"We just sat there watching our home being collapsed [by Israeli missiles]. All our memories are here, this is where our children grew up," says a Gaza woman after being bombed out of her home. Image: Quds News screenshot APR
The vast majority of the projectiles were intercepted by Israel’s air defence system, with assistance from the ever-helpful United States military, and damage was minimal.
Having completed its retaliation, Iran then declared that the matter could “be deemed concluded” — although Israel is not usually one to let anyone else have the last word.
Indeed, on April 19, explosions echoed over the central Iranian city of Isfahan in what sources claimed to be an Israeli attack, but Tehran played down the incident, saying three “quadcopters” had been shot down and there were no casualties or damage.
Later that night one person was killed and at least eight injured after a blast at Kalso military base in Iraq about 50 km south of the capital Baghdad which had been deployed by the Iran-aligned Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF).
Neither the Israelis or the United States admitted any involvement in either incident.
Western barrage of criticism
In the meantime, a barrage of criticism over Tehran’s “aggression” has continued unabated in the West.
“We just sat there watching our home being collapsed [by Israeli missiles]. All our memories are here, this is where our children grew up,” says a Gaza woman after being bombed out of her home. Image: @Mohammedasad.84/Quds News screenshot APRBritish Prime Minister Rishi Sunak condemned “in the strongest terms the Iranian regime’s reckless attack against Israel”, which he insisted had once again shown that Iran was “intent on sowing chaos in its own backyard”.
The Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs lamented that “Iran’s long term aggressive behavior is preventing the Middle East region to live in peace and security”.
For his part, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau whined about Iran’s “disregard for peace and stability in the region”, and regurgitated that old, tired slogan about “Israel’s right to defend itself”.
Germany’s Ambassador to Israel Steffen Seibert took to social media to proclaim German solidarity “with all Israelis tonight whom Iran is terrorising with this unprecedented and ruthless attack”.
Lastly, US President Joe Biden, who was forced to cut his beach weekend short due to the developments, announced: “Our commitment to Israel’s security against threats from Iran and its proxies is ironclad.”
The Iranian attack, mind you, occurred a little over six months into Israel’s ongoing pulverisation of the Gaza Strip, which has killed nearly 34,000 Palestinians, including some 13,800 children.
Terrifying numbers
And yet, given the thousands of missing persons presumed to be buried under the rubble, even these terrifying numbers are no doubt grave underestimates.
More than 76,000 people have been wounded, as the Israeli military has busied itself flattening entire neighbourhoods and blowing up schools, hospitals, and other basic infrastructure, all the while condemning the territory’s inhabitants to famine and starvation.
Talk about “terrorising”.
Indeed, genocide is nothing if not “long term aggressive behaviour” — to borrow the Czech Foreign Ministry’s words. If the whole business weren’t so unprecedently heinous, it would be almost laughable to claim that Iran is the one “intent on sowing chaos” and disregarding “peace and stability in the region”.
But because Israel’s outsize role as a prized US partner in crime entitles it to a total subversion of logic, genocidaires become victims and unmitigated Israeli aggression becomes “self-defence”.
And never mind the April 1 Israeli attack on the Iranian consulate in Damascus; that was just preemptive retaliation, right?
In light of the unceasing slaughter in Gaza, though, the Western response to the intercepted Iranian missiles and drones is sickeningly cynical. Sunak’s pathetic claim that “no one wants to see more bloodshed” fails to account for the reality that, as long as it’s Palestinian blood, it’s all totally fine.
Shifting focus from Gaza
Unfortunately, the Iranian spectacle may have provided the Biden administration with exactly what it needed to shift the focus away from Gaza — and specifically US complicity in genocide. After all, it would be a sad day for the arms industry if the US had to stop sending so many weapons to such an active client.
According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, the US was responsible for a full 69 percent of arms imports by the Israeli military between 2019 and 2023, when the all-out genocide kicked off.
So much for “peace and stability”.
But one should never underestimate the imperial utility of the good old Iranian menace in justifying whatever US policy needs justifying. Recall Tehran’s inclusion on the original “axis of evil” shortlist, courtesy of former US President George W Bush, who in his 2002 State of the Union address denounced Iran for “aggressively” pursuing weapons of mass destruction and “export[ing] terror”.
Armed with said “axis”, the US proceeded to engage in nothing less than mass destruction and terror throughout the Middle East and beyond.
Fast-forward 22 years to the present era of destruction, and the Iranian bogeyman is as handy as ever. Following the April 13 attack, perhaps everyone’s favourite refrain “But do you condemn Hamas?” can be updated to: “But do you condemn Iran?”
As for things genuinely worthy of condemnation, these continue to include, well, genocide in Gaza — not to mention the brazenly hypocritical Western insistence on Israel’s “right to self-defence”, which ultimately amounts to genocidal apologetics.
And as leaders continue to trip over themselves in affirmation of solidarity with Israel after this “unprecedented attack”, we’d all do well to remember that you reap what you sow — and that Iran is not the aggressor here.
Belén Fernández is the author of Inside Siglo XXI: Locked Up in Mexico’s Largest Immigration Center (OR Books, 2022), Checkpoint Zipolite: Quarantine in a Small Place (OR Books, 2021), Exile: Rejecting America and Finding the World (OR Books, 2019), and other books. She is a columnist for Al Jazeera, contributing editor at Jacobin Magazine, and has written for The New York Times, Middle East Eye, among numerous other publications.
These days, New Zealand's Foreign Minister Winston Peters can be relied on to echo Washington’s message lines with dogged fidelity. Image: www.scoop.co.nz
COMMENTARY: By Gordon Campbell
Good grief, Winston Peters. Tens of thousands of Gazans have been slaughtered, two million are on the brink of starvation and what does New Zealand’s Foreign Minister choose to talk about at the UN?
The 75-year-old issue of whether the five permanent members should continue to have veto powers over Security Council decisions.
Predictably, the NZ media has swooned at the prospect of New Zealand being invited to join the discussions on Security Council reform, whenever they happen, and whatever they involve. Typically, Peters has declined to say what he thinks significant UN reform should entail.
READ MORE: Israeli forces continue Nur Shams refugee camp raid, teen among 5 killed
In February, Ireland had already said everything about the UN that Peters said this week, but had gone much further. Ireland called for scrapping the Security Council veto altogether, and pointedly pledged $21.6 million to the relief agency UNRWA, at a time when most Western nations were cutting off, or suspending, their funding.
