Genocide of Rohingya shows no sign of abating

A UK-based Rohingya rights defender, the Burmese Rohingya Organization UK (BROUK), in a new report claimed “the genocide against Rohingya shows no sign of abating in Myanmar” despite the order of the UN's highest court to the Myanmar authorities for protecting the minority community. “Since the start of 2021, at least 15 Rohingya -- including nine infants and young children -- have died as a direct result of onerous and illegal travel restrictions preventing access to medical care,” the report released on Monday said. The release has also coincided with Myanmar’s duty to report to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), on how it is preventing genocidal acts against the minority Rohingya Muslims in Rakhine State. Myanmar is supposed to submit its periodical report to the ICJ by May 23 as the court in January 2020 imposed a legal injunction ordering the authorities of the Buddhist-majority Southeast Asian country to “prevent and halt genocidal acts against the Rohingya” as part of “provisional measures” and submit follow up reports in a genocide case brought by Gambia. Since Aug. 25, 2017, nearly 24,000 Rohingya Muslims have been killed by Myanmar’s state forces while more than 34,000 thrown into fires, over 114,000 others beaten, as many as 18,000 women and girls raped and at least 115,000 homes burned down, according to a report by the Ontario International Development Agency. But uncertainty has loomed around the case due to the Feb. 1 military coup in Myanmar, toppling down the democratically elected government. Myanmar’s agent in the ICJ case, former State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi, has been placed under house arrest by the military regime, and faces up to 26 years in prison on a range of charges. Underling the prevailing crisis in Myanmar, BROUK called on the international community “to redouble efforts to hold the Tatmadaw (Myanmar military) to account for atrocity crimes.” The rights defender also urged the National Unity Government, an anti-coup new platform mostly comprising ousted lawmakers in Myanmar, “to throw its full weight behind the international justice efforts, and submit its own report to the ICJ spelling out how it will end persecution against the Rohingya.” “The military’s brutal crackdown in Myanmar since the coup has again highlighted how crucial justice is for our country. The same generals who led the killings of thousands of Rohingya in Rakhine State are now gunning down peaceful protesters in the streets,” said BROUK's head Tun Khin. Referring to the long-prevailed negligence to Rohingya under both civilian and military regimes, the report claimed that “laws and policies (were) keeping Rohingya in an open-air prison in Rakhine State -- where they are denied citizenship and freedom of movement.” It added: “The pre-coup civilian government took no meaningful steps to change this situation.” “The ICJ must take steps to strengthen the provisional measures against Myanmar to ensure that they do not end up being a paper promise. The international community must lend the Court its full support -- politically and practically -- to ensure that this happens,” the report recommends.

The real crimes of Myanmar's Suu Kyi and the farce of her trial

Maung Zarni The author is coordinator of the UK-based Free Rohingya Coalition, general secretary of Forces of Renewal Southeast Asia, and a fellow of the Genocide Documentation Center in Cambodia LONDON This past Monday, the State Administration Council of Myanmar, the military regime, aired on state TV the still images of the detained National League for Democracy (NLD) leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, as she appeared in a closed-door courtroom, sitting alongside her two NLD deputies, in the dock. There is absolutely no question about the farcical nature of this trial of the deposed Myanmar state counselor by the regime that has committed -- and continues to commit -- all the gravest crimes in international law, as the UN International Independent Fact-Finding Mission (2016-18) had emphatically noted. Among the charges against her are the illegal import and possession of walkie-talkies for her security details, breaking the COVID-19 regulations, corruption and most ominously, breaking the State Official Secrets Act. Alas, the irony should not be lost that the State Official Secrets Act was the charge, Suu Kyi herself, used to defend the arrest and prosecution of Wa Lon and Kyaw Soe Oo, the two Burmese and Rakhine journalists with Reuters, who attempted to report on the summary execution of 10 Rohingya villagers in the midst of the genocidal purge of over 740,000 Rohingya. Suu Kyi told the world that her government was taking legal action against the duo, not because they were journalists doing their job, but because they revealed what was considered state secrets. The two went on to win the Pulitzer Prize for their investigative reporting and were released by Suu Kyi’s government under worldwide pressure. The images of Suu Kyi sitting in the dock had been imagined by others -- but not on trumped-up charges or at a Kangaroo court, but on Myanmar’s international state crimes for which the Burmese leader does bear responsibility. “I want to be a judge in your trial, Aung San Suu Kyi,” angrily declared Shirin Ebadi, the renowned UK-based human rights defender from Iran. The occasion was the international conference on Myanmar genocide held at the French National Assembly, the parliament, in Paris. Ebadi’s anger at Suu Kyi’s indifference to the plight of the genocide victims in Bangladesh refugee camps was palpable for those of us in the hall, when she delivered the keynote address before the audience made up of Rohingya refugees, Speaker of the National Parliament of Bangladesh Shirin Sharmin Chaudury, French parliamentarians, and international activists and scholars. As the main founder of the Nobel Women’s Group, Ebadi knew and met, her “Sister Laureate” at the group’s meeting of which Suu Kyi was a very much welcome member. Ebadi and other laureates, such as Northern Irish peace activist Mairead Maguire and American political activist Jodi Williams actively campaigned for Suu Kyi’s freedom during the 15 years of on-and-off house arrests. Of course, the Iranian had in mind Suu Kyi’s complicity in the atrocity crimes committed against Rohingya by the latter’s partners in power, the Burmese military generals. In their closed-door meeting with the Burmese sister that took place in New York City in 2013, the American laureate and anti-landmine campaigner, Williams, attempted to raise her concerns about the persecution of the Rohingya, and Suu Kyi’s stance -- denial of the gravest crime of genocide and the defense of the perpetrating military. Suu Kyi shot down the conversation instantly, in a callous tone, “What about them?” according to a friend of mine who was at the meeting and witnessed the exchange. Several years later, Sir Geoffrey Nice, the prosecutor in the trial of Slobodan Milosevic in the International Criminal Tribunal on the former Yugoslavia, co-authored an op-ed in Foreign Policy, A Genocide in the Making, where he, and co-author, Francis Wade, wrote: “Suu Kyi [as the nation’s popularly mandated leader] should know that inactivity in the face of genocidal actions can carry moral, legal, and even criminal responsibility.” Yanghee Lee, the former special rapporteur on the human rights situation in Myanmar (2014-2020), who looked to Suu Kyi as an inspirational Asian woman icon, told UK’s Channel Four News, emphatically, that the Myanmar state counsellor should face justice at the International Criminal Court, or any other ad hoc international UN tribunal, for the official role she played in the Myanmar genocide. Lee told me that the Nobel laureate pointedly unveiled a threat of entry visa refusal when they last met, face-to-face, in Suu Kyi’s office in Naypyidaw: “[Y]ou know, if you keep pushing this UN [Human Rights-Up-Front] line, you won’t be able to come here again.” The Myanmar laureate’s culpability in the state’s international crimes by her countless genocide denials on numerous occasions, both in opposition and in office -- and her hostilities toward UN human rights bodies and local human rights defenders and journalists, has been amply noted and roundly condemned worldwide, thanks to the frontpage coverage by the mass media, that turned on the very icon which it helped manufacture, over a few decades. Against this backdrop, it is deeply troubling that the parallel government, named the National Unity Government (NUG), continues to keep Suu Kyi as its patron-saint, in absentia. Myanmar’s anti-coup public wildly supports and holds unrealistic expectations of NUG as the sole legitimate body that will seek world recognition, material and financial support from states and non-state actors and communities. Besides Suu Kyi, NUG has lesser mortals whose deeds and words were documented to be a part and parcel of the military-led genocidal process of 2016 and 2017, who now play leading roles, either officially, as Cabinet members, or from behind-the-scenes. Perhaps most troubling of all, some among the old NLD card-carrying rank and file members, have begun to undertake fanatical and violent acts against anyone who opposes both the murderous coup regime, and the old NLD leaders and anti-Rohingya officials and activists, sitting on the front bench of the NUG. On May 25, one anti-genocide and anti-NLD/NUG Myanmar activist named Bhone Pyi Zone Min became the first casualty of what looks like a hate crime: in his sleep, he was stabbed seven times to death by a fanatical NLD/NUG follower, according to his friends who posted the details of the motive and the kill. The Myanmar Spring, or New Revolution, led on the streets by Generation Z, or the youth of Myanmar, is ultimately aimed not simply at restoring the tyranny of the racist majority with Suu Kyi as the Mother of the Nation, but to rebuild a new, inclusive society, where Rohingya too, will have their full and equal citizenship. The deeds and words of the NUG and its supporters, who continue to act as if they are old wine in a new bottle, do not bode well for either the social revolution for an inclusive society, or the violent political revolution, with the objective of totally dismantling the dictatorship, including its instrument of terror -- the armed forces.

United Nations General Assembly Resolution A/75/L.85 Preventing of armed conflict ( The situation of Myanmar)

