Two foreign activists were injured today, Friday, as settlers attacked them in Masafer Yatta, south of Hebron.

The head of the Susiya Village Council, Jihad Al-Nawajaa, said that armed settlers attacked the landowners from the Jabour family and two foreign activists who were injured while accompanying the citizens in the “Um Nir” area near Susiya in Musafer Yatta, in order to document the settlers’ ongoing attacks against the owners of those lands. One of them was hit in the head and his injury was described as serious.

The South African government announced its welcome of the temporary measures imposed by international justice on Israel in the framework of the lawsuit it filed against Israel in The Hague, according to statements by Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor.

The South African Foreign Minister said that the ruling represented a decisive victory for the rule of law and an important turning point in the search for justice for the Palestinian people.

The minister indicated that the orders of the International Court of Justice could not be implemented without a ceasefire, pointing out that "we would have liked the court to issue a ceasefire decision in Gaza."

Minister Pandor also stressed that the International Court of Justice orders cannot succeed without a ceasefire, and that we must call on Israel to abide by international law.

She said: “We stand with the Palestinian people and call on them not to lose hope.”

A short while ago, the International Court of Justice called on Israel to take all measures to prevent “genocide” in Gaza, stressing that Israel’s request to dismiss the lawsuit filed by South Africa cannot be accepted.

During the session devoted today, Friday, to deciding on interim measures regarding the genocide lawsuit, the International Court of Justice said that it was deeply concerned about the continued loss of life in Gaza.

It asserted its jurisdiction to decide South Africa's case against Israel. Taking into account international data that Gaza has turned into a place of despair and death. And UNRWA's statement about the deteriorating humanitarian conditions and the frustration of the population in the Gaza Strip.

Not to mention the statements of Israeli officials that strip the people of Gaza of their humanity. The Palestinian people are a protected group under the Genocide Convention.

The court imposed temporary measures on Israel in accordance with its obligations under the Genocide Convention to take measures to prevent all acts, including killing, causing physical harm, conditions affecting life, and material destruction.

Among the many measures also requested by South Africa is an immediate halt to the Israeli military campaign in the Gaza Strip, which it launched in response to the Hamas attack on October 7.

It should be noted that the announcement of the procedures of the International Court of Justice coincides with the commemoration of the victims of the Holocaust.

Israel feared that the International Court of Justice in The Hague would issue a decision confirming that it was committing genocide and therefore it had to stop the war on Gaza. After the court's decision was issued on Friday, Israeli political officials said, "This is a relatively very good decision. Perhaps it is the best we can get, because South Africa failed in trying to stop the war."

Regarding the content of the court’s initial decision, Israeli officials claimed that “all the demands are matters to which Israel is already committed. There is no stopping the fighting here and something practically prevents us from doing something of what we are doing. The fighting will continue as usual.”

Israeli officials described the International Court of Justice’s decision today, Friday, as “a major judicial achievement in addition to great damage to Israel’s image,” according to what Israeli media reported about them.

An Israeli political official claimed, "The court rejected South Africa's central request to stop the fighting in Gaza, and from this perspective, this is a great success for Israel."

Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper quoted unnamed political sources on its website as saying, “This is a relatively very good decision. Perhaps it is the best we can get, because South Africa failed in trying to stop the war.”

The sources added, "All demands are matters that Israel adheres to in any case. There is no ceasefire here, and there is nothing practical that prevents us from doing anything we are doing, and the fighting will continue as usual."

Israeli Channel 12 reported that there is great relief in Israel despite the harsh criticism of the International Court of Justice, and the relief is due to the fact that the court did not order to stop the fighting or stop the transfer of residents (forced transfer), and despite the damage to Israel’s image, but what happened is a very important legal achievement. at this time.

Netanyahu: “We will continue the war, and the claim that Israel is committing genocide is outrageous.”

Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, said after the international “justice” decision, “The claim that Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinians is not only false, but it is outrageous, and the court’s willingness to discuss it at all is a stain that will not be erased over the generations.”

Netanyahu added: “We will continue the war until we defeat Hamas, return all the kidnapped ones, and ensure that Gaza no longer poses a threat to Israel.”

The office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu instructed his ministers not to conduct interviews regarding negotiations related to a possible hostage deal, and regarding the decisions of the International Court of Justice.

Ben Gvir: The International Court of Justice “does not seek justice”

The Israeli Minister of National Security, Itamar Ben Gvir, considered that “the decision of the anti-Semitic court in The Hague proved what was previously known. This court does not seek justice, but rather to persecute the Jewish people. They remained silent during the Holocaust and today they continue their hypocrisy and have risen to another stage. It is forbidden to comply with decisions that "It poses a threat to the continued existence of the State of Israel, and we must continue to strike the enemy until decisive victory."

For his part, Knesset member Danny Danon said: “The court’s decision in The Hague today is shameful and completely disconnected from any reality on the ground. It will not prevent us from achieving our goals, which are the elimination of Hamas and the return of all detainees. We will not forget the horror, shock, and deaths of October 7. We will fight until we achieve all our goals.” .

At the beginning of the decision, the court affirmed its jurisdiction to consider South Africa’s lawsuit against Israel for genocide, and rejected Israel’s request to withdraw South Africa’s lawsuit against it.

The court called on Israel to submit a report on the temporary measures that must be taken within a month from today.

The court confirmed that "15 judges on the court voted for Israel to take measures to prevent any acts related to genocide."

The justices also voted 15 to two, in favor of requiring Israel to prevent the destruction of evidence related to genocide.

Sixteen justices voted to one in favor of requiring Israel to take measures to prevent incitement to genocide.

The court added, during the session announcing its decision to accept the lawsuit filed by South Africa, that “Pretoria has the right to file the lawsuit and Israel’s request to dismiss it cannot be accepted.”

The court affirmed, "We will not reject the case of genocide against Israel."

It stated that its decision to accept the lawsuit took into account the statements of Israeli officials regarding dehumanizing the Palestinians, as well as the concern of independent human rights officials about Israeli hate speech.

It also added that it took into account the statement of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) about the deteriorating humanitarian conditions and the frustration of the population in Gaza.

The International Court of Justice recognized the right of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip to protection from acts of genocide, saying that some of the rights that South Africa seeks to obtain are logical.

The session of the International Court of Justice began, on Friday, in the Dutch city of The Hague, to decide on South Africa’s request to take precautionary measures in the “genocide” lawsuit filed against Israel.

The Court of Justice said that it has the authority to rule on emergency measures in the genocide case against Israel, and that the conditions are available to impose interim measures.

The court added, during the session announcing its decision to accept the lawsuit filed by South Africa, that “Pretoria has the right to file the lawsuit and Israel’s request to dismiss it cannot be accepted.”

The court affirmed, "We will not reject the case of genocide against Israel."

It stated that its decision to accept the lawsuit took into account the statements of Israeli officials regarding dehumanizing the Palestinians, as well as the concern of independent human rights officials about Israeli hate speech.

It also added that it took into account the statement of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) about the deteriorating humanitarian conditions and the frustration of the population in Gaza.

The International Court of Justice recognized the right of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip to protection from acts of genocide, saying that some of the rights that South Africa seeks to obtain are logical.

On Friday, the International Court of Justice in The Hague imposed temporary measures on Israel during the session it held today to pronounce the initial ruling in the case brought by South Africa for the crime of genocide.

The interim measures imposed by the court are the following:

1- Israel must, in accordance with its obligations and in accordance with the Genocide Convention, take measures to prevent all acts, including killing, causing physical harm, conditions affecting life, and material destruction.

2- Take measures to ensure the urgent humanitarian needs of Palestinians in Gaza are met.

3- Take immediate action to ensure that evidence of genocide is prevented from being destroyed.

4- To submit a report to the court on all measures within one month from the date of issuance of the decision.

It is worth noting that the court did not impose “the immediate suspension of Israeli military operations in Gaza,” as requested by South Africa.

The court confirmed its jurisdiction to decide South Africa's genocide lawsuit against Israel, stressing that it cannot accept Israel's request to dismiss the lawsuit in this case.

Biden's statements came during a telephone conversation with Netanyahu, last Friday, according to American officials who said that Biden wants the war on Gaza to end before the longest possible time before the US presidential elections due to the fear of losing the votes of young voters.

US President Joe Biden put pressure on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during their phone conversation last Friday. He said that the Israeli army’s operations in the Gaza Strip must be reduced, and stressed that he does not support a war on Gaza that will last a year, according to what was reported by the website. “Walla” email from American officials today, Friday.

Biden's statements indicate increasing American concern about the continuation of the war on Gaza, and his desire for the war to end as long as possible before the presidential elections, next November.

One of Biden's advisors said that the White House is increasingly fearful of losing the votes of young voters who oppose the US President's policy of strongly supporting the war on Gaza.

According to an American source close to the White House, Biden cannot allow himself to let the war on Gaza and the large number of Palestinians killed daily continue to direct the news agenda in the United States as the presidential elections approach.

A third of the duration of that 40-minute phone conversation between Biden and Netanyahu dealt with the timetable for the Israeli army’s transition to low-force combat and Israel’s strategy in the war in general, according to an American official who spoke to Walla.

Biden touched on Netanyahu's statements about the continuation of the war for many months, during a press conference held on Thursday of last week. Biden told Netanyahu that he could not support a war that would last a year, and asked him to accelerate the transition to less intense fighting in order to reduce the number of civilian casualties, two American officials said.

One American official stated that Biden told Netanyahu that he did not understand what Israel's strategy was for getting out of the war, and asked several times about Netanyahu's plan for the next day after the end of the war.

Netanyahu told Biden that the Israeli army's transition to the third phase of the war and fighting with a less intense force had occurred in the north of the Strip and would happen in its south later.

Netanyahu claimed that the transition to the third stage would take longer than Israel thought, and that if the Israeli army withdrew from the areas where it is now present, Hamas would return to control there.

The White House and Netanyahu's office declined to comment on what was stated in this report.

The Hebrew newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth said that there are fears among the security services about the outbreak of a new intifada in the occupied territories, due to the actions of the occupying state and the continuing restrictions on the Palestinians.

The newspaper, citing what it described as high-ranking security sources, indicated that the stagnation in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s decision regarding the issue of authorizing the entry of Palestinian workers from the West Bank into Israel, and the weakening of the Palestinian Authority, is worrying the security forces, which warn that a fire in the West Bank could erupt. In a series of operations, even a real uprising arrives.