So far, the West has found it far easier to cut off the aid lifeline on which the Palestinians depend, than to cut off the supply of weapons that the IDF is using to kill them.
These days, Winston Peters can be relied on to echo Washington’s message lines with dogged fidelity. In his State of the Union speech last month for example, US President Joe Biden claimed that “the only real solution is the two state solution.”
Last week, Peters faithfully echoed that sentiment by repeating “The two state solution ….remains the only blueprint for peace that we have.”
For months, the US had used its veto to obstruct Security Council resolutions calling for an “immediate ceasefire” in Gaza, and the NZ government has politely refrained from criticising the US for doing so. And refrained from denouncing Israel’s blood-soaked violations of international law.
The miracle of our independent foreign policy these days is that it freely always finds itself in step with the US/UK consensus. Here are some of the gaps between what Peters told the UN, and reality.
Peters: “New Zealand welcomed Resolution 2728, which demanded an immediate ceasefire for the month of Ramadan, leading to a lasting sustainable ceasefire. We call on all parties to this conflict to comply with Resolution 2728 without delay.” Like Biden, Peters urged Israel not to conduct a military offensive in Rafah, the last Palestinian place of refuge.
Reality: Israel ignored Resolution 2728, and says it is putting the final touches to its military offensive against Rafah, the last Palestinian refuge.
Peters: “Building and expanding illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied territories and the forcible displacement of Palestinians from Gaza imperil the two-state solution, which remains the only blueprint for peace that we have.
Reality: For the past 30 years, Israel has been building illegal settlements on the land ear-marked by the Oslo Peace Accords for a Palestinian state. Since the start of 2023, the Israeli government has overseen a sharp escalation of settler violence on the West Bank that is forcibly displacing more and more Palestinians from their land.
Meanwhile, Israel is still penning Palestinian families behind 9 metre high concrete walls, in an ever-shrinking, disconnected series of Bantustans. For good measure in January, Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu had rejected the “two state solution” proposal.
Regardless, the Peters’ platitudes kept on coming:
Peters : “Palestinians should not have to pay the price of defeating Hamas.”
Reality: At least 33,000 Palestinians including some 13,000 children have alreadypaid the ultimate price for “defeating” Hamas. This is not counting those buried under the rubble of their homes. Two million Palestinians have been displaced, and — after being denied water, food, and adequate medical care — hundreds of thousands of them are on the brink of death by starvation. An estimated 122,000 Palestinian homes in Gaza have been totally destroyed.
Almost all of Gaza’s physical infrastructure — water, energy, roading, housing, hospitals, schools, mosques etc — have been destroyed. And yet the West’s political figureheads continue to wag fingers at Israel and urge it to show more restraint.
Peters has been well-rewarded for the mouldy old puffballs he tossed into the General Assembly. TheNew Zealand Herald called his speech” hard hitting” and RNZ called his speech both “harsh” and “scathing.” Academics applauded the speech as timely — as if what starving Palestinians really need right now is a UN committee to begin debating what the ideal balance of power in the UN Security Council might look like.
Meanwhile, other countries — South Africa, Ireland, Spain and so help us, Nicaragua — continue to show moral leadership on the Gaza situation, in both word and deed.
What Peters could have said
For a thought experiment, lets consider what a genuinely hard hitting speech by Peters might have contained.
Instead of blaming the UN in general for failing to bring peace to the Middle East, Peters could have/should have criticised the United States in particular for its use of its veto power. The US has repeatedly used its veto to insulate Israel, and to frustrate repeated attempts by the Security Council to condemn Israel’s disproportionate and indiscriminate response, to call for an immediate ceasefire, and to mitigate the suffering.
Finally in late March, Resolution 2728 (calling for an immediate Gaza ceasefire) was passed, but only because the US abstained. White House spokesmen then immediately undercut the UN measure by stating that Resolution 2728 was “non-binding” on Israel.
In any case, Israel ignored Resolution 2728. Nary a peep from Peters about this sorry saga.
Weapons sales Peters could also/should also have called on both the UK and the US — for starters — to stop selling the weapons to Israel that make the carnage in Gaza possible. But he didn’t. Such a call would have been timely.
Only days beforehand, the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva had passed a resolution calling on countries to impose a ban on arms sales to Israel. Yet although Peters was speaking a few days later, he chose not to mention the HRC ban, let alone commend it. Did New Zealand support the HRC resolution, or not?
On the very same issue, Nicaragua has just presented its case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) that Germany’s arms sales to Israel are facilitating Israel’s genocidal actions in Gaza.
You’d think the word “genocide” might ring a few alarm bells in Germany, but evidently not. Germany is Israel’s second-largest arms provider after Washington, and sent $353.7 million in military equipment to Israel in 2023. Germany has defended its position.
Moving right along . . . Peters could also have used his UN pulpit to announce that New Zealand would be formally joining South Africa’s legal claim of genocide against Israel at the ICJ. Ireland has already done so.
What weight — if any — is New Zealand giving to the ICJ’s preliminary finding that there is a “plausible case” to answer that some of Israel’s actions in Gaza may violate the Genocide Convention? Hard to tell, because there was no mention of the ICJ case in the allegedly “hard hitting” speech Peters gave at the UN.
Two state solution = Tooth fairy solution Both Winston Peters and Prime Minister Christopher Luxon repeatedly state their support for the “ two state solution” — as if, in 2024, this call still has any substance, or any merit. As the Palestinian writer and political analyst Tareq Baconi recently wrote in the New York Times:
The language that surrounds a two-state solution has lost all meaning. Over the years, I’ve encountered many Western diplomats who privately roll their eyes at the prospect of two states — given Israel’s staunch opposition to it, the lack of interest in the West in exerting enough pressure on Israel to change its behaviour and Palestinian political ossification — even as their politicians repeat the phrase ad nauseam.
Yet in the shadow of what the International Court of Justice has said could plausibly be genocide, everyone has returned to the chorus line, stressing that the gravity of the situation means that this time will be different. It will not be.
The two state solution has been a dead duck for at least 25 years. To continue to call for it is rank bad faith. The two state solution vanished under the remorseless settler expansion, encouraged by successive Israeli governments. By choosing to keep on peddling this fantasy, Western leaders legitimise the violent occupation by making it seem transient, a mere period of turbulence before justice (somehow) prevails, and an era of peaceful co-existence (somehow) emerges from future negotiations conducted in a climate of mutual compromise. Dream on.