Seventy-fifth session Agenda item 34 Prevention of armed conflict Albania, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Gambia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malta, Marshall Islands, Montenegro, Netherlands, North Macedonia, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and United States of America: draft resolution The situation in Myanmar The General Assembly, Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1 Recalling its relevant resolutions on Myanmar, the resolutions of the Human Rights Council, including the most recent, resolution 46/21 of 24 March 2021, adopted by consensus, as well as the Security Council statement on the situation in Myanmar of 4 February 2021, the statement by the President of the Security Council on the situation in Myanmar of 10 March 20212 and the press elements of the Security Council on the situation in Myanmar of 1 and 30 April 2021, Condemning in the strongest terms the declaration of the state of emergency by the Myanmar armed forces on 1 February 2021 and subsequent actions taken against the elected civilian Government, which constitute an unacceptable attempt to forcibly overturn the results of the general elections of 8 November 2020 and a major step back in the democratic transition of Myanmar and the respect for and protection of human rights, the rule of law and good governance, and democratic institutions and processes, and also impacts regional stability, Stressing its strong support for the central role of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and the continued constructive engagement of the Association with Myanmar towards facilitating a peaceful solution in the interest of the people of Myanmar and their livelihoods, and welcoming the holding and the outcome of the Leaders’ Meeting of the Association, on 24 April 2021, at the secretariat of the Association, taking into account in particular the Chairman’s statement on the Leaders’ Meeting and the five-point consensus reached during the Meeting, 3 Welcoming the statements made by the Chair of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations on 1 February and 2 March 2021, in which the Chair recalled the purposes and principles of the Charter of the Association, 4 notably the principle of democracy, adherence to the rule of law, good governance, the respect for and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, and called upon all parties to exercise utmost restraint and seek a peaceful solution through constructive dialogue and practical reconciliation in the interests of the people and their livelihoods, Condemning in the strongest terms the arbitrary detention and arrest of President Win Myint, State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi, and other government officials and politicians, human rights defenders, journalists, civil society members, foreign experts and others, Condemning in the strongest terms also the killing of and other forms of excessive use of force and violence, which has led to injuries and fatalities in many cases, against peaceful demonstrators, members of civil society, women, youth, as well as children and others, and expressing deep concern at the attacks on, harassment of and restrictions on medical personnel, human rights defenders, labour union members, journalists and media workers, targeted damage to hospitals and schools and restrictions on the Internet and social media, which unacceptably restrict the rights to freedom of opinion and expression, including the freedom to seek, receive and impart information, and the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association, respectively, Expressing concern for the safety and rights of all foreign nationals in Myanmar, Expressing unequivocal support for the democratic transition in Myanmar and for the need to uphold democratic institutions and processes, refrain from violence and fully respect human rights, fundamental freedoms and the rule of law, Noting in this context the various initiatives, movements and structures aimed at expressing the will of the people for a peaceful and democratic Myanmar, Underlining the need for a long-term peaceful political solution for Myanmar, including a return to its path of democratic transition and national reconciliation through an inclusive and peaceful dialogue between all stakeholders, in accordance with the will and interests of the people of Myanmar, Reaffirming its support for the Special Envoy of the Secretary-General on Myanmar and her efforts to maintain communication and engage constructively with all relevant parties in Myanmar, welcoming her briefing of 26 February 2021, and reiterating its request for continued reporting to the General Assembly as warranted by the situation on the ground, Concerned at the human rights situation of persons belonging to ethnic, religious and other minorities in Myanmar, including the Rohingya Muslim minority, in particular with respect to the violations committed against them and their rights related to citizenship status, and reiterating the responsibility of the Myanmar armed forces to respect the human rights of all persons in Myanmar, Expressing concern that recent developments pose particular serious challenges for the voluntary, safe, dignified and sustainable return of Rohingya refugees and all internally displaced persons, including those displaced since 1 February 2021, and in this regard stressing the need to address the root causes of the crisis in Rakhine State and for the Myanmar armed forces to abstain from taking measures that would lead to further displacement of the Rohingya Muslims and other minorities, both internally and across borders, Concerned at the ongoing conflict in Kachin, Kayin, Rakhine, Shan and southern Chin States between the Myanmar armed forces and other groups, and at the persistent impunity for crimes committed by the Myanmar armed forces, Recalling the mandate of the Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar to collect, consolidate, preserve and analyse evidence of the most serious international crimes and violations of international law committed in Myanmar since 2011, including crimes against humanity, and to prepare files in order to facilitate and expedite fair and independent criminal proceedings, in accordance with international law standards, Condemning in the strongest terms, in this context, the excessive and lethal violence by the Myanmar armed forces since 1 February 2021, and stressing the principle of command responsibility, Recognizing the role of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation in addressing the plight of the Rohingya Muslim minority in Myanmar, including by initiating measures to ensure accountability for crimes committed against them, Noting that the International Criminal Court has opened an investigation into alleged crimes within the Court’s jurisdiction in the situation in Bangladesh and Myanmar, and noting also the order of the International Court of Justice of 23 January 2020 in the case lodged by the Gambia against Myanmar on the application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 5 Reaffirming its support for the people of Myanmar and its strong commitment to the sovereignty, political independence, territorial integrity and unity of Myanmar, 1. Calls upon the Myanmar armed forces to respect the will of the people as freely expressed by the results of the general election of 8 November 2020, to end the state of emergency, to respect all human rights of all the people of Myanmar and to allow the sustained democratic transition of Myanmar, including the opening of the democratically elected parliament and by working towards bringing all national institutions, including the armed forces, under a fully inclusive civilian Government that is representative of the will of the people; 2. Also calls upon the Myanmar armed forces to immediately and unconditionally release President Win Myint, State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi and other government officials and politicians and all those who have been arbitrarily detained, charged or arrested, to ensure their access to justice and to engage in a peaceful and comprehensive national dialogue among all stakeholders, with the support of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and other members of the international community, aimed at restoring democratic governance in a political process led and owned by the people of Myanmar; 3. Calls upon Myanmar to swiftly implement the five-point consensus reached at the Leaders’ Meeting of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations held on 24 April 2021 to facilitate a peaceful solution in the interest of the people of Myanmar and their livelihoods, and to that end calls upon all stakeholders in Myanmar to cooperate with the Association and the Special Envoy of the Chair of the Association, and expresses its support for these efforts; 4. Calls upon the Myanmar armed forces to immediately stop all violence against peaceful demonstrators, members of civil society, women, youth, as well as children and others, attacks on, harassment of and restrictions on medical personnel, human rights defenders, labour union members, journalists and media workers, targeted damage to hospitals and schools and restrictions on the Internet and social media; 5. Also calls upon the Myanmar armed forces to facilitate the visit of the Special Envoy of the Secretary-General on Myanmar without delay, and calls for immediate, full, unrestricted and unmonitored access for all United Nations mandate holders and human rights mechanisms, and for ensuring unhindered access to and communication with the United Nations and other human rights entities witho ut fear of reprisals, intimidation or attack; 6. Calls for safe and unimpeded humanitarian access to all people in need, including to people in detention, allowing for unimpeded humanitarian assistance, including from the United Nations, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance on Disaster Management and other organizations, and calls for respect for the safety of medical facilities and staff; 7. Also calls for an immediate suspension of the direct and indirect supply, sale or transfer of all weapons, munitions and other military-related equipment to Myanmar; 8. Decides to remain seized of the matter, inter alia, on the basis of reports of the Secretary-General, the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar and the Special Envoy of the Secretary-General on Myanmar, and as warranted by the situation on the ground. __________________ 1 Resolution 217 A (III). 2 S/PRST/2021/5 3 A/75/868, annex. 4 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2624, No. 46745. 5 Resolution 260 A (III), annex.

UNGA determined to ensure better future for Rohingyas

UN General Assembly President Volkan Bozkir has expressed their determination to ensure a better future for the Rohingyas, a persecuted minority of Myanmar. "I assure you, the United Nations General Assembly is determined to ensure a better future for the Rohinga people," he said after his visit to the camps in Cox's Bazar where nearly a million Myanmar nationals took shelter after fleeing persecution in Rakhine State. Rohingyas have been taking refuge in Bangladesh since 1980s. Most of the refugees in Bangladesh fled military crackdown in Rakhine in 2017, which was dubbed as genocide. Repeated attempts of repatriation failed as the conditions of Rakhine state have not been conducive for return – a situation that puts huge burden on Bangladesh. Volkan arrived in Bangladesh on May 25. He has called on Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, Foreign Minister AK Abdul Momen, and delivered a speech on Bangladesh and UN's relationship. He also met with UN country team, led by UN Resident Coordinator Mia Seppo, and then visited the Rohingya camps on Wednesday. He met Rohingya leaders and received a briefing on the camp from the Refugee Relief and Repatriation Commissioner Shah Rezwan Hayat. In the statement issued yesterday following the visit, Volkan thanked Bangladesh for sheltering and providing humanitarian assistance to the Rohingyas. "The Rohingyas living in Cox's Bazar have survived unimaginable horrors and persecution. They undertook treacherous journeys to reach safety – last year alone 200 lost their lives at sea. In recent weeks, a fire broke out here in the camp, yet they persist," he said. "Right now, there is no defined path to the future, to a permanent home. Voluntary, dignified and safe return is the ultimate goal however the humanitarian need in Myanmar is increasing," Volkan said. In Rakhine State, there is an estimated 600,000 Rohingya, of which 144,000 are living in 21 displacement camps as well as among the host community since 2012. "We must not forget the order of the International Court of Justice in 2020 that everything possible should be done to prevent a genocide against the Rohingya people," Volkan Bozkir said. Mentioning the military takeover of Myanmar on February 1 and reports of insecurity, clashes, arrest and use of excessive force against protesters, Volkan said it is not too late for the military to reverse the negative trajectory on the ground and respect peoples' will. "The military must exercise restraint and help foster a path back to civilian rule in line with the outcome of the recent elections," he said. The UNGA President also reiterated the call for Myanmar's military to grant the UN Special Envoy, Christine Schraner Burgener, access to Myanmar to assess the situation first-hand under agreeable conditions while fostering the conditions for a frank and open dialogue. "The world has not given up on Myanmar. we have not forgotten the plight of the Rohingya people," Volkan's statement said.

