Tag: Gaza war

Turkey’s Unexpected Bid to Join BRICS Sparks Concern for NATO and the West

Turkey’s application to join the BRICS bloc highlights the geostrategic shifts straining the post-war order at a time of heightened international tensions.

On June 11, as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was appealing for help at a conference in Berlin at the start of a week of intense diplomacy in western Europe, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan was in the east, holding talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow.

The Kremlin meeting went “fantastically well”, Fidan told Turkish state media. Putin also sounded pleased. “We welcome Turkey‘s interest in the work of BRICS,” Turkish media quoted the Russian leader as saying. “Undoubtedly, we will fully support this aspiration.”

The aspiration inched towards fruition this week when Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) confirmed that Turkey had formally applied to join the BRICS bloc of emerging economies.

“Our president has expressed multiple times that we wish to become a member of BRICS,” AKP spokesman Omer Celik told journalists in Ankara on Tuesday. “Our request in this matter is clear, and the process is proceeding within this framework.”

Turkey’s BRICS candidacy marks the first time a NATO member and candidate for EU membership has applied to join a group dominated by Russia and China that views itself as a counterweight to the Western-led global order. The move, by a member of the world’s most powerful military alliance, highlights the geostrategic shifts straining the post-war order at a time of heightened international strains.

A banking jargon that ‘absolutely exploded’

The BRICS bloc has long been dismissed as a talking shop, a loose grouping of countries that are sometimes at odds and even engage in fierce border skirmishes, without a defining purpose.

The origins of the grouping itself are unorthodox, contributing to the muddle over its mission. The acronym “BRIC” was coined by British economist Jim O’Neill in 2001 while he was research chief at Goldman Sachs to categorise Brazil, Russia, India and China – countries with large populations and economic growth potential.

Over the next few years, the investment banker’s concept “absolutely exploded”, explained O’Neill – nicknamed “Mr BRIC” – in a 2009 interview. It was the year the leaders of the four countries formed a political grouping at the first BRIC summit in Russia.  South Africa joined the grouping in 2010, expanding the acronym to BRICS.

Nearly 15 years later, the grouping has nearly doubled to include Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) as official members.

The acronym no longer covers all its members. Neither does the “emerging economies” suffix employed to describe the bloc. While economists note that some BRICS economies have long “emerged”, they continue to use the explainer for lack of an alternative.

And yet, the number of nations queuing for BRICS membership keeps growing.

In addition to Turkey, nearly 20 other countries have applied for membership, forcing the bloc to institute expansion procedures. The line of aspirants has also sparked divisions within the original BRIC members, with Russia and China pushing for expansion while Brazil and India are more wary of adding members.

Meanwhile membership to the bloc’s New Development Bank (NDB), established in 2015 as an alternative to the World Bank and IMF, is also growing. Algeria was approved for NDB membership earlier this week, joining Bangladesh and Uruguay in addition to BRICS member states.

Hedging bets

Turkey’s latest bid to join the bloc has raised eyebrows in Western capitals.

NATO’s only Muslim-majority member nation straddles Europe and Asia, with coastlines hugging the Mediterranean and Black Seas and straits connecting the two. It’s a geography of vital strategic interest as the Ukraine war rages across the Black Sea to Turkey’s north while the Gaza war threatens regional stability in the Middle East, to Turkey’s south.

“This is something to which the transatlantic community should definitely pay attention,” said Asli Aydintasbas from the Washington DC-based Brookings Institute. “Turkey is seeking alternatives. It does not want to leave its NATO membership. It does not want to shed its European aspirations. But it wants to diversify its set of alliances, hedge its bets, so to speak. It no longer sees its NATO membership to be the sole identity, its sole foreign policy orientation.”

A NATO member joining the queue for BRICS membership may be unprecedented but it does not contravene the military alliance’s rules, notes Michel Duclos, a former French ambassador to Syria and a special advisor to the Paris-based Institut Montaigne.

“Legally, of course, there are no brakes. BRICS has no treaty obligations, there is no operational mechanism, it’s a very loose organisation,” said Duclos. “At the same time, the spirit of NATO as an organisation is that when you sit at the same table, you exchange views in a very, you know, confidential way. There is an atmosphere of trust,” he noted, adding that Turkey’s bid to join the BRICS is “a bit of a contradiction with being an ally in NATO”.

Pushing a geopolitical balancing act ‘too far’

Discrepancy and disagreement have long marked Erdogan’s dealings with the West, a truculence the Turkish president sometimes proudly displays on the international stage.

“President Erdogan defines a strategic success as one in which he can have a foot in different camps. He wants to have a foot in each camp and be able to play off the West against Russia, the West against China. I think that he has come to skillfully play this geopolitical act,” said Aydintasbas.

But at times, “President Erdogan has pushed his geopolitical balancing act too far, testing the waters and going a bit overboard,” Aydintasbas added.

Turkey’s ties with its Western military allies have been particularly strained in recent years over Ankara’s purchase of Russian S-400 air defence system that was designed to down NATO planes.

Amid concerns that Turkey’s deployment of the S-400 could expose classified features of NATO hardware to Russian intelligence, the US sanctioned Ankara by removing Turkey from an F-35 jet programme.

The US also withheld its sale of 40 F-16 fighter jets to Turkey following Erdogan’s S-400 fiasco. The F-16 sale was only approved in January, after Turkey ratified Sweden’s bid to join NATO.

The US response to Turkey’s BRICS membership bid has been muted so far, and is very likely to stay that way, Aydintasbas believes. “Washington is keeping quiet. It does not want a public, high-profile spat with Turkey, and it knows that President Erdogan is unpredictable,” she explained.

“There is also the assumption [in Washington DC] that this may not amount to much. BRICS is not really a hugely functional entity. It is an entity of the non-Western world and it is trying to develop economic muscle,” said Aydintasbas.  “But BRICS does not have a military force, special forces, a rapid reaction force, etc. It doesn’t have the same set of interests and values that you see within the transatlantic community.”

Gaza war triggers ‘double-standards’ complaints

The value that binds BRICS aspirants is a commitment to multipolarity amid mounting frustration with the US-led unipolarity that has dominated the international stage.

Duclos, whose latest book, “Diplomatie française”, hit the shelves in France earlier this year, notes that there is a tendency among observers in some Western countries such as France to dismiss BRICS as a “talking shop with no teeth”.

“I differ with these views because, for me, the simple fact that these countries feel the need to meet together is a very strong signal that the West is not as dominant and as attractive as it used to be. And the very fact that there are so many countries which are BRICS candidates is a clear indication of the vanishing prestige of the Western world,” he noted.

In the aftermath of Russia’s 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the neutral position of many Global South countries drew criticisms from Kyiv’s allies and supporters.

But two years later, as the Ukraine war drags on, the view is more nuanced. “A lot of these countries [in the Global South] do not approve the Russian aggression against Ukraine. They also feel comfortable to sit with Russia in the same club. This is a strong message for us I think,” said Duclos.

The message, for Duclos, is clear. Many Global South countries may not be anti-Western, “but they hate the policy of sanctions. The Brazilians, the Saudis and many others are not against Washington, but they are against sanctions. That’s very clear”, he noted.

The Gaza war and Washington’s unwavering support for Israel as the death toll in the besieged Palestinian enclave exceeds 40,000 has also reignited criticisms of Western hypocrisy and double standards – which are echoed in Moscow and Beijing.

“All my friends in the Global South share this opinion, they consider that the Gaza war is the last nail in the coffin of Western prestige,” said Duclos. “It’s clear that it’s perceived as Western double standards. The partiality of the West towards Israel is not understood in the Global South.”

Erdogan has long sought to style himself as a leader of the Muslim world. But apart from the Turkish leader’s incendiary bluster, his failure to effect any change or pause in Israel’s relentless assault on Gaza has weakened his standing in Turkey.

In the April local elections, Erdogan’s AKP lost mayoral races in the country’s five largest cities and saw a significant decline in its votes nationwide. The surprise winner was a tiny, hardline Islamist party, the YRP, which ran on a platform criticising Turkey’s growing bilateral trade ties with Israel.

In addition to the Islamist right, the Gaza war is also stoking anti-NATO sentiments among Turkey’s hard-left secularists.

On Wednesday, two US Marines in the western Turkish city of Izmir were attacked by members of the Turkey Youth Union (TGB), a youth branch of the nationalist opposition Vatan Party, according to local officials.

The Marines were on a port visit as the USS Wasp warship patrols the eastern Mediterranean in a show of support for Israel.

 

Turkish police arrested 15 suspects in the attack and the White House said it appreciated the actions of Turkish law enforcement officials. But the assault underscored the geopolitical strains triggered by the Gaza war.

“Erdogan’s hand is much weaker today than it used to be a few years ago. The Gaza war has demonstrated how little leverage Ankara has on an issue that deeply affects most Turks,” said Duclos. “In a way, Turkey’s BRICS bid is a way to distract the attention of the current weakness and to try to find something else because Erdogan has not been very successful in recent months.”

Leela Jacinto is a senior editor at France24.com

This article was originally published on France 24

The Palestine Question – A Tragedy of Perpetual Betrayals

Western inaction is not merely a violation of international norms; it represents complicity in the ongoing genocide.

West Asia finds itself engulfed in an unprecedented turmoil. The region remains a theatre of destruction as ballistic missiles and rockets wreak havoc, with the threat of an expanding conflict looming large. What began as a war in Gaza a year ago now risks stirring a broader regional crisis, with southern Lebanon entrenched in the conflict and the potential for escalation into Iran and Yemen growing ever more conceivable.

For Israel, this moment is marked by military assertiveness, emboldened by the high-profile assassinations of Ismail Haniyeh, the political chief of Hamas, and Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah. Yet, this period of intensifying militarism across regimes in the region brings grave consequences. Iran’s retaliatory strikes and Israel’s stern warnings of future responses on the anniversary of Hamas’s October 7 attacks reveal the precariousness of the situation, as the Gaza war shows no signs of resolution.

On Friday, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, leader of the Islamic Revolution, addressed worshippers in Tehran, asserting that every nation, including Palestinians and Lebanese, has the right to defend themselves against aggressors. He remarked that the attack on southern Israel on October 7 was entirely justified. His comments came shortly after the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) launched around 200 missiles at Israeli military sites in retaliation for the assassination of Nasrallah and Haniyeh. Khamenei condemned Israel’s hostile actions in the region since last October, stating that the enemies of Iran are the same as those of the Palestinian, Lebanese, Iraqi, Egyptian, Syrian, and Yemeni nations. He urged Muslim nations to collectively take decisive action against the Zionist regime. This appears to be a call with dangerous implications for the region. 

The past year has brought unprecedented devastation to Palestinians and Arab communities across the region. For 12 months, conflict has raged across the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Gaza, Israel, and Lebanon. This escalating violence has now culminated in a full-scale regional war, leaving hundreds of thousands of civilians dead, injured or displaced from their homes. Among the most affected are children, many of whom, a year later, continue to suffer from illness, malnutrition, and the long-lasting effects of war.