Before October 7, as Baconi says, Palestinian grievances (and the deaths of Palestinian children which through 2022 and into mid 2023 were running at record levels) were absolutely invisible on the world stage. It was only after Jewish people were killed on October 7 that the Gaza situation commanded media and political attention.
Since then, the international community has reverted to its deeply familiar call for a two state solution, under which Palestinians and Israelis co-exist in security and mutual prosperity, side by side. Baconi again:
Repeating the two-state solution mantra has allowed policymakers to avoid confronting the reality that partition is unattainable in the case of Israel and Palestine, and illegitimate as an arrangement originally imposed on Palestinians without their consent in 1947.
And fundamentally, the concept of the two-state solution has evolved to become a central pillar of sustaining Palestinian subjugation and Israeli impunity. The idea of two states as a pathway to justice has in and of itself normalized the daily violence meted out against Palestinians by Israel’s regime of apartheid.
If only Peters had chosen to address that reality . . . He didn’t, of course. Exactly 30 years ago the Rwanda genocide broke out — a catastrophe in which New Zealand played a positive role in spurring the UN and the wider international community into action. Evidently though, we’re a different country now.
Footnote One: Logically, any significant UN reform would require the US, Russia, China, France and Britain to all agree to weaken or surrender the veto power that each of them has in the Security Council. If Peters has any clues about how to convince those countries to do so, he should put those ideas on the table. The world would be all ears.
Instead, Peters has called for UN reform without offering any inkling of what he thinks that should entail. But lets take him at face value. Does he want the UN General Assembly to be able to over-ride the veto power held by any and all of the five permanent members of the Security Council?
Does he really think the US — which bankrolls so much of the UN activities — will voluntarily give away, or weaken its veto? A newly elected President Donald Trump is likely to say that only the US has bought itself the right to have a veto.
Also: does Peters still think that a relatively minor power like Britain should be allowed to keep its SC veto power? Arguably, India, Germany, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Brazil, the UAE, South Africa and Indonesia all have as great a claim (or better) than Britain to permanent Security Council membership. Why should Britain still enjoy a Security Council veto?
Does Peters think Britain still should, and if so, why? Since Peters says he wants to open the box of UN reform, he needs to be telling us what he thinks should be inside it.
Footnote Two : As mentioned above, the International Court of Justice has found (with respect to the South Africa allegations) that there is a “plausible case” to answer that some of Israel’s actions in Gaza may have been in violation of the Genocide Convention. A final verdict is still years away. No doubt, Israel will continue to ignore any ICJ findings critical of its actions. The moral weight of the process though, is significant.
Footnote Three: Interesting comments have been made in the course of Nicaragua’s ICJ case against Germany. “There can be no question that Germany . . . was well aware, and is well aware, of at least the serious risk of genocide being committed” in Gaza, according to Carlos José Argüello Gómez, Nicaragua’s representative at the ICJ.
Moreover: “It is indeed a pathetic excuse to the Palestinian children, women, and men in Gaza to provide humanitarian aid, including through air drops on the one hand, and to furnish the weapons and military equipment that are used to kill and annihilate them,” Nicaraguan lawyer Daniel Müller told the ICJ.
Because Nicaragua has lodged its ICJ case under emergency provisions, the court’s initial ruling may be only a week or two away.
Footnote Four: South Africa also petitioned the ICJ to address Gaza’s ongoing hunger crisis; the court ordered Israel to permit the delivery of basic food and water supplies “without delay”. In February, the ICJ accepted a long-planned case by the UN General Assembly to discuss the legality of Israel’s occupation of Gaza and the West Bank. International law is moving against Israel’s actions.
New Zealand has virtually ignored all of these ICJ proceedings. Oh, we talk about our support for the international rule of law, and about how important this system is to a small country like ours. But we no longer back up this rhetoric with meaningful action.
Right now, other small countries (Ireland, Spain and South Africa in particular) are actually walking the talk, while we sit nervously on the sidelines waiting to see which way the diplomatic wind is blowing.
Footnote Five: Interesting that British Foreign Minister David Cameron met this week with Donald Trump, and that Peters — as a lesser figure — is meeting with a Trump official in Washington. Having opened the door to New Zealand engagement with candidate Trump, Peters needs to be asked — what impact does he think that a re-elected President Trump would have on the AUKUS pact, and on America’s level of engagement with the Pacific?
Gordon Campbell is an independent progressive journalist and editor of Scoop’s Werewolf magazine. This article has been republished with the author’s permission.
Three Palestinian solidarity groups have joined the humanitarian aid charity Kia Ora Gaza in calling on New Zealand’s Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Foreign Minister Winston Peters to demand that Israeli authorities “end their inhumane blockade” of Gaza and allow the international Freedom Flotilla “safe and unhindered passage”.
A team of three doctors has been selected to join the flotilla to provide humanitarian medical aid when it sails soon to the besieged Gaza Strip.
They will be joined by hundreds of prominent civilians, human rights advocates and medics from around the world, plus international media people.
The three New Zealand doctors off to Gaza . . . Dr Faiez Idais (from left), Dr Adnan Ali (leader) and Gaza-born Dr Wasfi Shahin (seated). Image: Kia Ora Gaza
The volunteer doctors are Dr Wasfy Shahin and Dr Faiez Idais to be led by Dr Adnan Ali.
An open letter, signed by Kia Ora Gaza’s Roger Fowler; John Minto, national chair of the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA); Janfrie Wakim, spokesperson of the Palestine Human Rights Campaign (PHRC); and Maher Nazzal, co-founder of Palestinians in Aotearoa Co-ordinating Committee (PACC), has also called for permanent ceasefire.
The open letter stated:
Dear [Foreign Minister Winston Peters] and Prime Minister Christopher Luxon,
We call on the NZ government to demand the Israeli authorities end their inhumane blockade and siege and allow the international Freedom Flotilla safe and unhindered passage to their destination — Gaza
We are pleased to announce that a team of three New Zealand doctors have been selected to join the international Freedom Flotilla which is due to sail for Gaza very soon.
Our Kiwi team of volunteer doctors are Dr Wasfy Shahin and Dr Faiez Idais to be led by Dr Adnan Ali.
They will be joined by hundreds of prominent civilians, human rights advocates and medics from around the world, plus international media personnel on this peaceful non-governmental, civil-society mission to challenge the illegal and inhumane 17-year Israeli naval blockade and siege of Gaza and to deliver urgently needed humanitarian and medical aid and services.