UN rights chief: Israeli strikes in Gaza may be war crimes

GENEVA (AP) — The top U.N. human rights body on Thursday passed a resolution aimed to intensify scrutiny of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians, after the U.N. rights chief said Israeli forces may have committed war crimes and faulted the militant group Hamas for violations of international law in their 11-day war this month. The 24-9 vote, with 14 abstentions, capped a special Human Rights Council session on the rights situation faced by Palestinians. The session and the resolution were arranged by Organization of Islamic Cooperation countries, which have strongly supported Palestinians in their struggles with Israel. The resolution, which was denounced by Israel, calls for the creation of a permanent “Commission of Inquiry” — the most potent tool at the council’s disposal — to monitor and report on rights violations in Israel, Gaza and the West Bank. It would be the first such COI with an “ongoing” mandate. The commission is also to investigate “all underlying root causes of recurrent tensions, instability and protraction of conflict” including discrimination and repression, according to the text. Amid signs that the resolution would pass, its authors added more teeth to its language with a late revision on Wednesday. The revised text calls on states to refrain from “transferring arms” — the recipients were not specified — when they asses “a clear risk” that such weapons might be used to commit serious violations of human rights or humanitarian law. That appeared aimed to countries that ship weapons to Israel. “Today’s shameful decision is yet another example of the U.N. Human Rights Council’s blatant anti-Israel obsession,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a statement. “This travesty makes a mockery of international law and encourages terrorists worldwide.” The Palestinian Authority welcomed the resolution, saying it amounted to “international recognition of Israel’s systemic oppression and discrimination against the Palestinian people.” “This reality of apartheid and impunity can no longer be ignored,” it added. China and Russia were among those voting in favor. Several Western and African countries voted no. British ambassador Simon Manley said the commission’s “overly expansive mandate ... risks hardening positions on both sides,” and Austrian ambassador, Elisabeth Tichy-Fisslberger, said the session “continues the regrettable practice of singling out Israel for criticism in the Human Rights Council.” Russian envoy Olga Vorontsova said the resolution “has the goal of establishing all of the facts behind all alleged violations in the latest period.” Venezuelan Ambassador Hector Constant Rosales said a resolution “condemning the genocidal action of the Israeli government” was urgently needed. Israel had called on “friendly” countries to oppose the meeting, and the United States — while not a member of the 47-member state body — did not take part, even in its status as an observer state. An array of countries denounced the latest violence and urged efforts to address the roots of the Mideast conflict. After the vote, the U.S. mission in Geneva said the United States “deeply regrets” the move to create an “open-ended” Commission of Inquiry. It said some unspecified member states of the council “have chosen to engage in a distraction that adds nothing to ongoing diplomatic and humanitarian efforts” in the region. U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet, who spoke early in the session, called on Israel to allow an independent probe of military actions in the latest spasm of deadly violence, which left devastation and death in the Gaza Strip before a cease-fire last week. The 11-day war killed at least 248 in Gaza, including 66 children and 39 women. In Israel, 12 people also died, including two children. “Air strikes in such densely populated areas resulted in a high level of civilian fatalities and injuries, as well as the widespread destruction of civilian infrastructure,” Bachelet said. “Such attacks may constitute war crimes,” she added, if deemed to be indiscriminate and disproportionate in their impact on civilians. Bachelet urged Israel to ensure accountability, as required under international law in such cases, including through “impartial, independent investigations” of actions in the escalation. Bachelet said Hamas’ indiscriminate rocket fire during the conflict was also a clear violation of the rules of war, and she derided the group’s tactics that included locating military assets in densely populated civilian areas, and firing rockets from them. “These rockets are indiscriminate and fail to distinguish between military and civilian objects, and their use, thereby, constitutes a clear violation of international humanitarian law,” Bachelet said. “However, the actions of one party do not absolve the other from its obligations under international law.” She cautioned violence could erupt again unless the “root causes” are addressed. The day-long virtual debate involved personal accounts from Palestinians — like one of a young woman journalist from the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood in east Jerusalem, an early flashpoint that triggered the violence — as well as the statements from the council’s 47 member states and also observer states. Israel — backed at times by the United States — has long accused the council of anti-Israel bias and has generally refused to cooperate with its investigators. Israeli Ambassador Meirav Eilon Shahar said Hamas — designated a terrorist organization by the U.S. and its allies — had fired 4,400 rockets at Israeli civilians from “from Palestinian homes, hospitals, and schools. Each one of these rockets constitutes a war crime.” “What would you do if rockets were fired at Dublin, Paris, or Madrid,” she asked. Riad al-Maliki, the Palestinian foreign minister, sought to highlight years of suffering by Palestinians in the lands controlled or occupied by Israel. “The Israeli war machinery and terrorism of its settlers continue to target our children who face murder, arrest and displacement, deprived of a future in which they can live in peace and security,” al-Maliki said.

Israel arrested at least 250 Palestinian citizens in the last two days

Israeli police have arrested at least 250 Palestinian citizens of Israel within the last two days, while activists say attacks by Jewish Israelis against the community go unpunished. According to the Palestinian Authority's news agency Wafa, Israeli forces arrested 250 Palestinian citizens of Israel on Monday and Tuesday, in a campaign of detentions that is still ongoing. Hassan Jabreen, the head of Adalah, a legal centre for the protection of Palestinian citizens of Israel, told local news outlet Arab 48 that the Israeli police have been "terrorising" citizens via the campaign that comes from "purely political" motivations with no legal basis. In Wadi Ara and Kafr Manda, Israeli police arrested dozens of youths and raided homes. Arrests also took place in Negev and Umm Al-Fahm. Israeli intelligence forces also arrested Moein Al-Asam, a Negev based artist, after he sang an ode to Jerusalem and Gaza and praised "Palestinian resistance." He was interrogated for two hours. The majority of the arrests took place in Lod where nearly 140 young men were detained. Meanwhile, a Haaretz photographer filmed dozens of Jewish Israelis attacking a Palestinian citizen of Israel in the Tel Aviv district of Bat Yam, when an attempted lynching took place. Two weeks ago, around 20 people were filmed beating Said Mousa, with some of the attackers taking part in interviews afterward. According to the Israeli daily, only six were arrested despite the attackers being easily identifiable on video. Palestinian citizens of Israel make up 20 percent of the Israeli population and face systematic discrimination. They complain of being treated as second-class citizens in comparison to their Jewish counterparts. Large segments of the Israeli public see Palestinian citizens as a demographic threat to Israel's Jewry, with discrimination entrenched across housing, public services, education and employment. Recently, far-right mobs have attacked Palestinian civilians and properties while shouting "Death to Arabs." Police brutality Palestinian citizens of Israel are often at odds with the Israeli police – an institution they believe is taking a passive role in stopping a gun violence epidemic within their marginalised community. Palestinian gun violence in Israel accounts for over 60 percent of all murder victims nationwide. There are more than 400,000 illegal weapons among Palestinians in Israel, despite the population being just over two million. This means that one in five Palestinian citizens of Israel is armed, with little work being done to stop gun crime.

NYT published a press release on nuclear deal for Netanyahu and Iran hawks by Ben Armbruster

The New York Times is worried that Israel’s feelings will get hurt if President Joe Biden re-enters the Iran nuclear deal. That was the theme of a reported article that ran in Wednesday’s edition of the paper of record, pivoting off Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s recent visit to Jerusalem to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. According to the Times, “the prospect of a U.S. return to the nuclear deal threatens to generate new strains between Washington and Jerusalem on a subject that poisoned relations between President Barack Obama and Mr. Netanyahu.” And? So what? What will the United States gain by re-entering the Iran deal? Will these supposed “new strains” with Israel have any impact on the JCPOA’s efficacy? Why is Joe Biden the guilty party here? Are the Israelis being unreasonable? The Times did not explore any of these questions, and instead gave Bibi and his allies prime real estate to support Israel’s gripe and relay baseless criticisms of the nuclear accord without a hint of challenge. The article began by quoting Netanyahu saying the JCPOA “paves the way for Iran to have an arsenal of nuclear weapons with international legitimacy.” This assertion is just completely false. Not only does the agreement, via a variety of restrictions (some time limited) and a permanent inspection regime, ensure that Iran does not acquire nuclear weapons, but also, in the highly unlikely scenario that Iran somehow breaks that deal and develops a nuclear weapon, it certainly wouldn’t come with any “international legitimacy.” “The way you know the JCPOA was a good deal is that its opponents have to invent non-existent problems with it,” arms control expert Jeffrey Lewis quipped, referring to Netanyau’s claim. The Times offered no such rebuttal. Next, the Times turned to Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ Jonathan Schanzer, who was identified simply as “a Middle East expert,” to hype what he called an impending “political friction” between the United States and Israel. Aside from whether this purported friction would actually amount to much with regard to U.S. national security interests, it’s unclear on what criteria the Times used to award Schanzer with an “expert” title. Of course, the Times failed to mention that one of his primary roles at FDD is to harass and smear college students who support rights for Palestinians. Moreover, just last week, the Times identified FDD as “a Washington group that supports Mr. Netanyahu’s policies” — a context that would seem relevant to this article as well. Apparently, this week, however, FDD became a neutral arbiter with objective expertise, not the fanatical group hellbent on regime change and war with Iran that it is. The piece then relayed attacks on the JCPOA from 44 Senate Republicans who claim the Iran deal will do nothing but “enrich Israel’s enemies.” Carnegie’s Karim Sadjadpour picked up on that baseless theme by setting up the Iran nuclear deal as a means for the United States to fund Iran’s proxies and regional military activities. And of course, no anti-JCPOA screed would be complete without someone calling the deal “appeasement,” which the Times graciously provided Israel’s former ambassador to the United States, Ron Dermer, the opportunity to do. The Washington Institute for Near East Policy’s David Makovsky — who himself has floated the idea of going to war with Iran over its nuclear program — wrapped things up by passing on skepticism from Israeli officials about the utility of any U.S. diplomacy with Iran should both sides reach an agreement to resume full compliance with the JCPOA. The Times quoted no one to counter any of this nonsense or to offer points about the JCPOA’s clear benefits (that were working just fine before Donald Trump withdrew from the deal and reimposed sanctions). Nowhere in the article does the Times mention what the Iran deal actually does. It offered none of the nuances of sanctions relief. Nor did it explore the role that diplomacy will play in future negotiations with Iran about issues outside the nuclear file. Sadly, this kind of coverage of Iran and the JCPOA is par for the course for the Times. Perhaps the paper can complete the circle here and have its columnist Bret Stephens pen a piece this week trashing the deal without disclosing his side gig at a pro-Israel advocacy organization.

World Health Organization passes motion alleging Israel violating health rights

The UN’s World Health Organization held a session Tuesday singling out Israel as a violator of Palestinians’ health rights and passed a resolution on the matter, in the only country-specific discussion during its annual assembly, which was largely devoted to the coronavirus pandemic. The delegations of some 25 countries held speeches accusing Israel of violating the health rights of Palestinians and the Druze population in the Golan Heights. The agenda item was slammed by UN Watch, a nonprofit that tracks alleged incidents of anti-Israel bias in the United Nations and its bodies, where pro-Israel critics say there is an automatic majority against the Jewish state. Similar resolutions have been passed in previous years. The resolution required the WHO to hold the same debate at next year’s assembly, and to prepare another report on the “Health conditions in the occupied Palestinian territory, including east Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan.” The motion passed with 82 countries supporting it, 14 opposing, 40 abstaining and 38 absent. It was submitted by the Palestinian delegation and co-sponsored by 26 countries, including Cuba, Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Turkey, Venezuela and Yemen, as well as three countries that recently normalized ties with Israel: The United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Morocco. A health worker holds empty vials of the Pfizer-BioNtech COVID-19 vaccine at a clinic in East Jerusalem on February 3, 2021. (AHMAD GHARABLI / AFP) It called for “non-discriminatory, affordable and equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines” for Palestinians and for Syrians in the Golan. In an apparent reference to the recent 11-day military conflict between Israel and the Hamas terror group, which rules Gaza, the motion urged an assessment of “the extent and nature of psychiatric morbidity, and other forms of mental health problems, resulting from protracted aerial and other forms of bombing among the population.” The resolution did not include comparative data explaining the sole focus on the status of health care in the West Bank, Gaza and the Golan. UN Watch said Austria, Colombia and the Netherlands had shifted their position from abstaining last year to voting against the motion this year. Other countries that opposed it were the United States, Britain, Australia, Brazil, Cameroon, Canada, the Czech Republic, Germany, Honduras and Hungary. Poland, Malta and Monaco were said to have shifted their position from supporting the resolution last year to abstaining this year. The Palestinian Authority Foreign Ministry welcomed the decision in a series of tweets, saying that “the resolution affirms the unassailable international community’s support for the Palestinian people’s fundamental right to health, especially during this deadly pandemic and Israel’s systematic attacks on health facilities and personnel.” “Those who politicize this humanitarian resolution aim at depriving the Palestinian people of their basic fundamental right,” it added.