It was quoted by a high-level source as saying that “political parties are working on incitement, calling for the overthrow of the Palestinian Authority, and insisting on preventing the passage of Palestinian workers,” which could lead to a third intifada.

The newspaper continued, "Since the beginning of the war, the Israeli army has been operating in the occupied territories in an aggressive, focused and deep manner, in a manner that has not been seen since Operation Defensive Shield."

It continued, "So far, several large-scale campaigns have been conducted that lasted 40, 60, and even 70 hours in refugee camps such as Jenin, Nour Shams, Tulkarm, and others. Hundreds of Palestinians were killed, thousands of them were arrested, about 1,500 Hamas members, and air force missions were used along with military vehicles." 

It stressed that the security services fear that the achievements of the campaigns will be wasted within a few months, without a step to strengthen the Palestinian Authority.

It pointed out that the main fear in the security apparatus is the turmoil that is clearly visible in the Palestinian street - due to statements that the Authority cannot be a partner, and because of the absence of a decision on the issue of bringing in workers - which could cause an explosion.

An Israeli public opinion poll showed an increase in the popularity of War Council Minister Benny Gantz and his “National Unity” party, as it concluded that only 32 percent of Israelis believe that Benjamin Netanyahu is most suitable to head the government.

The Hebrew newspaper “Maariv” reported in the results of a poll published on Friday that “only 32 percent of Israelis believe that Netanyahu is most suitable to head the government, compared to 52 percent who said that Minister in the War Council, Benny Gantz, is most suitable for the position.”

The newspaper described the Israeli political map for this week, according to the poll, as “similar” to what it was last week, as a similar poll showed that “31 percent of Israelis believe that Netanyahu is most suitable to head the government, compared to 50 percent who preferred Gantz.”

The survey was conducted by the “Lazar” Institute (private) on a random sample of 513 Israelis, and the margin of error was 4.3 percent.

The poll revealed that if the Israeli elections were held today, the National Unity Party would obtain 40 seats in the Israeli Knesset, compared to the 12 seats it currently holds.

As for the “Likud” party, it will get 16 seats, compared to the 32 it currently has in the Knesset, while the “There is a Future” party, headed by the opposition leader, Yair Lapid, will get 13 seats, compared to the current 24 seats out of the 120 seats in the Knesset, according to the poll.

Maariv said that if the elections were held today, “the parties opposing Netanyahu’s presidency of the government would obtain 71 seats, while the parties supporting him would obtain 44 seats.”

I am writing this to the Palestinian public. I am writing as a friend of the Palestinian people and as someone who has spent the past 45 years working to end the occupation and to see a free Palestinian state established in the occupied territories with East Jerusalem as its capital.  It has always been clear to me that Israel will never have security if Palestinians do not have freedom and dignity. It is also true that Palestinians will never have freedom and dignity if Israel does not have security.  

There are seven million Israeli Jews and seven million Palestinian Arabs living between the River and the Sea. Neither side is going anywhere. Israeli Jews nor Palestinian Arabs will give up their right to self-determination. While both sides have very different narratives of their history and who did what to who, both peoples are here and the mutual denying of their rights to exist as a nation will only lead to more bloodshed and suffering.

What Hamas did on October 7 in Israel crossed the line between humanity and what is on the other side.   What Israel has been doing in Gaza since October 7 has crossed the same line. This has to end. How many more years will we accept denial, death, and destruction of each other? Too many lives have been lost. Too many innocent people are gone forever. Both sides are responsible, both sides need to take responsibility. Yes, it is true, that there is an occupier and an occupied and the occupied often feel powerless and think that violence and revenge is the only way forward. The Oslo peace process was supposed to bring an end to violence and the beginning of freedom and security for the Israeli and Palestinian people.  But we all know that Oslo was a miserable failure and the occupation became more entrenched and lot crueler. 

Israeli military and settler violence is out of control. Palestinian violence against Israeli increased to the level of the massacre done by Hamas mostly against Israeli civilians from their homes in communities along the Gaza Israel border. That assault by Hamas was celebrated by Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. There was almost no expression of condemnation and rejection by Palestinians of what Hamas did.  Israel has now massacred tens of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza. There are almost no voices of sorrow or condemnation from the Israeli public witnessing the destruction of Gaza. We are all very good at demonstrating our loss of humanity and empathy towards each other. But this cannot be the way forward.

I have been calling on the entire international community led by the OECD states to finally recognize the State of Palestine and to grant Palestine full membership in the United Nations. This is will not end the occupation immediately but it will remove Israel’s right of veto on Palestinian statehood. We have had enough of 30 years of talking about the two states solution while most of the OECD countries still only recognize one of the two states. In English we say “either put up or shut up!”. This also means that the Palestinian people have to take on the responsibility of being a state within the communities of nations. 

The immediate challenge will be to create Palestinian unity that is willing and able to govern responsibility in the West Bank and in Gaza. The challenge in Gaza will be to create a governing authority that eliminates the armed struggle from the Palestinian agenda and continues the just fight for freedom and dignity without violence, even if the occupation is an expression of violence. No country of the world will fund the desperately needed resources for the reconstruction of Gaza if anyone believes that the armed struggle will continue. There will be no way to prevent the full reoccupation of Gaza by Israel if there is a military threat from Gaza and that includes the shooting of rockets and the smuggling of weapons into Gaza.  The war of AlAqsa Flood must be the final and last war between Israel and the Palestinian people. 

The trauma that we are all experiencing has to end with a new resolution by both sides that there is no military solution to this conflict. Palestinians who continue to suffer the most should now accept officially and finally ending the armed struggle not as surrender. It is an act of courage and morality and the very best strategy to encourage the international community to force Israel to end the occupation.  It is also the best way to convince Israelis that Palestinians are genuinely ready to live in peace next to Israel. Israelis must be convinced that the intentions of Palestinians to make peace are genuine, just as Palestinians need to know that from Israelis.

This war has led to people all over the world, including in Israel and in Palestine, to wear the same neckless of the Land of Palestine, the Land of Israel, from the River to the Sea.   This land is the Land of Palestine and it is also the Land of Israel. We can either go on denying the existence of the other people and their rights to be here or we can begin to accept the reality and to look forward. Before this war I believed that the two states solution was dead. 

This war, Hamas’ victory, is the revival of the two states solution.   It may not be the best solution in an ideal world, but it is the solution that enables both peoples to live in security, freedom and dignity. The pain of suffering and trauma of this war it seems to be counter-intuitive to believing in a solution for resolving this conflict, but this is the choice that we must all make.

If you want Palestine to be free and you want Palestinians to live with security, freedom and dignity, it is time for new political leaders and for old and new political parties to stand up and declare that we Palestinians will continue to struggle for our freedom and to end the occupation, but we will we not use violence. Not stones, not guns, not bombs, not Molotov cocktails and not rockets. International law may grant the right to use all means to fight against occupation, but we Palestinians have paid too heavy a price for our struggle already.  Now we turn to the international community to join with us, hand-in-hand in bringing about our liberation. Our struggle will be led by the moral conviction that we are right and just and that we are not alone – the international community, including our Arab brothers and sisters will no longer tolerate the Israeli occupation. We as Palestinians will do our responsibility – we will hold free, fair and democratic elections. We will not allow political parties or people who support an armed struggle to participate in those elections. We will be responsible for ourselves and towards ourselves and Palestine will be a state that we will be proud of.

The writer has dedicated his life to peace between Israel and her neighbors. He has negotiated with Hamas for 17 years. He is a founding member of “KolEzraheiha - KolMuwanteneiha” (All of the Citizens) political party in Israel. He is now the Middle East Director for ICO - International Communities Organization, a UK based NGO.

According to the Israeli army, buildings are being demolished at a depth of 650 meters inside the Strip with the aim of “creating security conditions for the return of the residents of the south to their homes.” The 21 Israeli soldiers who were killed on Monday were booby-trapping these buildings in preparation for their demolition and bulldozing.

The Israeli army is working to establish a "buffer zone" inside the Gaza Strip, through which it is destroying thousands of buildings along the fence surrounding the Strip. The Israeli army blows up these buildings and flattens them. Last Monday, Israeli forces booby-trapped a number of these buildings in preparation for their destruction, but the forces were targeted by an anti-armor shell fired by a Hamas fighter, which led to the mines exploding, the buildings collapsing, and the killing of 21 Israeli soldiers.

Following the killing of these soldiers, Israeli army spokesman Daniel Hagari, in the first public confirmation of the establishment of a “buffer zone,” said that “the forces were removing terrorist buildings and infrastructure” about 650 meters from the border fence, claiming that establishing the zone The buffer aims to "create security conditions for the return of the residents of the south to their homes."

While the buffer zone, before October 7, extended over an area of 330 meters along the 36-mile separation fence, and Palestinians could farm in it, the Washington Post today, Thursday, quoted Israeli sources as saying that the new zone increases More than double this area.

The newspaper quoted a former spokesman for the occupation army, Jonathan Conricus, as saying that his understanding is that the area will extend a little more than 800 meters from the border, that is, more than double the size of the buffer zone before the war. He added, "In some areas it may be wider, and in some areas it may be a little less."

Israeli Channel 12 reported that there are 2,850 buildings in this area, and that the Israeli army has destroyed 1,100 of them so far.

The newspaper referred to clips published by the Israeli army and images taken by satellite, showing the destruction of dozens of homes, residential complexes, and schools and their leveling to the ground in the eastern regions of the besieged Strip from both the north and south.

Despite the United States' opposition to the "buffer zone" plan, the occupation army went ahead with it. US State Department spokesman Matthew Miller said in December, “If there is any proposed buffer zone inside Gaza, it will be a violation of the principle of preserving the territory of the Strip, which we oppose.”

US Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, also said that the United States was clear in “our opposition to the forced displacement of people,” and that “it is appropriate to take security measures so that Israelis can return to their homes in the south. But when it comes to the permanent status of Gaza, we remain clear regarding non-encroachment on its lands.

The newspaper quoted an American official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, as saying that the Israeli government informed the United States that the buffer zone being built inside Gaza is only a temporary security place to eliminate Hamas firing positions near the border.

But former Israeli spokesman Conricus told the newspaper that he expected the buffer zone to continue to be implemented as long as there were armed groups present in Gaza.