The conflict’s latest episode began on October 7 last year, when Hamas militants launched a major attack from Gaza, killing 1,200 people, wounding more than 5,400, and taking 251 hostages, including foreign nationals, within Israel. In retaliation, Israel unleashed large-scale military strikes on Gaza, resulting in the deaths of approximately 42,000 people and injuring over 96,000. Tens of thousands remain buried under the rubble.

The bombardment also claimed the lives of over 400 international volunteers and more than 1,000 medical personnel in Gaza. The humanitarian crisis deepened, with 1.9 million Palestinians – 90% of Gaza’s population – forced to flee their homes, and 2.5 million children in the West Bank and Gaza now facing existential threats. According to UNICEF, nearly 1.5 million children are in urgent need of humanitarian assistance, and the majority of Palestinian families have fallen into poverty.

Meanwhile, in Lebanon, Israeli airstrikes have claimed thousands of lives in recent days, with casualties continuing to mount. Northern Israel has also been affected, including the deaths of children in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, and mass displacements have occurred, with over 70,000 people fleeing northern Israel and 80,000 displaced from areas near Gaza. In the West Bank, hundreds of Palestinians have been killed and migrant violence has surged to unprecedented levels since October 7, with thousands of incidents reported.

Despite such devastation, the international community, including the United Nations, remains largely passive and unwilling to take decisive action other than passing resolutions. Earlier this year, the International Court of Justice found that genocide was occurring in Gaza, citing clear evidence of atrocities committed by the Israeli military. In July 2024, the court further declared Israel’s actions to be tantamount to war-like occupation. Despite these rulings, the judgments have gone unimplemented. Not only do the genocide and occupation persist, but there has been no meaningful effort to halt Israel’s actions. This failure to enforce international law had eroded global stability and emboldened authoritarian regimes.

For Palestinians, this is an existential struggle. Western inaction is not merely a violation of international norms; it represents complicity in the ongoing genocide. For decades, the international community has endorsed the two-state solution as the only viable path to peace. However, Israel’s illegal settlements and aggressive territorial occupation have fundamentally altered this situation. The ongoing colonisation of Palestinian land has rendered the prospect of a two-state solution increasingly untenable. Israel’s leadership now openly rejects the very notion of a Palestinian state. In July 2024, the Israeli parliament voted against Palestinian sovereignty, and in December 2023, Israel’s ambassador to Britain publicly affirmed that Israel would not support a two-state solution.

Also read: Palestine Diary: Meeting People Whose Only Hope Is Our Anger

The establishment of a Palestinian state is no longer a matter of mere political debate; it has become a reflection of deeper, troubling realities. Israeli governments have ceased to even feign interest in peace, outright denying the very existence of the Palestinian people. The Minister of National Security recently asserted that Jewish rights take precedence over Palestinian rights, reinforcing the entrenched apartheid policies and the continued expansion of Jewish settlements. These actions make the prospect of a two-state solution increasingly distant, if not impossible.

Meanwhile, much of the international community remains paralysed between indifference and complicity as Israel continues to violate international law with impunity. This inaction is often framed as political pragmatism, yet it disregards the profound disregard for human life and the failure to uphold international commitments. As global power dynamics shift, with China and Russia expanding their influence, many nations are gravitating toward these emerging powers. Yet, even China and Russia have shown reluctance to meaningfully intervene in the Palestinian issue, maintaining a limited engagement similar to their previous stance.

However, this widespread indifference is fuelling greater mobilisation in many countries. Over the past year, large demonstrations across the United States and Europe have brought people together in opposition to the genocide in Palestine. These protests have united diverse communities in a common stand against apartheid, occupation, and ethnic cleansing. The divide is no longer drawn along religious lines but between those who oppose genocide and those who remain complicit in letting it continue. Increasingly, nations are calling on their governments to take decisive action and demanding sanctions that could bring an end to the occupation and genocide, supporting international legal efforts as well as pushing to halt arms sales to Israel.

Why October 7 attacks

Hamas chose a highly strategic moment for its attack. Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories had reached unprecedented levels, creating a volatile environment. Compounding this, Hamas was outraged by the normalisation of relations between Israel and several Arab nations that had historically supported the Palestinian cause, viewing these peace agreements as betrayals. Meanwhile, the Palestinian Authority, led by Mahmoud Abbas in the West Bank, was already in conflict with Hamas due to ongoing corruption, mismanagement and divergent approaches to resistance, further deepening the political fragmentation within the Palestinian leadership.

Hamas was particularly angered by the normalisation of ties between several West Asian regimes and Israel through the Abraham Accords. The reconciliation of countries like the UAE, Bahrain, Sudan, Morocco, and Egypt with Israel was seen by Hamas as a betrayal and it had no means to disrupt these diplomatic agreements. Reports that Saudi Arabia, Oman, and Indonesia were moving towards joining the accords further intensified Hamas’s frustration.

Israel, which had previously maintained covert ties with Iran, suffered a significant setback as Iranian-backed groups such as Hezbollah and the Houthis grew closer to Hamas. This period marked the failure of Israel’s strategy to exploit the Shia-Sunni divide, particularly in relation to the Palestinian issue. Hamas also saw an opportunity in Israel’s internal discord, particularly during a time when corruption charges against Netanyahu were mounting. Seizing on Israel’s political instability, Hamas sought to exploit what it perceived as the state’s weakest moment.

Since 2006, when Hamas seized control of Gaza, tensions have only deepened. In the absence of successful diplomatic resolutions, regional countries and political forces have increasingly acted unilaterally, disregarding broader efforts to address the Palestinian issue. Many now overlook the fact that the United Nations had endorsed the creation of a Palestinian state alongside Israel as far back as the Cold War era. Israel was not founded by the destruction of a pre-existing Palestinian state when the partition plan was implemented in 1948. Yet, this raises a critical question: Shouldn’t those responsible for the eventual destruction of Palestine and their supporters be held accountable?

Moreover, even within the Arab world, there was no unified stance on the future of the displaced Palestinian refugees following the partition. Arab nations were often preoccupied with their own political interests, which further weakened the Palestinian cause. These divisions have continually undermined the Palestinians’ fundamental right to return to their homeland, compounding the challenges they face today.

The forced Jewish settlement of the West Bank constitutes a violation of international law, as it contravenes the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits the transfer of an occupying power’s civilian population into the territory it occupies. Likewise, in the case of Jerusalem, the United States and other Western nations have undermined United Nations resolutions that designated the city as an international zone under the UN partition plan. The disregard for these resolutions and international norms has contributed to the ongoing failure of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, which have stagnated for decades.

The shift began in 1993 when the Palestinian leadership formally recognised the State of Israel through the Oslo Peace Process, while Israel, in turn, recognised the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. This led to the creation of the Palestinian Authority with limited autonomy in the occupied territories. However, the prospects for peace quickly unravelled when Benjamin Netanyahu, then opposition leader, denounced the Oslo Accords as a threat to Israel’s security. Upon assuming the office of prime minister in 1996, Netanyahu’s administration endorsed new settlement plans in the occupied territories, reigniting tensions. In response, Hamas intensified its attacks, further entrenching the cycle of violence.

Although the peace process moved forward with the ultimate goal of a two-state solution, it got nowhere. Prime Minister Netanyahu called the US peace plan during Trump’s presidency the ‘deal of the century,’ but the Palestinians rejected it. Israel’s strict restrictions and airstrikes in densely populated areas have been a collective punishment for the people of Gaza. Despite sustained Israeli offensives, Hamas launched several counter-attacks. That is what led to the conflict and war that is now unmanageable.

Israel recognizes that Iran-backed groups such as Hezbollah, Hamas and the Houthis hold significant influence in the region. Prime Minister Netanyahu is convinced that neutralising these forces would secure Israeli dominance and believes that some Arab governments quietly share this ambition. Their interest in the Abraham Accords is largely driven by economic considerations rather than political or moral alignment and a democratically elected Palestinian government would pose a threat to many of these regimes. Historically, Arab states have demonstrated a lack of genuine unity on the Palestinian issue, as seen in their fragmented responses to both the ‘Arab Spring’ and the ongoing Palestinian struggle. If their intentions were truly aligned with their rhetoric, the Arab League or its leading members would have restored Palestinian land long ago. It is no surprise that America’s involvement is limited, especially with the upcoming presidential election, where any significant move against Israel could destabilise both Democratic and Republican positions, reflecting the entrenched bipartisan support for Israel in U.S. politics.

The global community recognises that as long as weapons continue to flow into Israel and other armed groups in the region, the conflict will persist and the suffering of civilians will endure. There is little doubt that the nations supplying these arms – including the United States, Germany, and India – bear significant responsibility for the ongoing Palestinian tragedy. West Asia has long been the largest arms market for the Western military-industrial complex, a sector even more valued by imperialist powers than the region’s oil trade. As a result, perpetual conflict has become a familiar reality in West Asia. The gravest tragedy, however, is that the survival of millions caught in this turmoil remains dependent on little more than unenforced international resolutions.

K.M. Seethi is Director, Inter University Centre for Social Science Research and Extension (IUCSSRE), Mahatma Gandhi University (MGU), Kerala. He also served as ICSSR Senior Fellow, Senior Professor of International Relations and Dean of Social Sciences at MGU.     

At Talks With Israel, India Expresses Concern About ‘Escalating Situation’ in West Asia

Several hours before the meeting, Israeli foreign minister Israel Katz said that hundreds of Israeli troops raided the West Bank “to dismantle Iranian-Islamic terror infrastructures”.

New Delhi: Even as Israel launched a major military operation in the West Bank, India reiterated its concern about the “escalating” situation in West Asia during its foreign office-level consultations with Israel.

The Indian delegation was led by foreign secretary Vikram Misri, while the Israeli side was headed by Yaakov Blitshtein, director-general of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs at the talks on Wednesday (August 28) here.

The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA)’s readout of the 17th round of foreign office talks between the two countries said that besides bilateral issues, both sides discussed various issues of bilateral interest and shared views on the situation in West Asia and the Indo-Pacific.

Misri underscored India’s “strong and unequivocal” condemnation of the October 7 terror attack by Hamas and reiterated New Delhi’s call for the “unconditional and immediate release of all hostages, a ceasefire, the continuation of humanitarian assistance and strict adherence to international humanitarian law.”

“At the same time, he also shared India’s concern at the escalating situation in West Asia and emphasised restraint, dialogue, and diplomacy,” the MEA’s statement said.

Several hours before the meeting, Israeli foreign minister Israel Katz said that hundreds of Israeli troops raided the West Bank “to dismantle Iranian-Islamic terror infrastructures”.

