highlighted companies paying workers well below living wage. It noted how this was leaving them:
unable to afford food or education for their children
It also underscored the unsafe working conditions, with workers describing:
being placed in highly dangerous situations, such as climbing scaffolding without a safety harness or being exposed to toxic substances, but said they refrain from speaking out for fear of losing their jobs.
And tech companies like Apple are complicit actors in this corporate colonial cocktail of abuse.
Apple: awash with lawsuits for conflict mineral complicity
In 2019, 13 Congolese families named Apple among a series of companies in a lawsuit over forced child labour in DRC cobalt mines. Their children had died or suffered severe injuries working in the dangerous conditions at UK mining company Glencore and Chinese cobalt firm Zhejiang Huayou Cobalt’s mining operations. The companies supplied its critical minerals to Apple and other tech firms like Google, Tesla, Microsoft, and Dell. Ultimately, a US court dismissed the case in 2021. And, in March 2024, the court of appeal refused to hold the companies to account.
However, in December 2024, Apple was under fire again for its sourcing of conflict minerals. This time, the DRC filed criminal charges against the tech giant in France and Belgium. But in February 2025, a Paris prosecutor also dropped this case. The DRC’s justice minister is planning to appeal.
Predictably, Apple has repeatedly refuted that it sources these critical minerals from companies committing human rights abuses. In its Conflict Minerals Report 2024, the company said that:
In response to reports of escalating regional conflict, as well as smuggling and illegal taxation, in June 2024 Apple issued a notification to its suppliers to cease the sourcing, directly or indirectly, of 3TG for Apple parts and products from the DRC and Rwanda.
However, big tech companies like Apple consistently fail to properly map and monitor their supply chains for rights breaches. In 2022, research and campaign group Global Witness unveiled that Apple was relying on a supply chain due diligence scheme that militias in the DRC were using to launder conflict minerals. The DRC’s lawyers have also argued that while its decision was welcome, it would need to be:
verified on the ground with facts and figures to support them.
Stand up for the Congo against Apple’s sales ‘stained with blood’ on iPhone 17 launch day
In September 2024, protest group Apples Against Apartheid spearheaded a global day of action against the iPhone 16’s release.
Now, as the company prepares its next major product release, campaign groups will stand up to Apple once more:
You can join the Boycott Apple campaign in London at Apple’s Regent Street store from 5pm on Friday 19 September as the iPhone 17 is launched. Stand For Congo and its partners are calling for people to “take a stand” against the company to:
expose their complicity in human rights abuses.
Vitally, the boycott seeks to disrupt:
their sales, built on the backs of Congolese people and stained with their blood.
Janine Jackson interviewed CEPR’s Alex Main about Trump’s Venezuelan boat assault for the September 12, 2025, episode of CounterSpin. This is a lightly edited transcript.
Janine Jackson: The US military struck a small boat in the southern Caribbean September 2, killing 11 people. The next day, the New York Timestold readers, “Pentagon officials were still working Wednesday on what legal authority they would tell the public was used to back up the extraordinary strike in international waters.”
As telling and concerning as that is, it seems it might’ve been generous in posing it as a question to be asked. In an online exchange, Vice President JD Vance declared that “killing cartel members who poison our fellow citizens is the highest and best use of our military.” And when someone pointed out that killing the citizens of another nation who are civilians, without any due process, is called a war crime, Vance replied, “I don’t give a shit what you call it.”
It does matter what things are called, how they relate to the law as we understand it, and how such an act is responded to. We’re joined now by Alex Main, director of international policy at the Center for Economic and Policy Research. Welcome back to CounterSpin, Alex Main.
Alex Main: Thank you, Janine. Great to be with you.
JJ: Reporting on this strike is full of qualifiers. Politicosays it was “against an alleged drug vessel leaving Venezuela, which President Donald Trump said was aimed at the Venezuelan Tren de Aragua group, killing 11 suspected traffickers.” But as the story gets told and retold, qualifiers morph into facts, and it becomes a matter of how else should we kill narco terrorists, if not in international waters?
And you want to say, “Wait, wait, wait. No. We have to first properly understand the events themselves.” So before we get to the pretenses behind it, the uses sure to be made of it, what do we actually know about this strike attack on a boat, that killed 11 people last week?
AM: Yeah, excellent question, and one that still needs to be figured out. And I’m really glad you bring up the fact that from the outset, so much of the media really took at face value what the Trump administration said about this boat and its occupants and its origin, and didn’t really seem to question this idea that they were all drug traffickers, that they might be associated with the Tren de Aragua. And we can talk more about the Tren de Aragua, which is a very nebulous sort of organization indeed.
And there was no effort whatsoever made, at least initially, to try to identify who the victims were, who were these 11 people that were shot in a small boat, that was clearly not a military boat of any kind. There was no indication that these individuals were armed, and all we know about them is what we see from aerial footage that was proudly posted by President Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio—just shows this grainy footage of a small boat, with what looks like people inside, and then a big flash of light, and that suggests that the boat was blown up.
And that’s really all we had. But, again, you immediately saw a lot of the media just go along with the narrative that was put out there by the Trump administration, and that itself is very problematic.
And to this day, I haven’t seen, really, any sort of major media, certainly from the US, make any sort of effort to try to identify the victims. The most I’ve seen in that regard has been from local media in Venezuela, where it seems that a small village, where there does seem to be drug trafficking, they had lost eight people from that village, and other people from neighboring villages. I mean, this sort of remains hearsay, but this is the most that I’ve really seen in terms of any kind of documentation. But I haven’t really seen any journalists investigate this, in any depth. And that doesn’t seem to be a priority.
JJ: Yeah, it doesn’t seem to be the priority, because it’s already being thrown into a number of narratives that were preexisting. So let’s put it in some context: If we call it a murder, that’s one thing. If we call it a military attack, well, those terms are going to affect your understanding. But we do know that it exists in a context of US bullying, essentially, of Venezuela and of President Maduro. I mean, that’s the way it’s going to be sold.
AM: Yeah, absolutely. I mean, that’s the two pieces of this, really. On the one hand, you have what appears to be the next stage of an ongoing drug war—a forever war, really, that the Trump administration has wholeheartedly subscribed to, as have prior administrations for decades now. But where, to date at least, we hadn’t seen such an overt, extrajudicial killing that had taken place by the US military, and publicly, proudly displayed, as it has been—without, as you mentioned, any sort of legal justification to this date.
And you do have a number of members of Congress that have been asking the Trump administration to explain what the legal grounds are for blowing up these people that didn’t seem to pose any kind of threat to the United States. They were in the south Caribbean, to begin with, hundreds of miles away from the coast of the US, and seemingly headed for the island of Trinidad, which is one of the islands of the Caribbean that’s really the furthest from the coast of the United States. So how could it be plausibly depicted as some kind of a threat? But the administration just hasn’t bothered providing a justification. And, of course, no Republicans, with the notable exception of Sen. Rand Paul, have tried to take the administration to task about that.
JJ: I’m going to bring us back to this expansion of “war on terror” in a second. But in your statement from CEPR, you referred to a massacre in Honduras that had resonance here that seemed to be a kind of referent. Can you just tell us a little bit about that, and why it made sense for you to connect these things?
AM: Absolutely. So Honduras is one of the countries that we’ve followed closely for many years at CEPR, where we monitor the impact of US policy throughout Latin America. And I think it’s fair to say that Honduras is one of the countries where the US has had perhaps the most negative impact, along with Venezuela, along with Cuba and a few others. But over the past 15 years or so, certainly with the coup in 2009 that was really enabled by the US, where the US allowed that coup, an overt military coup against the democratically elected leader, to be successful.
And then, following that, you really had many years of what a lot of Hondurans refer to as a “narco dictatorship,” enormous repression that was going on, an extreme militarization of the country, under the right-wing authoritarian governments that remained in place, really thanks to fraudulent elections, particularly in 2017, that ended up being endorsed by successive US administrations.
But in 2012, you had collaboration, if you want to call it that, a joint operation involving heavily militarized US DEA agents and a heavily militarized, supposedly elite Honduran police force. And together they carried out an operation in a remote part of Honduras with an Afro-Indigenous population, and had what they called a successful operation in which they killed some drug traffickers that had attacked them during the operation. That’s the narrative that they pushed out after the operation took place back in 2012.