The newspaper also quoted the advocacy official at the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, Basil Sourani, as saying that the buffer zone established by Israel before the war included more than 40% of agricultural land in Gaza, which prevented farmers from reaching their fields for more than a decade. In 2006, an agreement brokered by the International Red Cross allowed them to return to their lands.

He added, "Now with this one-kilometer-deep buffer zone that they're talking about, and I'm sure it's wider than that, what are we going to do?", noting that his family's farm, which includes about 10,000 olive trees and is located about 2.4 kilometers from the border, It had already been razed, "not a single olive branch left in it."

The petition demands Netanyahu’s ouster from power, and will be published in the United States and directed first and foremost to the American political arena: “Netanyahu is not qualified, fundamentally and morally, to lead Israel into war, and he poses an imminent and existential danger to the state.”

A petition published today, Friday, and signed by 26 former Israeli security officials and 17 civilian officials, called for the ouster of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu due to the “failures of the current war” on Gaza, and accused him of having “his hands stained with the blood of the dead” Israelis who were killed in an attack. 7 last October.

The political analyst in the Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper, Nahum Barnea, published this petition and indicated that it would be published in the United States as well, at the end of this week.

Among the signatories of the petition were the former chiefs of staff of the Israeli army, Moshe Ya’alon and Dan Halutz, the former heads of the Mossad, Tamir Pardo and Danny Yatom, the former heads of the General Security Service (Shin Bet), Nadav Argaman and Yaakov Perry, and the former Inspector General of Police, Assaf Hefetz. It was also signed by three Israeli Nobel Prize winners.

Most of the petition signatories in the past expressed their opinions against Netanyahu before October 7, and some of them participated in the protests against the “judicial reform” plan initiated by the Netanyahu government with the aim of weakening the judiciary.

Barnea pointed out, “The issue is not the list of names of the signatories, but rather the timing: the protests that were brought into a deep stagnation on October 7 are seeking to return to the center of public discourse. The arguments have changed, but the goal has not changed.” The petition is addressed to the President of the State, Isaac Herzog, and the Speaker of the Knesset, Amir Ohana, “but it is directed first and foremost to the American political arena.” This petition was initiated by Jeremy Levin, the former general manager of the Israeli pharmaceutical company “Teva”, who holds dual American and Israeli citizenship.

To the saying that was repeated throughout the protests against the weakening of the judiciary, that Netanyahu seeks to destroy democracy, was added another saying, which is that he is guilty of the failure of October 7. “His hands are stained with the blood of the dead, and he is fundamentally and morally unqualified to lead Israel into war, and he poses an imminent and existential threat to the State of Israel,” the petition stated.

Barnea pointed out, “These are very strong statements, and they come at the height of a war and at the height of a battle in Congress and American public opinion over emergency aid to Israel. President Biden wants to give Israel $14 billion, and this is a huge amount, and Israel needs it more than any time in the past.” .

He added, "Members of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party are delaying ratification by claiming that American-made bombs are killing thousands of civilians in Gaza. Young voters are threatening to abstain from voting in the elections because of Biden's strong support for Israel."

He added that any American president did not fear that his support for Israel would cost him a price at the ballot box. "The opposite happened: in an election year, presidents feared entering into a confrontation with Israeli governments. The fear was of losing donations and losing Jewish voters in central states. Israel was a place of consensus. The situation is no longer like this now."

According to Barnea, “Netanyahu, the man and everything he represents, is at the heart of the debate. The hostility to him in domestic American discourse goes beyond the discussion of the war. Like Putin, he is considered a hero of one party, the Republican, and a burden in another party, the Democratic. Netanyahu’s stated refusal to trade "In Biden's plan to end the war, he is pushing administration officials to the conclusion that he cannot work with him. For them, they are not qualified. And in internal deliberations in the White House, they are now looking for a way to talk to the political establishment and public opinion in Israel over Netanyahu's head."

Barnea concluded, "The petition calling for Netanyahu's ouster warns of the damage he is causing to relations with the United States. The petition will find listening ears in the White House."

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken anticipated today's decision in The Hague regarding the lawsuit filed by South Africa against Israel "for committing genocide in Gaza" by speaking with his South African counterpart, Naledi Pandor.

Blinken stressed to Pandor that the United States supports Israel's right to "ensure that the October 7 terrorist attacks are never repeated," according to a White House statement.

He noted in the statement that Blinken and his South African counterpart discussed “the need to protect civilian lives, ensure the continuation of humanitarian aid to the Palestinians, and work for a lasting regional peace that guarantees the security of Israel and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.”

The South African government is awaiting the issuance of the ruling of the International Court of Justice in the lawsuit it filed against Israel, today, Friday.

On January 11-12, the International Court of Justice in The Hague conducted a trial in South Africa’s lawsuit against Israel on charges of violating the Convention on comprehensive genocide in the Gaza Strip.

A decision by the International Court of Justice against Israel would increase political pressure on it, and observers expect that it could serve as an excuse to impose sanctions on it. According to what American media reported yesterday.

The Israeli forces stormed several Palestinian towns and villages in the West Bank, and confrontations took place between the occupation army and Palestinian youth during the raids.

France condemned the bloody bombing of a United Nations shelter center in Khan Yunis in the southern Gaza Strip, calling on Israel to “comply with international humanitarian law,” according to a statement issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The French Foreign Ministry stressed the need to "protect United Nations sites and humanitarian workers whose work is essential for the civilian population in Gaza," recalling that "protecting civilians is both a moral duty and an international obligation."

Director of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) in Gaza, Thomas White, said that two tank shells hit a United Nations building in Khan Yunis on Wednesday, where thousands of displaced Palestinians were sheltering, killing 13 people.

On the 112th day of the Israeli aggression on Gaza, Israeli forces are still committing one massacre after another and targeting civilians throughout the Strip.

The Israeli forces blew up facilities and homes west of the city of Khan Yunis, south of the Gaza Strip.

The Israeli army focused its bombing on Khan Yunis during the past days, and also targeted hospitals there, and two days ago bombed a center for sheltering displaced persons affiliated with UNRWA, which left dozens of killed and wounded, and received widespread UN and international condemnation.

Medical sources reported that at least 70 Palestinians were killed in Israeli bombing on the cities of Rafah and Khan Yunis during the past 24 hours.

Today (Friday), United Nations judges will issue their ruling on a request submitted by South Africa to impose emergency measures against Israel, which faces charges before the International Court of Justice of committing genocide crimes in connection with its military operation in the Gaza Strip, according to Reuters.

The ruling that the court will issue today will not address the main accusation in the case, that is, whether genocide occurred, but will focus on the urgent intervention requested by South Africa.

Among the measures that South Africa called for was an immediate halt to the Israeli military operation that destroyed vast areas in the Gaza Strip and claimed, according to health authorities in Gaza, the lives of more than 25,000 people.

Israel is asking the court to dismiss the case in its entirety. An Israeli government spokesman said yesterday (Thursday) that they expect the UN court to “drop these false and misleading accusations.”

South Africa said two weeks ago that the Israeli air and ground attack aims to “destroy the population” of Gaza.

Israel rejects these accusations and says it respects international law and has the right to defend itself.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faces accusations from within Israel of leading the country into artificial regional crises, through a possible confrontation with the mediators who have been working between Tel Aviv and the Hamas movement, even before the outbreak of the current war, in addition to their involvement since the beginning of the crisis in negotiations about prisoner exchange deal.

Although the relations between the extremist Netanyahu government with both Egypt and Qatar were marred by many “pent-up” tensions during the current war period, these differences have come to light for the first time, and they are differences that are not far from the Israeli dispute with the American administration, which also works with Cairo and Doha in the mediation negotiations between Israel and Hamas.

Israeli media focused on Netanyahu leading Israel to regional crises, noting that the differences had reached the point where Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi refused to respond to his calls, while Qatar attacked him publicly, in response to statements made by Netanyahu against Qatar. Media reports expected that a third crisis would emerge with Jordan, after it was leaked that the Israeli Ministry of Energy was studying the possibility of “not extending the water agreement with Jordan.”

Meanwhile, American media reports reported that Israeli soldiers have continued to work since November to establish a buffer zone along the border with the Gaza Strip. The Wall Street Journal quoted soldiers as saying that they had received orders to clear an area one kilometer wide along the border, as part of an Israeli plan to create a security buffer zone inside Gaza.

In a related context, attention is turning today to the International Court of Justice, which will issue, from its headquarters in The Hague, its decision on the possibility of imposing emergency measures on Israel following accusations from South Africa that the Israeli war in Gaza constitutes genocide.

Benjamin Netanyahu calling Qatar's mediation role on behalf of Israeli hostages 'problematic' drags his wartime behavior to a new low – which is saying something for the man who doesn't understand terms like 'public decency' or 'accepting responsibility'

There's an old story about a guy who murdered both his parents and then asked the court for leniency. "On what grounds?" asked the judge. "I'm a grieving orphan," the crying man replied.

That's the story with Benjamin Netanyahu and Qatar. The prime minister's coarse attempt to deflect responsibility on to the Gulf state, blaming the Qataris for actions he should be held accountable for, is typically transparent and cheap. Except that his comments, leaked to the media on Tuesday, were not merely just another political statement. These words were reportedly uttered in a meeting with the agonizing, dejected families of the Israeli hostages.

Qatar "is essentially no different from the UN or Red Cross, and in a certain sense is even more problematic. ... They have leverage over [Hamas] ... because they finance them," casually declared the man who pressured Qatar into funneling funds to the terror group in Gaza.

Netanyahu's timing was critical – right at the moment when a delicate deal to free the hostages is being mediated. Qatar has a vital role to play in securing their release, and even if his mendacity is a familiar trait, he seems to have gone too far this time.

The conventional political wisdom in Israel is that Netanyahu himself (or his office) leaked his words in order to disrupt a hostage deal. Not only are the families convinced it was Netanyahu who leaked the conversation; the White House is also convinced he did it deliberately.

Such a deal, along the contours that include a prolonged cease-fire, could mean the end of the war without toppling Hamas. That could mean the end of his governing coalition.