Following Hamas’s attack on Israel on October 7, which claimed the lives of over 1,200 people, Prime Minister Narendra Modi promptly declared India’s “solidarity” with Israel.

In the immediate aftermath, India abstained from a United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) resolution calling for a humanitarian pause to Israel’s military actions in Gaza, setting itself apart as one of the few large developing countries to take this stance.

However, India soon found it necessary to clarify and balance its diplomatic stance.

The government reiterated its unwavering support for the Palestinian cause, highlighting its historical commitment to this issue. It voted in favour of the second UNGA resolution that called for a ceasefire to allow an increased flow of aid into Gaza.

Yet, in a demonstration of its continued balancing act, India abstained on a resolution in the UN Human Rights Council that called for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and an arms embargo on Israel.

At the same time, it voted in favour of the UNGA’s call for admitting Palestine as a member of the world body.

India has not issued any statement after Hamas political chief Ismail Haniyeh was killed in Iran on August 1, which has further increased tensions as the region has remained braced for retributive attacks by Iran and its aligned proxy groups.

The Poliovirus Rides the Gaza War

A polio outbreak seems imminent in beleaguered Gaza. But prioritising polio vaccination – a comprehensive and rigorous public health initiative – could give Gaza’s health systems a boost and bring them back from the brink.

As Israeli armed forces continue to rain lethal rockets and bombs over Gaza, its devastated children and their families, as it turns out, are sitting on a different time bomb – an imminent polio outbreak of a highly infectious nature.

While millions of people the world over have protested the near-genocidal conditions in Gaza and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has voiced a fear of “physical destruction in whole or in part” of the besieged population, should we be worrying about a likely polio outbreak there as a matter of priority?

Not only is the World Health Organisation (WHO) “extremely worried” about this possibility, but so are Israel’s highly respected epidemiologists and public health experts who have made an ardent plea for a ceasefire through Israel’s Haaretz newspaper.

“The response to the threat of the highly infectious poliovirus, recently detected in sewage in Gaza, must be coordinated and comprehensive. As Israeli public health professors, we call for a cease-fire to stop it spreading,” they write. They remind all parties to the hostilities that children in Gaza and Israel “are not guilty of any crime, other than the dangerous circumstances they were born into.”

Gaza’s health ministry announced on Friday (August 17) that it had detected the coastal strip’s first case of polio in years, after a highly infectious vaccine-derived poliovirus Type-2 (VDPV2) was found in six sewage samples collected in late June from the Khan Younis and Deir al Balah camp areas.

Gaza has been polio-free for the past 25 years and immunisation rates in the Occupied Territories – Gaza, East Jerusalem and the West Bank – were “optimal” at 99% till 2022 according to WHO. They came down to 89% last year; but immunisation coverage in Gaza could be lower than that due the decimation of its health system – with only 16 out of the territory’s 36 hospitals partially functioning and more than half of its primary health facilities destroyed. 

Add to this the lack of security, access difficulty, continuous population displacement, shortages of medical supplies and absence of cold chain equipment to keep the vaccines for polio and other diseases in the necessary temperature range, and you have the perfect recipe for a “health catastrophe” as described by Gaza’s health ministry.

Dr Ayadil Saparbekov, head of the WHO’s team in the Palestinian territories, has been desperately trying to attract world attention to the dire situation of sewage contamination and lack of clean water.

Wastewater is running freely between displacement camp tents and and inhabited areas; about 600 people are having to share one toilet; as many as 70% of sewage pumps have been destroyed and not a single wastewater treatment plant is working in Gaza, presenting the “perfect breeding ground” for polio and other vaccine-preventable disease to spread, he told the media.

Also read | Polio in Gaza: What Does this Mean for the Region and the World?

Historically the origin of polio is the ‘wild poliovirus’ that spreads through faecal matter-contamination and poor hygiene. There is evidence that through the centuries, the rulers and the ruled, the rich and the poor, and colonising countries and colonies were equally affected by the virus.

The United States, a superpower, was humbled by the polio epidemic of 1952, reporting 57,628 cases that year with 3,145 dead and 21,269 left with mild to disabling paralysis. This speeded up the development of the oral polio vaccine (OPV), and a dramatic drop was seen in the number of cases in countries that could afford the vaccine.

And then came 1988. The entire international community represented by member states at the World Health Assembly unanimously adopted the resolution to eradicate polio from the face of this earth. The polio vaccine became free for every child, marking the launch of the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) spearheaded by national governments, WHO, Rotary International, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and UNICEF.

The GPEI – of which movie star Amitabh Bachchan has emerged as an ally on Indian TV – was later joined by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and GAVI, the global vaccine alliance. Billions of dollars have backed the initiative, and the commitment for turning the aspirational goal of polio eradication into reality has been driving the programme for more than three and a half decades.

There are two kinds of polio vaccines, WHO tells us: OPV, which contains an attenuated or weakened live virus and is given orally; and the inactivated polio vaccine or the IPV, which is given through intra-muscular injection.

If more than 95% of the targeted population is not vaccinated at the same time, the vaccine-derived poliovirus (VDPV) can emerge when children vaccinated with OPV excrete the vaccine virus, and it spreads to under- or unimmunised people. If not quickly tackled with a vaccination campaign, it may mutate over time to become a virulent virus that circulates and causes paralysis in populations with low levels of immunity.

In 2023, WHO reported 524 polio cases in 32 countries caused by vaccine-derived poliovirus. The strain of vaccine-derived poliovirus that has been detected in the wastewater in Gaza is the circulating VDPV Type-2. This was a clear signal that the virus was lurking and could attack any moment.

Keeping a polio-free Gaza is critical not only for Gaza’s children, but also for the region and for this entire global village we live in. We have been warned time and again that viruses, pathogens and toxic exposures know no borders.

The circulating VDPV Type-2, the same as in Gaza, was isolated in wastewater in Jerusalem, London and New York in early 2022. Some researchers have attributed this to high concentrations of Orthodox Jews in these urban neighbourhoods who may have refused vaccination. Later in the same year, a young man of twenty, living 65 kilometres north of New York City, became the first case of local polio transmission in the United States in three decades.

Global polio data tells us that in 2023, most outbreaks of VDPV Type-2 were in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Yemen, Nigeria, Sudan and Somalia, where ongoing armed conflicts obstructed and considerably reduced access to vaccination. There was also one case reported in Egypt, from a place that borders Gaza. Did the virus found in Gaza’s wastewater hop across from Egypt? Epidemiologists will tell us in due course.

As part of an assignment with UNICEF, I had the opportunity to work intensively with the polio eradication programme in India, Afghanistan, countries in central Asia as well as west and central Africa. “Why this fuss? Why make this monumental effort to eradicate one disease?” was the question that bothered me initially as I worked long hours in the field with health workers, community mobilisers, government officials, teachers, religious leaders, celebrities, parliamentarians, media persons, and of course children and their families.

But as I allowed myself to see, hear, smell and feel what it took to reach every child through scorching heat, flood waters, snow and war, the principle of health equity, gender rights, diversity and inclusion that the programme stood for sank deep into my heart and made a permanent home there.

To many experts, ending polio in India had seemed impossible until it was done. Representative photo. Credit: RIBI Image Library/Flickr. CC BY 2.0.

India accounted for 60% of the world’s polio cases when the then Congress government of PM Narasimha Rao rolled out the Pulse Polio Immunisation Programme in October 1994. To many experts, ending polio in India had seemed impossible until it was done. The last polio case reported was in Howrah, West Bengal on January 13, 2011 and India was certified ‘polio-free’ three years later.

The sheer size and complexity of India’s polio operation was baffling. Over 172 million children were vaccinated with approximately 1 billion doses of OPV administered every year through several campaign rounds. In addition to obvious impediments such as lack of clean water, poor sanitation and hygiene habits and malnutrition among children, differences of religion, caste, access to services, mistrust and superstition created social and cultural barriers giving rise to numerous ‘high-risk’ pockets that were reservoirs of transmission for the poliovirus.

To overcome this problem by engaging with resisting communities on a regular basis, UNICEF deployed a network of over 7,000 community mobilisers to assist an army of vaccinators more than twice the size of India’s armed forces.

The problem was mainly with the underserved sections of the society and minorities whose dominant fear was that the vaccine was a ploy to induce sterility among male children. Minority communities such as Muslims in UP, Dalits in Bihar, Adivasis in Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand, and tribespeople in the northeastern states were suspicious of the programme and hid their children from vaccinators.

During one of the campaigns, I was with my team of community mobilisers in a village close to Aligarh in Uttar Pradesh, which had reported vaccine hesitancy and active refusal to vaccinate children, particularly boys, with the polio vaccine. From a 0% coverage, we were desperate to reach at least 95% to make the round successful – an incredible task of turning night into day, I thought!

We had a convincing narrative, we thought. We enriched it with anecdotes, adapted it to the local situation, did a few street corner skits, reasoned with the younger people, pleaded with the elders; but it was a firm “no” from the villagers.

Suddenly, Bibijan, a respected woman with ash-coloured hair and a wisened face, made a proposal. “Give your polio drops to my hen, and if she lays an egg tomorrow, I will make sure that all the children in this village and the next will take polio drops from you.”

Sheela, our pragmatic community mobiliser who knew every household in that village inside out, jumped at the bait. I made big eyes at her and shook my head fearing the worst. But Sheela had seen her opportunity and did not wish to let it slip by. She slipped two OPV drops promptly into the hen’s beak that Bibijan had held open.

I didn’t sleep that night. How could we tie the future of this rigorously data-driven, globally watched programme to the whims of a hen?

The next morning, we found the whole village gathered in the old lady’s courtyard. The chief medical officer (CMO) of Aligarh was also present, and so was the Aligarh Muslim University’s then-vice chancellor Prof Naseem Ahmed, nicknamed ‘Naseem Polio’ by the students for his devotion to polio eradication. There was tea for everyone with a dash of expectation and a lot of uncertainty.

The star of the event, Bibijan’s hen, clucked around smugly, fed on some soaked grain while time stood still for me. And all of a sudden before my glazed eyes, she started whirling around and ran to her box emitting croaking sounds. We watched her make a notional bed with the sawdust, spread her wings slightly, take position, and voila – a beautiful white egg was laid!

True to her word, Bibijan gathered all the children of the village and sent word to the neighbouring villages too. We vaccinated them and the job was done.

How could Sheela be so sure? “I know the hen. She is in her fertile period, and loves her virile rooster,” she explained with a smile. Her approach was controversial from a scientific point of view and was discussed threadbare at review meetings by the epidemiologists amongst us. 

Sheela listened to her own inner voice and relied on her community-based intelligence network. The choice was between not getting children vaccinated either way by not giving the drops to the hen, and exploring the possibility of a positive result by going along with Bibijan’s logic. This experience taught the polio team to think on their feet and open our hearts and minds to communities whose interest we claimed to represent.