The Hindu American Foundation’s defamation case against Hindus for Human Rights

From Scroll.in: The suit prompted more than 300 prominent writers, academics, and scholars last week to stand in solidarity with Hindus for Human Rights. Anisha Sircar --- The Hindu American Foundation advocacy group said, earlier this month, that it was suing four activists, academic Audrey Truschke, and a journalist for two articles published in Al Jazeera that it claims are defamatory. The lawsuit has sparked a debate over free speech in the US, with hundreds of activists and scholars criticising the defamation case and standing in solidarity with those named in it. The Al Jazeera articles, published in April, said that federal Covid-19 relief funding amounting to $833,000 had been given to the Hindu American Foundation and four other US foundations which, the reports alleged, had “ ties to Hindu supremacist and religious groups”. The articles said that the HAF, Vishwa Hindu Parishad America, Ekal Vidyalaya Foundation of USA, Infinity Foundation, and Sewa International had received the funds under three programmes “aimed to provide economic relief to distressed businesses and keep their workforce employed during the Covid-19 crisis”. One of the Al Jazeera articles quoted a statement by a group called the Coalition to Stop Genocide in India alleging that the five groups “have ‘existential links’ with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, the ‘fountainhead of Hindu supremacist ideology’ and ‘ideological parent’ of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party”. The story quoted Sunita Viswanath, co-founder of a US group called Hindus for Human Rights, expressing concern that these five organisations could use these funds to “further a hate campaign against Muslims and other minorities in India”. On May 7, Hindu American Foundation filed a defamation suit in the US District Court for the District of Columbia against some of the people quoted in the articles, including Hindus for Human Rights co-founders Viswanath and Raju Rajagopal. Rutgers University professor Audrey Truschke was also named in the suit for tweeting about the story and the Hindu American Foundation. The suit prompted more than 300 prominent writers, academics, and scholars last week to sign a statement criticising the HAF case and standing in solidarity with Hindus for Human Rights. The signatories, who included author Amitav Ghosh, professor Noam Chomsky, and economist Meghnad Desai, said that they “deplore efforts to silence an important alternative and inclusive Hindu voice in the diaspora”. It added: “Viswanath and Rajagopal exercised their right to free speech by commenting on the matter of disbursement of federal COVID relief federal funds to several Hindutva-aligned organizations...Hindutva is an authoritarian ideology, having no tolerance for peaceful dissent or debate, the very qualities that underline a democracy...We earnestly hope that the courts will quickly rule in favor of HfHR’s First Amendment right to free speech.” The First Amendment of the US Constitution protects free speech. ‘Scheme’ and ‘conspiracy’ In a statement emailed to Scroll.in, the Hindu American Foundation said: “It has become increasingly clear that we can no longer ignore these attacks…It is impacting our funding, and ability to effect change through our educational and advocacy efforts.” In its suit, the group has sought compensation and punitive damages from the defendants. In the statement, the group insisted that it is a wholly independent, non-partisan American organisation that does not contribute any funds to spread Hindu nationalism in India. The Hindu American Foundation said that claims in the stories about funnelling Covid-19 relief funds were “categorically false.” “All funds received under the Covid relief programs were used to the letter of the law, ensuring that HAF’s rent was paid and no employees were laid off during the pandemic,” the group stated. “Not a single cent was sent overseas.” Their initial cease-and-desist letter to the defendants, sent on April 19, stated that their foundation does not provide money to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh or anyone affiliated with the organisation. “HAF only donates to two organisations abroad: one that assists Hindu refugees from Pakistan and another that assists Hindu minorities in Pakistan,” it stated. Hindu American Foundation claimed that the defendants “concocted a scheme to defame groups even outside India whom they perceive to be ‘pro-Indian government’.” They argued that the defendants’ claims are based on their ‘political disagreements’ with the Indian government, “especially with respect to its alleged treatment of Muslims and other religious minorities.” ‘Stand by our words’ Also named in the case are Indian American Muslim Council executive director Rasheed Ahmed, and Federation of Indian American Christian Organizations of North America chairman John Prabhudoss. The author of one Al Jazeera article, Raqib Hameed Naik, has been listed as a co-conspirator. Viswanath from Hindus for Human Rights had been quoted in the Al Jazeera article saying that the groups who received the funds openly acknowledge that they are inspired by Hindu nationalist organisations, such as the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, and that any American non-profit perpetuating Islamophobia and other kinds of hate should not receive federal relief funds. Viswanath and Rajagopal told Scroll.in in an email message that they responded to the cease-and-desist letter soon after receiving it. “We retained legal counsel who responded to the letter by saying we stand by our words and are well aware of our First Amendment rights,” they said. They now have pro-bono representation from a law firm with expertise in defamation law. “We’ll continue to reiterate what we stand for: a progressive and inclusive Hinduism, which asserts that all of us are equal,” they said. While the suit is against people quoted in the Al Jazeera articles, Hindu American Foundation has also included individuals who shared the article and commented on it on social media. Among them is Audrey Truschke, who has received threats from Hindutva supporters for her books on Mughal history. “I believe this lawsuit is meritless, and I fully expect it to be resolved in my favour,” Truschke said. “The Hindu American Foundation has made clear their displeasure at my research agenda, and I see this lawsuit as a bald-faced attempt to intimidate and silence my scholarship.” She added: “Whereas they [the Sangh Parivar] wield weapons of intimidation, fear, and, at times, even violence, those of us devoted to human rights, free speech, and academic freedom do something quite different.” ‘SLAPP’ case Journalist Raqib Naik, who has been named a co-conspirator, took to Twitter to describe the action as “an assault on free press” and said this was a “SLAPP lawsuit”. SLAPP or Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation suits refer to defamation and libel suits filed with the intention of curbing speech. The Ohio chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union says that that SLAPP suits are “designed to intimidate the target in order to discourage them and others from speaking out on an issue of public importance…In essence, SLAPPs are designed to discourage public discussion by using our legal system to choke the exercise of free speech.” In the US, SLAPP suits have also been used against survivors of the #MeToo movement. “This is an absurd lawsuit,” Naik told Scroll.in. He said that since his article had been published on April 2, he has received death threats and been subjected to Islamophobic slurs on social media. He added, “This is not an opinion piece – it’s a news feature, and anything properly backed with facts and evidence is very hard to counter.” Naik said Hindu American Foundation had declined to comment on his piece before it was published. “They’ll lose in court, because their evidence is publicly available information that implicates them,” he said. Dissent against Hindu nationalism Rasheed Ahmed of the Indian American Muslim Council was quoted in the Al Jazeera article saying that US taxpayers’ money should not keep “hate groups in business” and that this matter should concern anybody who believes in government accountability. He told Scroll.in that only an outfit that is truly a hate group would view his comments as being directed at them. “But if they [HAF] aren’t a hate group, why are they concerned?” he asked. Naik echoed the view that “nothing will come” of the lawsuit. He said this experience has given him more resolve to “do the right thing” and report more rigorously on Hindu nationalism. Support our journalism by contributing to Scroll Ground Reporting Fund. We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.

Why Israel Blows Up Media Offices and Targets Journalists BY NORMAN SOLOMON

Israel’s missile attack on media offices in Gaza City last weekend was successful. A gratifying response came quickly from the head of The Associated Press, which had a bureau in the building for 15 years: “The world will know less about what is happening in Gaza because of what happened today.” For people who care about truth, that’s outrageous. For the Israeli government, that’s terrific. The AP president, Gary Pruitt, said “we are shocked and horrified that the Israeli military would target and destroy the building housing AP’s bureau and other news organizations in Gaza.” There’s ample reason to be horrified. But not shocked. Israel’s military began threatening and targeting journalists several decades ago, in tandem with its longstanding cruel treatment of Palestinians. Rather than reduce the cruelty, the Israeli government keeps trying to reduce accurate news coverage. The approach is a mix of deception and brutality. Blow up the cameras so the world won’t see as many pictures of the atrocities. Of course, there’s no need to interfere with journalists documenting the also awful — while relatively few — deaths of Israelis due to rockets fired by Hamas. In recent days the Israeli government has spotlighted such visuals, some of them grimly authentic, others fake. The suffering in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is tragically real on both sides, while vastly asymmetrical. During the last 10 days, as reported by the BBC, 219 people have been killed in Gaza. In Israel, the number was 10. In Gaza, at least 63 of the dead were children. In Israel, two. In the midst of all this, shamefully, President Biden is pushing ahead to sell $735 million worth of weapons to Israel, a move akin to selling more whips and thumbscrews to torturers while they’re hard at work tormenting their victims. On Wednesday, a few members of Congress introduced a bill that seeks to do what the Israeli targeting of media seeks to prevent — the galvanizing of well-informed outrage. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib and Mark Pocan introduced a resolution opposing the sale of those weapons. “For decades, the U.S. has sold billions of dollars in weaponry to Israel without ever requiring them to respect basic Palestinian rights. In so doing, we have directly contributed to the death, displacement and disenfranchisement of millions,” Ocasio-Cortez pointed out. Tlaib, the only Palestinian-American in Congress, said: “The harsh truth is that these weapons are being sold by the United States to Israel with the clear understanding that the vast majority of them will be used to bomb Gaza. Approving this sale now, while failing to even try to use it as leverage for a ceasefire, sends a clear message to the world — the U.S. is not interested in peace, and does not care about the human rights and lives of Palestinians.” As usual, Israel’s latest killing spree can avail itself of deep pockets provided by U.S. taxpayers, currently $3.8 billion a year in military assistance. An articlepublished last week by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace makes a strong case that the massive subsidy is legally dubious and morally indefensible. Not many members of Congress can be heard calling for an end to doling out huge sums to the Israeli government. But some progress is evident. A bill introduced last month by Congresswoman Betty McCollum, H.R.2590, now has 21 co-sponsors and some activist momentum. Its official purpose flies in the face of routine congressional evasion: “To promote and protect the human rights of Palestinians living under Israeli military occupation and to ensure that United States taxpayer funds are not used by the Government of Israel to support the military detention of Palestinian children, the unlawful seizure, appropriation, and destruction of Palestinian property and forcible transfer of civilians in the West Bank, or further annexation of Palestinian land in violation of international law.” Right now, the government of Israel is exerting deadly force on a large scale to underscore an assertion of impunity — in effect, wielding power to subjugate Palestinian people with methodical disregard for their basic human rights. The process involves reducing as much as possible the eyewitness news coverage of that subjugation. Israeli leaders know that truth about human consequences of their policies is horrific when illuminated. That’s why they’re so eager to keep us in the dark. Norman Solomon is executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy, where he coordinates ExposeFacts. Solomon is a co-founder of RootsAction.org.