The chutzpah of what Netanyahu said is astounding. For six years, he encouraged Qatar to fund Hamas. Not one payment since 2017 was made without Israeli consent. When Qatar was reconsidering its policy in 2018, Netanyahu implored it not to. All that time, he was being briefed by the Mossad that there was concrete evidence showing that Hamas had been abusing the Qatari funds, which totaled over $1 billion over a six-year period. It used them for arms, rocket manufacturing and the construction of its vast network of tunnels.

However, that did not dissuade Netanyahu or force him to reconsider his policy. On the contrary: he doubled down on it. On October 7, that flawed and reckless policy exploded. But this is Benjamin Netanyahu we are talking about here – a man who has never recognized terms like responsibility, accountability, public decency or morals. So he blamed the IDF chief of staff, then the intelligence branch, then the Shin Bet security service, then U.S. President Joe Biden.

Now he has found a convenient new nemesis: Qatar. Yes, Qatar funded Hamas. Yes, that makes the Gulf state extremely unpopular. But no, it did not supply arms, rockets, explosives or build tunnels.

Netanyahu's statements are irresponsible, a livid Qatar responded, saying it was "appalled" by the remarks. The Qataris added, though, that they will not let one man sidetrack them from what they are doing.

The prime minister also realizes that Qatar will be part of the reconfigured Middle East. He is equally aware of the strategic relationship between the United States and Qatar. Neither of these things fit into his "permanent war" concept for the region. Seeking confrontation with America regarding postwar Gaza and a possible diplomatic process has been his objective since November. Blaming Qatar for Hamas' savage attack is consistent with that: both, in his mind, enable him to frame October 7 not as his debacle but as a greater conflict.

Hamas leader Osama Hamdan said on Thursday, January 25, 2024, that the movement will adhere to any ceasefire decision issued by the International Court of Justice “as long as Israel adheres to that,” according to what he stated in a press conference.

Hamdan also considered that "Washington's repeated call for the occupation to protect civilians, relief personnel and facilities of humanitarian organizations in Gaza since the beginning of the aggression is nothing but empty and cheap media propaganda amid the continued support and partnership for the Israeli occupation and its supply of weapons."

On the other hand, the leader of the Hamas movement stressed that "the only chance for the soldiers captured by the resistance to return alive to their families will not be until after a comprehensive cessation of the aggression against our people."

Regarding the expected decision to be issued by the International Court of Justice (based in The Hague) on Friday, regarding the “genocide” case filed by South Africa against Israel, Hamdan said, “Hamas will adhere to any ceasefire decision issued by the court as long as the enemy adheres to that.”

The Hamas leader added: “The continuous attacks by Netanyahu (the Israeli Prime Minister) and his government on our Arab countries, the latest of which is our sister Qatar, expresses bankruptcy and political failure in the face of the torrent of international criticism.”

Earlier Thursday, the far-right Israeli Finance Minister, Bezalel Smotrich, criticized Qatar, which is mediating indirect negotiations between Tel Aviv and Hamas for the exchange of prisoners and the ongoing ceasefire in Gaza since last October 7.

Smotrich's criticism comes in response to a tweet by Qatari Foreign Ministry spokesman Majid Al-Ansari in which he said, "Netanyahu is obstructing Qatar's mediation efforts between Tel Aviv and the Hamas movement, if his statements regarding the efforts made by Doha are correct," according to the Israeli Broadcasting Corporation.

In a leaked recording broadcast by Hebrew Channel 12 on Tuesday, Netanyahu said that he did not thank Qatar publicly because it “did not exert more pressure on Hamas,” and he criticized Qatari-American relations, calling for pressure on Doha.

On Tuesday, Al-Ansari confirmed that mediation efforts between the Palestinians and Israel “are still underway to reach a ceasefire and exchange of prisoners,” while mediation and Qatari efforts continue to ensure the entry of aid and medicine into the Gaza Strip.

Regarding Egypt, Hamdan praised its position “rejecting any Israeli plans to occupy the Philadelphia axis (the border with the Gaza Strip) and to displace our people from the Strip.”

Diaa Rashwan, head of the official Egyptian Information Service, said in a statement, “Any Israeli move towards occupying the Philadelphia or Salah al-Din Corridor in the Gaza Strip will lead to a serious and serious threat to Egyptian-Israeli relations, and Israel’s persistence in marketing these lies is an attempt to create legitimacy for its endeavor.” To occupy the Philadelphia Pass or the Saladin Pass.”

The official Israeli Broadcasting Corporation also reported that Israeli officials informed Egypt that they are planning to carry out a military operation in the Philadelphia axis area, which is the border area between the Gaza Strip and the Egyptian Sinai Peninsula.

The Director of the World Health Organization, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, called on Thursday for a ceasefire and a “real solution” to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in an emotional appeal to the Executive Council of the United Nations organization in which he described the conditions in Gaza as “hellish.”

Ghebreyesus' emotions flowed as he described the conditions in the Gaza Strip, which is being subjected to Israeli strikes in which more than 25,000 people were killed.

Ghebreyesus endured the war at a young age, and his children hid in a bunker during the bombing in the border war between Ethiopia and Eritrea between 1998 and 2000.

He said, before the Executive Board of the World Health Organization in Geneva during a discussion on the health emergency in Gaza: “I am a true believer, because of my own experience, that war does not bring a solution, but rather more war, more hatred, more suffering, and more destruction.” "So let's choose peace and solve this issue politically."

British doctors document their observations in the Gaza Strip: hell on earth

He added, "I think you all said about the two-state solution and so on, and I hope that this war will end and move to a real solution," before he broke down, describing the current situation as "at a loss for words."

Israel's representative to the United Nations in Geneva, Merav Elon Shahar, said in statements sent to Reuters that the WHO director's comments represent a "complete failure in leadership."

She added, "The Director-General's statement was an embodiment of everything that has been wrong with the World Health Organization since October 7. There was no mention of hostages, nor of the rape and killing of Israelis, nor of Hamas' military use of hospitals and its despicable use of human shields."

She accused the World Health Organization of "colluding" with Hamas, saying that the organization turned a blind eye to Hamas' military activities in Gaza's hospitals.

In the same speech, Ghebreyesus warned that more people in Gaza would die from hunger and disease. "If you add all that up, I think it's not easy to understand how hellish the situation is," he said.

(Reuters)

BY MICHAEL ARRIA  

The week, a federal court in Oakland will begin hearing arguments in a lawsuit accusing the Biden administration of failing to prevent a genocide in Gaza. The case could bring U.S. support for the Israeli assault on Gaza to a halt.

This week, a federal court in Oakland will begin hearing arguments in a lawsuit accusing the Biden administration of failing to prevent a genocide in Gaza.

The claim was filed against President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin by the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) in November. The legal effort was taken on behalf of two Palestinian organizations and eight Palestinians living in the United States.

The effort is backed by almost 80 human rights organizations across the globe.

Advertisement

“For the last five weeks, President Biden and Secretaries Blinken and Austin have stood shoulder-to-shoulder with an Israeli government that has made clear its intention to destroy the Palestinian population in Gaza,” said CCR senior attorney Katherine Gallagher after the suit was filed. “As neighborhood after neighborhood, hospital after hospital, and sheltering displaced Palestinians were bombed, while subject to a total siege and closure that denies 2.2 million people basic necessities for life, they have continued to provide both military and political support for Israel’s unfolding genocidal campaign while imposing no red lines. The United States has a clear and binding obligation to prevent, not further, genocide. So far, they have failed in both their legal, moral duty and considerable power to end this horror. They must do so.”

The suit charges the administration with violations of international law, codified in the 1948 Genocide Convention.

“Immediately after the Hamas attacks and the launch of the Israeli assault on Gaza, President Biden offered ‘unwavering’ support for Israel’s military campaign, which he and administration officials have consistently repeated even as mass civilian casualties escalated, Gaza was sealed and basic necessities for life cut, alongside Israeli genocidal rhetoric,” reads the complaint.

The document goes on to detail Israel’s historical oppression of Palestinians, the brutality of the bombing, and

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of the human rights groups Defense for Children International–Palestine (DCIP) and Al-Haq, two organizations that have documented Israeli human rights violations for years.

Plaintiffs also include Great March of Return founder Ahmed Abu Artema, 24-year-old intern physician Dr. Omar Al-Najjar, and Defense for Children field researcher Mohammed Ahmed Abu Rokbeh. All of these clients currently reside in Gaza, where they have been subjected to Israel’s ongoing assault and siege. Rokbeh is currently living in a tent along with his wife and four children.

Plaintiffs Mohammad Monadel Herzallah, Laila Elhaddad, Waeil Elbhassi, Bassim Elkarra, and “A.N.” are Palestinians living in the United States with family members back in Gaza.

At the time of filing, the plaintiffs had already collectively lost over 100 family members as a result of Israel’s bombings.

In December, the Biden administration filed a motion to dismiss the case, claiming that the court was being asked to rule outside of its jurisdiction.

“Even if the political-question doctrine did not preclude judicial review here (which it does), Plaintiffs still cannot overcome another jurisdictional hurdle—their lack of standing,” reads the motion. “Plaintiffs’ alleged injuries are the result of the military and other activities of an independent foreign sovereign, Israel, over which this Court has no authority. There is no order that is within this Court’s jurisdiction to fashion that could provide effective relief to Plaintiffs—namely, preventing Israel from taking the sovereign actions it chooses to take to respond to the October 7th attack. Plaintiffs therefore cannot meet the causation or redressability prongs of the standing requirements.”

In reaction to the government’s response, several of the plaintiffs submitted declarations detailing additional harm and deaths sustained after the original filing. Attorneys also submitted a declaration from Josh Paul, a former State Department official who quit his position over Biden’s Gaza policy.

“The United States provides and transfers to Israel a vast amount of military critical technologies and 

capabilities..the United States is aware that these military critical technologies and capabilities will be used in ways that are contrary to U.S. law and Israel’s own commitments to the U.S. under applicable processes and agreements, and other requirements including international law,” it reads.

“If the court rules in our favor, the judge could order the U.S. government to stop providing military and diplomatic support to Israel while the court considers the case. Given the urgency and the hundreds of Palestinians killed every day, we are hoping that will be the case.” DCIP Advocacy Officer Miranda Cleland

In a recent development, the court granted motions for the Jan 26 hearing to be in person and for clients to be able to present live testimony. Testimony will also be presented by Barry Trachtenberg, a genocide scholar who submitted an expert brief in the case. 