Also read | Vaccine Hesitancy: A View From a Polio Eradication Programme in Balochistan

During 2007-2009, the growing violence in Afghanistan, particularly in the polio ‘high-risk’ southern provinces of Zabul, Kandahar and Helmand, prodded us to adapt and innovate access strategies to get polio drops to every child. Since all our polio partners believed that public health should not be held hostage to political or military hostilities, we made a joint decision to work with government officials as well as the Taliban to access children in their respective areas of influence.

While health workers and volunteers of the government delivered vaccines in the districts governed by the then-government, the Taliban tanks with white flags and equipped with OPV vials in cool boxes vaccinated children at hub points in areas where they held sway.

In most countries, the polio campaign relied on communities themselves to provide vaccinators and mobilisers as a strategy to develop a sense of participation and ownership in the larger public good that the campaign represented. In Afghanistan too, community members came forward to join the campaign and got a small amount of ‘pocket money’ to buy ‘naan (bread), samboosa (savoury patties) and chai.’

As we waited to train these volunteers a week before the scheduled campaign, a solitary messenger came by to convey the regrets of the community members. They had been hired by the poppy growers on daily wages of US$18, a simple choice to make for the community in comparison to our ‘pocket money’ of US$4 a day.

Can you blame them for going for a better-paying option in a country that had practically no jobs for them? Lesson learned – don’t clash polio campaign dates with poppy harvesting.

One of the strategies to enhance outreach was to work with teachers who could immunise children in schools. In this context, I was waiting with a covered head and a ‘mahram,’ a male escort outside a decision-maker’s office in the department of education in the Taliban-held Kandahar province.

It was my first meeting with a senior Taliban official and I was somewhat apprehensive. He came out of his office to receive me, and I could see he was wearing a black patch under his Afghan ‘pagri’ (turban).

“I stepped on a mine and lost my right eye during the Mujahideen war in the early nineties,” he explained in fluent English. “I studied in Pune in India,” he told me, knowing that I was Indian. “I like Hindustani classical music a lot, and raag Bhairavi is my favourite,” he added, enjoying the stunned look on my face.

That broke the ice, and we went on to discuss Ustad Muhammad Hussain Sarahang, the famous classical singer from Kabul who had trained in Ustad Bade Ghulam Ali Khan’s Patiyala ‘gayeki’ (style of singing). Thus, the late Ustad Sarahang opened Kandahar’s schools for polio immunisation, and I happily dumped my stereotypes about Taliban administrators.

In 2008, the conflict between the 41,000-strong International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) led by NATO and the Taliban insurgent groups worsened. It was almost impossible to conduct mass campaigns, with rockets and bullets fired without warning and armoured vehicles humbled by improvised explosive devices.

WHO, UNICEF and ‘neutral’ Afghan intermediaries acceptable to both sides started negotiating ceasefire days with the warring factions. There was a lot of back-stage diplomacy involved, and it was also difficult to keep track of the number of factions involved.

On one occasion I remember flying low in a chopper over a Taliban-dominated area between Kandahar and Helmand on a negotiation mission. All six of us in that rickety aircraft had our eyes glued to the barren, undulating terrain below us to make sure that no one was sending up a rocket to down our chopper!

Sometimes ceasefires, or ‘Days of Tranquility’ as they were called, were agreed to to give safe passage to vaccinators. They were broken on a few occasions, mostly by ISAF forces who wanted to use the safe passage opportunity to catch a wanted insurgent or two. This dealt a serious blow to the programme and put the lives of community mobilisers and the local intermediaries at risk, since the insurgent groups suspected them of double-crossing and sneaking on them in order to aid ISAF soldiers.

Trust is key for the smooth continuation of a public health programme, especially in war; and all parties to the conflict have the responsibility to keep their word. The polio programme in Pakistan saw the community’s trust broken in May 2011 by a trusted doctor in charge of the polio campaign in the town of Abbottabad in the Hazara region of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province.

In Afghanistan, sometimes ceasefires were agreed to to give safe passage to vaccinators. Representative image. Credit: Canada in Afghanistan. CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.

Residents of the area alleged that the doctor had collected blood samples of children from the house where Osama bin Laden, the man most wanted by the United States for the 9/11 attacks, had taken shelter in. It is believed that the CIA was able to establish bin Laden’s identity based on a DNA analysis of the samples collected by the doctor and conduct a clandestine operation on the house that killed bin Laden.

The trust deficit created by this single incident set the campaign back by decades. It fanned an anti-vaccine and anti-vaccinator sentiment that resulted in the deaths of tens of vaccinators in subsequent years. It is a major reason why polio is still endemic in Pakistan and neighbouring Afghanistan. Have the CIA or the US government provided any explanation, leave alone an apology? I have not seen one.

Coming back to the original question, why prioritise polio vaccination when there is a dance of death going on in Gaza? Eradicating polio is undoubtedly the most comprehensive and rigorous public health initiative that embodies people, skills and programmes that will continue to strengthen the core functions of healthcare systems in every country, long after polio is gone.

Emergencies such as Ebola, COVID-19 and health crises after floods, tsunamis and earthquakes have built their response activities on the polio eradication blueprint using micro plans of streets, villages and towns, social networks and community mobilisation platforms, programme management mechanisms and coordination tools, etc.

“Polio workers go where even the rays of the sun do not penetrate,” a WHO report quotes a father in India as saying when the country was the polio epicentre of the world. But more importantly, the investment made in the eradication of polio is an investment in the future of public health in times when governments are stepping back from the public sector and handing over essential health care and health governance to commercial interests.

In a situation where Gaza’s health services are being reduced to rubble, it speaks volumes for ongoing polio surveillance that it was able to detect the presence of VDPV2 in the territory’s wastewater. While the polio surveillance system is primarily responsible for poliovirus detection, it has proven to be a resource for supporting much of the overall vaccine-preventable disease surveillance in many low-income countries.

Collectively, the system built to vaccinate every child against polio has invariably helped detect and respond to outbreaks of other preventable diseases such as measles, Ebola, yellow fever and neonatal tetanus, among others.

Mainstreaming polio programming elements into other health care priorities or using the existing capacities of the programme to respond to health emergencies that Gazans are facing are investments that will build a healthier life and surroundings for the Palestinian people, particularly children who have lost their families and have been robbed of their childhood.

There is a strong case for investment in organising polio campaigns for 600,000 children in Gaza as Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the WHO director general, has proposed to do with 1.2 million doses. If two polio campaign rounds as proposed by WHO are allowed to happen, they could provide an entry point to other critical immunisations like measles and to an essential package of services including clean water, sanitation and hygiene promotion, nutrition services and psycho-social support to overcome trauma.

This strategy of riding on the back of polio campaigns would give Gaza’s health systems a boost and bring them back from the brink.

Nothing short of an immediate ceasefire is needed in Gaza for an effective immunisation campaign to reach every child with polio drops. “We know what needs to be done. It must be done for the sake of all residents of the region. This is not about politics. This is about health and life,” Israel’s leading epidemiologists have minced no words to make the point. Will they be heard?

The author worked in social and behaviour change communication for the International Red Cross and UNICEF in Afghanistan, central and south Asia, and francophone Africa.

Interview | Why These Three Young Israeli Men Refused Their Military Conscription

The three teenagers spoke about the reasons for their refusal – including being directly or indirectly exposed to what was happening in Gaza and the West Bank – the reactions of those around them and the prospects of convincing more Israelis of their position.

This week, three 18-year-old conscientious objectors reported to the Israeli army’s Tel Hashomer recruitment centre, near Tel Aviv, and declared their refusal to enlist in mandatory military service in protest of the occupation and the current war on Gaza. Yuval Moav, Oryan Mueller and Itamar Greenberg were each tried and sentenced to an initial 30 days in military prison, which is likely to be extended. The only other refuseniks to have publicly opposed the draft for political reasons since October 7 – Tal Mitnick, Ben Arad and Sophia Orr – were recently released after serving prison sentences totalling 185 days, 95 days and 85 days respectively.

The three latest refuseniks – who are being accompanied through the refusal process by the conscientious objector network Mesarvot – each released statements prior to appearing in military court. Greenberg, who grew up in the ultra-Orthodox city of Bnei Brak, said he originally saw enlisting as a way to become more integrated into Israeli society, before coming to realise that “the door into Israeli society goes through the oppression and killing of another people.” He added: “A just society cannot be built on gun barrels.”

Moav addressed his statement to Palestinians. “In my simple act, I want to stand in solidarity with you,” he said. “I also acknowledge that I do not represent the majority opinion in my society. But in my action, I hope to raise the voice of those of us waiting for the day we can build a joint future [and] a society based on peace and equality, not occupation and apartheid.”

Mueller spoke of how revenge is the engine driving the cycle of bloodshed. “The war in Gaza is the most extreme way the State of Israel takes advantage of the urge for revenge to advance oppression and death in Israel-Palestine,” he said. “The struggle against the war is not enough. We must fight the structural mechanisms enabling it.”

Several dozen people came to support the refuseniks at a demonstration outside the recruitment centre on Monday morning, as Moav received his sentence. Nearby, hundreds of ultra-Orthodox Jews also held a fierce protest at the site, on the first day of their mandated conscription following last month’s landmark High Court ruling, which overturned a decades-old military exemption.

Mounted police suppress a protest by ultra-Orthodox Jews against mandatory conscription, at the Israeli army’s Tel Hashomer recruitment centre, near Tel Aviv, August 5, 2024. Photo: Oren Ziv.

The Haredim initially thought the left-wing protesters were secularists who had come to demonstrate against them, but the two groups of protesters soon found common ground in their shared opposition to the military. “The holy Torah forbids us from [engaging in] war, occupation and the military,” one ultra-Orthodox protester said, to applause from those supporting the refuseniks. “We must not provoke the [non-Jewish] nations, we must compromise on what is possible, because the most important thing is life, not death.”

Before entering prison, the three teenagers spoke to +972 Magazine and Local Call about the reasons for their refusal, the reactions of those around them and the prospects of convincing more Israelis of their position. The conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

How did you arrive at the decision to refuse?

Mueller: I was born in Tel Aviv, and all my political education began at home. I come from a family that is critical of the occupation and other political problems, but it was still a Zionist home and my whole family served in the army. There was an expectation that I would serve too. But then I learned and understood more, and when the war broke out [and I read] the testimonies that came out of Gaza, I realised that I had to refuse.

I think the brutality undermined [for me] the idea that you can distinguish between the occupation on one hand and the State of Israel on the other, and that these are separate things. The level of destruction and death in Gaza and the lack of attention it receives in Israel – or the way in which it is actively concealed – broke that dissonance.

Greenberg: After growing up in an ultra-Orthodox home, I went through processes of political and religious questioning. I left religion, and because I’ve been a very political person since I was young, this directed me toward justice, and I got to where I am today. I think the decision to refuse is a direct result of that.