The team of Kiwi doctors are ready to join the Freedom Flotilla to bring humanitarian and medical aid to Gaza.
Our NZ medical team’s participation in this important humanitarian mission has been facilitated by Kia Ora Gaza and supported by many hundreds of fellow New Zealanders. We expect our government to resolutely uphold their safety and wellbeing.
This mission seeks to bring a message of hope and solidarity with the Palestinian struggle for peace and justice and to highlight demands to end Israel’s illegal siege and deprivation of Gaza, the bombing, and the occupation.
As with previous international humanitarian flotillas to Gaza, the current mission poses no threat whatsoever to Israel.
However, in light of the urgent need for aid, Israel’s non-compliance of ICJ orders, and their illegal interception and seizure of previous Gaza-bound boats in international waters, we call on the NZ government to urgently demand the Israeli (and US) authorities lift the siege, implement a permanent ceasefire and allow the Freedom Flotilla safe and unhindered passage to reach their destination and deliver humanitarian and medical aid.
Yours sincerely,
Roger Fowler QSM Chair, Kia Ora Gaza
John Minto National Chair Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa
Janfrie Wakim Spokesperson Palestine Human Rights Campaign
Maher Nazzal Co-founder
Palestinians in Aotearoa Co-ordinating Committee (PACC)
A pro-independence activist in New Caledonia is warning France to immediately halt its planned constitution amendments or face “war”.
The call for a u-turn follows proposed constitutional changes to voting rights which could push the number of eligible anti-independence voters up.
Pacific Independence Movement (le Mouvement des Océaniens indépendantistes) spokesperson Arnaud Chollet-Léakava was one of the thousands who took to the streets in Nouméa in protest last Saturday.
A dog wearing a Kanak flag at the pro-independence rally last Saturday. Image: RNZ Pacific/Lydia Lewis
She feared the indigenous people of New Caledonia — the Kanak people — would lose in their fight for independence:
“They want to make us a minority . . . it will make us a minority!
“The law will make the Kanaky people a minority because it will open the electoral body to other people who are not Kanaky and who will give their opinion on the accession of Caledonia to full sovereignty,” Ponija said.
Security was high last weekened with more than 100 additional security forces sent from France for the protest and counter-protest. Image: RNZ Pacific/Lydia Lewis
‘Heading towards a civil war’ A French man who has lived in New Caledonia for two decades said independence or not, he just wanted peace.
The man — who wanted to remain anonymous out of fear of retribution — said he moved to New Caledonia knowing he would be living on colonised land.
Having experienced violence in 2019, the man begged both sides to be amicable.
“[It’s] very complicated and very serious because if the law is not withdrawn and passed. We are clearly heading towards a civil war,” he said.
“We hope for peace and we hope that we find a common agreement for both parties.
“People want peace and we don’t want to move towards war.”
The constitutional bill was endorsed by the French Senate on April 2.
The next stage is for the bill to be debated, which has been set down for May 13.
Then both the Senate and the National Assembly will gather in June to give the final stamp of approval.
This would allow any citizen who has lived in New Caledonia for at least 10 years to cast their vote at local elections.
The Kanaky New Caledonia pro-independence rally last Saturday. Image: RNZ Pacific/Lydia Lewis
Lydia Lewis is a RNZ Pacific journalist. This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ and Asia Pacific Report.
"Netanyahu stands a lot to gain personally from drawing the US into a war with Iran to help him with his legal and political troubles and take the focus off of Israel’s genocide in Gaza." Graphic: https://caitlinjohnstone.com.au/
COMMENTARY: By Caitlin Johnstone
Iran has carried out its long-promised retaliation for Israel’s attack on its consulate building in Damascus, launching a massive barrage of drones and missiles which it claims hit and destroyed Israeli military targets, while Israel says they dealt only superficial damage with a few injuries.
The US and its allies reportedly helped shoot down a number of the Iranian projectiles.
Just as we discussed in the lead-up to the strike, the Western political-media class are acting as though this was a completely unprovoked attack launched against the innocent, Bambi-eyed victim Israel.
Comments from Western officials and pundits and headlines from the mass media are omitting the fact that Israel instigated these hostilities with its extreme act of aggression in Syria as much as possible.
Here in Australia The Sydney Morning Herald write-up about the strike didn’t get around to informing its readers about the attack on the Iranian consulate until the tenth paragraph of the article, and said only that Iran had “accused” Israel of launching the attack because Israel has never officially confirmed it.
In any case, Iran says the attack is now over. Given that we’re not seeing any signs of massive damage, Iran’s reported claim that its retaliation would be calibrated to avoid escalation into a full-scale regional war seems to have been accurate, as does Washington’s reported claim that it didn’t expect the strike to be large enough to draw the US into war.
A new report from Axios says Biden has personally told Netanyahu that the US will not be supporting any Israeli military response to the Iranian strike. An anonymous senior White House official told Axios that Biden said to Netanyahu, “You got a win. Take the win,” in reference to the number of Iranian weapons that were taken out of the sky by the international coalition in Israel’s defence.
Mitigation is all
Apparently helping to mitigate the damage from the Iranian attack is all the military commitment the White House is willing to make against Iran at this time.
And thank all that is holy for that. A war between the US alliance and Iran and its allies would be the stuff of nightmares, making the horrors we’ve been seeing in Gaza these last six months look like an episode of Peppa Pig.
But Washington merely declining to get involved is nowhere near enough. As the Quincy Institute’s Trita Parsi quipped on Twitter, “Biden needs to PREVENT further escalation, not just declare his desire to stay out of it.”
Indeed, Israel has already made it clear that it is going to be moving forward with an escalation against Iran. Israel’s Channel 12 cites an unnamed senior official saying the Iranian counterstrike is going to receive an “unprecedented response”.
“Israel has already informed the Americans and governments in the region that its response is inevitable,” The Economistreports. “Its military options include launching drones at Iran, and long-range airstrikes on Iran, possibly on military bases or nuclear installations.”
It’s unclear at this time how much the latest message from the Biden administration will affect the calculations of this position, but the mass media are reporting that White House officials are worried Israel is getting ready to do something extremely reckless that could draw the US into a war it would rather avoid.
“Some top US officials are concerned Israel could do something quickly in response to Iran’s attacks without thinking through potential fallout afterward, according to a senior administration official and a senior defense official.