DCIP Advocacy Officer Miranda Cleland told Mondoweiss that the historic hearing could potentially have an immediate impact on the administration.

“If the court rules in our favor, the judge could order the U.S. government to stop providing military and diplomatic support to Israel while the court considers the case. Given the urgency and the hundreds of Palestinians killed every day, we are hoping that will be the case,” she said. “This would send a very strong message not only to the Biden administration itself but also to members of Congress. If the federal court system takes the assertion of genocide seriously, that should put all U.S. government officials on notice that they, too, could be held to account for their role. And if the government actually follows the court order, that further isolates the Netanyahu government.”

Earlier this month South Africa filed a petition to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), calling for Israel to be investigated for war crimes in Gaza.

“Israel has now killed in excess of 21,110 named Palestinians, including over 7,729 children — with over 7,780 others missing, presumed dead under the rubble — and has injured over 55,243 other Palestinians, causing them severe bodily and mental harm. Israel has also laid waste to vast areas of Gaza, including entire neighbourhoods, and has damaged or destroyed in excess of 355,000 Palestinian homes [more than 60% of Gaza’s housing stock], alongside extensive tracts of agricultural land, bakeries, schools, universities, businesses, places of worship, cemeteries, cultural and archaeological sites, municipal and court buildings, and critical infrastructure, including water and sanitation facilities and electricity networks, while pursuing a relentless assault on the Palestinian medical and healthcare system,” reads part of the country’s 84-page application to The Hague. “Israel has reduced and is continuing to reduce Gaza to rubble, killing, harming and destroying its people, and creating conditions of life calculated to bring about their physical destruction as a group.”

The Biden administration has been publicly dismissive regarding the South African effort, with National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby calling it “meritless, counterproductive, and completely without any basis in fact whatsoever.”

However, the ICJ will rule on whether it will grant emergency measures to stop the war in Gaza on the same day that the Oakland hearing begins.

“Perhaps the most monumental part of this case is that Palestinians will be testifying in federal court to the impact of the Biden administration’s complicity in Israel’s genocide of Palestinians,” explained Cleland. “Just a couple weeks after the first ICJ hearings, it is a big deal for courts to take Palestinian rights seriously, and no matter how the judge rules on Friday, this case creates a public record of Biden’s complicity.”

TAREQ S. HAJJAJ

Even in areas like Rafah, where the Israeli ground invasion has not reached, Gaza’s society has been decimated. Its economy no longer exists and basic goods can only be found on the black market where they cost ten times their prewar price.

She wakes up in the early hours of the morning every day, attempting to light the green wood that had been chopped the day before so she could prepare breakfast for her family of six. All of them are crammed into a single tent on the sidewalk in Rafah.

She sets the wood in the middle, between three rocks arranged in a triangle made to serve as a base for a cooking vessel. She attempts to light the wood using discarded pieces of plastic and nylon as kindling. Smoke starts to swell from the pile, rising into her eyes and causing them to water. Behind her, inside the tent, her husband lies on the ground with their children, save for the little one beside her, who is fascinated with the fire and tries to get closer to it. She waves him away, holding him back from the fire and telling him off.

That a woman should be forced to sit on the side of the road and build a fire to prepare breakfast for her family, a rite usually regarded as mundane and reserved for the privacy of the home, but which she is now forced to do out in the cold with thousands of other strangers around her, is anything but normal in Gaza.

Amnah Qaddoum, 48, fled from Gaza City to Rafah after an arduous journey of displacement from one place to another. Before the war, Amnah used to work at a nursery for a modest salary that was barely enough to meet her own needs, but it helped to supplement her husband’s income as a taxi driver in Gaza City. His taxi was bombed early on in the war, taking away the family’s main livelihood.

During the war, Amnah and her husband, Ismail, have lived off the food aid that arrives in Gaza through UNRWA. The breakfast she is preparing includes an UNRWA-issued can of fava beans that she heats up and prepares alongside a can of hummus. The meal will be all the family eats for the whole day, to be followed by some cheese sandwiches handed out by UNRWA in the evening. With no other money to speak of, their situation is similar to that of the thousands of other families who cannot meet any of their basic needs beyond the already scant aid that arrives.

Erasing an economy, destroying a society

The most dramatic effects of the war are undoubtedly the scale of human death, displacement, and bodily and mental harm. Yet outside the constant bombardment and immediate threat of death, the most important feature of this war is that it is underwritten by the destruction of an entire society. Among other consequences, what this means is that Gaza essentially no longer has an economy, and what has arisen in its stead is a series of black markets that exploit the gargantuan humanitarian needs created by the war. These black markets sell basic subsistence goods for astronomical prices.

In Rafah, there is still a street resembling a marketplace, with produce vendors and markets for the trade or sale of humanitarian aid. Commercial items like potato chips, chocolate, milk, and sugar also sometimes enter Gaza, invariably finding their way to this market.

Yet due to the rapid hyperinflation that has resulted from the extreme shortages imposed by Israel’s starvation plan, these goods now cost ten times their prewar price. A kilogram of sugar that used to cost 3 shekels (less than a dollar) is now sold for 25 shekels, if available at all. The price of diapers has gone from 15-25 shekels to 100-125 shekels; coffee from 30-50 shekels to 250 for the cheapest kind; children’s biscuits from half a shekel to 7 shekels; a pack of cigarettes from 19-20 shekels to 100-110 shekels. This month, a 25-kilogram bag of flour cost 400 shekels (100 dollars), but after slightly more flour started to arrive in Rafah as humanitarian aid (which is not the case for northern Gaza), the price of flour went down to only double its prewar price, now costing only 50-60 shekels.

A liter of diesel that used to cost 7 shekels now costs 70-90 shekels. The 12-kilogram propane cylinders that used to cost 50 shekels to fill are now available on the black market for 250-300 shekels. Even firewood, which used to cost half a shekel per kilogram, has now risen to 4 shekels per kilogram, given the unprecedented demand for it as the only available alternative fuel source to fend off the winter cold. Legumes such as lentils, a traditional staple for poor families, have jumped from 6 shekels per kilo to 30-35 shekels per kilo.

For families like Amnah’s, this uncontrollable inflation has rendered what little money they do have devoid of any value.

“In these circumstances where we’re sitting out in the cold, with fumes surrounding us from cars running on cooking oil instead of diesel, and with garbage and waste around us, we’re all getting sick,” Amnah tells Mondoweiss. “I can’t buy even a bar of soap to maintain the cleanliness of my family.”

In the earlier days of the war, even though we couldn’t find food to eat, we were still safe in our homes,” she continues. “Now our home is the street.”

As she speaks, the sound of coughing children coming from inside the tent is clear. It barely stops as our conversation continues.

She goes on to say that the cold is coming close to killing her family, and that she is unable to keep her children warm, lying down on the ground with nothing underneath them but a thin blanket. 

When they first fled their home in the north, the weather was still warm, and they did not need to take heavier clothes with them. With winter in full force, Amnah has attempted to find and buy some jackets at the market.

“The prices are hard to believe,” Amnah says. “It’s not that they’re a little expensive. It’s that they are unfathomable. A small jacket for my 8-year-old son costs 150 shekels, and I have three other children. If I were to buy jackets for all of them at that price, it would be the entire salary that I used to make before the war. Now I don’t even have that amount of money.”

“My children say they haven’t eaten meat in months and miss it,” she continues. “But meat is now 150 shekels per kilo, and I can’t afford to buy it for them now.”

Families that didn’t have stable sources of income before the war and relied on aid from the World Food Program have had it worse since the war. These families are the vast majority of Gaza’s residents, and most of them are now refugees in Rafah.

Public sector workers under attack

Other families are supported by breadwinners who have comparatively stable salaries, such as employees of the Palestinian Authority (PA) who receive a monthly salary, or employees of the Hamas government in Gaza. Since the war, however, neither of these government employees have been receiving their salaries consistently, if at all. On top of all that, Israeli warplanes continue to bomb all money-changing offices and ATMs that distribute salaries to employees of the Hamas government, even though they are merely civilians who happen to have public sector jobs, like school teachers and healthcare workers. Most recently, Israeli forces targeted the Firwala company in Khan Younis, which had been distributing late salaries to employees from previous months.

Alaa Suboh, 41 years old and a father of four, fled Gaza City to western Rafah by the coast. Had it not been for the war, camping in this area temporarily for the night would have been considered recreational, with a seaside view that was the envy of many a Gaza resident. Today, that same view is marred by the sea of tightly packed tents stretching along the coast, with entire families crowding around meager fires for warmth without proper clothing. This is made all the worse by the icy coastal winds that cut through the encampments and spare no one.

Alaa had been living a comfortable life, receiving a stable salary as a teacher at the Azhari College, part of the PA-affiliated Al-Azhar University. 

“Life was good,” Alaa tells Mondoweiss. “Even when prices would rise somewhat, we were able to survive. But this time, the rise in prices has become too expensive even for the rich.”

“Gaza has not imported any new goods during the war,” he continues in anger. “So why are prices so high now? It would have been better if we all took into account the circumstances of the war, and merchants should have refrained from raising prices. Or if they were going to raise prices, they could have at least raised them by a reasonable margin, even if double. We would have accepted a doubling of prices. But we can’t accept a tenfold increase.”

This month, Alaa and his fellow PA employees received their salaries with a 40% pay cut, only exacerbating the effects of the price hikes.

Yet, in spite of the unprecedented rise in prices in Rafah, the effects of inflation are not nearly as important as the effects of scarcity and the difficulty of obtaining food and medicine. Pharmacies open their doors, but their shelves are empty. Grocery stores are similarly sparse. The largest supermarkets in the area sell one or two shipments of a single commodity per day — unloading a newly arrived shipment of salsa on one day, for instance, then unloading a shipment of something else on another. Otherwise, all supermarket shelves remain empty.

“Even water is hard to come by now,” Alaa says. “The amount I now pay to buy drinking water per day is the same as the amount I used to pay per month.”

“I never thought that quenching your thirst would come at such a steep price,” he laments.

A report published by the French newspaper L'Express confirmed that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, by rejecting peace and focusing only on his political future, is leading the region and the entire Middle East to the brink of abyss, and this explains the impasse that Israel is experiencing.