Shemah Yisrael BY SUSAN BLOCK

Usually I talk about sex, but Israel’s most recent, gut-wrenching horrors wreaked upon Palestinian people have propelled me, like a virtual kick from behind, to step out of my *comfort zone* and say that I am deeply embarrassed as a Jew. Yes, as a Jew. No, I’m not an Israeli, certainly not a Zionist, and not a religious or even a practicing Jew. Actually, I’m a pretty blasphemous Jew (especially on my show), as well as a Wandering Jew, an agnostic ethical hedonist bonoboësque Jew; but a Jew nonetheless, certainly by Hitler’s standards. So, for me, as a Jew, Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians is, in addition to being an atrocity, a tragedy and a war crime, an embarrassment. In Yiddish, they call it a shanda, a terrible shame, and that’s what I feel: Ashamed. I often say we should not feel ashamed of our sexuality, that various religions, governments, parents and schools throughout human history have made us feel ashamed in ways we really shouldn’t. But we should feel shame if we do something wrong, that is, something that hurts someone else, sexually or otherwise. There is also such a thing as communal shame—just as there is communal ecstasy and grief—when a community you are connected to has done something wrong. Though I personally haven’t done anything wrong here and have long opposed Israel’s apartheid in Palestine, nevertheless I feel shame for the appalling actions of some of my fellow Jews in Israel, aided by America. Yes of course, aided by America, Israel’s bestie, and being American, I feel double the shame because all of those deadly bombs Israel has been dropping are being paid for by the place where I live and pay taxes. Some say this means the Jews control America, a twist on the old antisemitic Protocols of the Elders of Zion that suggests Jewish people somehow control the world. Though there are a few Jews in high places—the odious Henry Kissinger, Javanka and Stephen Miller come to mind—I think it’s mostly the other way around. America controls Israel, though neither country likes to confess that truth. In a way, the much ballyhooed Israel Defense Forces (IDF) are a branch of the American Military-Industrial Complex. Every bomb killing Palestinians makes money for some Americans. As Counterpunch editor Jeffrey St. Claire tweets, “There’s a theory that Israel controls US politics, that the most powerful war-making state the world has ever known is a mere puppet of Israel, incapable of asserting its own agenda. But in fact the US finances Israel. It is dependent on us. Its crimes are ours. We paid for them.” Now Israel’s crimes are multiplying so fast, we can’t keep up with them. John Oliver offers a good tip on what it means to be besties: “America is an unwavering friend to Israel… and at the end of the day, I would hope that a real friend would tell me when I’m being an asshole, and definitely when I’m committing a fucking war crime.” Exactly, friends don’t let friends drive drunk. Israel is now intoxicated on “expansion” (a euphemism for ethnic cleansing), and America needs to take the keys—the bombs, the money, the support—away… like, yesterday. Here’s what Newsmax host Grant Stinchfield has to say about Jews like me: “If you are Jewish and you are a Democrat and you are living in America today, how do you support an administration that turns its back on your home country?” My home country? Sounds like the former guy telling the Squad to “go back to where they came from” even though three of them were born here. I visited Israel once for six weeks at age 16. Before that, in my very American Sunday school, I was taught that Israel was “a land without people for a people without land.” When I got there, I was naïvely shocked to see there were people in that land, and then, slowly, I came to realize a genocide was being committed against them in the name of “my” people, the Jews. What a lie I (and so many more) had been taught. This lie was a lot worse than that silly little lie about Fake Elijah drinking the wine on Passover that I refused to believe when I was five years old, B.I. (Before Indoctrination). Though, one lie leads to another. According to Newsmax, if I’m not rooting for my “Home Country” like a home team, no matter what, I’m a bad Jew. Of course, I’m already a bad Jew for various reasons, but not because I don’t support Israel’s vicious bombing and apartheid treatment of the Palestinians whose main “crime” is to be simply living in their “home country.” If I have a “home country,” it’s Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A., or maybe Los Angeles, California where, between the two, I’ve spent my life squatting on land stolen from the Natives in an American genocide which inspired the atrocities of both Hitler and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu. Several of my fellow Counterpunchers, as well as Bernie Sanders (“Palestinian Lives Matter”), David Steinberg and even the MSM have said that Bibi diabolically orchestrated the current mess to maintain power because he was losing it, which appears to be working, as now he’s back in the saddle again. It’s true that sleazy Bibi, like his Zionist mentor Ariel Sharon, have made Israel even more militaristic, fascistic and geared to the odious Religious Right, including many Christians that despise Jews and want them in charge of Israel for that reason, as well as ammosexual Orthodox Jewish extremists and even Israeli Proud Boys. Yes, it’s gotten that bad. However, the whole Zionist Project is unavoidably apartheid. It’s the opposite of “bonobo.” It’s also not “good for the Jews”; antisemitic attacks inside and outside Israel are increasing again. Israel has become what my late grandmother might call “a shanda for the goyim.” According to the Jewish Language Project, “To be a ‘shanda for the goyim’ is to confirm the most hurtful stereotypes, thereby doing damage twice: a Jew who dishonors Jews by not only doing something bad, but doing something that confirms the worst fears of others about Jews in general.” Call me a “self-hating Jew,” if you like, and right now, I do *hate* that side of myself that’s genetically and/or ethnically related to these despicable destroyers of apartment houses, media buildings, medical facilities, family homes and the people inside them—broken bodies, lost lives—unspeakable brutalities! Yet we must try to speak about them. And I must try to speak out against them, or I am complicit, like those Germans who didn’t speak out against the Nazis exterminating some other distant relatives of mine (and theirs) who happened to be Jewish. Right now, we have an opportunity to be heard, so we need to speak louder. Shemah Yisrael. Hear O Israel: Stop the carnage. End the apartheid. It’s a shanda. A real shame. Susan Block, Ph.D., a.k.a. “Dr. Suzy,” is a world renowned LA sex therapist, author of The Bonobo Way: The Evolution of Peace through Pleasure and horny housewife, occasionally seen on HBO and other channels. For information and speaking engagements, call 626-461-5950. Email her at drsusanblock@gmail.com