But then locals, first of all, were reporting very different things, from what they’d seen on the ground during the operation. And I, along with colleagues who work on Honduras, Annie Bird, Karen Spring, we visited the village of Ahuas, and we interviewed many, many people, and we interviewed also local security officials, and put together a very different picture of what had happened.
And that involved, first of all, an operation that was led, directed, by the DEA, whereas the DEA had always presented it as a Honduran operation, where they were playing a secondary role. That, first of all. And then, secondly, it became increasingly clear that they had not been attacked in any way, that they shot innocent bystanders, really, that were on a boat that had nothing to do with drug trafficking, that happened to be on the river at that time, and that was perceived as a threat, and then was shot up.
And then it turned out afterwards, and there was a subsequent inspector general review from both Department of State and Department of Justice inspector generals, which confirmed that the DEA had actually given orders to fire on this boat, where four innocent villagers were killed, others badly injured, a really huge tragedy in this small community in a remote part of Honduras.
And a completely false narrative had been sold by the DEA to the media, to the US Congress. They lied outright about what happened. And, again, this inspector general review—which took years to come out, thanks to all the stonewalling that came from the DEA and the State Department during those years—well, that did finally confirm what we heard from people on the ground during our investigation, which was that the DEA was entirely responsible for this mission, and ultimately responsible for the deaths of these innocent people, who were shot up with a machine gun, essentially.
And we’re seeing such big parallels now. In fact, it’s just been revealed that the video, that was heavily edited and was then posted by President Trump and by Secretary Rubio, that editing, what it didn’t show—according to sources, apparently within the military, that spoke to the New York Times—is that the boat was shot at repeatedly. The boat had turned around, and headed in the other direction. So if it wasn’t bad enough that this boat had been shot up without any clear justification, it’s becoming clear that the boat had actually turned away and was heading in the opposite direction, thereby not posing, really, any kind of threat whatsoever, if ever it had posed a threat.
JJ: I maintain that when reporters took the expression “war on terror” out of quotation marks, something important was lost. We have laws against drug trafficking, against drug dealing, and even against drug use, and they just don’t include killing people without judge or jury. That’s why we call them “laws.”
This action, along with other actions we could talk about, seems to be a further step in this ever fungible rationale. Now we’re going to call crime, or drug crime, “terrorism,” and make it subject to the actions that unleashes. This seems to be, just in terms of public information and public understanding, a further creep of this very nebulous and concerning framework.
AM: Absolutely. And, of course, what we saw last Tuesday, with these extrajudicial killings, is very reminiscent of what we’ve been seeing in the Middle East for a while, with the drone warfare—if you want to call it that; I would say more drone assassinations—that have been carried out.
This became a very big thing during the Obama administration in Iraq, Yemen, Syria, Somalia; people were targeted with no sort of due process. Civilians were killed in the process, all in the name of the “war on terror” and under the AUMF, the Authorization of Use of Military Force, from 2001 after 9/11, all part of this big “war on terror.”
And now we’re seeing a similar sort of incident taking place in the Caribbean, but there isn’t even an AUMF in this case. Not that it was justified in the Middle East, but they attempted a legal justification; in this case, there is no attempt.
The only thing that we’ve seen from the Trump administration so far is a letter to Congress, basically affirming that this fell within Article Two powers of the president to defend the country against imminent attack. As if this little boat in the south of the Caribbean, hundreds of miles from the US—they couldn’t even reach the shore of the US—was somehow an imminent threat to the US.
And then things started to really heat up, I would say, when, at the end of July, the Department of the Treasury announced that the Cartel de los Soles is also a specially designated global terrorist organization.
Now, the Cartel de los Soles is sort of nonexistent in terms of the global drug trade. There’s no indication that they’re really involved in any sort of major drug trafficking. There’s no actual indication that they really exist.
What you have is, basically, this accusation that senior military officials in the Venezuelan government have been involved in drug trafficking, much as you see in many countries, really around Latin America and even other parts of the world, corrupt officials that are paid off by drug traffickers to allow them to ship their drugs through the country, outside of the country, to turn a blind eye to drug-trafficking activities. That’s really the extent of it.
And based on that, the Trump administration has created this monster. They depict the Cartel de los Soles as a major transnational cartel, with Maduro at the top, pulling the strings. There’s absolutely zero evidence of this.
And then, on top of that, they have increased the bounty on Maduro’s head, information leading to his arrest, to $50 million. And then, of course, the beginning of August, there was this announcement of a major deployment of US military assets in the south Caribbean to deal with the “narco-terrorist threat.”
So they’ve been setting the stage for this boat attack for a while. Apparently they want to do more of this. That’s certainly what Rubio has said, and Trump has said: There’s more where this came from.
JJ: And all the murk around it, and disinformation and misinformation and lack of information—all of that plays a role, particularly as media allow it to slip and slide: “accused of being,” “actually are.” And then, of course, well, are there drug dealers in countries whose regimes the US doesn’t want to overthrow? Like, why are we looking for the keys under the lamppost? There are a whole lot of questions that are not being asked, big-picture questions about this, that would tie this—“extrajudicial” is a very generous word—killing of people to just the simple desire of this administration to have a new president of Venezuela. And yet we as readers, as news consumers, we’re supposed to see these as separate news events.
AM: That’s right. I mean, this is just the latest chapter in the many, many attempts to bring about regime change in Venezuela from the US. It goes all the way back to at least 2002, when the George W. Bush administration supported a coup against the democratically elected government of Hugo Chávez, at the time, that was overturned, essentially thanks to a popular rebellion against the military coup.
But ever since then, there have been all sorts of attempts. And of course the last big one was in 2019, when then Senator Marco Rubio worked with National Security Advisor John Bolton to come up with this plan to support a parallel government in Venezuela, that of Juan Guaido, from the hardline opposition in Venezuela, to declare him president with very little legal basis, if any, and then to overtly push for a coup to take place.
And it went quite far. And at the time, it looked like they might actually be successful in getting at least a part of the Venezuelan military to rebel against the government.
Had that happened, I think we would’ve seen a real bloodbath, and probably a prolonged civil conflict in Venezuela, certainly in no one’s interest, no matter what you think of Maduro, certainly not in the interest of the people of Venezuela, and not in the interests of the US or any other country in the region that would suffer the consequences of a major war in Venezuela.
But that’s what happened. And the media went along with the narrative back then as well. And it’s been a recurrent problem on Venezuela. Facts don’t seem to really matter. For a long time, Venezuela was depicted as a dictatorship, despite the fact that you had transparent, competitive elections there. That was not the case of the last election, in 2024, and we can talk about that.
But the circumstances, as well, are of a country that’s been under siege by the US, through extremely potent sanctions that have been in place, well, for a very long time. But the particularly potent sanctions came into place under Trump in 2017, during the first administration, again, pushed by then-Sen. Marco Rubio and others, and then really hardened during this last attempt of regime change in 2019, to the point that it really devastated the economy of Venezuela, contributed to massive outmigration of millions of Venezuelans, including many, many to the US, due to the real economic collapse of that country. The economy was in bad shape to begin with. But there’s no doubt at all that the US sanctions really made the situation exponentially worse. Basically the worst depression that we’ve ever seen in the region’s history in a country that’s not at war.
And so that’s the reality of what’s happened in Venezuela, and it’s one that’s really not described, at least not correctly, in the media.
And we see the crisis in Venezuela. There is an ongoing economic crisis, there’s a political crisis, and the US’s role in that is generally never really talked about by the media. Only occasionally on the margins, maybe at the end of the article, they might mention that there are these very hard-hitting sanctions that have destroyed the economy. Though they’re unlikely to mention that they’ve destroyed the economy.
JJ: Right. And this strike is not going to necessarily play the role that we might hope, in terms of complicating that understanding of the US role in Venezuela.
Just finally, we understand we’re in medias res. It’s September 11; we’re just learning what we can learn. But what would you be looking for reporters, in terms of basic questions, in terms of bigger questions? What would you hope from US journalism at this point?