Writer Corentin Pennarguear added that Netanyahu emerged as a rising star of the Israeli right with his complete opposition to the Oslo Accords and the establishment of a Palestinian state. He benefited from the support of many for his theses and later won the elections after the killing of Yitzhak Rabin. He became the youngest prime minister in the history of Israel, and shaped the country according to his faith and personality.

Express quoted political scientist Liran Harsgor from the University of Haifa - as saying that many Israelis see Netanyahu as a cat with 9 lives, as his political career always seems to be on the verge of collapse, but every time he finds a way out.

Pennarguear added that Netanyahu is a politician "capable of manipulating public opinion in an unparalleled way, but he has never faced such a disastrous situation before, with extremely poor popularity."

The edge of the abyss

Express added that the Middle East is on the brink of abyss, as Netanyahu rejects any idea of stopping the war or negotiating with Palestinian leaders.

The magazine quoted Mairav Zonszein, a specialist in Israeli-Palestinian affairs at the International Crisis Group, as saying, “This impasse is the result of 20 years of drift by the Israeli right and the killing of the peace process. It is also the result of one man’s conviction that only military action can achieve peace.” Results".

The magazine said that Netanyahu has never hidden his fight for the establishment of a Palestinian state, and he also previously stressed that dividing the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank is “an essential part of our strategy.”

According to Express, Netanyahu believes that power is everything at any cost, and he led his election campaign in July 2019 on the basis of this. The Likud Party published giant posters showing Netanyahu shaking hands with Donald Trump, Narendra Modi and Vladimir Putin, “as the Israeli leader approached all illiberal leaders who despise Western democracies.”

In December 2022, after Netanyahu was rejected by all other parties, and was tried in 3 corruption cases, he decided to ally with the far right to form the government.

The magazine continued that Netanyahu was always keen to present himself as “the protector of Israel,” but what happened on October 7 made everything collapse, according to Mairav Zonszein, as he waged a war that seemed legitimate to his supporters.

The French magazine added that an opinion poll conducted by the Dialogue Center showed that 9 out of 10 Israelis attribute responsibility for the events of October 7 to the mistakes of the Netanyahu government, while only 4% saw him as the right man to lead the country.

Dangerous game

According to Express, Netanyahu is playing a dangerous game with the Americans during the era of his old friend, US President Joe Biden, who in 2014 summarized their relationship by saying during a meeting of the Jewish Federation of North America: “He has been a friend for more than 30 years.”

It adds that the US President criticized "the most extreme measures of this government, such as reforming the judicial system or supporting settlers in the West Bank," but without attacking Netanyahu at all.

But the war on Gaza - continues Xpress - is exhausting Biden's patience, as his support for the Israeli attack cost him several points in the opinion polls, a few months before the presidential elections.

Express says that Netanyahu also faces great international weight in The Hague, before the International Court of Justice, where the country born from the Holocaust finds itself accused of genocide crimes. In addition to the killing of more than 24,000 Palestinians, the accusation is based on statements by Israeli political leaders, who call for war crimes to be committed in Gaza every day.

In light of Netanyahu’s insistence on continuing the war, the French magazine quoted Mairav Zonszein as saying that the current war on Gaza “is a war without end. No one knows what victory will look like, and no one knows what the end of the war will look like, especially since Netanyahu has every interest in continuing it.” .

According to Mairav Zonszein, it is clear that Israeli society was shocked by October 7, but this war is creating generations of trauma among the Palestinians. She added, “We are not witnessing the elimination of Hamas, but rather we are witnessing the birth of something much worse,” as she put it.

Source: French press

The American newspaper "The New York Times" said that Israel has declassified more than 30 orders issued by the war government and military leaders that it claims "refute the accusations against it of committing genocide in Gaza."

The newspaper added that Tel Aviv says that "the orders instead show its efforts to reduce deaths among Palestinian civilians."

The declassification of these documents, which the American newspaper says it has seen, comes after South Africa based its accusation on statements made by Israeli leaders, which it described as inflammatory and indicated as “evidence of intent to commit genocide.”

South Africa filed the lawsuit accusing Israel of "violating the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide" within the framework of the agreement concluded in 1948 as a global response to the Jewish Holocaust.

The New York Times stated that the mission of the Israeli government defense force is to prove that everything that some officials said “was overruled by executive decisions and official orders issued by the Israeli War Council and the army’s high command.”

The nearly 400-page defense file includes what Israel claims is evidence that it sought to wage war against Hamas and not a campaign of genocide against the Palestinians.

On Thursday, the International Court of Justice, the highest judicial body affiliated with the United Nations, announced that it would issue a historic decision on Friday in the case against Israel.

The decision to be issued on Friday will only decide on South Africa's request for emergency measures and not on the basic issue of whether Israel committed genocide, an issue that will take years to decide.

A decision by the International Court of Justice against Israel would increase political pressure on it, and observers expect that it could serve as an excuse to impose sanctions on it.

It is possible that the court will order Israel to stop its military campaign in Gaza, which it launched following Operation “Al-Aqsa Flood” on October 7, 2023.

Orders issued by the International Court of Justice that decide disputes between states are legally binding and cannot be appealed, but the court does not have broad authority to enforce its rulings.

The 1948 Genocide Convention does not only define genocide as the killing of members of a particular ethnic or national group, according to Ganina Dale, co-director of the Oxford Institute for Ethics, Law and Armed Conflict, who stressed in an interview with the newspaper that “everything depends on intent.”

Therefore, both South Africa and Israel focus "not only on what the leaders and soldiers did, but also on what some of them said."

The Israeli newspaper "Haaretz" said, citing an informed source, that Tel Aviv and the Islamic Resistance Movement "Hamas" have reached understandings on most of the terms of a prisoner exchange agreement between the two sides.

The source of the Israeli newspaper also explained that the truce between the resistance and the occupation will last 35 days and will include the release of all Israeli detainees in Gaza in exchange for Israel releasing Palestinian prisoners and providing humanitarian aid to the Strip.

The newspaper added that the criteria for releasing the prisoners have already been determined, but their identity is still under discussion. However, it pointed out that the only outstanding issue is a ceasefire at the end of the truce or not, and said that this is a Hamas demand that Israel rejects.

The Israeli newspaper "Haaretz" also added that "there may be other minor changes in the broad outlines of the agreement, but the main problem that needs to be solved relates to the absolute ceasefire that Hamas insists on."

Earlier Thursday, the American newspaper "Washington Post" quoted informed officials as saying that the director of the CIA, William Burns, will meet with Israeli, Egyptian and Qatari officials in Europe in the coming days. To discuss ways to reach an agreement regarding Israeli prisoners in Gaza and a long-term truce in the Strip.

The sources said that Burns is expected to travel to Europe for talks and meet with Israeli intelligence chiefs David Barnea, Egyptian Abbas Kamel, and Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Mohammed bin Abdul Rahman Al Thani.

Meanwhile, Reuters quoted an informed official, on Thursday, that the directors of the Israeli intelligence service (Mossad) and the American Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) will meet with the Qatari Prime Minister in Europe at the beginning of the week. To discuss a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip and the release of prisoners.

Egypt and Qatar were key interlocutors between Israel and Hamas, and the two countries helped secure an initial halt to the Gaza aggression and the release of Israeli prisoners in November.

But tensions between the Israelis and Qataris reached the brink of the abyss, after an audio recording of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was leaked in which he did not hide his “disappointment” with the Biden administration. Because it does not put more pressure on Doha.”

Nicaragua announced, on Thursday, that it had submitted a request to the International Court of Justice to participate in the genocide case filed by South Africa against Israel before the court.

This came in a statement published on the Nicaraguan government website.

The statement stated that Nicaragua had submitted a request to the International Court of Justice to be included in the genocide case brought by South Africa against Israel on the grounds of violation of the United Nations Genocide Convention in Gaza.

It added that Nicaragua wanted to be a party to "all possible legal consequences" that might arise from the court.

It added, "Nicaragua wants to demonstrate its intention to fulfill its commitment to prevent genocide, and to contribute to the punishment of those who committed genocide."

The statement said that Nicaragua informed the International Court of Justice that it wanted to intervene in the course of the entire case as a state if its request was accepted.

It explained, "Nicaragua believes, as the international community has stated, that Israel's actions clearly violate the rules of the Genocide Convention."

It continued, "The genocidal intent and the inhumane statements made by the highest Israeli authorities against the Palestinian people are also indicators of this."

The statement called for an "immediate" halt to Israeli military attacks against the Palestinian people.

It added, "Nicaragua calls on Israel once again to fulfill its international legal obligations. We also affirm that the occupation must end, and we call for the creation of the necessary conditions for the establishment of a sovereign and independent Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders."

Press sources in Washington reported that the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Bill Burns, will go in the next few days to meet with the head of the Israeli Mossad, the head of Egyptian intelligence, and the Qatari Prime Minister in Europe in the coming days to discuss efforts to reach an agreement to secure the release of hostages held in Gaza. American officials told Axios.

According to what the site attributed to an Israeli official, “The meeting is very important for efforts to reach a breakthrough in the talks on a new agreement that includes a two-month pause in exchange for the release of all hostages held by Hamas.”

The official said that Israel hopes that the meeting will encourage the Qatari and Egyptian mediators to put more pressure on Hamas and delve deeper into the details of the potential deal to reach compromise solutions.

American officials acknowledged that reaching an agreement may be the only way that could lead to a ceasefire in Gaza.

The expected meeting will include Burns, Mossad Director David Barnea, Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdul Rahman Al Thani, and Egyptian Intelligence Chief Abbas Kamel.

Israeli officials say that the director of the Israeli Shin Bet security service, Ronen Bar, and General Nitzan Alon, who is in charge of the Israel Defense Forces in the hostage case, will also participate in the meeting.

According to the website: “A senior Israeli official directly involved in the talks said that the impression is that there is a desire on all sides to reach an agreement and that momentum has built.”

But the official said that Hamas must realize that Israel will not agree to its (Hamas) demand that Israel commit to ending the war as part of the hostage deal. The official also said that Hamas' demand for the number of Palestinian prisoners it wants to release as part of the deal is too high.

The official said that the role of the mediators is to clarify this to Hamas. Each of them does it in a different style. We want to see them not only as facilitators, but as more active mediators who propose creative solutions,” according to the website. .

On Thursday, the Israeli occupation army asked the displaced people in the largest shelter center run by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), in the city of Khan Yunis, south of the Gaza Strip, to evacuate the place on foot, giving them until Friday afternoon.