Apartheid Does Not Have the Right to Defend Itself, or to Exist

BY JIM KAVANAGH With its latest attack on Gaza—on the families it drove from their homes in what is now Israeli territory—Israel is surpassing itself in viciousness. As of today, Israel has killed 212 Gazans, including at least 61 children and 36 women. It is “obliterate[ing] multiple generations of families” in the middle of the night—at least 21 members of the al-Qawlaq family, from 6 months to 90 years old. It is pulverizing residential towers and media offices and bombing “civic infrastructure, businesses and the main roads leading to the city’s al-Shifa hospital.” Destroying the roads is an instructive example of Israel’s gratuitous, and clever, cruelty: It of course prevents ambulances and medics from moving where they’re needed; it also blocks the families who are fleeing to the hospitals for safety from the sudden explosion of their homes. But, We didn’t bomb the hospital! Given all of Israel’s precision weapons and careful advance planning, this is not an accident, nor was the killing of at least two key senior medical staff in one night—reminiscent of the one day, during the Great March of Return protest in 2018, when Israeli snipers, who claimed to “know where every bullet landed,” just happened to wound and kill 18 paramedics. It’s a plan to increase the suffering and chaos. A powerful state only does these things to people it despises and fears. I hope that everyone, or at least an increasing number of Americans, can finally acknowledge what they are seeing, what Israel is, and that they will then reject the fables and excuses they are being constantly fed. Israel is a colonial-settler enterprise. Israel is an ethno-religious (Jewish) supremacist enterprise. Ipso facto, Israel is an apartheid enterprise. It is that kind of enterprise by virtue of its ongoing conspicuous actions and by virtue of its own self-definition as a “Jewish State.” As British activist Haim Bresheeth-Žabner says “From a de facto racist state, Israel has become an Apartheid state de jure.” Per Israeli human-rights organization B’Tselem, Israel is “A regime of Jewish supremacy from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea: This is apartheid.” Even Human Rights Watch agrees that Israel is guilty of the “crime” of apartheid. It is indisputable, as B’Tselem’s executive director. Hagai El-Ad, says, that: “Apartheid is the organizing principle that connects all these forms of colonization and transfer, disenfranchisement and oppression, domination and supremacy. …All Palestinians living under Israeli rule are treated as inferior in rights and status to Jews who live in the same area.” As I’ve said in a previous article, regarding the Zionist colonial, intrinsically apartheid, enterprise: “That’s what has to be named and opposed. Every other problem in the context is a derivative of that.” And that is indefensible. Colonialist apartheid is a crime—in terms of both internationally-accepted political ethics and the norms of international law. Colonialism and apartheid are crimes under jus cogens—the preemptory, compelling norms of international law “from which no derogation is ever permitted.” The perpetrators of such crimes are considered hostis humani generis, an enemy of all mankind. A colonial apartheid regime has no “right of self-defense” against the resistance of the people it is attempting to exterminate, expel, or force into submission. Those people the colonial regime is trying to subjugate do have every right to fight for “liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, including armed struggle.” Individual people and organized groups—whether kids throwing rocks or Hamas throwing missiles—have every right, with any means necessary, to resist, fight, and defeat the occupying colonial power. Nine years ago, in an essay I recommend to everyone, Noura Erakat demolished Israel’s claims to have a right to self-defense under international law in occupied Palestinian territory—and Gaza is “still considered to be occupied by Israel by the United Nations”: the right of self-defense in international law is, by definition since 1967, not available to Israel with respect to its dealings with real or perceived threats emanating from the West Bank and Gaza Strip population. … This is not to say that Israel cannot defend itself—but those defensive measures can neither take the form of warfare nor be justified as self-defense in international law…. An occupying power cannot justify military force as self-defense in territory for which it is responsible as the occupant…. Israel is distorting/reinterpreting international law to justify its use of militarized force in order to protect its colonial authority. Although it rebuffs the de jure application of Occupation Law, Israel exercises effective control over the West Bank and Gaza and therefore has recourse to police powers. It uses those police powers to continue its colonial expansion and apartheid rule and then in defiance of international law cites its right to self-defense in international law to wage war against the population, which it has a duty to protect. We’re now beyond the “occupied territory” issue and Israel’s game of denying it “occupies” the various geographical prisons whose every facet of life it controls. It is clear now that all Palestinian Arabs in the West Bank, Gaza, or the Green Line, “from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea”—a majority of the population—are under the single apartheid “regime of Jewish supremacy,” and have the full right of resistance thereto. It’s important that everyone recognize, as Joseph Massad, points out, that “Israel’s leaders now accept that Jewish colonists and their descendants will forever be a minority in historic Palestine,” in “their own settler-colonial state.” That regime not only does not have the “right” to defend itself against its subjugated population, it does not—and we should have no compunction to say so—have the “right” to exist. Per Sharmine Narwani, also nine years ago, the Zionist enterprise is “the last modern-day colonial-settler experiment, conducted at a time when these projects were being unraveled globally.” I reprised that point in my aforementioned article, where I said it was possible in the few years after WWII “because racism and ethno-supremacist colonialism were still integral parts of the Western worldview. The great world powers could still blithely dismiss the lives, land, and humanity of an Arab population as dispensable—secondary both to the aspirations of the largely European Jews who formed the Zionist vanguard and to the guilty consciences of European gentiles. It was compensatory colonialism, with the compensation paid by an expendable third(world) people.” And James Baldwin: “the state of Israel was not created for the salvation of the Jews; it was created for the salvation of the Western interests… and for Europe’s guilty Christian conscience” It was a propitious historic opportunity for Zionism. Ten years later, when anti-colonial struggles were raging, no Western liberal would have dared to suggest any such project had a “right” to exist. Seventy-three years later, it should be just as unimaginable. That the Zionist movement never considered demanding territory from Germany or any White European country that participated in the Holocaust (which would have at least had some ethico-political logic), although it did start out considering Uganda and Argentina, indicates its self-understanding as a child project of White supremacy and imperialism. “Little Ulster,” and all. May be an image of text that says 'Fiorella Isabel and 11 others liked Caitlin Johnstone @caitoz 15h You don't get to drop an entire colony on top of an inhabited country, grind those inhabitants into the dirt for generations, and then claim self defense every time they retaliate. That's not a thing.' So it is good, finally, to see “apartheid” and the “colonization of Palestine” being named and opposed by Democratic activists and prominent politicians, including Palestinian-American Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib, on the floor of the Congress and AOC and her squaddies tweet-storming “Apartheid states aren’t democracies.”. And it’s good to see legislation introduced by Congresswoman Betty McCollum, with “more than a dozen” supporters, to prevent U.S. aid to Israel from “paying for the military detention and abuse of Palestinian children, the demolition of Palestinian homes, or the annexation of Palestinian land.” Though I find too much of it—AOC and Bernie in particular—about the bad right-wing Netanyahu government, and whether we can get our politicians to speak in really neutral terms. Let’s recognize everyone’s humanity. Palestinian lives matter, too. This isn’t about finding a way for the victims and opponents of Zionist apartheid to get along peaceably with its enforcers and proponents. It’s about finding a way to defeat them. There is definitely a new trend. The Zionist narrative is losing—among large sectors of younger adults (Jewish and Gentile) has, I would say, already and irretrievably lost—its air of legitimacy, virtue, and necessity. Nothing has done more to undermine that narrative than the open internet and social media (which is why no force is more interested in imposing controls on those channels than acolytes of Zionism). The scenes of Palestinian dispossession and Israeli rampage are just too blatant to ignore. A divide is opening up in the country over Palestine-Israel, and it is reflected in the Democratic Party, a majority of whose constituency understands that you can’t claim to be anti-racist and continue to support the US being the indispensable enabler of Israel’s Mohammed Crow apartheid. There is no such thing as Progressive Except Palestine. It also remains the case that both political parties and the entire media, academic, and cultural apparatus—none of which is controlled by popular will—are firmly committed to Zionism and the unconditional support of Israel in ways that will be extremely difficult to reverse. We still live in a polity where 75% of House members “oppose placing any conditions on aid to Israel, including some progressives from the Democratic Party’s left [sic] wing,” and signed an AIPAC-backed letter saying so; a country where Creepy Joe (“I am a Zionist” “the USA would have to invent an Israel”) Biden is ratifying the decisions of Bad Orange Man to recognize Israel’s illegal annexation of Syria’s Golan Heights within the apartheid “regime of Jewish supremacy,” with the whole of Jerusalem as its capital; where it was the Cool Black Guy preceding both of them who first gave bunker-buster bombs to Israel, secretly, and made it a non-negotiable demand that Native Americans must recognize that America will be a White Man’s State “Palestinians must recognize that Israel will be a Jewish state“; a culture where, under the auspices of the Republican and Democratic Parties’ largest donors (uber-Zionists Sheldon & Miriam Adelson and Haim Saban) and the occasional Israeli-spy producer many of them work for, the crème de la Hollywood crème shows up dutifully twice a year to raise $50 million a night in comfort money (to provide “well-being facilities”) for the Israeli Army that is pulverizing apartment towers and killing multi-generational families in Gaza. (Fear not, though, the Dem celebs do not hesitate bravely to ruffle feathers at such events by challenging their Republican counterparts); where the United States military itself can, without objection, be described as “a Zionist institution”; and on and on. In a deep sense, America has become a Zionist country. There is a lot of Zionist-committed money and power controlling the institutions that make policy and manufacture consent and that have made Zionism into a core component of American ideology and politics. They will have to be forthrightly and fearlessly named, opposed, and defeated to change the way the United States enables the apartheid “regime of Jewish supremacy.” There will be a lot of hemming and hawing to avoid doing that. I’ll point out, for example, that if Betty and other tweet-storming “left-wing” progressive legislators really want to disrupt the military aid to Israel that is right now enabling the killing of children in Gaza, they have no need for new legislation to do so. All aid to Israel—every dollar—is already illegal under the terms of the Symington and Glenn Amendments, which prohibit aid to any country acquiring nuclear weapons. The latter came about because Sen. John Glenn was concerned specifically about “diversion [of weapons-grade uranium] from U.S. nuclear contractor NUMEC to Israel’s nuclear program”—an act of nuclear espionage and theft abetted by that Hollywood spy-producer, which, for some reason, didn’t subject him and his confreres to the same fate as Julius and Ethel. Every single US president and the entire US “intelligence community” blatantly lies, and every single member of Congress knows they are lying, about the (per Schumer!) “well-known fact” of Israel’s nuclear weapons in order to disburse aid to Israel. All any member of Congress who is serious about “conditioning” aid to Israel has to do is point this out, publicly and consistently, on the floor of the Congress and in every media interview. All Betty has to do is join Desmond Tutu, tell the truth and demand that her colleagues and the president follow the law. That would simply and immediately disrupt the discourse of Israeli “self-defense” exceptionalism, the blathering about dangerous Palestinian rockets and Iranian nuclear programs, etc., and create new kinds of pressure for American politicians to explain themselves—much more than concerned tweeting and submitting bills they know Nancy Pelosi and Chuck (“Guardian of Israel”) Schumer are going to bury. Which is why nobody does it. There is no chance that a group of people who unanimously lie all the time to give Israel tons of public money in contravention of U.S. law will pass Betty’s law, or any like it—and Betty knows it. If Betty and her co-signers are serious about “conditioning” aid, they will bring up Israeli nuclear exceptionalism, every day. If they don’t, it’s because they have agreed, at the direction of their party leadership, not to. It’s because they are more committed to not disrupting Zionism’s hold on the Democratic Party (or on America itself) than they are to disrupting, let alone defeating, Israeli colonialism and apartheid; it’s because they are not really fighting for Palestinians, but–with deliberate, chosen impotence—virtue-signaling to their increasingly dissatisfied constituents (53% of Dems support such conditioning of US aid.). Just as they are doing with Medicare-for-All and the minimum wage. Here’s where that gets you: It took a long time to turn the Democratic Party away from its long-standing alliance with Crow apartheid in America. It took a lot of images like those of Emmet Till, and Goodman, Schwerner, and Chaney, and Bull Connor’s cops and dogs, and the taking up of arms by black groups, and burning of American cities, broadcast on the media of the day, to help make that happen—to get the Democratic Party and the political and media elite to see that it was just plain wrong, and there could be no more asking black people to be patient and wait—just a little more, until we figure out all the complications, hem, haw—for the end of American apartheid. Now take the difficulty of that transformation and multiply it. Keep going. I hope I’m wrong, but I will use the “n”-word we should always avoid: The Democratic and Republican parties will never abjure their commitment to Zionism. As in: “If Washington D.C. crumbled to the ground, the last thing that would remain is our support for Israel.” There is a lot more lopsided money and power behind that proclamation today than was behind George Wallace’s “Segregation forever!” in 1963. Those political parties will die, and should be killed, as the parties they are—and as one of their presidents, without objection, said he would—fighting for Israeli apartheid. The political and media elites, and George Wallace himself, came to see American Jim Crow apartheid as not just wrong, but impossible: they could not not significantly re-calibrate in the face of armed black militancy and burning American cities. They do not care a whit how many Palestinian (or Syrian, or Iranian) towers, towns, and children burn. There is no limit. If “left-wing” legislators and activists aren’t going to go right at it, and, as unflinchingly as they would have against George Wallace, fight the fight to the political death of any agent or institution that wants to die on the crumbling hill of Zionism, then…well, there’s no such thing as Progressive Except Apartheid Zionism Forever. Because time is way past up for hemming and hawing. It always comes too late in systems of apartheid. It came very late for African-Americans. It has been way too long for Palestinian Arabs. If you don’t see the connection, you’re just wrong. Here’s an eloquent voice on that for African-Americans, which also absolutely is a voice for Palestinians, about whose predicament he wrote with equal urgency and eloquence: What is it that you expect Palestinians to reconcile themselves to? There comes a time when even the most stubborn have to recognize that appeals to colonized people for peace and patience are nothing more than demands to surrender and accept their subjugation. I hope that an increasing number of Americans see Israel’s latest blatant program of ethnic cleansing and its vicious attack on Gaza as instances of colonialist violence that has never and will never stop within the Zionist project. I hope they see that it is simply wrong to expect, let alone demand, that Palestinians wait any longer to overturn, by any means necessary, the system of apartheid in which their homes, lands, hopes, and lives are just not as important as those of Jewish settlers. I hope, and think, they understand that the time for hemming and hawing is over. Way over. This is not a conflict between Israel and Hamas, but between the whole Zionist movement—which includes all the forces mentioned above—and the whole Palestinian people. It is a fight that pits enormous, well-coordinated, military, financial, and political power against the enormous, but still ill-organized, power of millions of people. I know it seems impossible to imagine the defeat of Zionism, but we have to recognize both the reality and fragility of Zionist power. Yes, Israel has the fourth-largest army in the world, with nuclear weapons, and the support of the Imperial High Command in Washington. Yes, per Bresheeth-Žabner, “Israelis, of left, right and center, do not doubt that they can continue to oppress and suppress Palestinians with impunity.” Yes, “Palestinians have been abandoned by the west, by the Arabs, by Israeli liberals, and by liberals the world over.” And, yes, after securing the betrayal of a few Arab monarchies, Jared Kushner crowed, “We are witnessing the last vestiges of what has been known as the Arab-Israeli conflict.” So, Mission Accomplished? Problem is, there’s those seven million Palestinians whose lives Israel must control, and who, despite being betrayed by Arab countries, ignored by Western liberals, and crushed again and again by arrogant Israelis armed with American-supplied weapons and impunity, just won’t stop rebelling against their subjugation. The impossible-to-ignore breadth of betrayal itself, capped off by the accelerated ethnic cleansing that, it is now evident, none of them can escape, has only created unprecedented Palestinian unity and solidarity. Even the streets of ‘48 Israel are burning with rage. Israel has erased the Green Line, and the Palestinian General Strike has forgotten it. As David Hearst says, the Abraham Accords—Netanyahu and Trump’s gambit “that opening relations with Arab states was the means by which he could bypass a Palestinian state and ignore Palestinian rights”—have been revealed as a “delusion,” and the Arab signatories to be fools as well as traitors. Add to that the always-obvious but always-ignored fact that, as Sharmine Narwani put it: “Strip away the spin and the gloss, and you quickly realize that Israel doesn’t even have the basics of a normal state. After 64 [now 73] years, it doesn’t have borders. … and it needs a gargantuan military just to stop Palestinians from walking home.” Add to that the fact that the deceptive historical and ethical narrative of Zionism has been exposed and discredited for everyone who peers outside the mainstream media Overton window—and that’s too many people. Israel’s feared “de-legitimization” has already left the barn; Gaza and Sheikh Jarrah are just sealing the door. All of which makes it possible for Hearst to say: “The project to establish Israel as a Jewish state has never been in more peril than it is now, when it thinks it is on the cusp of victory.” After all, Israel, as the “regime of Jewish supremacy,” depends on a program of brutally colonizing seven million people forever, with the necessary acceptance and approval of the rest of the world. History has some lessons about that. “No justice, no peace,” isn’t just a slogan; it’s political analysis. Given who has what to lose in the actual context, if those seven million Palestinians continually rile thing up and make life uncomfortable for their colonial masters, there’ll be a lot of the latter re-settling on the East Bank. Of the Hudson. Like Hearst, I have favored words like “project” and “enterprise” over “state” because I also see an Israeli state as the unfinished project of the Zionist enterprise. As I’ve remarked before, the question: “Does Israel have a right to exist?”—which we rightfully deconstruct as demanding our ratification of the colonial ethnic cleansing whereby Zionists have established 1948 Israel, should really be deconstructed further. It is not about the past, but the present and the future. It is actually asking—and that is why Zionists are so insistent on getting our answer—“Will Israel exist?” It is asking: “Do you accept the legitimacy of Zionists to be establishing a colonial-settler Jewish State, ethnic cleansing, apartheid, brutally enforced submission, and all?” The settlers’ motto is “Finish ’48!” Because the Nakba isn’t over, and never will be. Just look. Israel does not yet exist, because seven million Palestinians still do. And we have to be aware, as Bresheeth-Žabner warns us, that: “Israel has been preparing for many years for a window of political opportunity – a historical juncture which will enable it to vacate Palestine of most of its remaining indigenous population.” We cannot let this uprising or the next become Zionism’s next big opportunity. Every American is engaged in this fight now, and must make a choice—because their government has already made one for them, the choice for Zionism, which silence and inaction ratify. The clear and simple choice we all make is either to continue to support Israeli Zionism, which is colonialism, ethno-religious supremacy, and apartheid, or to oppose and defeat it. Don’t overcomplicate it. It really is a simple choice. This is Zionism: These settlers taking over Palestinian homes are exactly right: This is the essential activity of Zionism: Taking other people’s homes. This is what how the unfinished project of Israel was started, what it still is, and always will be, “at the expense of the Arabs who lived here.” This is what Palestinians are being asked to reconcile themselves to. This is colonialism, ethno-religious supremacism, ethnic cleansing—intrinsically, apartheid. The notion that the historical burden of one people is to surrender their land and homes to, and be subjugated by, another. There is no defense of it. This is what one supports if one supports Israel and Zionism. This is what one accepts if one accepts Zionism. This is what every major US politician, every media institution, and every major academic institution support when they support Israel. This—which is only possible because of US military, political, diplomatic, and financial support—is what you abet when you ignore and stay silent about it. This, and all the past (Iraq, Libya), ongoing (Syria), and future (Iran) wars and aggressions in support of it This is just wrong. How much longer? Jim Kavanagh edits The Polemicist. Follow him on Twitter @ThePolemicist_.