Alex Main: “I would’ve hoped by now that more US journalists would report on the fact that the US is at the brink of war with Venezuela.”
AM: I would’ve hoped by now that more US journalists would report on the fact that the US is at the brink of war with Venezuela, basically through enormous provocation, amassing these warships close to the Venezuelan coast.
More recently, they’ve brought in some F-35 stealth fighters that have never been used for counter-narcotics operations, that have been used for major military operations. They’re now based in Puerto Rico.
And, of course, this strike against the boat, with all the rhetoric accompanying it, the rhetoric directed at Maduro and his so-called “cartel,” certainly is pushing things in the direction of a direct conflict with Venezuela. And there is an anticipation among many, certainly in Venezuela, that the US is soon going to be carrying out strikes in Venezuela. They’re now well-equipped to do that, with these fighters based in Puerto Rico.
On the Venezuelan side, they’re preparing, basically, for a US invasion. They’ve militarized the entire coast at this point. They are mobilizing the militias.
And around the region, there are real fears that this is going to blow up. And not necessarily because of an existing plan to strike Venezuela, although many think that there is a plan. But simply because when you deal with this kind of brinkmanship, anything can happen.
Last week, Venezuela, as a response to the strike on the boat that came from Venezuela, with presumably Venezuelan citizens on it, did a flyover with a couple of F-16s over some US Navy ships. And this was, of course, very poorly received by the Trump administration. And the Department of Defense put out a very strong statement, very threatening towards Maduro, referring to the country’s government as a “cartel.”
And, again, we’re in the context of this “war on cartels,” this “war on narco-terrorists,” where, according to the Trump administration, the narco-terrorists are running Venezuela today. So, obviously, this creates real fear that things could escalate even more, and that there could be some sort of incident that sets off a direct military conflict with Venezuela. And that would have absolutely terrible consequences for the region, and ultimately for the US as well.
JJ: We’ve been speaking with Alex Main. He’s director of international policy at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, and you can follow their work online at CEPR.net. Alex Main, thank you very much for joining us this week on CounterSpin.
A powerful new documentary produced by Fault Lines on Al Jazeera English tells the story of Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya, the Palestinian pediatrician and director of the Kamal Adwan Hospital in northern Gaza whom Israel has detained with virtually no contact to the outside world for almost nine months. He became known to millions of people around the world for his regular video dispatches from inside…
The former lawyer was outspoken about China’s response to the Covid pandemic
A Chinese citizen journalist who was previously jailed after reporting from the frontlines of the Covid-19 outbreak in Wuhan is set to face trial for the second time, according to human rights activists and media freedom groups.
Zhang Zhan, who was released from prison in May 2024 after serving four years behind bars, is expected to face trial once again for “picking quarrels and provoking trouble”, a catch-all term used to target government critics, at 9am on Friday at the Shanghai Pudong New Area people’s court.
A skilled and persuasive human rights lawyer who fought for civil liberties in the face of over-reaching anti-terror law
As a leading authority on counter-terror legislation, Conor Gearty was incensed at the way anti-terror laws are so often enacted to stifle debate and intimidate protest.
The Labour government’s banning of Palestine Action, he argued, was “preposterous”. He told a podcast for Prospect magazine that the then home secretary, Yvette Cooper, had fallen back on the “usual claim they make in a tight corner”, that “‘you have no idea what I know’ … They calculated the ban would produce not much of a reaction.”
WARNING: THIS ARTICLE CONTAINS GRAPHIC VIDEO SOME READERS MAY FIND DISTRESSING
Israel committed a horrific massacre yesterday, 17 September 2025, targeting forcibly displaced Palestinian civilians near to Al-Shifa Hospital, as they were evacuating Gaza City.
At least 15 people have been killed, including Palestinian journalist Alaa Al-Sawalhi, a cameraman for Al-Quds Al-Youm channel.
Women and children were among those killed.
Israel committing ‘full-fledged’ war crimes in full view
A press release issued by Hamas on Wednesday evening calls the targeting of these innocent civilians:
a full-fledged war crime that exposes the brutality of this entity in attacking civilians even at moments of displacement.
This massacre, along with all the other atrocities that happened yesterday – including the targeting, by Israeli occupation forces, of two Palestinian civilians near the Red Crescent in Tel Al-Air, south of Gaza City – came only one day after a UN commission confirmed that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.
Between 12am and 9.20pm on 17 September, the total number of Palestinians killed by the occupation was 86.
Malta is still struggling to adequately protect human rights defenders, including journalists, according to a new OSCE review published on 2 September 2025.
While some progress has been noted, the report warns that legal pressure, rhetoric used and a lack of meaningful reforms continue to erode fundamental freedoms. The assessment by the OSCE’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) follows a fact-finding mission to Malta in March 2023.
ODIHR noted “concerning instances of disparaging rhetoric and smearing remarks used by political actors, including politicians and other persons of authority” in relation to activists in various areas and journalists Those working on corruption, migration, environmental issues, and sexual and reproductive rights were identified as frequent targets. Interviewees described harassment, threats and intimidation, often extending to their families.
Women activists reported sexist abuse, including being spat on or confronted physically.
Interviewees told ODIHR that their work was often portrayed as partisan political activity. The assessment also noted attempts to damage reputations, harm employment prospects and label defenders as enemies, traitors or political opponents.
The report connects this hostile environment to the 2021 public inquiry into journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia’s assassination, which found that state inaction and vilification of journalists fostered a “climate of impunity.” Two years later, ODIHR says many recommendations remain unfulfilled, particularly on media freedom and journalist safety.
The OSCE heard accounts of online trolling, social media threats, spoofing campaigns, threatening phone calls, and verbal abuse of family members.
ODIHR also found that Maltese journalists continue to receive threatening letters from local and international law firms, sometimes prompting article removals due to fear of high legal costs.
Although defamation was decriminalised in 2018, gaps in the law remain, and proposed anti-SLAPP reforms have been criticised as inadequate.
Freedom of expression and access to information also face obstacles. Journalists spoke of costly and lengthy efforts to secure public records, while whistle-blower protections are seen as weak due to fears of reprisals.
The report calls for a public review of Malta’s Freedom of Information Act, the release of a government-commissioned evaluation, and new legislative proposals to improve transparency and accountability.
Civil society activists also described intimidation around protests, including court rulings against authorities for repeatedly removing banners and memorials related to Caruana Galizia.
ODIHR acknowledged political support for LGBTI rights, with NGOs in this sector receiving strong public backing and engagement from officials. Freedom of assembly was generally upheld, and some NGOs received benefits through tax incentives and secondments. Nonetheless, ODIHR concludes that Malta must urgently rebuild trust and ensure a safer environment for rights defenders.
Key recommendations include public recognition of their work, stronger police protection protocols, robust anti-SLAPP legislation, improved transparency measures, and genuine consultation on media reforms. “Baseless lawsuits, threats and smear campaigns not only endanger individuals but weaken democracy itself,” the report warns.
ODIHR said it is ready to support Malta in implementing reforms but emphasised that political commitment is vital.
These reports reaffirm that conscientious objection is a recognised human right within UN frameworks. Crucially, they link conscientious objection to refugee protection and non-refoulement, underlining that objectors facing persecution must be granted safety.
For advocates, these references are valuable tools: they can be cited in policy dialogue, asylum cases, and international advocacy to press governments to respect the right to refuse military service, to provide genuine alternatives, and to end the punishment of objectors. By embedding conscientious objection into the broader UN human rights agenda, these reports strengthen the case for protecting COs everywhere, especially in times of war.
On 12 September, 2025 the seven rights groups described Khalid’s prolonged imprisonment as a “violation of his rights” and an instance of “selective persecution”, asserting that he was arrested on “politically motivated and spurious charges” on 13 September 2020.
Alongside Amnesty International, the signatories include: CIVICUS, FORUM-ASIA, Front Line Defenders. International Commission of Jurists, International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT).
The statement expressed deep concern over the invocation of the anti-terror law UAPA (Unlawful Activities Prevention Act) and the repeated denial of bail to Khalid.
“These repeated bail denials combined with persistent delays, and the continued absence of trial proceedings, amount to a violation of his right to a fair trial, including speedy trial, guaranteed under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which India is a state party, as well as under the Constitution of India,” the statement read.