In an ultra-Orthodox family, supposedly it’s not a big deal not to serve, but I grew up with a father who served in reserve duty for 25 years, and even now he’s been in the reserves for ten months. It greatly affects the atmosphere at home. It’s not easy. I don’t talk about it with them because I know how painful it is. This is what bothers me the most about the whole process. The real cost of refusal is not prison but what happens outside. I care about the price [my family] pay, because they don’t deserve it. I try not to hurt them too much.

Yuval Moav waves to friends and supporters before entering the Israeli army’s Tel Hashomer recruitment center, near Tel Aviv, August 5, 2024. Photo: Oren Ziv.

Moav: I’m from Kfar Netter, a moshav near Netanya. Like Oryan, I grew up in a left-wing Zionist family, but in a less political home. They played a part in who I am, but my refusal didn’t come from there. The truth is that I was lucky to be exposed to international content that allowed me to change my mind about the place that I live.

I realised that I really didn’t know what was going on here. As soon as I became interested and asked questions, I saw that I was alone: I realised that I couldn’t enlist because it’s an occupying army, and though I knew that there were others who refused, I felt completely alone in my experience and in the reason from which my decision stemmed. Then I heard about refuseniks, about Mesarvot, about people who come out and speak their truth and pay a price, and I realised that I belonged there, that I was not alone.

If you ask me why I refuse today, the answer is, ultimately, because I refuse to participate in genocide. I’ve been met with violence [for my decision], but I keep going. The war has only strengthened my position.

Did experiencing the occupation first-hand influence your decision?

Greenberg: I am active [in solidarity activities] in the West Bank, mainly in the village of Mukhmas [a Palestinian community that faces regular army-backed settler violence]. Being present in the West Bank changes perceptions, makes you familiar with the occupation and oppression and turns you from a listener into a physical partner in the experience. While I don’t experience it myself, I have friends who face daily oppression, people who want to kick them out of their homes. When you see it with your eyes, it doesn’t go away. I’m walking around here, but my head is there.

Mueller: I didn’t get to experience it, but unlike most of Israeli society, I was exposed to testimonies from the field, mainly online. I am active in forums for political discussion. When I try to talk about these testimonies with people who are not exposed to them, I encounter a huge wall separating Israelis from what is happening five kilometres south of where they live. I don’t know what kind of cultural upheaval it would take for them to start seeing testimonies coming out of Gaza on the Israeli news; at the moment we just don’t see it.

If you can talk about it, you have to: about the scale of destruction and death in Gaza, about the oppression and about how deep the roots of apartheid are in the West Bank. There’s a limit to how many [videos of] children without arms you can watch until you realise something is wrong.

Moav: My process was more personal. The main cause of my radicalisation has to do with Israeli society and its opacity. In the end, I decided not to enlist because I was exposed to international content. I came to the understanding that the average Israeli knows less about what is happening two kilometres from his home than anyone who has access to the internet abroad, and you encounter zero sympathy from many people, some older than you, who are supposed to protect you.

Also read: Photo Essay | An Evening in West Bank’s Susiya, Battling the Threat of Israeli Settler Terror

Do you see your refusal as a way to try to influence Israeli society – especially in today’s extreme environment, where many have no desire to listen to anti-war voices?

Greenberg: I think this is an important message to Israeli society: to start saying no. I urge my peers to think about what they are doing. Enlistment is a political choice, and that’s how it should be treated. We have the right to choose what we believe in.

Mueller: Refusal is like holding up a mirror to Israeli society, first of all to show that it is possible to resist the militaristic death machine and the cycle of bloodshed. We don’t have to take part in it. It’s also a kind of platform that makes it possible to show Israeli society what’s happening beyond what you see in the media, which doesn’t really reveal what’s happening in Gaza and the West Bank.

Moav: Unlike my friends, I’m less optimistic about the impact of what we do on Israeli society, and in the end it’s also less important to me. First of all, I do this out of solidarity with the Palestinian people, and in the hope of elevating the voice of people in Israeli society who are waiting for the day when we can build a shared future. But my call is first and foremost to the Palestinian people.

However, it’s very important for me to do this also for the people I love, to show them that there is another way. I can only hope that people will stop and think when they carry guns and are asked to do things they might not want to do. I also hope that it will reach the world, because in the end people from all over the world see the horrors that are happening in Gaza.

Conscientious objectors Oryan Mueller, Itamar Greenberg, Yuval Moav participate in a protest at the Israeli army’s Tel Hashomer recruitment center, near Tel Aviv, August 5, 2024. Photo: Oren Ziv.

Greenberg: I think our biggest message to Palestinian society is that there are people here who are fighting, maybe not enough, but still fighting, and are willing to pay a very heavy personal price for choosing to fight for justice and equality.

Mueller: There is the bigger picture of the conflict and the occupation, as a whole historical process, but there is also the immediate struggle of war and of death that needs to be stopped. And the most practical way to participate in this struggle is refusal.

Unlike many past refuseniks, your refusal comes during wartime. Do you think this gives additional meaning to the decision?

Greenberg: We had a discussion about the privilege of refusal, and I think that refusing during war really is a privilege. But refusing is also the strongest act we can do in the face of war.

Mueller: If I can prevent one Israeli from going to Gaza, from killing and dying, then that’s worth it. And of course, we want to support and promote the struggle against the occupation. The change that the Israeli consciousness undergoes quite extensively during wartime turns our refusal into something even more fringe than it was in the past. It’s going against Israeli society and saying, “No, we don’t need to build monuments to the dead if we can prevent the deaths in the first place.”

Moav: At the end of the day, what is most important for me to say is that I refuse to participate in genocide. Speaking of privilege, I’m not going to jail with a clear conscience because I don’t know if I’m doing enough, I don’t know what my responsibility is in this situation. I recognise that younger people and children my age in Gaza and the West Bank cannot do something similar to me; they cannot decide that they refuse to raise arms, to communicate this act and to try to improve the situation of both peoples.

Is your refusal also a statement against the militarism that has further intensified in Israel since the war?

Moav: Yes. We are people of peace. But there is something bigger here, a process that corrupts society. Ours is a society that can remain silent in the face of crimes of such magnitude. It’s a society where right now the only thing I can do about it as a human being, as painful as it is to say, is separate myself from it. If repeating again and again, that I refuse to be complicit in genocide, or even to say this phrase at all, may harm my ability to reach the Israeli public, so be it.

Greenberg: It’s a bit complicated. I’d really love to tell you yes, because I think militarism is one of the worst things. At the age of 12, I decided I would enlist because I understood that this was my way of integrating into Israeli society, and I think it was one of the most accurate observations I’ve made. It’s such a great injustice to everyone who grew up in this society – this is the way to be part of it? Unfortunately, the answer is yes. But public refusal also has a militaristic aspect, of mobilising for a cause, just a different one.

Conscientious objectors Oryan Mueller, Itamar Greenberg, Yuval Moav at the Israeli army’s Tel Hashomer recruitment center, near Tel Aviv, August 5, 2024. Photo: Oren Ziv.

Did you prepare for prison? Did you talk to refuseniks who already served sentences?

Mueller: Within Mesarvot, there is a role called an escort: a former refusenik who served time in prison and helps prepare the future refusenik – whether it’s mental preparation regarding the difficulties in the process leading to incarceration, or in understanding life in prison, learning tricks that can make everyday life easier, knowing the laws, procedures and routine.

More or less like a pre-military preparatory program.

Greenberg: A pre-refusal preparatory course – that’s the dream.

Moav: The main tip was that the more you talk, the more you get screwed.

Books and CDs are allowed inside prison, subject to inspection and approval at the entrance. What will you bring with you? 

Mueller: First of all, Israelis and Palestinians: From the Cycle of Violence to the Conversation of Mankind by Jonathan Glover. It’s a great book but super difficult, and I’m reading it slowly. I’ll also bring Ilan Pappe’s The Biggest Prison on Earth, and a lot of Hebrew prose. I have a Johnny Cash CD, ‘At Folsom Prison’, which he recorded in a US federal prison. I also have an OutKast CD that I got from the refusenik Ben Arad, which I’m very excited to take.

Greenberg: I have several books on economics. My goal is to have the legitimacy to express an economic opinion, because right now I don’t understand economics. I have a book about Vietnamese economics, for example.

Moav: I will bring some good works by Marx, and other classics that in prison will be easier for me to read. I have to keep learning.

Itamar, you grew up in an ultra-Orthodox home, and on the day you show up at the recruitment centre, Haredi protesters are demonstrating in the very same place against mandatory conscription. How do you see their struggle against the draft?

Greenberg: I can understand the ultra-Orthodox justification for refusing to enlist: it violates their religion, so they have no interest in acquiescing to it. I can also understand the feeling among “Dalabim” [a Hebrew acronym for “democracy for Jews only”, referring to the bulk of last year’s mass protest movement against the far-right government’s judicial overhaul] that the [security] burden should be equally shared.

We need to work on integrating the ultra-Orthodox into Israeli society and work toward equality – but not through equality in killing and oppressing. If we didn’t have security with 300,000 soldiers, then we won’t have security with 360,000 either.

Oren Ziv is a photojournalist, reporter for Local Call, and a founding member of the Activestills photography collective.

This article was originally published on +972 Magazine in partnership with Local Call.

Netanyahu Ordered Hamas Leader Ismail Haniyeh’s Killing to Scuttle Peace Talks: Former Ambassador

Former ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Oman and the UAE Talmiz Ahmad believes Hamas and Iran will retaliate in their own time and in a measured way because they do not wish to provoke a wider regional conflict.

One of India’s foremost experts on the Middle East and a former ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Oman and the UAE, Talmiz Ahmad, has said that he believes Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu could have ordered the killing of Hamas leader and former Prime Minister of Palestine, Ismail Haniyeh, to scuttle peace talks, because if a successful ceasefire had been agreed to, Netanyahu would have lost his job as Prime Minister of Israel.

Ahmad does not believe that the Biden administration in Washington would have been consulted, leave aside given prior clearance, before  Haniyeh’s assassination. He also believes that although Hamas and Iran will retaliate – and separately Hezbollah for the killing of Fuad Shukr 24 hours earlier – they will do so in their own time and in a measured way, because they do not wish to provoke a wider regional conflict.

What Has India Risked by Exporting Arms to Israel?

Indo-Israeli strategic ties have enhanced India’s intelligence and surveillance operations, but the arms exports have invited scrutiny to its Middle East balancing act amid the Gaza conflict and may significantly impact its relations with Arab countries.

India’s foreign policy balancing act in the Middle East has come under scrutiny with arms shipments to Israel during the Gaza conflict.

India’s reported arms ‘exports’ to Israel amid the Gaza conflict have sparked controversy.

It challenges India’s historical balanced stance on issues in the Middle East and the complexity of balancing strategic partnerships.