The girl who showed the world the suffering of Gaza's children

The video of 10-year-old Palestinian Nadine Abdullatif, tearful and devastated as she stands in front of the newly obliterated remains of her neighbour's home, has now been viewed more than 13 million times. Israel-Palestine: The names of Palestinians and Israelis killed during the violence Read More » "You see all of this?" she asks, eyes red, gesturing at the rubble behind her. "What do you expect me to do? Fix it? I'm only 10." Her voice breaks with emotion. "I just want to be a doctor or anything to help my people, but I can't. I'm just a kid." The internet carried images of the recent spate of violence around the world over the past two weeks, as Israel once again dropped bombs on Gaza, a small stretch of land that is home to more than two million people - 40 percent of whom are under 14. Yet despite Israel's best efforts and heavy-handed moderation - if not outright censorship - of pro-Palestinian posts by several social media platforms, it seems to have lost the battle for control of the narrative in large parts of the online space. The reaction to the video of Nadine is just one example. "When they bombed the house next to us, I heard the sound and it was very loud because they are very close to us, and I was very scared," Nadine told Middle East Eye in a phone call. "My younger brother, who is six years old, was terrified. I hid the fear inside of me so that my brother doesn't get too scared. I always try to hide my fear because I try to take care of my brother. I want him to feel safe. "When the shelling takes place I hold him tight. I stay by his side and sleep beside him. I keep him away from the windows because he will start crying." Since last Monday, Israeli bombs have killed 243 Palestinians living in the enclave, including 66 children. Dima Aseela funeral The funeral of Dima Aseela, an 11-year-old girl killed while on her way to buy bread on 19 May. Taken on 20 May, 2021 (MEE/Sanad Latefa) Eleven had been receiving trauma counselling from the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC). Aged between five and 15, they were all killed while sheltering inside their homes. Among the children was 15-year-old Lina Iyad Shar, who was killed with both of her parents on 11 May in Gaza's al-Manara neighbourhood. NRC said that Shar's two-year-old sister, Mina, sustained third-degree burns and remains in a critical condition. The same attack also killed four-year-old Zaid Mohammad Telbani and his mother, Rima, who was five months pregnant. Zaid's sister remains missing and is presumed dead. Israel-Gaza: 11 children receiving trauma counselling killed by Israeli bombings Read More » "They are now gone, killed with their families, buried with their dreams and the nightmares that haunted them. We call on Israel to stop this madness: children must be protected," said the NRC's secretary-general, Jan Egeland. Days later, five members of the Eskuntuna family were killed by Israeli bombs. Riad Eshkuntana, 46, spent seven hours trapped under the debris of his home, hearing the voices of his wife and children grow fainter, before being rescued with his four-year-old daughter, Suzi. His wife, Abir, 30, and their four other children, Dana, nine, Lana six, Yahya, five, and two-year-old Zayn, were all killed. 'They're just kids' "You see all of the kids around me?" Nadine asks in the viral video, as three boys, solemn-faced and silent as they watch her speak, come into shot. "Why would you just send a missile to them and kill them? It's not fair." For many of Gaza's children, this was not their first experience of life under Israeli bombs. Hundreds have been killed in similar offensives in recent years: 333 children in 2008-09 and 551 in 2014. Palestinians killed in Gaza And the psychological consequences of the years of conflict and loss on those who have survived, many of whom have only known life under siege, are unfathomable. Especially as the blockade by Israel and Egypt, in place since 2007, means they are largely unable to leave. Almost 90 percent of 11- to 17-year-olds in Gaza have experienced personal trauma and seen property demolitions, according to a 2020 study, while more than 80 percent have witnessed trauma to others. These are the three biggest contributors to post-traumatic stress disorder, the study adds. According to Islamic Relief, roughly 38 percent of young people in Gaza have considered suicide, and mental health services were too few and underfunded even before the latest offensive, which saw 24 health facilities attacked, according to the Palestinian Ministry of Health. Dima Aseela funeral The funeral of Dima Aseela, an 11-year-old girl killed while on her way to buy bread on 19 May. Taken on 20 May, 2021 (MEE/Sanad Latefa) Video diary "We never saw this intensity in attacks in previous wars," Mohamed Abdullatif, Nadine's 26-year-old brother, told MEE. She has five siblings. "Although the shelling around us was strong, and they were threatening a house close to us, we did not leave. We will stay here because there is no place for us to go." Like countless children, Nadine, who learned English from cartoons and computer games, publishes videos online about her daily life. Some videos on her Instagram page feel typical: in one, she quizzes her little brother on how well he knows her ("what's my favourite ice cream flavour?"), in another, she films two stray dogs on the beach and screams as one runs towards her. "Then," said her brother Mohamed, "she started vlogging about the war, and the suffering she and my little brother endured." She went out to film the morning after their neighbour's house was bombed, Mohamed added, (which was when she spoke to MEE reporter Sanad Latefa). "But even though she tried to hide her fear, she was afraid. Frankly speaking, even adults are afraid when the shelling starts." Nadine told MEE she hopes her videos will "show the world the suffering that my people and my country are facing". "I want to keep informing the world about what's happening, about our usurped rights. I want to defend the children who can't defend themselves. "We are ordinary people," she added. "I don't understand why they are carrying out these massacres against us and robbing us of our rights. They have robbed children of their right to learn, play, and live in safety."