The groups further highlighted the unequal application of bail standards, particularly in cases related to the 2020 Delhi riots and anti-CAA protests, saying:
“We are further concerned about the discriminatory application of bail standards in cases arising from the violence surrounding the CAA protests and more broadly in cases involving the UAPA. While similarly situated accused have been granted bail, Khalid continues to be denied relief. Such unequal treatment violates the principle of equality before the law and sets a deeply troubling precedent.”
The rights organizations also drew attention to the role of the Delhi Police and political leaders during the 2020 Delhi riots, where Khalid and other Muslim activists were implicated.
“Independent investigations, including by Amnesty International India, Human Rights Watch and Delhi Minorities Commission, have documented the role of the Delhi Police in human rights violations during the CAA protests and the ensuing violence,” the statement said. “Police officers were recorded engaging in beatings, torture and other ill-treatment, and arbitrary arrests, and in some cases standing by as mobs attacked protesters.”
The statement noted that Indian courts have repeatedly criticized the police investigations, describing them as: “Very poor,” “callous,” and “fraught with multiple flaws,” with documented instances of fabricated cases and manipulated records.
It further condemned the role of senior political leaders, who were seen delivering inflammatory hate speeches, branding protesters as “traitors” or “anti-nationals”, and openly inciting violence.
“Despite the existence of video and documentary evidence, no meaningful accountability measures have been taken against implicated political figures or police officials,” the statement added.
The rights groups emphasized that Khalid’s prolonged detention is not an isolated incident, but part of a larger pattern of repression against those exercising their constitutional rights to freedom of expression and association.
“Other students and human rights activists, including Gulfisha Fatima, Sharjeel Imam, Khalid Saifi, Shifa-ur-Rehman and Meeran Haider, also remain in detention for their peaceful opposition to the CAA, while police officials and political leaders responsible for incitement or complicity in violence continue to enjoy impunity,” the groups noted. “This selective prosecution erodes public trust in the justice system, entrenches impunity for state actors, and criminalises free expression.”
The seven international organizations demand:
The immediate and unconditional release of Umar Khalid
The equal application of bail standards
An end to the discriminatory treatment of human rights defenders
Accountability for police officers and political leaders implicated in incitement and violence
On Monday 15 September, the Science Museum in London held a private cocktails and canapés reception for one of its key sponsors, genocide profiteer and prolific human rights violator Adani.
In the wake of this, campaigners are ramping up calls for a full cultural and educational boycott of the museum for its gross greenwashing for big polluters.
Adani at the Science Museum: cocktails and canapés for the climate criminal
The company became the sponsor for the museum’s new ‘Energy Revolution’ gallery. Opening in 2023, this replaced the Shell-sponsored ‘Atmosphere’ gallery.
The conglomerate is involved in large-scale coal mining. It is one of the foremost companies profiting from the polluting industry driving the climate crisis.
As India’s biggest coal producer, it has been at the centre of violent displacements of Indigenous Adivasi people from their ancestral lands. It has an extensive record of human rights abuses against the Indigenous population. Alongside this, the company has a chequered history of workers’ rights violations. It has subjected its employees to inhumane conditions which have led to injuries and deaths at its facilities.
And while the museum sponsorship is through its renewables arm Adani Green Energy, the group is ramping up its production of coal. On 13 September it announced a new agreement for an additional 2,400MW power plant in Bhagalpur.
Adani is also the operator of Israel’s Haifa port, through which countries are supplying it with the fuel and weapons its using in its genocide. It is a manufacturer of drones in partnership with Israeli weapons company Elbit Systems. Of course, Israel has used these to brutally massacre Palestinians in Gaza.
Yet, despite ethical issues around the group, the Science Museum has given the Adani name a huge presence within the museum. It has ignored the group’s role in exacerbating global issues of climate crisis and enabling war crimes.
Once again, the museum’s shameful greenwashing for the coal giant was on full display at this latest schmooze-fest.
Adani execs: awash with bribery allegations
Adani held its private reception for investors inside the Science Museum’s ‘Energy Revolution: Adani Green Energy Gallery’. As around 50-60 smartly dressed guests arrived, activists greeted them by unfurling a banner at the museum doorway which read:
The Science Museum: complicit in human rights buses, fraud, bribery, climate destruction, genocide.
The cocktails and canapés event coincided with a series of in-person investor meetings hosted by the Adani Group. Between 15 -17 September the ports, coal and green energy arms of the conglomerate came together for these in London.
The event comes after the museum confirmed earlier this year that it was “monitoring developments” after the US issued arrest warrants for senior Adani executives. This included billionaire Chairman Gautam Adani. The warrants were over their alleged role in a major $265m bribery scheme. Ironically, the bribery allegations revolved around a solar project the company has showcased in its Energy Revolution gallery.
As the Art Newspaperreported, previous Freedom of Information requests showed that the Science Museum:
produced an internal due diligence report which identified instances of alleged corruption and fraud, as well as human rights concerns associated with the Adani Group.
Outrageously however, the Science Museum has obstinately maintained its ties with Adani and hosted this function. This is also despite the clear anti-bribery positions in its own ethics policy, which states that:
The Science Museum Group will not accept donations, sponsorship or grants where the donor has acted, or believed to have acted, illegally in the acquisition of funds or where there are concerns of fraud, money laundering or other financial crime.
In bed with BP too
For the last four years, climate crisis and pro-Palestine campaigners have been holding the museum’s feet under the fire for its problematic sponsorships. The museum also hosts oil and gas company BP among its significant sponsors. This is despite the company’s long atrocious human rights and climate record.
The fossil fuel major is complicit in Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza. In November 2023, Israel awarded a number of Western energy companies, including BP, gas exploration licences in occupied Palestinian waters. Alongside this, BP is the operator and largest shareholder of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) oil pipeline. The pipeline has supplied Israel with 28% of its oil during its genocide.
Notably, BP worked with the Science Museum to establish its Energy Gallery in 2003. Today, BP sponsors the museums STEM ‘Training Academy’. This trains teachers on how to deliver science education. And until recently, it also hosted the annual awards ceremony of its ‘Ultimate STEM Challenge’ in the museum.
A full cultural and educational boycott
In the wake of this new appalling greenwashing event, groups are calling for a full educational, cultural, and academic boycott of the Science Museum.
Fossil Free Science Museum, Parents for Palestine, Culture Unstained, Education Climate Coalition, and others are spearheading this until it drops Adani as a sponsor.
As part of this, the Education Climate Coalition is hosting an online webinar on Thursday 18 September.
As one boycotting school headteacher said:
discussing with students then agreeing to join this boycott was one of the best educational lessons; our students now have a greater understanding of the importance to uphold moral standards and the power of our collective voice.
The webinar, designed for educators, will be exploring the following questions:
Did you know that the Science Museum’s sponsors, Adani and BP, are both ramping up fossil fuel extraction, are complicit in the genocide in Gaza and guilty of human rights abuses globally?
Is the Science Museum compromising itself and its reputation among young people and the educational community by offering these companies a promotional platform?
Can educators trust the educational materials made through the Science Museum’s STEM Academy, knowing that they’re funded by fossil fuel companies?
If trustees are resigning over this, what message is this sending to our students by maintaining their sponsorship?
The webinar will feature speakers from the NEU, London Mining Network, Culture Unstained, South Asia Solidarity Group, Ministry for EcoEducation, and DeSmog. The NEU will outline support for any teacher or school joining the boycott.
Parents pulling up the museum for its problematic partnerships
It will build on the success of boycott partners like Parents for Palestine, which launched its ‘Press Pause on School Trips’ campaign in May 2025.
The group has highlighted that school trips are an integral part of a child’s learning and exposure to different ways of seeing the world. But its campaign points out that asking a school to cancel a trip to the Science Museum is not a loss – there are many alternatives. It offers an opportunity for educators to introduce into their classroom topics of climate justice and human rights, including the human impact of fossil fuel production, as well as Palestinian culture, history, and the current genocide.