While deepening ties with Israel may bring technological benefits, arms export also risks straining relations with Arab countries and Iran.

Saudi Arabia, a crucial economic partner for India, might view these exports as contradictory to its foreign policy and regional stability goals, especially amid the sensitive Gaza conflict.

Iran, an adversary of Israel and supporter of Palestinian groups, for example, might see India’s actions as a betrayal. This could complicate India’s strategic and economic engagements with Iran, including the Chabahar port development, crucial for India’s access to Central Asia.

India needs to carefully address these challenges to maintain regional stability and protect its diverse strategic interests without compromising long-standing moral commitments.

Protests greet ship

While arms transfers are inherently sensitive, controversial and shrouded in secrecy, the Indian arms export controversy intensified when the German-owned vessel Borkum, suspected of carrying weapons, faced protests in Cartagena, Spain, and diverted to Slovenia’s Koper port.

Al Jazeera confirmed the ship transported Indian arms to Israel’s Ashdod port. Despite denials from the ship’s manager, evidence indicated India’s discreet arms shipments to Israel during the conflict.

A video released by the Quds News Network on June 6 showed missile debris labelled ‘Made in India’ after an Israeli bombing in Gaza, suggesting India-Israel missile collaboration. The video’s authenticity requires verification, but it indicated Indian involvement.

Premier Explosives Limited manufactures solid propellants for Barak missiles, which may be used in the conflict. The company confirmed exports to Israel, supported by findings by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. India’s defence ties with Israel also include an unmanned aerial vehicle facility by Adani Defence and Elbit Systems, producing drones used in Gaza.

With these reports emerging in international media, India’s foreign policy balancing act in the Middle East has come under scrutiny.

Why it’s complicated for India

Historically supporting a ‘two-state solution’ and promoting dialogue in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, India’s stance is complicated by its deepening strategic partnership with Israel.

Formal diplomatic relations since 1992, accelerated under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, marked a significant shift, especially after his 2017 visit to Israel.

Defence collaboration, a cornerstone of this relationship, includes uninterrupted imports of radars, drones and missiles worth US$2.9 billion over the past decade. Despite defence ties with Israel, India advocates for a ceasefire and humanitarian aid for Gaza.

At the UN, India supported resolutions for a ceasefire and full Palestinian UN membership. Modi emphasised India’s commitment to a two-state solution and condemned civilian casualties in Gaza, balancing strategic interests with support for Palestinian self-determination.

India’s defence cooperation with Israel includes joint ventures like the Adani-Elbit UAV facility in Hyderabad. This partnership has bolstered India’s intelligence and surveillance operations along its borders with Pakistan and China, highlighting the practical benefits of this collaboration.

Meanwhile, India’s strengthened relationship with Israel has drawn criticism regarding its stance on Palestine.

India has condemned Hamas attacks, supported Israel’s right to self-defence and called for adherence to humanitarian laws. Amid the complex situation in the Middle East, India aims to maintain stability, protect economic interests and ensure energy supplies.

Gaza war creates opportunities

Even as New Delhi strives to maintain a balanced approach, some observers noted that the Israel-Hamas conflict has created opportunities for India’s defence exports, with Israeli companies potentially relying more on Indian suppliers.

Driven by the ‘Make in India’ initiative, India’s defence sector has grown substantially. India’s strategic partnership with Israel reflects a balanced approach, advocating peace while pursuing strategic interests.

Despite Israel’s extensive military operations in Gaza, which began after Hamas militants killed 1,200 Israelis on October 7, the supply of defence equipment to India continued uninterrupted.

The specific needs of Israel’s war effort do not overlap with the equipment exported to India. As the fourth-largest military supplier to India, Israel helps India diversify its arms purchases and reduce dependency on Russian weapons.

According to Yedioth Ahronoth, India supplied Israel with advanced drones and other weaponry manufactured at the Adani-Elbit facility in Hyderabad, the first outside Israel to produce these drones. During February, 20 drones intended for the Indian military were redirected to the Israeli army. India also provided Israel with artillery shells and other weapons.

Also read: Govt-Owned Munitions India Ltd Exported Ordnance to Israel as Gaza Was Reduced to Rubble

India faces calls from Palestine to reconsider its weapon exports to Israel, used in Gaza. This appeal was made by Palestine’s Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, Varsen Aghabekian, to Indian representative Renu Yadav in Ramallah, amid reports that India has allowed arms exports to Israel since the conflict escalated.

India and Israel have robust bilateral cooperation in fields such as water, agriculture, counter-terrorism and defence. Defence collaboration is a priority, highlighted by the November 2021 Bilateral Innovation Agreement between India’s Defence Research and Development Organisation and Israel’s Directorate of Defense Research and Development to promote innovation and R&D.

Diversifying defence supplies

The India-Israel defence partnership strengthened during the 1999 Kargil war when Israel supplied India with crucial military equipment, despite international pressure.

India has diversified its defence suppliers, reducing dependence on Russian equipment, with Israel becoming a top arms exporter alongside the US and France. Key purchases from Israel include Phalcon airborne early warning systems, UAV systems, and Spyder and Barak missile systems, totalling US$4.2 billion from 2001 to 2021.

This trade has been mutually beneficial, enhancing India’s intelligence and surveillance operations, particularly along the borders with Pakistan and China. In 2019, India used Israeli Spice 2000 bombs in a raid on a terrorist camp in Pakistan.

However, India’s arms exports to Israel could significantly impact its relations with Arab countries, especially Saudi Arabia and Iran, both strong supporters of the Palestinian cause.

Other Arab countries in the Arab League, which have historically supported the Palestinian cause, might also react negatively, perceiving a shift in India’s balanced approach as siding with Israel.

This could lead to diplomatic friction, affecting India’s economic interests, as Gulf Cooperation Council countries are major trade partners and sources of remittances from the Indian diaspora.

K.M. Seethi is Director, Inter University Centre for Social Science Research and Extension (IUCSSRE), Mahatma Gandhi University, Kerala. He also served as Dean and Senior Professor of International Relations at the university.

Originally published under Creative Commons by 360info.

How Protests Against War On Gaza And Racist Lynching Of George Floyd Are Related

The collective mourning elicited by the racist violence that claimed the lives of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and so many others galvanised demonstrations aimed at the systems, structures, and histories that enabled such racist state violence.

Solidarity with Palestinians and their decades-long struggle in defense of their land, culture, and freedom has long been a central theme of my political life. I am gratified to see so many young people — especially young Black people — supporting the struggle in Palestine today. The emotional turbulence so many of us have experienced for the past five months as we’ve witnessed the unprecedented damage the Israeli military has inflicted reminds me just how central the Palestinian quest for justice is to liberation struggles here in the U.S. and in other parts of the world, as well as to my own sense of self in our extremely complicated political world.

The state of Israel is the purveyor not only of a settler-colonial project but also of one that actively continues its violent expansion in the 21st century. Over the past months we have witnessed widespread, unnecessary death and extraordinary devastation that has led to the uprooting of practically the entire population of Gaza. Massive demonstrations all over the planet and deep collective grief about the conditions in Gaza have turned my attention back to the emotion-laden political mobilisations during the summer of 2020. People everywhere, including in Palestine, felt both rage and profound sadness at the racist police lynching of George Floyd. Some might say that the issues driving the George Floyd mobilisations and the current protests against the war on Gaza are different. But are they?

The collective mourning elicited by the racist violence that claimed the lives of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and so many others galvanised demonstrations aimed at the systems, structures, and histories that enabled such racist state violence. And those demonstrations were implicitly directed at the global imperialism that furthers the proliferation of racial capitalist strategies. Some of the protests also highlighted the lessons the U.S. has learned as a direct result of its close alliance with Israel, which has included trainings offered by the Israel Defense Forces to U.S. police departments all over the country. Whether or not the Minnesota police ever directly learned combat moves from the IDF, the increased militarisation of policing here is directly related to global capitalism, including the economic and military ties between Israel and the U.S.

Israel’s genocidal war against the Palestinian people in Gaza — who, along with those in the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and inside Israel itself, have been conscripted to serve as involuntary embodiments of the foundational enemy of Israel — has produced unimaginable grief and sorrow. Gazan families will never fully recover from the deaths of their loved ones, from the destruction of their homes (as many as 70 percent of homes and more than half of all buildings have been damaged or destroyed), from their monthslong attempts to survive without food and water, or from sleeping in the open as human counterparts of the scarred landscape, which may not recover in the foreseeable future. The vicious and dehumanising verbal assaults by representatives of the government and armed forces have compounded this trauma. In announcing a “complete siege” of Gaza, the Israeli defense minister, Yoav Gallant, announced: “There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel. Everything is closed.” He justified this action by adding, “We are fighting human animals and we are acting accordingly.” The international press widely quoted these remarks in the aftermath of the October 7 assault by Hamas.

Also read: Israel Ends Two-week Onslaught, Leaves Gaza’s Shifa Hospital Devastated

These atrocities, according to the charges South Africa brought before the International Court of Justice, have acquired genocidal proportions. But amid all of this, we have witnessed the rise of an unprecedented degree of global resistance and solidarity with Gazans and Palestinians. Like many others during these heartbreaking times, I have been encouraged by the leadership proffered by Jewish Voice for Peace, IfNotNow, and other progressive Jewish organisations. Their dramatic presence in the movement is a reminder that binary constructions obscure more accurate and nuanced understandings of what it means to engage in freedom quests.

I was fortunate to witness Jewish solidarity with Palestine, however minoritised, during the early history of the state of Israel, which coincided with my undergraduate years at Brandeis University. My own lifelong sense of solidarity with Palestine is rooted in those experiences of my young political life. I learned the moral value of political solidarity and what it means to express that solidarity not only as a minority position within a larger progressive community but also through a deep identification with those who have been designated as enemies. Solidarity is never entirely straightforward, but in this situation, it requires us to reach beyond simplistic explanations that attribute positions of moral rectitude to one side and utter depravity to the other. Solidarity commands us to recognize the fallacious either/or construction that effectively forbids the proximity of positions of solidarity for Palestine and of deep and heartfelt condemnations of antisemitism.

In the process of reflecting on the meaning of solidarity, I have also learned over the years how dangerous it is to objectify one’s perceived enemies such that nothing they do or say can ever change or even challenge the qualities they are assumed to embody. It is always easy to defer to prevailing discourses that rely on these objectifications, and I think that most of us (myself included) have given in to such pressures at times. Colonialism, racism, and patriarchy all thrive on such capitulations.

But some of us have had the good fortune to have been presented with alternative ways of understanding, critical engagements that question the ideological underpinnings of what we are confronting. I am thankful to many people in the various collective movements and organisations to which I have belonged — the Communist Party USA, L.A. SNCC, Black Panther Political Party, Black Panther Party, Socialist German Students’ Union, Black Women’s Health Project, and others too numerous to name — for having pointed me and others in more productive directions, regardless of the consequences for their own lives. I have always gravitated toward those who are prepared to challenge the status quo. And I am grateful to those who have offered support when I have come under attack personally.