“Those concerns stem in part from the administration’s views of the approach Israel has taken to its war against Hamas, as well as the attack in Damascus.
“President Joe Biden has privately expressed concern that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is trying to drag the US more deeply into a broader conflict, according to three people familiar with his comments.”
Netanyahu’s gain
People have been raising this concern for some time now. Earlier this month Responsible Statecraft’s Paul Pillar wrote up a solid argument that Netanyahu stands a lot to gain personally from drawing the US into a war with Iran to help him with his legal and political troubles and take the focus off of Israel’s genocide in Gaza.
Anyone Who Wants The US To Attack Iran Is An Enemy Of Humanity
“People who want to unleash a war of that scale upon our species should be rejected from our society as aggressively as child molesters and Nazis.”https://t.co/FALWSS39Ir
Whether that’s the case or not it’s pretty absurd for the Biden administration to just sit around passively hoping this doesn’t happen as though it wouldn’t have a say in the matter, and as though there’s nothing it can do to prevent such an occurrence right now.
Biden has had the ability to end this insane cycle of escalation in the Middle East since it started six months ago by demanding a ceasefire in Gaza and demanding that Israel rein in its murder machine, just as US presidents have done successfully in the past.
Biden could end all this with one phone call. The fact that he doesn’t means he’s a monster, and no amount of mass media reports about how “concerned” and “frustrated” he is regarding Israel’s actions will ever change that.
"What’s happening [in Gaza] really could not be more obvious. A nuclear-armed high tech military has been raining bombs and inflicting siege warfare upon a densely packed, walled-in civilian population, half of whom are children, with the full backing of the most powerful Empire that has ever existed." Image: https://caitlinjohnstone.com.au/
COMMENTARY:By Caitlin Johnstone
Gaza is simpler than Iraq. Iraq was simpler than Yemen. Yemen was simpler than Libya. Libya was simpler than Ukraine. Ukraine is simpler than Syria.
Gaza is the simplest and most straightforward of all the evil interventions of the US murder machine in recent memory — which is why I’ve got no patience for anyone who gets it wrong.
I’m a lot more forgiving of people who bought into the imperial narrative about Syria and believed that country erupted in violence because Assad just went ape shit and started killing innocent people for no reason, because it takes a lot of work to sort out fact from fiction about what actually happened there.
There were really good journalists who got Syria wrong at first in the early years of the conflict, just because there was so much information to comb through and so much aggressive imperial narrative management about it.
There was so much less visibility into the facts on the ground in Syria than there is in Gaza, and there were so many complex narrative control ops muddying the waters.
Gaza isn’t like that. What’s happening really could not be more obvious. A nuclear-armed high tech military has been raining bombs and inflicting siege warfare upon a densely packed, walled-in civilian population, half of whom are children, with the full backing of the most powerful Empire that has ever existed.
We’ve been seeing a constant stream of footage showing children ripped apart by military explosives and starved to skeletons, Israeli soldiers posting videos of themselves gleefully doing some of the most sadistic and depraved things you can imagine, destroyed hospitals, carpet-bombed neighbourhoods, and Israelis blocking aid trucks from feeding starving people.
This is not the slightest bit complicated. It’s as subtle as a kick in the teeth. There is no excuse for getting this one wrong now. There’s not even any excuse for getting it wrong on day one. It’s been obvious this entire time.
Any politician, pundit or journalist who’s gotten it wrong can be dismissed as completely worthless, even if they’re beginning to come around now after they sensed the wind blowing against Israel in recent weeks.
Gaza is a test of the absolute bare minimum requirements for someone to be worth listening to about anything at all, because if you got this one wrong then there’s just something wrong with you as a human being.
Empire Managers Keep Acting Like Iran Is About To Attack Israel Without Provocation
You’re too screwed up and twisted inside to have a clear vision into anything that’s happening in the world. You’re not in touch with your own humanity enough to have any useful insight into humanity as a collective. You have wasted your time on this planet. You’ve managed to spend your entire life without learning any of the more meaningful lessons that can be learned here.
And there are plenty of people getting Gaza right who are buying into all kinds of other imperial propaganda spin about other international affairs and conflicts, which is to be expected — being able to understand the simplest possible foreign policy issue doesn’t mean you’ll be able to grasp the more complicated ones.
But every one of them stands head and shoulders above everyone who couldn’t see the destruction of Gaza for what it is. They might fail other tests, but at least they passed the first one.
Everything I’m saying here will all be completely obvious to everyone one day. People will look back on what was done to Gaza and struggle to comprehend how the world could have allowed such a thing when it was all happening right out in the open for everybody to see.
And if I’m still around I will struggle to explain it myself, because it baffles me here and now in the present moment. It probably always will.
"Nameless, faceless Palestinians" . . . Israeli air strikes on Gaza killed renowned Palestinian writer, poet, and professor Refaat Alareer and six members of his family on 6 December 2003. In his writing, Alareer captured the stories of a resilient community and advocated for the rights of Palestinians. Image: Al Jazeera screenshot APR
This unpublished “heartfelt” letter sent to The Press this week criticising its April 6 editorial about a “turning point” in the deadly war on Gaza by Earthwise co-presenter Lois Griffiths of Christchurch is published here in the public interest.
Historian Howard Zinn stressed the importance of historical background if one wants to understand today’s world. The past cannot be changed. But learning about the past makes it easier to understand the present and how to strive for a better future.
Every Gaza war article, including the [6 April 2024] Press editorial “A turning Point in Gaza”, begins with Hamas attacking Israel last October and then Israel retaliating. No historical background is needed.
Yet UN Secretary-General António Guterres said that “October 07 did not happen in a vacuum”.
Maybe, just maybe, he reads history. Maybe he is thinking of the Nakba of 1948, the regular Israel bombing campaigns with names like “Operation Cast Lead”.
If Israel has the right to retaliate, maybe Palestinians do too?
The same Press article refers to “Western media and its consumers” not being able to identify with “faceless, nameless Palestinians” .
“Nameless, faceless Palestinians” . . . Israeli air strikes on Gaza killed renowned Palestinian writer, poet, and professor Refaat Alareer and six members of his family on 6 December 2003. In his writing, Alareer captured the stories of a resilient community and advocated for the rights of Palestinians. Image: Al Jazeera screenshot APR
Palestinians aren’t “faceless or nameless”. I’ve read about and seen pictures of some of the Palestinian journalists targeted. Refaat Alareer, a well-loved Gazan academic, writer, and story-teller, was targeted.