Science Museum director Ian Blatchford has claimed that visitors support the Science Museum’s corporate partnerships. Yet in 2021, over 500 teachers pledged to boycott the museum over its support of the billionaire coal producer. And in April, the National Education Union (NEU) – the largest education union – passed the following motion during its conference:
Support a campaign for schools to boycott the Science Museum Group while they are sponsored by Adani and BP.
Since it launched its campaign, the group has got 14 schools to agree to boycott the Science Museum. Nearly 500 parents have been involved in the campaign. So far, they have called on 34 schools to cut ties with the greenwashing institution.
Parents for Palestine member Leila Hoballah said:
Parents are shocked when they find out about the Science Museum’s partnerships with Adani and BP. This boycott campaign is a practical and easy way to take action. It raises awareness among our school communities and shows that we can have the power to make changes and ensure our kids’ education is not exploited to legitimise dirty profits.
To join the Science Museum boycott webinar, educators and the public can sign up here.
A new campaign has launched aimed at non-disabled people who think it’s appropriate to manhandle wheelchair users’ equipment. Journalist and campaigner Melissa Parker, who runs Disability Representation Diary, launched the Hands Off Our Handles campaign in response to the way she had been treated as a wheelchair user, particularly by men who have grabbed her wheelchair and pushed her.
Hands Off Our Handles
The campaign came about after Melissa shared her experience of a stranger grabbing her wheelchair in a supermarket and pushing her without saying anything the entire time in an article on Metro.
She wrote in the article:
Suddenly, I was aware how vulnerable I was. I was completely at the mercy of this man. And all I could think was ‘what could he do to me? I have to get away
She detailed in the article that the man did not stop and did not speak to her despite her pleading with him. At this point, she was forced to stop the wheels herself, taking the skin off her fingers in the process. She said the man thankfully just walked off in a huff, but it could’ve been much worse.
Melissa explained that this is by no means the first time this has happened: men (it’s nearly always men) have grabbed the handles of her chair in many different places and situations:
In nightclubs – where I have been left shaking in terror as a man I had never met laughed at my reaction to being moved away from friends without my consent. In supermarkets, shopping centres, train stations and even museums I have been moved without permission because I ‘looked like I needed help’. And of course, I’ve been grabbed on the streets too.
She spoke specifically about the time a man on the street grabbed her wheelchair handles and pushed her for what felt like a mile. Melissa said she, again, never said a word to her despite her protestations – he only stopped when another non-disabled man intervened. She said:
The notion of fight or flight is all well and good until you remember that neither is wholly possible for me. And I truly thought this man was going to harm me
Melissa said the biggest problem is that people genuinely think wheelchair users need and should be grateful for “help” like this, despite the fact that many can very clearly get about independently.
A campaign was born
After the article was published, Melissa received a lot of messages from other disabled people, especially women, who’d been in a similar situation. That’s why she knew she had to do something.
The Hands Off Our Handles campaign is being run by Melissa, “and my one good arm,” as she puts it, on Instagram, where she encourages others to share the graphic and their stories. The aim of the campaign is to bring awareness to the fact that this happens on a huge scale and hopefully make people realise that it’s not okay to do so without a wheelchair user’s consent.
The graphic being used in the campaign states boldly:
Wheelchair users are tired of being touched, moved, groped assaulted and kidnapped – hands off
Melissa told the Canary:
People reached out to me to share their experiences and, honestly, as is my way, I cried and then got angry. Every one of the words on the graphic is a word used by a wheelchair user to describe their experience.
Hands Off Our Handles: a campaign for ALL disabled people to get behind
Melissa said she “hasn’t really stopped” since she had the idea for the campaign and contacted every single disabled person and organisation she could think of and received some incredible support. She’s also aware, however, that many disabled people who aren’t wheelchair users but still experience harassment could feel excluded, and that’s the last thing she wants:
I’ve received feedback that it’s not just people in wheelchairs, and I know that. I am desperate to work with people with other disabilities and other mobility aids. But I think there’s something really beautiful about being able to say, “This is my experience—here’s this article I wrote—this is me trying to do something about it.” I believe some of the best campaigns have come from that close, personal experience.
She continued:
This campaign will never exclude and will include every experience and disability. I hope this is just the start. I also hope it inspires others to start their own.
Disabled women- you don’t have to put up with this
She said the main reason she started the campaign was because it’s so normalised to touch and move people’s wheelchairs and to assault disabled people in the process:
I grew up thinking this was all normal—that I shouldn’t complain. There’s one incident that stays with me: a man moving my bra strap when he was pretending to “help me.” My first thought was that no one would believe me. Violence against disabled women is so well-hidden—we [disabled people] all know that, don’t we?
She hopes that by running this campaign, as well as making non-disabled people this isn’t acceptable, she helps disabled people see that they shouldn’t have to put up with it:
Any disabled person who has experienced this knows the sickening weight it leaves you with. If I can prevent one disabled child from knowing that feeling, growing up thinking it’s OK, it’ll all be worth it.
You can support the Hands Off Our Handles campaign by following on Instagram and sharing the graphic.
The Rafto Prize 2025 has been awarded to The Emergency Response Rooms of Sudan (ERRs) for their courageous work to preserve the most fundamental human right – the right to life.
The Emergency Response Rooms of Sudan are grassroot networks that emerged in the wake of the war in Sudan in 2023. They consist of thousands of volunteers who engage in collaborative, community driven efforts to meet urgent humanitarian needs of others, at great personal risk. The ERRs save lives and maintain human dignity in a place of misery and despair.
After the brutal war between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) broke out in April 2023, the Sudanese state collapsed. As a consequence, civilians have an enormous need for humanitarian assistance.In a desperate attempt to save lives, ordinary Sudanese took matters in their own hands and formed self-help groups to offer services supporting basic life, welfare, and human dignity through Emergency Response Rooms (ERRs).
The ERRs originated in Khartoum and has spread to other conflict areas of Sudan. To mitigate excessive loss of life and human suffering, ERRs provide key services such as health, food, water, body retrieval and burial. They also work on monitoring, documenting, and responding to cases of sexual violence.
The Rafto Prize 2025 honours the Emergency Response Rooms and the thousands of individuals protecting the right to life and health, who are building hope in Sudan, at tremendous risk to their own lives. The prize is also a recognition of the significance of grassroot mobilization and collective effort in ensuring basic human rights in times of conflict. The need for protection of human rights and humanitarian assistance is becoming greater by the day. In these trying times, we must all stand in solidarity with the people of Sudan.
According to Gaza’s Government Media Office, there has been an escalation in recent days in the forced displacement of residents from Gaza City to the South, due to the Israeli occupation’s crimes, with approximately 190,000 people being compelled to leave their homes, because of the bombing.
At the same time, more than 15,000 residents returned to their original neighbourhoods in Gaza City by midday Tuesday. These families had moved their belongings to the south for safekeeping, but returned to Gaza city due to the absence of even the most basic means of survival in the South.
Israel accelerating forced displacement in Gaza City
The Al-Mawasi area in Khan Younis and Rafah, which currently hosts nearly 800,000 people is falsely referred to as a ‘safe zone’ by the occupation, even though it has been subjected to more than 109 airstrikes and repeated bombardments, leaving over 2000 killed in successive massacres committed by the Israeli army inside Al-Mawasi itself. This ‘safe zone’ has no hospitals, no infrastructure, and no vital services such as food, water, shelter, electricity or education, making survival there virtually impossible.
The Israeli occupation is planning to cram 1.7 million Palestinians into the designated ‘safe zone’- which is no more than 12% of the total area of the Gaza Strip, under its systematic forced displacement policy which aims to empty Gaza City and the wider northern area of the Strip of Palestinians. This is a violation of international law, and a war crime.
All states complicit are fully responsible for these crimes
Most of the 1.3 million residents of Gaza City and the North Gaza Governate have been forcibly displaced to the western parts, while almost 350,000 have been displaced from the eastern neighbourhoods of the city and are now sheltering in the central and western areas.
The Media Office describes the international silence and failure to uphold legal and moral responsibilities as “disgraceful”, and says it holds all states complicit in genocide fully responsible for the:
systematic crimes and their resulting international legal consequences.