In 2018, the Birmingham Civil Rights Institute offered me a human rights award named after Fred Shuttlesworth, a co-founder of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, and then rescinded the honor because of my activism in support of Palestine. Before I even had the opportunity to decide what my response would be, Jewish Voice for Peace and other progressive Jewish organisations began to organise.

Their support was especially important, because it was clear that I was not being targeted as an individual. Several months after the rescission of the award, Representative Ilhan Omar was singled out by Donald Trump, who misrepresented her as he argued that she was insufficiently critical of the perpetrators of 9/11 and accused her of antisemitism because of her principled support of Palestine. Scholar and activist Barbara Ransby and others organised an outdoor convergence and protest in Washington, D.C., to support Omar, alongside her fellow representatives Rashida Tlaib, Ayanna Pressley, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. In November 2018, CNN fired academic and activist Marc Lamont Hill because he had used the phrase “from the river to the sea” at a UN meeting on the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People. His firing prefigured Zionists’ widespread contemporary effort to ban a rallying call that for many, in the words of Tlaib, is “an aspirational call for freedom, human rights, and peaceful coexistence, not death, destruction, or hate.”

It was clear then that the Zionist lobby was stepping up its offensive because it had been losing ground. During and after the 2014 Ferguson protests, young Black activists and their supporters had begun to fiercely challenge the ideological representation of Israel as the central outpost of democracy in the Middle East, which had to be defended at all costs. The longstanding work of Palestinian activists Linda Sarsour, Ahmad Abuzaid and others to develop productive alliances that could amplify Black solidarity with Palestine and further cultivate internationalism within the Black Lives Matter movement began to resonate broadly. The Dream Defenders, founded in Florida by Phillip Agnew, Ahmad Abuznaid, and Gabriel Pendas in the aftermath of Trayvon Martin’s murder, not only brought Palestinian Americans and African Americans together in an organisation that identifies as abolitionist, feminist, and socialist but also has organised a number of delegations to Palestine. I see a direct line connecting this recent history — and, of course, all the history linking Black and Palestinian movements since the Nakba in 1948 — with the rising numbers of Black people who now refuse to toe the Democratic Party line on support for Israel.

As radical advocates and activists, we don’t often have the opportunity to experience the changes for which we struggle; instead we expect that our work will affirm new starting points for generations to come. But sometimes, if we manage to live long enough, we may also have the good fortune of experiencing the transformative impact of struggles in which we have participated. When I first heard the news that the Fred Shuttlesworth Human Rights Award was being rescinded as a response to my Palestine activism, I felt unable to breathe — as if this blow had literally knocked the wind out of my body — which was why my statement at the time indicated that I was “stunned.” That feeling soon dissipated, however, as many expressions of solidarity from all over the world, including from organisations of rabbis and other Jewish formations, began to circulate. Overwhelmingly supportive responses from Black and other politically progressive organisations reminded me that freedom work, even when it may not appear to be making an appreciable difference, can lead to profound and transformative results.

Though the Birmingham Civil Rights Institute’s gala had been canceled, community activists, together with the mayor and other city officials, came together to organise a public event at the Boutwell Auditorium that probably attracted 10 times more people than the fund-raiser would have. For me personally and politically, this event occasioned a rare and deep-seated sense of collective triumph. In this historical bastion of racist segregation where I had been born and grew up — the Johannesburg of the South — a vast collection of people of different racial, religious, and cultural backgrounds attested to the weakening influence of Zionist ideology. When I looked out into the audience from the stage, I saw so many of my childhood friends, a number of whom had helped organise this gathering, protesting the BCRI decision, and all of whom were putting their bodies on the line by showing up en masse.

Before visiting Birmingham, I had traveled to Waltham, Mass., to participate in the 50th anniversary celebration of the Department of African and African American Studies at Brandeis. Students at Brandeis during the early 1960s were constantly reminded that Israel was founded in 1948, the same year Brandeis was established. While none of us could avoid the pervasive Zionism, I was grateful to have a Jewish roommate during my first year who constantly steered me to think critically about the representation of Israel as the only possible defense for the global Jewish community. She turned my attention to the condition of Palestinians, who were being systematically divested of their land, their rights, and their future. She also helped me to understand that standing with the Palestinian resistance was the best way to fight for a world where we could all be safe.

I invoke my own experience at Brandeis because despite its perpetuation of the claim that Palestinians embody a continuing existential threat to Israel (it was the first private university to ban a Students for Justice in Palestine campus chapter), I do not remember any major conflicts around this issue during my time there. But I do recall many subterranean conversations about the impact of this militaristic nation-building process on the Palestinian people. What I now deeply appreciate is that I retained crucial insights regarding the kinship between racism and antisemitism (violent white supremacists dynamited Black churches and homes in my natal city of Birmingham and targeted a synagogue), and these insights continued to lead me to the people I organised with and the people with whom I socialised. They were not displaced by my evolving consciousness of the dangers of Zionism.

After I graduated from Brandeis in 1965, I traveled to Frankfurt, Germany, to study with Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, and others associated with the Institute for Social Research at the University of Frankfurt. Shortly after arriving, I became involved with the Socialist German Students’ Union (SDS). This was precisely when SDS began to turn away from Israel and toward solidarity with the Arab states challenging Israel. A few days before the outbreak of the 1967 war, the police killed a student named Benno Ohnesorg while he attended an SDS protest against the shah of Iran’s visit to Berlin. Fascist police violence happened at the same time as the Israeli army’s aggression. This led the SDS to create an interesting connection between supporting Third World Liberation efforts (including solidarity with Palestine) and challenging police violence and other forms of state repression within what was then West Germany. That a student could be killed for participating in peaceful protests provided clear evidence that West Germany had not overcome the dangers of fascism.

After I returned to the U.S. in the fall of 1967, I was determined to find my way into the revolutionary Black Liberation Movement, and I reconnected with Herbert Marcuse, my Brandeis mentor, who was now teaching at UC San Diego. My experiences in Germany — especially among students from Africa and other parts of what was then known as the Third World — had consolidated my embrace of revolutionary internationalism, and I gravitated toward organisations and individuals who shared that identification. At a time of growing global solidarity with Third World struggles, all of the groups I worked with — the Communist Party, the Black Panther Party, and the Los Angeles chapter of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) — were absolutely clear about their solidarity with Palestine. During that period, I participated in a series of exciting and enlightening political conversations with James Forman, who was then the international affairs director of SNCC. At that time, SNCC encouraged its members to study the situation in the Middle East; the organisation insisted that making significant progress in our domestic struggles required us to embrace internationalism. In a letter Forman wrote to the executive secretary of SNCC during the 1967 war, he explained:

The class struggle in the black community will become sharper if the war continues. Obviously the “gut” reaction in many people is against Israel and for the Arabs, reflecting the black-white tension, the hardening of racism, and the particular circumstances in which we find ourselves in this country. However, it becomes very necessary for those of us in the organisation, especially those of us in leadership positions, to study the historical development and the contemporary economic policies of Israel. Actually Israel represents an extension of United State foreign policy as well as an attempt by the Zionists to create a homeland for the Jews. The latter merges with the former in many countries, especially the United States, Great Britain, and France in some respects.

When the FBI arrested me in October 1970, I could not have predicted that my own political proximity to Palestine would increase exponentially. Of the many expressions of solidarity forwarded to me during my imprisonment, I was most deeply moved by the messages emanating from prisons. I can still remember how humbled I felt upon receiving a beautiful letter of solidarity signed by Palestinian political prisoners. The letter had been smuggled out of an Israeli jail and transmitted to my lawyers, who brought it into the California jail where I was being held. Some 40 years later, when I joined a solidarity delegation to Palestine of women of color and indigenous scholar-activists, I met a Palestinian activist who told me that he was one of the imprisoned people who had signed that solidarity message so many years ago. When we embraced, I experienced a profound sense of satisfaction with the trajectory of my life and how it has intersected with so many others around the world who again and again collectively generate the hope that radical transformation is being inscribed on the agendas of our futures.

Today the unceasing military assaults on Gaza are reason for deep despair, especially as we learn every day about a loss of life and community destruction that is unprecedented in comparison to all recent wars.

Despite the obvious need for a cease-fire — a permanent cease-fire — the U.S. government continues to lend aid and support to Israel. Young activists today are trying to unravel this conundrum, even as the government and both major political parties remain in thrall to Zionism. Despite efforts to persuade the public that any critique or even questioning of the state of Israel is equivalent to antisemitism, astute young people, including radical Jewish activists, are pointing out that the most effective struggles against antisemitism are necessarily linked to opposition to racism, Islamophobia, and other modes of repression and discrimination. This is the first time in my own political memory that the Palestine solidarity movement is experiencing such broad support both throughout the U.S. and all over the world. Here in the United States, despite the McCarthyist strategies employed against those who call for freedom and justice for Palestine on campuses, in the entertainment industry, and elsewhere, we are in a new political moment, and we cannot — we must not — capitulate to those who represent the interests of racial capitalism and the legacies of colonialism. As June Jordan wrote in “Poem for South African Women”:

And who will join this standing up
and the ones who stood without sweet company
will sing and sing
back into the mountains and
if necessary
even under the sea

we are the ones we have been waiting for.

Angela Y. Davis is Professor Emerita of History of Consciousness and Feminist Studies at UC Santa Cruz. An activist, writer, and lecturer, her work focuses on prisons, police, abolition, and the related intersections of race, gender, and class. She is the author of many books, from Angela Davis: An Autobiography to Freedom Is a Constant Struggle.

This article is republished from Liberation. Read the original article.

‘Reasonable Grounds’ to Believe Genocide Is Being Committed in Gaza: UN Expert

“There are reasonable grounds to believe that the threshold indicating the commission of the crime of genocide…has been met,” said the UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese.

There are “reasonable grounds” to believe that Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories said on Tuesday.

Francesca Albanese was speaking at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, where she presented her latest report, entitled ‘Anatomy of a Genocide’, during an interactive dialogue with Member States.

“Following nearly six months of unrelenting Israeli assault on occupied Gaza, it is my solemn duty to report on the worst of what humanity is capable of, and to present my findings,” she said.

“There are reasonable grounds to believe that the threshold indicating the commission of the crime of genocide…has been met.”

Three acts committed

Citing international law, Ms. Albanese explained that genocide is defined as a specific set of acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group.

“Specifically, Israel has committed three acts of genocide with the requisite intent, causing seriously serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group, deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part, and imposing measures intended to prevent birth within the group,” she said.

Furthermore, “the genocide in Gaza is the most extreme stage of a long-standing settler colonial process of erasure of the native Palestinians,” she continued.