According to local sources, the army warned the displaced people at the UNRWA training center located in Khan Yunis of the necessity of evacuating it on foot, before five o’clock in the afternoon on Friday, local time.

This warning comes a day after Israeli artillery targeted a building in the center, killing 12 displaced people and wounding 75 others, according to a statement by UNRWA.

The occupation army made phone calls with displaced people inside the center, asking them to evacuate.

A number of displaced people who were able to leave the center and arrived in Rafah safely said that they "went out holding their ID cards so that the army could identify them."

They added, "The army set up barriers in the corridors that it said were safe, to conduct security checks for the displaced."

"More than 50 vehicles and tanks also gathered in the vicinity of Al-Aqsa University, the Al-Qadisiyah site, and the UNRWA training center west of Khan Yunis."

Earlier Thursday, the Israeli army dropped paper leaflets on several neighborhoods in Khan Yunis, demanding that their residents evacuate.

The army said in the leaflets: “Residents of the Khan Yunis area in the Al-Nasr, Al-Amal, City Center and Camp neighborhoods, in Blocks 107-112: For your safety, you must move immediately to the humanitarian zone in Al-Mawasi, via Al-Bahr Street.”

In a statement, UNRWA said on Thursday, “The violent fighting in/around Khan Yunis, over the past three days, has caused loss of life and damage to the city’s infrastructure, including the largest UNRWA shelter in the southern region of the Strip, the Khan Yunis Training Center.” ".

It explained that, on Wednesday, for the second time in a week, the center was subjected to Israeli bombing, which led to casualties among the displaced people residing inside it.

It indicated that Israel bombed this center despite “its shelter for about 30,000 displaced people, in addition to the clear signs that it is a United Nations facility, while its coordinates were shared with the Israeli authorities, as is the case with other UN facilities.”

It considered the bombing of the center a "clear disregard for the basic rules of war."

The UN agency called for the necessity of "taking all measures to protect civilians."

It added, "Hospitals, clinics, medical teams, and UN facilities must be protected, as is clearly stipulated in international law."

Since last Monday, the Israeli army has launched a series of intense air and artillery raids on Khan Yunis, and in the vicinity of the hospitals located there, amid a ground advance of its vehicles in the southern and western regions of the city, which prompted thousands of Palestinians to flee the city.

On Tuesday, the Israeli army claimed to have “completed the encirclement” of the city of Khan Yunis, south of the Gaza Strip, announcing that “the 98th Division carried out, over the last 24 hours, a large-scale attack in Khan Yunis.”

Israel’s government is widely understood to be the most extreme in its history, stuffed with religious bigots and self-declared fascists, and is currently carrying out a genocidal, scorched-earth policy against the 2.3 million Palestinians of Gaza.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who needs the slaughter to continue to keep himself out of jail, has boasted that he is more determined than ever to prevent a Palestinian state from emerging.

Gaza’s destruction – in which more than 100,000 Palestinians have so far been either killed or seriously wounded, and two-thirds of the enclave’s homes pounded into ruins – appears to be integral to that strategy.

And yet, extraordinarily, Keir Starmer, Britain’s opposition leader, has chosen this moment to declare that, from now on, the Labour Party’s policy on Palestinian statehood will be dictated to it by the pariah state of Israel. 

Reversing Labour’s stance under his two predecessors, Ed Miliband and Jeremy Corbyn, who promised to immediately recognise a Palestinian state on winning power, Starmer told a meeting last week that such recognition would occur only as “part of a process” of peace talks involving Israel and other states.

Some 139 nations have recognised Palestine as a state at the United Nations, but Britain – as well as the United States – is not among them. 

Labour’s shadow Middle East minister, Wayne David, expanded on Starmer’s remarks to explain that Israel would have a veto. A two-state solution would only ever come to “fruition in a way which is acceptable to the state of Israel. That is the way to bring about peace.”

Starmer’s Labour is insisting that Israel remain firmly in the driving seat, even as Gaza is made uninhabitable and its population subjected to an entirely man-made famine – and when Palestinians need international solidarity more desperately than ever, while Israel needs to be hit with tough sanctions, not endless indulgence, to end its genocide.

Starmer has not just broken with a decade-old Labour policy. He has abandoned his own declared support for Palestinian statehood. 

In the summer of 2021, as Israel engaged in one of its regular bouts of violence against Gaza, the Labour leader pressed the prime minister of the time, Boris Johnson, to lobby for recognition of a Palestinian state at that year’s G7 summit in Cornwall. 

Starmer noted that Palestinian statehood was the only way “to stop the expansion of illegal settlements” designed to pre-emptively eat up the territory needed for such a state. It was, the Labour leader added, also the way “to get a meaningful peace process back up and running”.

Why are the Palestinians less entitled to statehood now that Israel is carrying out genocide on part of their territory? Buoyed by the destruction of Gaza, Israel’s Jewish settlers are rampaging across Palestinian territory in the West Bank even more aggressively than they were in 2021. 

Three years ago, international recognition of Palestinian statehood, according to Starmer, was the cudgel needed to get an intransigent Israel talking. Now the Labour leader treats a Palestinian state quite differently, as an obstacle to negotiations. 

The order is being reversed: statehood, according to Starmer’s new position, can only come about through peace talks, even though Israel utterly rejects any talks with the Palestinians.

Starmer is treating his party and voters like fools. 

Last weekend, in an apparent effort to placate growing discontent, Starmer called Netanyahu “wrong” for rejecting Palestinian statehood. But that only served to underline the utter depravity of his new policy.

Making the same point to the Jewish Chronicle last week, David acknowledged that the Israeli government was resolutely opposed to ending its decades-long military occupation of the Palestinian territories of Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem. 

Palestinian statehood would therefore “require a different mindset from leading politicians in Israel”. That would happen “over a long period of time”, with “many complex issues to be sorted out”, said David.

Starmer and his ministers appear not to have noticed that, on average, 250 Palestinians are being killed by Israel each day in Gaza, with many more likely to starve to death. They may not have the luxury of waiting “a long period of time”. 

But Israeli officials will be delighted with their veto. If their genocidal statements are any indication, they believe things will be considerably simpler once some two million Palestinians are either dead or ethnically cleansed, dispersed to the far corners of the globe.

Appetite for genocide

Starmer’s Labour is back to joining the ruling Conservatives – as well as Washington – in resuscitating the make-believe “peace process” politics of three decades ago, as though the past 30 years never happened.

The more “moderate” Israeli politicians Labour wants to cultivate simply do not exist. Netanyahu is the longest-serving prime minister in Israel’s history. He has presided over so many rightwing coalition governments – each more extreme than the last – precisely because the ultra-nationalist right is hugely popular with Israeli voters. 

And though Netanyahu may be in personal political trouble – chiefly for failing to stop Hamas from breaking out of the Gaza prison on 7 October – he is not some outlier in his fervent opposition to Palestinian statehood. He is fully in the mainstream.

What the past three months have proven decisively is that there is zero appetite in Israel for an agreement of any kind with the Palestinians, even with the quisling Palestinian Authority led by Mahmoud Abbas. Quite the reverse. There is fervent support across the Israeli political spectrum for wiping the Palestinians out. 

Benny Gantz, the opposition leader to Netanyahu, who now serves in his war council, is helping to oversee the bombing and military siege that is starving Palestinians in Gaza. 

President Yitzhak Herzog, formerly leader of Israel’s supposedly leftwing Labor party, has declared that no Palestinian in Gaza is innocent, making him effectively cheerleader-in-chief of the genocide.

When even “moderate” Israeli politicians back genocide, who does Starmer imagine he is going to engage with in Israel for peace talks? Or is his real goal to let Israel do as it pleases indefinitely? 

Cynical makeover

The reality is that Starmer has simply given a cynical makeover to the position he announced immediately after the 7 October break-out – when the nature of Israel’s genocide began to take shape.

Starmer threw his weight behind the “complete siege” announced by Israel’s defence minister, Yoav Gallant, that has denied more than two million Palestinians food, water and power. Even though famine and lethal diseases were the inevitable outcome, the Labour leader described the policy as “Israel’s right to defend herself”.

Collective punishment is expressly illegal under international law.

When quizzed on whether he approved of Israel cutting off telecommunications to Gaza, effectively plunging the enclave into darkness as Israel intensified its slaughter, he said he felt unable to “adjudicate on each and every issue”.

And yet, notably, Starmer felt quite capable of adjudicating on – and naming – the Russian military’s crimes after it invaded Ukraine, and demanding that Russia’s President Vladimir Putin “face justice” at the Hague.

Israel is known to have killed at least 25,000 Palestinians in Gaza so far – a majority of them women and children, with many thousands more under rubble. Israel has destroyed almost all critical infrastructure, including the health sector. And yet no one in the Labour leadership dares refer to these actions as war crimes, let alone genocide. 

It was not always thus. Starmer, in his earlier role as a high-profile human rights lawyer, understood only too well that what Israel is doing today qualifies as genocide. 

At a 2014 hearing before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), he made the case that Serbian forces had carried out a genocide in besieging the Croatian city of Vukovar for three months. He described a city reduced to rubble, enduring a “sustained campaign of shelling, systematic expulsion, denial of food, water, electricity, sanitation and medical treatment”.

Those are the very conditions being inflicted on Gaza, but this time on a far greater scale.

Four years ago Starmer was also unhesitant in terming Serbia’s 1995 slaughter of 8,000 Bosnian men and boys in Srebrenica an “inhuman genocide”. Those crimes, he added, should “help us find the courage and conviction to stand up and say, never again”.

How quickly Starmer’s “conviction and courage” have failed him in Gaza.

A blank cheque

This is all of a pattern with Starmer and his team. 

The Labour leader rejected calls for a ceasefire when many tens of thousands of Palestinian casualties could have been avoided. Even now he insists on a “sustainable” ceasefire that has become code in Washington for allowing Israel to keep the slaughter going for as long as it wishes.

In a similar vein, he hung leftwing Labour MP Zarah Sultana out to dry last week after she confronted Prime Minister Rishi Sunak in the House of Commons. 

She urged Sunak to listen to government officials and “de-escalate” spiralling tensions in the Middle East, which have led to Britain and the US striking Yemen over Houthi attacks on Red Sea ships. She pointed out that de-escalation could only be achieved through an immediate ceasefire in Gaza.