Gaza official says 2,000 housing units destroyed in war with Israel

United Nations says 800,000 people don’t have regular access to clean water, as nearly 50% of network was damaged in fighting. GAZA CITY — A Palestinian official says an initial assessment shows at least 2,000 housing units were destroyed in the fighting between Israel and Palestinian terror groups in Gaza. Naji Sarhan, deputy of Gaza’s Hamas-run works and housing ministry, said more than 15,000 other units were partly destroyed in the 11-day war. The fighting in Gaza began after Hamas launched rockets toward Jerusalem following days of clashes and unrest in East Jerusalem and the Temple Mount and Al-Aqsa Mosque, including over the planned eviction of several Palestinian families from the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood. As the conflict unfolded, Hamas fired thousands of missiles at Israeli communities, and Israel launched hundreds of airstrikes on what it said were terror targets in the enclave. The Israeli Air Force targeted residential, commercial and government buildings, saying it was going after locations where Hamas — the Islamist terror group that seized control of Gaza from Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah in 2007 — had offices, command posts and resources. Get The Times of Israel's Daily Edition by email and never miss our top storiesFREE SIGN UP Sarhan said four mosques were destroyed along with dozens of police offices in Gaza. He said most of the factories in Gaza’s industrial zone were destroyed or damaged. Israel says Hamas stores rockets and other weapons in mosques and schools, and fires from nearby. A Palestinian policeman walks on the rubble of Arafat City, Gaza’s Hamas police headquarters in Gaza City on May 22, 2021 (Emmanuel DUNAND / AFP) Meanwhile, police inspected unexploded Israeli ordnance collected during the campaign. Police chief Mahmoud Salah said nearly 300 Israeli rockets and shells did not explode. Sarhan put the estimated financial losses from the fighting at $150 million. He said the assessment was still ongoing. The United Nations said approximately 800,000 people in Gaza did not have regular access to clean piped water, as nearly 50% of the water network was damaged in the recent fighting. Quoting Gaza’s public works and housing ministry, the UN ’s office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs said nearly 17,000 residential and commercial units had been damaged or destroyed in the 11-day campaign. These include 769 housing and commercial units that had been rendered uninhabitable, at least 1,042 units in some 258 buildings which had been destroyed and another 14,538 units that have suffered minor damage. A Palestinian man rides a motorbike past a newly-set billboard which reads in Arabic ‘Palestine is victorious,’ in Gaza City on May 22, 2021 (Emmanuel DUNAND / AFP) The UN said 53 education facilities, six hospitals and 11 primary health care centers were damaged since May 10. One health center was severely damaged, the UN said, while one hospital was not operational because of lack of electricity. Schools in Gaza remained closed, affecting almost 600,000 children. An Egypt-brokered truce halted Israeli airstrikes on the crowded Palestinian territory and rockets fired by Palestinian groups at Israel, which had been ongoing since May 10. The latest round of bombardment killed at least 248 people in Gaza, including 66 minors, and wounded more than 1,900 since May 10, the Hamas-run health ministry says. The United Nations says more than half of those killed, the overwhelming majority in Israeli airstrikes, were civilians. Israel says more than 200 were terrorists, including 25 commanders. It also says some civilians were killed by errant Palestinian rockets. A Palestinian woman eats ice-cream in front of the destroyed Al-Shuruq building, destroyed by an Israeli air strike, on May 22, 2021, in Gaza City (MAHMUD HAMS / AFP) During the same period, thousands of rockets fired by Palestinian terror groups killed 12 people in Israel including one child, a teenager, an Israeli soldier, one Indian and two Thai nationals. Hundreds of Israelis were injured. An Egyptian diplomat said Saturday that two teams of Egyptian mediators were in Israel and the Palestinian territories to continue talks on firming up the ceasefire deal — and securing a long-term calm. The diplomat said discussions include implementing agreed-on measures in Gaza and Jerusalem, including ways to prevent practices that led to the latest fighting. The official did not elaborate. He was apparently referring to violence at the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the planned eviction of Palestinian families from the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood in East Jerusalem. A Palestinian man inspects damaged products in a shopping center, next to a building that was hit by an Israeli strike, in Gaza City on May 22, 2021. (MAHMUD HAMS / AFP) The diplomat also said Israel had given a green light to Gaza fishermen to return to sea Saturday as part of the ceasefire deal. Hussein Sheikh, a senior aide to PA President Abbas, tweeted that one of the Egyptian delegations planned to hold talks with the Palestinian leadership in Ramallah on Saturday. Both sides were fast to claim victory as the ceasefire came into effect. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel’s bombing campaign against terror groups had been an “exceptional success.” Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh said Israel had been “dealt a painful and severe blow that will leave its deep marks,” and thanked Iran for “providing funds and weapons.” While also claiming a decisive victory, Defense Minister Benny Gantz on Friday called for a major international effort to rebuild and develop Gaza to improve the lives of its residents. Palestinian fishermen mend their nets before setting to sea at the main port in Gaza City on May 22, 2021, after a ban on fishing was lifted following a ceasefire between Israel and Palestinian terrorists (Emmanuel DUNAND / AFP) H said it was now time for diplomacy to build a new reality “on the rubble of the homes of the Hamas leaders.” He added: “If we don’t act diplomatically, quickly and wisely,” this operation will go down as “simply another round of conflict to be followed by the next one.” Convoys of trucks carrying aid began passing into Gaza through the Kerem Shalom crossing Saturday after it was reopened by Israel, bringing much-needed medicine, food and fuel. Israel temporarily reopened both the Erez and Kerem Shalom crossings into Gaza at the height of the violence, allowing many truckloads of desperately needed fuel, medical equipment and animal feed into the enclave, according to Israel’s military liaison to the Palestinians. While the crossings were opened, terrorists in the Strip launched a large mortar barrage across the border, firing dozens of shells throughout the area, including at Kerem Shalom and Erez. A soldier was lightly wounded Tuesday in a mortar attack while assisting in the transfer of humanitarian aid shipments into Gaza Strip through the Erez Crossing, and Israel decided to again shut the crossings.

UK 'evading responsibility' over Israeli arms exports after British military hardware found to be used in Gaza bombardment

The British government says it has robust checks on arms sales but campaigners have raised concerns that several UK-made parts are found in weapons used by Israel. The United Kingdom is being urged to make good on promises of robust checks on arms sales after new research revealed numerous British-made components are found in weapons used by Israel in its bombardment of the Gaza Strip. The research by Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) shows UK-produced parts are used in the F-35 and F-16 fighter jets and Apache helicopters used by the Israeli military, according to The Independent. Lockheed Martin, the American aerospace manufacturer that produces the F-35, says on its website that "the fingerprints of British ingenuity can be found on dozens of the aircraft's key components". "More than 100 UK-based suppliers" including BAE Systems and Rolls-Royce are involved in the production of the fighter jet, according to Lockheed Martin. The UK Defence Journal estimates around 15 percent of the jet is British-made. A spokesperson for the Israeli military confirmed last week that F-35s were among the warplanes being used to pound Gaza. Israel also uses F-16 jets, which are also produced by Lockheed Martin. The jets include advanced targeting equipment produced in the UK, according to CAAT. Apache helicopters used by the Israeli military and produced by Boeing use British-manufactured radar systems and navigation equipment, among other components. When asked about the supply of such components to end-user Israel, a British government spokesperson told The Independent "the UK takes its arms export responsibilities extremely seriously". RELATED Ocasio-Cortez leads efforts to block US arms sales to Israel MENA The New Arab Staff & Agencies 20 May, 2021 "The government tells us that it's concerned, but it has failed to do the bare minimum, and has consistently refused to provide clear answers to very basic questions about whether UK-made arms that it sold are being used or not," Andrew Smith of CAAT told the British newspaper. "It wouldn't be the first time. Time and again UK-made weapons and components have been used against Palestinians, and it looks like that is what has happened again," Smith said. In 2009, then-Foreign Secretary David Miliband admitted that weapons used by the Israeli military in the brutal 2008-9 assault on the Gaza Strip "almost certainly" contained British-made parts. Amnesty International has called for an immediate halt to arms sales to Israel and "any third country which could be using UK-supplied components to incorporate into weaponry supplied to Israel". "In particular, UK ministers must say whether UK technology is still being used in the Israeli military drone programme – something that came to light as long ago as 2006 but is still largely shrouded in secrecy," said Oliver Feeley-Sprague, the organisation's military, security and policing programme director. Labour Party MP Richard Burgon has backed calls for an arms embargo. "Without this, our government's talk of supporting peace is not only empty rhetoric, it is actually complicit in Israel's war on the Palestinian people," Burgon said. The UK has also come under fire for supplying arms to Saudi Arabia despite concerns over the weapons' use in Yemen. "We are always told how robust arms export controls supposedly are, but nothing could be further from the truth," Smith said.