Our commitment to humanity challenges us to follow Howard Zinn’s advice and believe that another, kinder, world is possible.
Quoting Bethlehem Lutheran Pastor Munther Isaac, “Gaza today has become the moral compass of the world.”
Pro-independence protesters and a sea of "Kanaky" flags take over the Place des Cocotiers in the heart of the New Caledonian capital of Nouméa today. Image: @knky987
Security forces reinforcements were sent from France ahead of two rival marches in the capital Nouméa today, at the same time and only two streets away one from the other.
One march, called by Union Calédonienne party (a component of the pro-independence FLNKS umbrella) and its CCAT (field action group), was protesting against planned changes to the French Constitution to “unfreeze” New Caledonia’s electoral roll by allowing any citizen who has resided in New Caledonia for at least 10 years to cast their vote at local elections — for the three Provincial assemblies and the Congress.
The other march was called by pro-France parties Rassemblement and Les Loyalistes who support the change and intend to make their voices heard by French MPs.
The constitutional bill was endorsed by the French Senate on April 2.
However, as part of the required process before it is fully endorsed, the constitutional bill must follow the same process before France’s lower House, the National Assembly.
Debates are scheduled on May 13.
Then both the Senate and the National Assembly will be gathered sometime in June to give the final approval.
Making voices heard
Today, both marches also want to make their voices heard in an attempt to impress MPs before the Constitutional Bill goes further.
The pro-France march is scheduled to end at Rue de la Moselle in downtown Nouméa, two streets away from the other pro-independence march, which is planned to stop on the Place des Cocotiers (“Coconut square”).
The pro-independence rally in the heart of Nouméa today. Image: @knky987
At least 20,000 participants were estimated to take part.
Security forces reinforcements have been sent from France, with two additional squads (140) of gendarmes, French High Commissioner Louis Le Franc said yesterday.
While acknowledging the “right to demonstrate as a fundamental right”, Le Franc said it a statement it could only be exercised with “respect for public order and freedom of movement”.
“No outbreak will be tolerated” and if this was not to be the case, then “the reaction will be steadfast and those responsible will be arrested,” he warned.
Le Franc also strongly condemned recent “blockades and violence” and called for everyone’s “calm and responsibility” for a “Pacific dialogue in New Caledonia”.
CCAT spokesman Christian Téin, Arnaud Chollet-Leakava (MOI), Dominique Fochi (UC) and Sylvain Boiguivie (Dus) during a press conference on Thursday at the Union Calédonienne headquarters. Image: LNC
Tight security to avoid a clash New Caledonia’s Southern Province vice-president and member of the pro-France party Les Loyalistes, Philippe Blaise, told Radio Rythme Bleu he had been working with security forces to ensure the two opposing marches would not come close at any stage.
“It will not be a long march, because we are aware that there will be families and old people,” he said.
“But we are not disclosing the itinerary because we don’t want to give bad ideas to people who would like to come close to our march with banners and whatnot.
“There won’t be any speech either. But there will be an important security setup,” he reassured.
Earlier this week, security forces intervened to lift roadblocks set up by pro-independence militants near Nouméa, in the village of Saint-Louis, a historical pro-independence stronghold.
The clash involved about 50 security forces against militants.
Tear gas, and stones Teargas and stones were exchanged and firearm shots were also heard.
On March 28, the two opposing sides also held two marches in downtown Nouméa, with tens of thousands of participants.
No incident was reported.
The UC-revived CCAT (Field Actions Coordination Cell, cellule de coordination des actions de terrain), which is again organising today’s pro-independence march to oppose the French Constitutional change, earlier this month threatened to boycott this year’s planned provincial elections.
CCAT head Christian Tein said they were demanding that the French Constitutional amendment be withdrawn altogether, and that a “dialogue mission” be sent from Paris.
“We want to remind (France) we will be there, we’ll bother them until the end, peacefully”, he said.
“Those MPs have decided to kill the Kanak (Indigenous) people . . . this is a programmed extermination so that Kanaks become like (Australia’s) Aborigines,” he told local media.
“Anyone can cause unrest, but to stop it is another story . . . now we are on a slippery slope,” he added.
War of words, images over MPs Pro-France leader Sonia Backès, during a the March 28 demonstration, had also alluded to “causing unrest” from their side and its ability to “make noise” to ensure their voices are heard back in the French Parliament.
“The unrest, it will come from us if someone tries to step on us,” she lashed out at that rally.
“We have to make noise, because unfortunately, the key is the image,” she said.
“But this little message with the ballot box and Eloi Machoro’s picture, this is provocation.
“I am receiving death threats every day; my children too,” she told Radio Rythme Bleu.
The CCAT movement is placing a hatchet on a ballot box, recalling the Eloi Machoro protest. Image: 1ère TV screenshot APR
Hatchet and ballot box – the ghosts of 1984 During the CCAT’s press conference earlier this month, a ballot box with a hatchet embedded was on show, recalling the famous protest by pro-independence leader Eloi Machoro, who smashed a ballot box with a hatchet to signify the Kanak boycott of the elections on 18 November 1984.
The iconic act was one of the sparks that later plunged New Caledonia in a quasi civil war until the Matignon Accords in 1988. Both pro-France leader Jacques Lafleur and Lanak leader Jean-Marie Tjibaou shook hands to put an end to a stormy period since described as “the events”.
On 12 January 1985, Machoro was shot by French special forces.
The territorial elections day in New Caledonia on 18 November 1984 when Eloi Machoro smashed a ballot box in the small township of Canala. Image: RNZ/File
Patrick Decloitre is the RNZ Pacific correspondent French Pacific desk. This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ and Asia Pacific Report.
On Friday, March 22, a video circulated of TNI (Indonesian military) soldiers torturing a civilian in Papua. In the video, the victim is submerged in a drum filled with water with his hands tied behind his back.
The victim was alternately beaten and kicked by the TNI members. The victim’s back was also slashed with a knife.
The video circulated quickly globally and was widely criticised.
Gustav Kawer from the Papua Association of Human Rights Advocates (PAHAM) condemned the incident and called for the perpetrators to be brought to justice.
This was then followed by National Human Rights Commission (Komnas HAM), Indonesian Human Rights Watch (Imparsial), the Diocese, the church and students.