A groundbreaking scientific study released Wednesday 17 September reveals that the climate crisis caused at least 16,500 heat-related deaths in European cities this summer.
Across the cities, the climate crisis was behind 4,597 of the estimated heat deaths in Italy, 2,841 in Spain, 1,477 in Germany, 1,444 in France, 1,147 in the UK, 1,064 in Romania, 808 in Greece, 552 in Bulgaria, and 268 in Croatia
The crisis was most acute in capital cities. There were 835 additional deaths in Rome, 630 in Athens, 409 in Paris, and 387 in Madrid.
People aged 65 and over made up 85% of the excess deaths. It highlighted how hotter summers will become increasingly deadly for Europe’s ageing population.
Across the continent, scientists found the climate crisis was responsible for 68% of the 24,400 estimated heat deaths. Crucially, this was the result of it pushing temperatures up to 3.6°c higher.
Climate crisis causing surge in heat deaths across Europe
Imperial College London, the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, the University of Bern, the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute and the University of Copenhagen conducted the research.
It underlines how preventable many of these deaths were. Crucially, it underscored how far governments are from delivering the urgent climate action needed to protect people.
This summer, extreme climate impacts battered Europe. Wildfires scorched over a million hectares across Spain and Portugal, devastating rural communities. Nordic countries endured unprecedented heatwaves, with temperatures climbing above 30°c even inside the Arctic Circle. Meanwhile, droughts disrupted harvests from Italy to the UK, pushing food prices higher and threatening livelihoods. Scientists warn these events are no longer rare anomalies but the new reality of a continent heating faster than the global average.
The report comes after EU countries failed to agree Friday on the bloc’s 2040 climate target. It is delaying a decision until an October summit of EU leaders and leaving the bloc’s planned Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) to the Paris Agreement in limbo. NDCs are countries’ plans to deliver their emissions reductions vital to meeting the 1.5°c and 2°c under the Paris Agreement. Each party signatory to the agreement must update these every five years.
Laying bare the deadly reality of climate inaction
European Director at 350.org Kate Blagojevic said:
These shocking figures lay bare the deadly reality of the climate crisis in Europe. Ordinary people are paying with their lives, while billionaires, polluters, and the politicians shielding them continue with business as usual. This cannot go on. European leaders are stalling on setting a new, ambitious 2040 climate commitment — but delay costs lives. Governments need to act with urgency, starting with taxing the super-rich and fossil fuel companies to fund climate action, protect communities, and build a livable future.
Dr Garyfallos Konstantinoudis, lecturer at the Grantham Institute on climate change and the environment at Imperial College London, said:
Heatwaves are silent killers. The vast majority of heat deaths happen in homes and hospitals, where people with existing health conditions are pushed to their limit, but heat is rarely mentioned on death certificates.
Despite being the deadliest type of extreme weather, heat has long been underestimated as a public health risk. For example, even this summer in Europe, people are still working outdoors in temperatures above 40°C.
No one would expect someone to risk their life working in torrential rain or hurricane winds, but dangerous heat is still treated too casually.
Dr Pierrre Masselot, research fellow at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, who also conducted the analysis, said:
This summer was another stark reminder of the necessity to take climate change seriously.
It is important to adapt our cities and societies as a whole to a warming world. But ultimately, adaptation will not compensate for extreme heating in Europe.
The best way to save thousands of lives from heat remains a drastic cut in greenhouse gas emission.
The findings add urgency to the upcoming Draw the Line global weekend of action (19–21 September). More than 90 demonstrations will take place across Europe. This includes flagship marches in London, Berlin, and Paris. The protests will unite communities in demanding an end to fossil fuels, a tax on extreme wealth, and investment in people, not polluters.
The Gaza Ministry of Health reported last night, 16 September 2025, Israelbombed the upper floors of Al-Rantisi Children’s Hospital in Gaza City three times, each strike occurring within a few minutes of each other.
Israel bombs Al-Rantisi Children’s Hospital three times in one night
80 patients, across different departments, were receiving treatment at the time, including four in the pediatric intensive care unit and eight in the neonatal intensive care unit.
The bombing forced 40 children and their families to flee the building under fire, but 40 patients, including the 12 intensive care patients, along with 30 doctors, nurses and medical staff remained in the hospital.
Al-Rantisi specializes in the treatment of children, including babies, with cancer, kidney diseases, as well as disorders impacting the respiratory and digestive organs. It is Gaza’s only specialized children’s hospital.
The Palestine Children’s Relief Fund (PCRF), which claims it was the Pediatric Cancer Department which was attacked last night, wrote on social media:
As we write (17 Sep, 1:00 am Gaza time), we continue to hear terrifying reports that the Israeli military is launching continued strikes and targeted drone attacks on the hospital’s infrastructure and its patients.
The Oncology department was initially established by PCRF in 2019, to provide local life-saving treatment for children with cancer who couldn’t access care elsewhere.
Not the first time Israel has targeted it
Al-Rantisi Children’s Hospital was also targeted by the Israeli occupation in November 2023, but PCRF managed to repair the building. Now they must rebuild again.
The Ministry of Health said:
We call on the world and the United Nations to take immediate action to provide protection for medical staff and patients inside hospitals, and to stop the repeated attacks on health facilities.
It is the collective responsibility of states and global actors to protect health facilities, patients and medical personnel from such attacks, and to hold the occupation to account. Medical personnel and hospitals are specifically protected under international humanitarian law but, according to the Gaza Government Media Office, between 7 October 2023 and 6 September 2025, Israel has:
Bombed, destroyed, or put out of service 38 hospitals.
Bombed, destroyed, or put out of service 96 healthcare centers.
Made 788 attacks on healthcare services, facilities, vehicles, personnel, and supply chains.
Martyred 1670 medical personnel.
Targeted 197 ambulances, and 61 Civil Defense vehicles.
He marched against the Vietnam war, supported the Black Panthers, has protested over animal rights, ended up in prison after a climate sit-in – and starred in Babe, LA Confidential and Succession. He explains how he became the ultimate activist-actor
Amid the hustle of midtown Manhattan on Wednesday 11 May 2022, James Cromwell walked into Starbucks, glued his hand to a counter and complained about the surcharges on vegan milks. “When will you stop raking in huge profits while customers, animals and the environment suffer?” Cromwell boomed as fellow activists streamed the protest online.
But the insouciant patrons of Starbucks paid little heed. Perhaps they didn’t realise they were in the company of the tallest person ever nominated for an acting Oscar, deliverer of one of the best speeches in Succession, and the only actor to utter the words “star trek” in a Star Trek production. Police arrived to shut down the store.
He marched against the Vietnam war, supported the Black Panthers, has protested over animal rights, ended up in prison after a climate sit-in – and starred in Babe, LA Confidential and Succession. He explains how he became the ultimate activist-actor
Amid the hustle of midtown Manhattan on Wednesday 11 May 2022, James Cromwell walked into Starbucks, glued his hand to a counter and complained about the surcharges on vegan milks. “When will you stop raking in huge profits while customers, animals and the environment suffer?” Cromwell boomed as fellow activists streamed the protest online.
But the insouciant patrons of Starbucks paid little heed. Perhaps they didn’t realise they were in the company of the tallest person ever nominated for an acting Oscar, deliverer of one of the best speeches in Succession, and the only actor to utter the words “star trek” in a Star Trek production. Police arrived to shut down the store.
As we mark the third anniversary of Jina (Mahsa) Amini’s death in Iran and the uprising that sparked the global Woman, Life, Freedom movement, the voices that courageously challenged authoritarianism at home find themselves navigating an increasingly complex geopolitical landscape. In response to the June 2025 war between Israel and Iran, mainstream media outlets — both Persian-language and…
In the USSR, writers often became defenders of human rights. They were people of various ages and backgrounds, yet their works exposed injustice and reflected personal courage to speak the truth — for which many paid with exile and labor camps. Why did the authorities fear writers so much? And why should they be honored today?
One such figure was the Soviet-Ukrainian writer and poet Lina Kostenko, who, through her works and personal stance, inspired resistance, standing proudly for freedom and against the oppressive system, despite multiple attempts to push her out of cultural and literary life. Her novel Notes of a Ukrainian Madman, written in the 1970s, was long banned and circulated only through underground self-publishing (samizdat). Through this work, Kostenko protested the totalitarian regime and shed light on the lives of those who could not live in good conscience under Soviet rule. The novel symbolized the fight for the right to be oneself.