A tragedy foretold

“For over 76 years, this process has oppressed the Palestinians as a people in every way imaginable, crushing their inalienable right to self-determination demographically, economically, territorially, culturally and politically.”

She said the “colonial amnesia of the West has condoned Israel’s colonial settler project”, adding that “the world now sees the bitter fruit of the impunity afforded to Israel. This was a tragedy foretold.”

Ms. Albanese said denial of the reality and the continuation of Israel’s impunity and exceptionalism is no longer viable, especially in light of the binding UN Security Council resolution, adopted on Monday, which called for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza.

Arms embargo and sanctions against Israel

“I implore Member States to abide by their obligations which start with imposing an arms embargo and sanctions on Israel, and so ensure that the future does not continue to repeat itself,” she concluded.

Special Rapporteurs and independent experts like Ms. Albanese receive their mandates from the UN Human Rights Council. They are not UN staff and do not receive payment for their work.

Israel ‘utterly rejects’ report

Israel did not participate in the dialogue but issued a press release stating that it “utterly rejects” Ms. Albanese’s report, calling it “an obscene inversion of reality”.

“The very attempt to level the charge of genocide against Israel is an outrageous distortion of the Genocide Convention. It is an attempt to empty the word genocide of its unique force and special meaning; and turn the Convention itself into a tool of terrorists, who have total disdain for life and for the law, against those trying to defend against them,” the release said.

Israel said its war is against Hamas, not Palestinian civilians.

“This is a matter of explicit government policy, military directives and procedures. It is no less an expression of Israel’s core values. As stated, our commitment to uphold the law, including our obligations under international humanitarian law, is unwavering.”

‘Barbaric aggression continues’: Palestine Ambassador 

The Permanent Observer of the State of Palestine to the UN in Geneva, Ibrahim Khraishi, noted that the report provides the historic context of genocide against the Palestinian people.

He said Israel “continues its barbaric aggression” and refuses to abide by the decision of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), issued in January, to take provisional measures in order to prevent the crime of genocide. Israel has also refused to abide by UN General Assembly and Security Council resolutions, including the one adopted on Monday, he added.

“And this means that all recommendations in the report of the Special Rapporteur shall be implemented, and practical measures should be taken to prevent the export of weapons, to boycott Israel commercially and politically, and to implement mechanisms of accountability,” he said.

Israeli settlement expansion 

Separately, the UN Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, Nada Al-Nashif, presented a report on Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory during the period from 1 November 2022 to 31 October 2023.

“The reporting period has seen a drastic acceleration, particularly after 7 October 2023, of long-standing trends of discrimination, oppression and violence against Palestinians that accompany Israeli occupation and settlement expansion bringing the West Bank to the brink of catastrophe,” she said.

There are now around 700,000 Israeli settlers in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, who live in 300 settlements and outposts, all of which are illegal under international humanitarian law.

Expansion of existing settlements 

The size of existing Israeli settlements has also expanded markedly, according to the report by the UN human rights office, OHCHR.

Approximately 24,300 housing units within existing Israeli settlements in the West Bank in Area C were advanced or approved during the reporting period – the highest on record since monitoring began in 2017.

The report observed that policies of the current Israeli Government “appear aligned, to an unprecedented extent, with the goals of the Israeli settler movement to expand long-term control over the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and to steadily integrate this occupied territory into the State of Israel,” Ms. Al-Nashif said.

Transfer of power

During the reporting period, Israel took steps to transfer administrative powers relating to settlements and land administration from the military authorities to Israeli government offices, whose primary focus is to provide services within the State of Israel.

“The report therefore raises serious concerns that a series of measures, including this transfer of powers to the Israeli civilian officials, could facilitate the annexation of the West Bank in violation of international law, including the Charter of the United Nations,” she said.

‘Dramatic increase’ in violence

There was also a dramatic increase in the intensity, severity and regularity of Israeli settler violence against Palestinians, accelerating their displacement from their land, in circumstances that may amount to forcible transfer.

The UN recorded 835 incidents of settler violence in the first nine months of 2023, the highest on record. Between 7 and 31 October 2023, the UN recorded 203 settler attacks against Palestinians and monitored the killing of eight Palestinians by settlers, all by firearms.

Of the 203 settler attacks, more than a third involved threats with firearms, including shooting. Furthermore, almost half of all incidents between 7 and 31 October involved Israeli forces escorting or actively supporting Israeli settlers while carrying out attacks.

Blurred lines

Ms. Al-Nashif said the line between settler violence and State violence has further blurred, including violence with the declared intent to forcibly transfer Palestinians from their land. She reported that in cases monitored by OHCHR, settlers arrived masked, armed, and sometimes wearing the uniforms of Israeli security forces.

“They destroyed Palestinians’ tents, solar panels, water pipes and tanks, hurling insults and threatening that, if Palestinians did not leave within 24 hours, they would be killed,” she said.

By the end of the reporting period, Israeli security forces had reportedly handed out some 8,000 weapons to so-called “settlement defence squads” and “regional defence battalions” in the West Bank, she continued.

“After 7 October, the United Nations human rights office documented cases of settlers wearing full or partial Israeli army uniforms and carrying army rifles, harassing and attacking Palestinians, including shooting at them at point-blank range.”

Evictions and demolitions

Israeli authorities also continued to implement eviction and demolition orders against Palestinians based on discriminatory planning policies, laws and practices, including on the grounds that properties lacked building permits.

Ms. Al-Nashif said Israel demolished 917 Palestinian-owned structures in the West Bank, including 210 in East Jerusalem, again one of the fastest rates on record.  As a result, more than 1,000 Palestinians were displaced.

“It is noteworthy that out of the 210 demolitions in East Jerusalem, 89 were self-demolitions by their owners to avoid paying fines from the Israeli authorities. This epitomizes the coercive environment that the Palestinians live in,” she said.

The human rights report also documented Israel’s ongoing plan to double the settler population in the Syrian Golan by 2027, which is currently distributed among 35 different settlements.

Beside settlement expansion, commercial activity has been approved, which she said may continue to limit the access of the Syrian population to land and water.

This article was originally published on UN News.

UN Chief Appalled by ‘Tragic Human Toll’ of Gaza War

‘Tragically, an unknown number of people lie under rubble,’ António Guterres said, reiterating his call for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire and unconditional release of all the hostages seized during the Hamas-led terror attack of October 7.

The UN Secretary-General said on Thursday he was “appalled by the tragic human toll of the conflict in Gaza” where more than 30,000 people have now reportedly been killed and over 70,000 injured.

“Tragically, an unknown number of people lie under rubble,” António Guterres added, in a statement issued by his spokesperson, reiterating his call for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire and unconditional release of all the hostages seized during the Hamas-led terror attack of October 7.

“He once again calls for urgent steps so that critical humanitarian aid can get into and across Gaza to all those in need”, UN Spokesperson Stéphane Dujarric said.

Dozens killed waiting for aid

As the death toll passed another chilling total, conflicting reports emerged on Thursday over the death of more than 100 Palestinians waiting for desperately needed aid.

“Even after close to five months of brutal hostilities, Gaza still has the ability to shock us,” said UN relief chief Martin Griffiths in a post on X.

“I am appalled at the reported killing and injury of hundreds of people during a transfer of aid supplies west of Gaza City today,” he said. “Life is draining out of Gaza at terrifying speed.”

The Secretary-General also condemned the incident.

Intense Israeli bombardment from air, land and sea continues to be reported across much of the Gaza Strip, resulting in further civilian casualties, displacement and destruction of civilian infrastructure, according to the latest situation report from UN humanitarian agency OCHA.

Fears of Rafah invasion

Fears persist over the planned Israeli incursion into Rafah, where more than one million people are seeking shelter from the violence sparked by the Hamas-led terror attacks in early October that killed almost 1,200 people in Israel and left 240 taken hostage.

Rafah is under fire every day, said Georgios Petropoulos, OCHA’s head of the Gaza sub-office.

“We will do our best” to serve people in need with the resources at hand, he added. “We are needed here. We need people here to stand for hope and human dignity.”

Famine and health crisis

Unless more aid is delivered, UN officials warned of an impending famine in Gaza. Local health authorities reported that six infants have already died as a result of malnutrition and dehydration, the OCHA report stated.

Besieged hospitals continue to grapple with raids and attacks, according to doctors trapped in the enclave who continue to serve patients as best they can.

As health centres and hospitals persevere amid raids and dangerous shortages of lifesaving supplies, a Palestine Red Crescent Society (PRCS) medical point in Jabalya, in northern Gaza, is receiving a daily average of 100 to 150 patients suffering from hepatitis A.

Meanwhile, stalled aid deliveries idle on border crossings with Egypt and Israel. Media reports indicate that Israel civilians were preventing trucks from entering Gaza at the Kerem Shalom crossing.

Massive deaths, injuries near aid trucks

Desperation among Gazans has multiplied as aid trickles into the enclave, with UN officials stating that the current, restricted deliveries do not even meet the minimum demands.

Early Thursday, it was reported that more than 100 people were killed in Gaza City, where aid trucks attempted to deliver food and other lifesaving supplies close to an Israeli checkpoint.

Initial reports from the Gaza heath ministry said that Israeli forces had fired into the crowd of thousands.

The Israeli Defense Force said soldiers had opened fire in a “limited response” to deter crowds from advancing on their checkpoint, but news reports suggest that amid chaotic scenes and a scramble for aid, many casualties were caused by trucks running people over.

Mr. Dujarric briefed reporters in New York and said the aid convoy involved was not part of UN operations. Responding to questions, he spelled out that “the way we operate right now is not safe”

“It is not safe for those who delivery the aid, it is not safe for people who receive the aid,” he said. “This is a chaotic, opportunistic humanitarian operation that we are trying to run. We want to see an immediate humanitarian ceasefire so that we can distribute aid in an organized, predictable and safe manner, which is currently not an option.”

Joint appeal to resume funding for UNRWA

Also on Thursday, 17 non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in the European Union (EU) signed a joint appeal to restore funding to the UN relief agency for Palestine refugees, UNRWA.

“We urge the EU and Member States to take note that other aid agencies cannot replicate UNRWA’s central role in the humanitarian response in Gaza, and amidst the current crisis many will struggle to even maintain their current operations without UNRWA’s partnership and support,” they said in a statement.

The joint appeal comes after major UNRWA donors suspended funding following Israel’s allegations that a dozen staff members were involved in the Hamas attacks in October that triggered the current devastating war in the enclave. The donors withheld funds pending ongoing independent UN investigations of the matter.

“The suspension of funding to the main aid provider for millions of Palestinians in Gaza will impact life-saving assistance for over two million people,” said UNRWA, which serves almost 6 million Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, Jordan and Syria, with education, healthcare and other essential services.

“Don’t look away from Gaza,” OCHA’s Mr. Petropoulos said. “Find the truth of what’s happening and believe in humanity. The only good thing war can do is to end.”

This article was originally published on UN News.