Meanwhile, Cenderawasih/XVII regional military commander (Pangdam) Major-General Izak Pangemanan tried to cover up the crime by saying it was a hoax and the video was a result of “editing”.
This argument was later refuted by the TNI itself and it was proven that TNI soldiers were the ones who had committed the crime. Thirteen soldiers were arrested and accused over the torture.
The torture occurred on 3 February 2024 in Puncak Regency, Papua.
Accused of being ‘spies’
The victim who was seen in the video was Defianus Kogoya, who had been arrested along with Warinus Murib and Alianus Murib. They were arrested and accused of being “spies” for the West Papua National Liberation Army-Free Papua Organisation (TPNPB-OPM), a cheap accusation which the TNI and police were subsequently unable to prove.
Indonesia human rights: 13 soldiers arrested after torture video. Video: Al Jazeera
The three were arrested when the TNI was conducting a search in Amukia and Gome district. When Warinus was arrested, his legs were tied to a car and he was dragged for one kilometre, before finally being tortured.
Alianus, meanwhile ,was also taken to a TNI post and tortured. After several hours, they were finally handed over to a police post because there was not enough evidence to prove the TNI’s accusations.
Defianus finally fainted, while Warinus died of his injuries. Warinus’ body was cremated by the family the next day on February 4.
Defianus is still suffering and remains seriously ill. This is a TNI crime in Papua.
But that is not all. On 22 February 2022, the TNI also tortured seven children in Sinak district, Puncak. The seven children were Deson Murib, Makilon Tabuni, Pingki Wanimbo, Waiten Murib, Aton Murib, Elison Murib and Murtal Kurua.
Makilon Tabuni died as a result.
Civilians murdered, mutilated
On August 22, the TNI murdered and mutilated four civilians in Timika. They were Arnold Lokbere, Irian Nirigi, Lemaniel Nirigi and Atis Tini.
The bodies of the four were dismembered: the head, body and legs were separated into several parts, put in sacks then thrown into a river.
Six days later, soldiers from the Infantry Raider Battalion 600/Modang tortured four civilians in Mappi regency, Papua. The four were Amsal P Yimsimem, Korbinus Yamin, Lodefius Tikamtahae and Saferius Yame.
They were tortured for three hours and suffered injuries all over their bodies.
Three days later, on August 30, the TNI again tortured two civilians named Bruno Amenim Kimko and Yohanis Kanggun in Edera district, Mappi regency. Bruno Amenim died while Yohanis Kanggun suffered serious injuries.
On October 27, three children under the age of 16 were tortured by the TNI in Keerom regency. They were Rahmat Paisel, Bastian Bate and Laurents Kaung. They were tortured using chains, coils of wire and water hoses.
The atrocity occurred in the Yamanai Village, Arso II, Arso district.
On 22 February 2023, TNI personnel from the Navy post in Lantamal X1 Ilwayap tortured two civilians named Albertus Kaize and Daniel Kaize. Albertus Kaize died of his injuries. This crime occurred in Merauke regency, Papua.
95 civilians tortured
Between 2018 and 2021, Amnesty International recorded that more than 95 civilians had been tortured and killed by the TNI and the police. These crimes target indigenous Papuans, and the curve continues to rise year by year, ever since Indonesia occupied Papua in 1961.
These crimes were committed one after another without a break, and followed the same pattern. So it can be concluded that these were not the acts of rogue individuals or one or two people as the TNI argues to reduce their crimes to individual acts.
Rather, they are structural (systematic) crimes designed to subdue the Papuan nation, to stop all forms of Papuan resistance for the sake of the exploitation and theft of Papua’s natural resources.
The problems in Papua cannot be solved by increasing the number of police or soldiers. The problems in Papua must be resolved democratically.
This democratic solution must include establishing a human rights court for all perpetrators of crimes in Papua since the 1960s, and not just the perpetrators in the field, but also those responsible in the chain of command.
Only this will break the pattern of crimes that are occurring and provide justice for the Papuan people. A human rights court will also mean weakening the anti-democratic forces that exist in Indonesia and Papua — namely military(ism).
Garbage of history
A prerequisite for achieving democratisation is to eliminate the old forces, the garbage of history.
The cleaner the process is carried out, the broader and deeper the democracy that can be achieved. This also includes the demands of the Papuan people to be given the right to determine their own destiny.
This is not a task for some later day, but is the task of the Papuan people today. Nor is the task of the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) political elite or political activists alone, but it is the task of all Papuan people if they want to extract themselves from the crimes of the TNI and police or Indonesian colonialism.
Independence can only be gained by the struggle of the ordinary people themselves. The people must fight, the people must take to the streets, the people must build their own ranks, their own alternative political tool, and fight in an organised and guided manner.
Sharon Muller is a leading member of Indonesia’s Socialist Union (Perserikatan Sosialis, PS) and a member of the Socialist Study Circle (Lingkar Studi Sosialis, LSS). Arah Juang is the newspaper of the Socialist Union. The English language version is republished from Asia Pacific Report.
References
Gemima Harvey’s report The Human Tragedy of West Papua, 15 January 2014. This reports states that more than 500,000 West Papua people have been slaughtered by Indonesia and its actors, the TNI and police since 1961.
Veronica Koman’s chronology of torture of civilians in Papua. Posted on the Veronica Koman Facebook wall, 24 March 2024.
Who would not condemn the Hamas attack of 7 October 2023 when hundreds of Israeli civilians, as well as hundreds of military and security personnel were killed? Why then is Hamas so popular among Palestinians and in the wider Muslim world?
March 2024 polling by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PCPSR) shows that 70 percent of Gazans continue to believe the October 7 attacks were justified. Support for Hamas remaining in control of Gaza has increased by 14 points.
In a two-way competition between Hamas’s Ismail Haniyeh and Fatah’s Mahmoud Abbas, the Hamas leader would garner 70 percent of the vote.
Ramallah-based political analyst Esmat Mansour told US news agency The Media Line that a lack of political horizons fed Palestinian sentiment.
“After three decades of no progress on the political front, like it or not, Hamas’ actions brought attention back to the Palestinian cause,” he said.
International lawyer John V Whitbeck has worked on Middle Eastern issues for decades, including previously advising Palestinian negotiating teams. He said in a recent newsletter:
“Demonising Hamas has, ever since the resistance group’s inception, been essential to delegitimising Palestinian resistance to perpetual occupation and oppression and, now, is essential to legitimising genocide in Western eyes.”