Lina Kostenko was part of the “Sixtiers” (Shistdesyatnyky) movement, a generation that opposed Soviet propaganda stereotypes, aimed to restore historical memory, protect national culture, and resist ideological control in Ukraine. As a writer and poet, Kostenko not only used her works to critique the totalitarian regime but also supported the core values of the movement: personal freedom, the right to cultural expression, and the condemnation of repression.
“We are warriors. Not idlers. Not slackers. And our cause is righteous and holy. For while others fight for whatever, We fight for independence. That’s why it’s so hard for us.” “A human seemingly cannot fly… But has wings. Has wings!”
Her contribution to the cultural revival of Ukraine and the preservation of free speech values is immeasurable. Today, Lina Kostenko still resides in Ukraine. In 1987, she was awarded the Shevchenko National Prize for her novel Marusia Churai.
One of Lina Kostenko’s close friends and fellow Sixtiers was the poet, translator, and dissident Vasyl Stus. They actively supported each other in their fight against censorship during the most difficult times of repression.
Stus openly criticized the Soviet regime for human rights violations, which led to his repeated persecution. In 1972, he was arrested and sentenced for “anti-Soviet agitation and propaganda.” Despite the harsh conditions of his imprisonment, he continued to write, and his works were distributed through samizdat, inspiring many to resist oppression.
After five years in a Mordovian labor camp and two years in exile in the Magadan region, Stus returned to Kyiv in September 1979. There, he resumed his human rights activities, supporting “prisoners of conscience” with the help of Western organizations. In 1978, he was made an honorary member of the English PEN Club. However, in early 1980, he was arrested again. Vasyl Stus died in a maximum-security labor camp in 1985. His life and works became symbols of the relentless struggle for freedom and human dignity under totalitarianism.
The stories of Lina Kostenko and Vasyl Stus remind us that words can be powerful weapons in the fight for truth and dignity. Their courage, dedication to the ideals of freedom, and love for Ukrainian culture prove that even under the harshest conditions, there is always room for bravery and resistance. Today, as issues of freedom of speech and cultural identity remain pressing, their legacy continues to inspire us to remember that truth is a value worth fighting for.
Priyantha Kumara was a Sri Lankan export manager in a factory in Sialkot, Pakistan who was falsely accused of insulting Islam. He was beaten to death and his body was set on fire on December 3, 2021. IMAGE/Lankan
Muslims should remember three precepts:
Allah is a concept – it cannot be destroyed.
Muhammad is with his Allah*, so is beyond any harm.
Quran is reprintable and can be replaced when haters burn Quran.
*A Quranic scripture with consoling words for bereaving believers at time of death is:
Brian J. Dooley is an Irish human rights activist and author. He is Senior Advisor at Washington DC–based NGO Human Rights First. In October 2023 he was made an Honorary Professor of Practice at the Mitchell Institute, Queen’s University Belfast. He is a visiting scholar at University College, London (UCL). He is a prominent human rights voice on Twitter (@dooley_dooley).
From April 2020 to March 2023 he was Senior Advisor to Mary Lawlor, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders. He is as an advisory board member of the Gulf Centre for Human Rights, and was a visiting scholar at John Jay College, City University of New York from 2022 to 2023, and at Fordham University Law School in New York from 2019 to 2020.
He receives the award for having dedicated his career to advocating human rights and bringing greater global attention to less visible issues. Congratulations with a big DISCLAIMER : I am a good friend and admirer of Brian [see posts: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/brian-dooley/] and he has represented Human Rights First on the MEA Jury for years.
Dooley has written numerous reports on human rights defenders and human rights issues based on research in countries including Bahrain, Egypt, China (Hong Kong), Hungary, Kenya, Lebanon, Northern Ireland, Palestine, Ukraine, the USA (Guantanamo), and the United Arab Emirates. His efforts have played a crucial role in exposing human rights violations, and he has actively supported justice in conflict areas, including Ukraine and Northern Ireland.
Commenting on the Award, Brian Dooley said: “This is such a great honour for me, and I’m very grateful to the University of Oslo for recognising my work. I’ve been very lucky over decades that my work with Amnesty International, with The Gulf Centre for Human Rights, with Mary Lawlor – the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders – and with Human Rights First has enabled me to meet and work with Human Rights Defenders working in some of the most difficult places in the world. Too often great work by local activists in wars or revolutions, or those living under oppression, goes unseen and unreported. This award helps bring attention to this work, and to those who do it.”
Brian will receive his Award during the Oslo Peace Days this coming December.
Brexit removed many checks and balances from the UK government. That’s why leaving the European convention on human rights would be a huge risk
‘Humbug”, and “a half-baked scheme to be administered by an unknown court”. Nigel Farage or Robert Jenrick attacking the European convention on human rights (ECHR)? No – Herbert Morrison, leader of the Commons, and William Jowitt, lord chancellor in Clement Attlee’s postwar Labour government, respectively, both arguing that Britain should not accede to the convention.
Labour was suspicious, fearing that it would prevent nationalisation. It did not. Today, Conservatives and Reform UK fear that it will frustrate immigration control. It need not.
On 8 September 2025, a report “Defending forests shouldn’t cost lives: Forest 500 assesses corporate zero tolerance policies,” links world’s top banks to social & environmental harms from mining
… Global Canopy’s annual Forest 500 assessment looks at six human rights criteria closely associated with preventing deforestation. Three indicators are interconnected with deforestation as violations of these rights frequently happen around the point of forest loss. They are: Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC); zero tolerance for threats and violence against forest, land and human rights defenders; and customary rights to land, resources and territory.
Among them, zero tolerance is least likely to be addressed by companies: only 9% of the 500 companies assessed have a public commitment in place for at least one forest risk commodity. By comparison, 37% of companies have committed to FPIC, and 24% have commitments to respect the customary rights of IPLCs to land, resources and territory.
… Only 47 Forest 500 companies have commitments for zero tolerance. Companies in the palm oil (18%) and cocoa (14%) supply chains are more likely to have commitments. Commitments are scarce in the beef (10%), soy (11%) and timber (6%) sectors, although these industries are linked to abuses in Latin America. According to BHRRC, 40% of attacks against human rights defenders over the last decade took place in Latin America, with Brazil recording the highest number of killings worldwide.
… Only six of the Forest 500 companies publish evidence of due diligence and progress reporting on eradicating violence and threats f
The report focuses on financing for companies mining critical minerals used in the global energy transition, including lithium, nickel, graphite and cobalt. Nearly 70% of these transition mineral mines overlap with Indigenous lands and roughly an equal amount is in regions of high biodiversity.
“Our findings shed light on the central role that financial institutions play in enabling this new wave of destruction as companies rush to expand mining operations as rapidly as possible,” Steph Dowlen, forests and finance campaigner for the Rainforest Action Network, told Mongabay by email. “While this extraction for raw minerals falls under a ‘green’, ‘clean’ or ‘renewable’ banner, it’s still extraction and the mining sector remains high-risk, dominated by companies with egregious track records on rights, the environment and corporate accountability.”
The report assessed environmental, social and governance policy scores of 30 major financial institutions and found an average score of only 22%. Vanguard and CITIC scored the lowest, each with just 3%. The assessment found that many financial institutions lacked policies to prevent financing issues, including pollution, Indigenous rights abuses or deforestation.
Of all institutions assessed, 80% lacked policies on human rights defenders and none had safeguards for Indigenous peoples living in voluntary isolation. Many institutions (60%) lacked grievance mechanisms, which allow communities that have been negatively impacted by mining activities to seek justice. Also, 60% of institutions had no policies on tax transparency, which is key to preventing companies from shifting profits abroad and ensuring that mining revenues remain in the resource-rich countries.
“Due to the significant overlap with transition minerals and Indigenous Territories, and high-biodiversity areas, there is an immediate need for governments, financial institutions and mining companies to stop and listen,” Dowlen said. “Indigenous Peoples and local communities have been raising the alarm for a long time but continue to face disproportionate harm as well as violence and intimidation for defending their rights and their lands.”