Sunak responded with dog-whistle Islamophobia, telling the Muslim MP she should “call on Hamas and the Houthis to de-escalate the situation” – and thereby implying that she was their representative in the UK.

Characteristically, Starmer no more came to Sultana’s defence than he has Gaza’s. 

Labour Party officials have been warned not to attend Palestinian solidarity marches, and its branches are reported to have been banned from debating issues related to Israel or Palestine. Dozens of Labour councillors have quit over Starmer’s position on Gaza. 

This week a Labour MP, Tahir Ali, was forced to apologise, under pressure from party whips, after accurately describing Sunak as having “blood on his hands” for approving the sale of weapons to Israel despite receiving advice from the Foreign Office that Israel was breaking international law in its attack on Gaza. A Labour spokesman said Ali's remarks were "clearly inappropriate". 

Now, having approved of the Israeli government’s siege, Starmer is giving Israel a blank cheque to keep the Palestinians stateless indefinitely, unprotected from Israel’s genocidal impulses. 

Lisa Nandy, his shadow international development secretary, led a march against antisemitism in Manchester at the weekend. The protest’s barely veiled message was that opposition to genocide in Gaza is driven by Jew hatred.

Standing next to Nandy was Britain’s chief rabbi, Ephraim Mirvis, who used a column in the Sunday Telegraph to make that point explicitly. The headline declared: “Accusing Israel of genocide is a perverse moral inversion”.

This is the same Mirvis who earlier this month extolled “our heroic soldiers” – apparently unaware that they are Israeli, not British, soldiers – for doing the “most outstanding thing possible” in destroying Gaza.

Arms sales complicity

Equally, Starmer has done nothing to hold the British government to account – the very purpose of an opposition party – for its continuing supply of weapons to Israel.

Last week, Middle East Eye reported that David Cameron, the foreign secretary, had approved arms sales despite his officials repeatedly raising “serious concerns” through November and December that Israel was breaking international law.

That makes Starmer as complicit as the British government in Israel’s crimes against humanity in Gaza – and in genocide too, should the ICJ at the Hague back South Africa’s pending case against Israel.

Indeed, the Labour leader may have been among those named in a criminal complaint filed last week to the Metropolitan Police by a UK group identifying senior British politicians as complicit in Israeli war crimes.

The Met’s war crimes unit was already gathering evidence on Israeli leaders and Britons who have travelled to Israel to take part in potential war crimes, as part of an existing investigation by the International Criminal Court.

The International Centre of Justice for Palestinians has asked that the Met’s investigation be expanded to include British politicians, public figures and commentators who may have “aided and abetted” Israel’s crimes in Gaza through support, encouragement or incitement.

Stalling tactic

Starmer’s indecent political manoeuvring over the past three months has only made clearer what has long been true: that the “peace process”, and its proclaimed two-state goal, is viewed by western establishments entirely cynically. It is nothing more than a diversion and stalling tactic.

Once, support for two states provided a necessary cover story: of good intentions behind which Israel could hide its bad faith as it stole the very land that was supposedly about to serve as the basis for a Palestinian state.

Now, support for two states is providing the cover story as Israel commits genocide. The aim is to distract western publics from what is staring them in the face: that an Israeli state levelling Gaza and seeking to ethnically cleanse its population is not in the business of conceding Palestinian statehood.

A Palestinian state, viable or otherwise, will happen only if Israel’s hand is forced. Anything less is simply time-wasting as Israel eradicates the Palestinian people under cover of fighting Hamas.

This week, China indicated that it might call Washington’s bluff by using its seat on the Security Council to insist on “concrete steps” – rather than endless talks about talks – towards “full membership for Palestine in the UN”.

Should Beijing follow through, Washington, with a veto at the Security Council, would be forced to show whether it really is serious about advancing a two-state solution. 

Starmer’s seriousness would be exposed too.

In truth, his complete abandonment of the Palestinians at a moment when they are being butchered and starved has done even more damage to Labour than Tony Blair did in backing Washington’s illegal 2003 war on Iraq on false pretences. 

Blair hollowed out Labour as a vehicle for advancing an ethical foreign policy. Starmer has hollowed it out as a vehicle for even mobilising opposition to the horrors of a genocide. 

Starmer has thereby set the stage for a toxic brew of alienation, bitterness and despair that will destabilise British politics for the foreseeable future.

Dr Alon Ben-Meir*

My recent article, “Why the Two-State Solution is the Only Viable Option to the Exclusion of Any Other,” solicited many different reactions. It became clear to me that many who read it have succumbed to the pervasive narrative that such a solution is simply unrealistic. I vehemently disagree.

In the article, I argued that the two-state solution is the only viable option to bring closure to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Not surprisingly, the reaction of many of those who read it fell generally into four categories. One group argued that this is not the right time, given the Israel-Hamas war, and it will take another generation before Israelis and Palestinians can reconcile and begin peace talks.

The second argument is that the Palestinians will never accept Israel’s right to exist even if they established a state of their own, as they are bent on Israel’s destruction. The third category believes the whole idea of a two-state solution is akin to satire and does not warrant serious consideration. The final group argues that the conflict is endemic and irreconcilable, and thus, the whole notion of a two-state solution is illusionary and will never happen.

What is troubling about these views is the resignation that any renewed peace negotiation will be futile because everything that has been tried before to reach a peace agreement did not work. I vehemently disagree because this conflict, which has already inflicted so much death and destruction on both sides over the past 75 years, simply will never go away and will continue to haunt them for generations until they face their current disastrous reality.

This is not the right time

For those who claim this is not the right time, I ask, when is the right time? Do the Israelis and Palestinians need more time to inflict hundreds of thousands more casualties before waking up to their tragic existence? More time to poison another four generations with enmity and venom toward the other? More time to dehumanize the other, to make the killing and savagery of innocent people casual?

More time to squander billions for training, procuring military hardware, and preparing the young to die in the next war? More time to conspire and collude to terrorize the other?  More time for millions to suffer, feel threatened, and live in fear and agonizing uncertainty? More time to deepen the hatred, animosity, and distrust to make reconciliation impossible? And more time to shatter the dream of the vast majority on both sides to live in peace and security?

Now is the time to end the conflict because more time will make it even more intractable and exact an ever-higher price in blood and precious resources, and as the conflict continues, they will still face one another in war or in peace because their coexistence in one form or another is inescapable.

The Palestinians are bent on Israel’s destruction

There are indeed many extremist Palestinians, such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad, who are committed to Israel’s destruction and will not abandon their plan to destroy Israel even if the Palestinians establish a state of their own. But then, 75 years later, they have nothing to show for it. There is no Palestinian state and they are subjected to occupation under which they are losing ground every passing day.

They never had the means to pose a clear and present danger to Israel and will never acquire a military edge over Israel. The Israel-Hamas war is only demonstrating Hamas’ calamitous miscalculation, as their savagery of innocent Israelis will end up eviscerating the movement to the point of no return.

Surely, there will still be fanatics who revel in self-deception, believing they can still destroy Israel, but here is where it will end in self-deceit. The Palestinian Authority, a multitude of Palestinian moderates, and the leading Arab states have long since accepted Israel’s existence. This goes back to the Arab Peace Initiative in 2002, representing a major transformation from the Arab League’s Khartoum Resolution of September 1967, known for its three Nos—no negotiation, no recognition, and no peace.

The Abraham Accords further attest to the Arab states’ attitude toward Israel, which has not been lost on the Palestinians. Even Hamas’ own charter, updated in 2017, accepts a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders—a recognition, albeit implicit, that Israel does and will continue to exist.

The idea of a two-state solution is akin to satire

Others who read the article refer to the idea of a two-state as satire and intimate that only the naïve would still advocate for such a foolish proposal. Well, I do not find the continuing death of Israelis and Palestinians by the thousands funny, nor do I view the indiscriminate killing of Israeli men, women, and children by Palestinian terrorists amusing. I do not think that the occupation and the frequent Palestinian casualties in the West Bank are a laughing matter, nor do I find the horrifying savagery and mutilation of women by Hamas hysterical.

I do not believe wars that cause so much havoc, destruction, tragic loss of life, and starvation of children are humorous, nor do I see the continuing suppression of Palestinians under occupation as comical. I do not find the indoctrination of Palestinian youth to hate and violently resist the Israelis hilarious, nor do I find the Israelis’ view that the Palestinians are a perpetual mortal enemy entertaining.

This madness must stop, and nothing will stop it unless Israel and the Palestinians agree on a two-state solution. However doubtful many on both sides are about such an end-game, no one has come up as yet with a realistic alternative to end four generations of bloody conflict.

The two-state solution is an illusion

Finally, there are those who claim that the two-state solution is nothing but an illusion that will never come to pass simply because neither Israel nor the Palestinians will ever agree to share the land from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River, which each considers to be exclusively theirs. To make their case, they submit that for the past seven decades, nothing has worked—incentives, compromises, pressure, persuasion, peace negotiations, the threat of violence, mediation, international conferences or UN resolutions, summits, or interim agreements—and there is nothing left that can facilitate a solution.

For all they know, it is illusionary to think that the conflict could end with a two-state solution because it is endemic and has become an intrinsic module of Israeli and Palestinian DNA.

I disagree with this argument, which assumes that there are conflicts that simply cannot be resolved. There are ample examples of violent conflicts that ended peacefully. Whereas past efforts to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have failed, sometimes it takes a major explosion to shake the dynamic of the conflict fundamentally.

Hamas’ unprecedented gruesome attack and Israel’s unparalleled retaliation have done exactly that. They dramatically upended the dynamic of the conflict and created new conditions between the two sides, making it impossible for them to simply return to the status quo ante, which has never been sustainable.

The ultimate defeat of Hamas as a political force offers a historic opportunity to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that must not be missed. Unlike any other time in the past, the two-state solution is now back at the front and center of any future Israeli and Palestinian discourse and is seen as the only viable option. It will take, though, new, courageous, and visionary leaders on both sides to seize this generational opportunity.

It will, of course, take some time before both sides act, but the time of reckoning has arrived.

*Dr. Alon Ben-Meir is a retired professor of international relations, most recently at the Center for Global Affairs at NYU. He taught courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies. [email protected]   Web: www.alonben-meir.com [IDN-InDepthNews]