Prior to October 7, Hamas had, since emerging in the 1980s, only killed a few hundred Israelis. I am not disrespecting those lives, I am simply indicating the scale.
For those actions, Hamas people have been described as “monsters”, “ISIS”, “not human, savages”, “Nazis” . . . and a lurid parade of terms designed to dehumanise rather than contextualise.
US and Israeli propaganda added fiction to the unquestioned facts when they promoted the false and now discredited narratives that Hamas beheaded dozens of babies and committed systematic rape during the October 7 attacks. Al Jazeera’s excellent October 7 documentary administers a valuable truth serum.
Few in the West know that prior to October 7, 95 percent of the victims of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict were Palestinian. Ponder that lop-sided statistic: 95 percent of the victims are the indigenous people.
Why didn’t Hamas try peaceful tactics — like Mahatma Gandhi did? Again, I’m stunned at how few of the people I ask know anything substantive about the Palestinian embrace of the Oslo Accords, the desperation that led to the first and second Intifadas (civil uprisings) or the March of Return in 2018 and 2019.
The 1987 intifada had been “sparked off by the dreadful and inhumane conditions endured by the Palestinians for many years and the humiliation and degradation to which they had been subjected,“ Azzam Tamimi says in Hamas: A History from Within.
Hamas won elections across Palestine in 2006 — in both the West Bank and Gaza. Nobody questions the legitimacy of those elections.
Rather than accept the democratic mandate of the people, the US, Israel and Fatah (PLO) cooperated to subvert democracy. Fatah seized control in the West Bank and with Israeli-US help drove Hamas underground.
In Gaza, Hamas held on and remains the only legally-elected government.
In the 2018 Great March of Return, Gazans, in their tens of thousands, walked peacefully up to the barrier with Israel to demand a lifting of the brutal, suffocating siege imposed by Israel on Gaza and the right of return to the lands and homes that had been stolen from them by the Israelis.
“The Palestinians felt deserted and they needed to remind the world they were still there. They were still hoping to return to their homes,” says Tamimi.
Israeli forces lined up against the mums, dads, sisters, brothers, grandparents who marched, sang, waved banners, had picnics, and approached the security fence. Hundreds of people were gunned down, dozens of children killed, and thousands maimed for life.
Responding to the massacres, UN General Assembly Resolution ES-10/20 states that the UN:
“Deplores the use of any excessive, disproportionate and indiscriminate force by the Israeli forces against Palestinian civilians in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and particularly in the Gaza Strip, including the use of live ammunition against civilian protesters, including children, as well as medical personnel and journalists, and expresses its grave concern at the loss of innocent lives.”
“Non-violent resistance is based on the following premise: you’re never going to convince your enemy that what they are doing is wrong. They are too hardened in their beliefs, in their convictions, in their moral corruption or depravity. The whole point of non-violent resistance is to try to convince the passive bystanders to do something out of a sense of pity.”
He’s referring to us and our governments.
Finkelstein says the 1960s civil rights movement in the southern states of the USA was designed to trigger national outrage at the mistreatment of blacks.
“If the Federal troops hadn’t been sent in, at some point, people would have concluded — like the people concluded in Gaza — that non-violence doesn’t work and they would have chosen more violent, militant tactics. What happened with the Great March of Return [in Gaza] is it failed to move the international community . . . which was totally unresponsive.
“They stayed non-violent in the face of the targeting of children, medics, journalists, the disabled — and the disabling of thousands of young people for life. It wasn’t their failure. It was our failure.”
What a thought! By our failure to respond to the persecution of the Palestinians we helped create the conditions for October 7. It begs the question: what is so wrong with our own culture that we can live in a world that tolerates genocide being committed by two of our closest allies and, rather than reflect on what it says about us, so many simply parrot the Israeli-Pentagon lines about Hamas.
Hamas leadership – and their military wing the al-Qassam Brigades — however, did take note.
“What was the response of the international community?” asks Dr Bassem Naim, in the outstanding Al Jazeera documentary October 7.
“Nothing. Keeping the ears and eyes always closed. Generally, there was a consensus in the political bureau: We have to move, we have to take action. If we don’t do it, Palestine will be forgotten — totally deleted from the international map.”
Benjamin Netanyahu had imagined just this when he presented a map of “A New Middle East” to the United Nations last year — Gaza and the West Bank had indeed been erased — incorporated into a Zionist state that ran from the river to the sea.
I rewound and listened to Dr Naim’s comments several times. They give a context — and a challenge to us in our cosy condemnation. Why did the massacre of people at the Israeli Nova music festival on October 7 trigger an explosion of anger across the white world, but shooting Palestinian men, women and children like ducks in a barrel produces only yawns and amnesia?
I’m not suggesting we should agree with everything Hamas has done — but if we are to achieve moral and intellectual integrity we should at least make a genuine effort to understand people in their own words and terms. I only recently read the Hamas Charter.
I was surprised when I found my local library had a copy of Dr Tamimi’s book. It is a compelling history of an organisation born in slavery, under brutal daily oppression. It captures the atmosphere of a resistance movement surviving constant assassinations, deportations, imprisonment and torture of its members — and the necessity to move much of the senior leadership outside Palestine to ensure their survival and the continuation of organised resistance.
Viewed through this lens, the term terrorist is problematic. It opens the question: who is the real terrorist — the militia group known to its own community as “the Resistance”, or the powerful state that immiserates the lives of millions, that kills tens of thousands with impunity and steals more land every day? Under international law an occupied people has the right to violent resistance if other ways have failed.
Can we think our way past the mental slavery imposed on us by the Western elites’ massive global PR machine that has invested billions in getting you to connote “Hamas” with “evil” — and the inverse: that Israel is somehow a plucky battler fighting for democracy in a rough neighbourhood?
Sheikh Ahmad Yassin, the first leader of Hamas, said some time before his assassination in 2004: “The intifada will go on and the suffering of the Palestinian people will continue. But so will our absolute determination to pursue the struggle.”
It is time to de-demonise Hamas.
Eugene Doyle is a community organiser and activist in Wellington, New Zealand. He received an Absolutely Positively Wellingtonian award in 2023 for community service. His first demonstration was at the age of 12 against the Vietnam War. This article was first published at John Menadue’s public policy journal Pearls and Irritations and is republished here with permission.
!["We just sat there watching our home being collapsed [by Israeli missiles]."](https://davidrobie.nz/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Gaza-woman-laments-her-bombed-home-1.png)