BlackRock and JPMorgan Chase declined to comment on the report. None of the other institutions mentioned in this piece responded to Mongabay’s emails.
Listen to the stories of four human rights defenders who have been banned from travelling by their own governments simply for trying to cooperate with the United Nations. Can you guess which suitcase belongs to whom?
Location: Geneva, Switzerland Date: 16 September 2025, 10:00AM – 5:00PM CEST
Some States use travel bans as reprisals against human rights defenders who cooperate with the United Nations. These acts of retaliation are designed to isolate, intimidate, and silence them.
A travel ban may be less visible than a prison cell, but its impact is deeply damaging. It restricts defenders from attending UN meetings, carrying out their work, reuniting with family or seeking international protection.
Travel bans take many forms, including cancelling or confiscating passports, detaining defenders attempting to exit a country, denying defenders the right to leave or enter back into their own countries, and placing defenders on terrorist lists.
Through this exhibition, we unpack the stories of four human rights defenders who have been barred from entering or leaving in their own countries under arbitrary travel bans. These are not just about State reprisals against activists, they are stories of people whose lives have been disrupted, whose voices have been silenced, and whose basic freedoms have been trampled. They are also stories of resilience and perseverance in seeking positive social change.
Their voices defend human rights. Travel bans silence them: #EndReprisals!
Revelation relating to then Northern Ireland home affairs correspondent, Vincent Kearney, a ‘matter of grave concern’
MI5 has conceded it “unlawfully” obtained the communications data of a former BBC journalist, in what was claimed to be an unprecedented admission from the security services.
The BBC said it was a “matter of grave concern” that the agency had obtained communications data from the mobile phone of Vincent Kearney, a former BBC Northern Ireland home affairs correspondent.
Madrid-based NGO estimates at least 60,000 inmates subject to forced labour with little or no pay in Cuban jails
Prisoners in Cuba are forced to work producing the country’s world-famous cigars and marabu charcoal sold to European consumers, according to a new report.
The Madrid-based NGO Prisoners Defenders estimates that at least 60,000 people are being forced to work with little or no pay, under threats, in exhausting conditions and without adequate equipment, with reports of violence including the sexual abuse of female detainees.
Calls are growing for the Indian government to scrap its controversial Great Nicobar project after it suffered a series of setbacks in recent weeks
They include:
• The Tribal Affairs Ministry has demanded answers from the Andaman and Nicobar Islands’ authorities after it emerged that they had wrongly claimed the project had the consent of the Indigenous peoples of the islands, whose lands are set to be devastated by it. This has been confirmed by the Great Nicobar Tribal Council.
• The main opposition party, the Indian National Congress, has come out strongly against the project, with both Opposition Leader Rahul Gandhi and Congress Parliamentary Chair Sonia Gandhi raising serious concerns about its impact on the mostly uncontacted Shompen and the Nicobarese peoples.
• The estimated cost of the project has risen dramatically – the latest government estimates say it will now cost more than US $10 billion, compared to the 2020 figure of just over $1 billion.
• A series of earthquakes in the region have underlined the warnings of seismologists and geologists that building a huge infrastructure project in one of the world’s most active seismic zones is a recipe for disaster.
Last year 39 international genocide experts wrote to the Indian President, describing the mega-project as a “death sentence for the Shompen, tantamount to the international crime of genocide”. They called for the scheme to be immediately abandoned.
Survival International’s Director Caroline Pearce said: “With every passing week it’s becoming clearer that this project is a disaster waiting to happen – from every perspective. It’s a scandalous violation of international human rights law; it will be disastrous for the Shompen and Nicobarese people whose lives are at stake and whose livelihoods will be destroyed; its price tag is now astronomical; and it all stands every chance of coming crashing down when the next major earthquake strikes, as it inevitably will. The government must now abide by its own laws and scrap this ill-conceived project.”
Editors’ note:
The Indian government plans to transform Great Nicobar Island into the ‘Hong Kong of India’. The Great Nicobar project involves the creation of a mega-port; a city; an international airport; a power station; a military base; an industrial park; and tourism zones, spread over more than 244 square km of land, including 130 square km of rainforest.
Experts estimate that 10 million trees will be destroyed in the mega project’s creation.
The government claims it will offset the rainforest loss by planting trees in the scrublands of North India. Crocodiles and thousands of coral colonies would be translocated to other parts of the island.
The mega-project will take up around a third of the island – half of it within the official Tribal Reserve.
The project would create a massive population explosion. Currently an estimated 8,000 people live there. The government plans to settle up to 650,000 people under the scheme, a population the size of Las Vegas. In addition to the inherent problems of a sudden population rise, it would drastically increase the Shompen’s exposure to outside diseases for which they have no immunity, and which could wipe them out.
The government plans to encourage 1 million tourists and others to visit the island every year.
For more information on the Great Nicobar project and its effects on the Shompen and Nicobarese, see Survival’s 2025 report.
Detainee Mahmoud Hassan Mohammed Al-Wardian, 48, remains in the intensive care unit at the Arab Society Hospital in Bethlehem, Southern occupied West Bank, after spending just over three weeks being interrogated by the Israeli occupation. He had no health problems prior to his arrest. According to the Ramallah-based Palestinian Prisoner’s Society (PPS), Wardian was subjected to an “assassination attempt in Israeli interrogation cells”.
Mahmoud Hassan Mohammed Al-Wardian
Mahmoud Hassan Mohammed Al-Wardian was arrested by the IOF on August 18 2025, alongside his father and several other residents of Bethlehem, as part of the occupation’s ongoing mass arrest campaign in the West Bank. After being arrested, he was transferred to the Ofer interrogation centre, where Israeli intelligence issued an order prohibiting him from meeting with a lawyer throughout his detention period, which was extended four times so as to continue his interrogation.
Wardian’s condition was critical when he was transferred from Ofer prison to the Israeli occupation’s Hadassah Medical Centre, on 25 August. By the time he arrived he was unconscious, so was admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU).
Wardian was released, and transferred to the Arab Society Hospital’s ICU, on 11 September, because of critical condition, where he remains today. Medical reports from the hospital claim Wardian is suffering from brain damage due to severe deprivation of oxygen, as well as fractures to his ribs, wounds and bruises, including around his neck.
Israel violating international law through systematic torture of Palestinian prisoners
In a statement released on 14 September, the PPS said of Mahmoud Hassan Mohammed Al-Wardian:
The occupation committed a compounded crime against Al-Wardian, starting from the moment of his arrest, through his transfer for interrogation, his denial of legal counsel, the repeated extensions of his detention under the pretext of ongoing interrogation, culminating in his torture and attempted assassination.
The PPS went on to say:
We hold the occupation authorities fully responsible for the crime committed against Al-Wardian, which constitutes another episode in a long series of heinous crimes carried out by the occupation for decades.
Mahmoud Hassan Mohammed Al-Wardian has been a frequent target of repeated arrests over the past years, most of which were under administrative detention, meaning there was no trial or charge, and detention could continue indefinitely.
According to the PPS, since the start of this genocide:
It said that crimes committed are now reaching “a level beyond description”.
The PPS continued that:
What is happening is part of an ongoing process of ethnic cleansing and erasure, and the treatment of prisoners is a direct extension of the genocide. The continued international silence regarding these crimes is an affront to all humanity. The consequences of this genocide will reach everyone who has used impotence as an excuse to shirk their responsibilities.
Israel’s treatment of Palestinian prisoners flagrantly violates international law, including the 1984 Convention Against Torture and the 1949 Geneva Conventions, which forbid torture and require the protection of detainees. The International Criminal Court (ICC) defines the widespread, systematic use of torture as a crime against humanity – an accusation that aligns with Israel’s policies, especially since it has uniquely attempted to legalise such practices within its own legal framework, for decades.
More than 11,000 Palestinian political prisoners are currently locked up in Israeli occupation jails.
Priyantha Kumara was a Sri Lankan export manager in a factory in Sialkot, Pakistan who was falsely accused of insulting Islam. He was beaten to death and his body was set on fire on December 3, 2021. IMAGE/
