The Aotearoa New Zealand union representing many of NZME’s journalists says it is “deeply worried” by a billionaire’s plans to take over its board.
Auckland-based Canadian billionaire Jim Grenon is leading a move to dump the board of media company NZME, owners of TheNew Zealand Herald and NewsTalk ZB.
He has told the company’s board he wants to remove most of the current directors, replace them with himself and three others, and choose one existing director to stay on.
He took a nearly 10 percent stake in the business earlier in the week.
Michael Wood, negotiation specialist at E tū, the union that represents NZME’s journalists, said he had grave concerns.
“We see a pattern that has been incredibly unhealthy in other countries, of billionaire oligarchs moving into media ownership roles to be able to promote their own particular view of the word,” he said.
“Secondly, we have a situation here where when Mr Grenon purchased holdings in NZME he was at pains to make it sound like an innocent manoeuvre with no broader agenda . . . within a few days he is aggressively pursuing board positions.”
What unsaid agendas? Wood said Grenon had a track record of trying to influence media discourse in New Zealand.
“We are deeply concerned about this, about what unsaid agendas lie behind a billionaire oligarch trying to take ownership of one of our biggest media companies.”
Canadian billionaire James Grenon . . . track record of trying to influence media discourse in New Zealand. Image: TOM Capital Management/RNZ
“We are deeply concerned about this, about what unsaid agendas lie behind a billionaire oligarch trying to take ownership of one of our biggest media companies.”
He said it would be important for New Zealand not to follow the example of the US, where media outlets had become “the mouthpiece for the rich and powerful”.
E tū would consult its national delegate committee of journalists, he said.
Grenon has been linked with alternative news sites, including The Centrist, serving as the company’s director up to August 2023.
The Centrist claims to present under-served perspectives and reason-based analysis, “even if it might be too hot for the mainstream media to handle”.
Grenon has been approached for comment by RNZ.
Preoccupations with trans rights, treaty issues Duncan Greive, founder of The Spinoff and media commentator, said he was a reader of Grenon’s site The Centrist.
“The main thing we know about him is that publication,” Greive said.
“It’s largely news aggregation but it has very specific preoccupations around trans rights, treaty issues and particularly vaccine injury and efficacy.
“A lot of the time it’s aggregating from mainstream news sites but there’s a definite feel that things are under-covered or under-emphasised at mainstream news organisations.
“If he is looking to gain greater control and exert influence on the publishing and editorial aspects of the business, you’ve got to think there is a belief that those things are under-covered and the editorial direction of TheHerald isn’t what he would like it to be.”
The Spinoff founder and media commentator Duncan Greive . . . Investors “would be excited about the sale of OneRoof”. Image: RNZ News
Greive said the move could be connected to the NZME announcement in its annual results that it was exploring options for the sale of its real estate platform OneRoof.
“There are a lot of investors who believe OneRoof is being held back by proximity to the ‘legacy media’ assets of NZME and if it could be pulled out of there the two businesses would be more valuable separate than together.
“If you look at the shareholder book of NZME, you don’t image a lot of these institutional investors who hold the bulk of the shares are going to be as excited about editorial direction and issues as Grenon would be . . . but they would be excited about the sale of OneRoof.”
Wanting the publishing side Greive said he could imagine a scenario where Grenon told shareholders he wanted the publishing side, at a reduced value, and the OneRoof business could be separated off.
“From a pure value realisation, maximisation of shareholder value point of view, that makes sense to me.”
Greive said attention would now go on the 37 percent of shareholders whom Grenon said had been consulted in confidence about his plans.
“It will become clear pretty quickly and they will be under pressure to say why they are involved in this and it will become clear pretty quickly whether my theory is correct.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
SPECIAL REPORT:By Markela Panegyres and Jonathan Strauss in Sydney
The new Universities Australia (UA) definition of antisemitism, endorsed last month for adoption by 39 Australian universities, is an ugly attempt to quash the pro-Palestine solidarity movement on campuses and to silence academics, university workers and students who critique Israel and Zionism.
While the Scott Morrison Coalition government first proposed tightening the definition, and a recent joint Labor-Coalition parliamentary committee recommended the same, it is yet another example of the Labor government’s overreach.
It seeks to mould discussion in universities to one that suits its pro-US and pro-Zionist imperialist agenda, while shielding Israel from accountability.
The UA definition comes in the context of a war against Palestinian activism on campuses.
The false claim that antisemitism is “rampant” across universities has been weaponised to subdue the Palestinian solidarity movement within higher education and, particularly, to snuff out any repeat of the student-led Gaza solidarity encampments, which sprung up on campuses across the country last year.
Some students and staff who have been protesting against the genocide since October 2023 have come under attack by university managements.
Some students have been threatened with suspension and many universities are giving themselves, through new policies, more powers to liaise with police and surveil students and staff.
Palestinian, Arab and Muslim academics, as well as other anti-racist scholars, have been silenced and disciplined, or face legal action on false counts of antisemitism, merely for criticising Israel’s genocidal war on Palestine.
Randa Abdel-Fattah, for example, has become the target of a Zionist smear campaign that has successfully managed to strip her of Australian Research Council funding.
Intensify repression The UA definition will further intensify the ongoing repression of people’s rights on campuses to discuss racism, apartheid and occupation in historic Palestine.
By its own admission, UA acknowledges that its definition is informed by the antisemitism taskforces at Columbia University, Stanford University, Harvard University and New York University, which have meted out draconian and violent repression of pro-Palestine activism.
It should be noted that the controversial IHRA definition has been opposed by the National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU) for its serious challenge to academic freedom.
As many leading academics and university workers, including Jewish academics, have repeatedly stressed, criticism of Israel and criticism of Zionism is not antisemitic.
UA’s definition is arguably more detrimental to freedom of speech and pro-Palestine activism and scholarship than the IHRA definition.
In the vague IHRA definition, a number of examples of antisemitism are given that conflate criticism of Israel with antisemitism, but not the main text itself.
By contrast, the new UA definition overtly equates criticism of Israel and Zionism with antisemitism and claims Zionist ideology is a component part of Jewish identity.
The definition states that “criticism of Israel can be anti-Semitic . . . when it calls for the elimination of the State of Israel”.
Dangerously, anyone advocating for a single bi-national democratic state in historic Palestine will be labelled antisemitic under this new definition.
Anyone who justifiably questions the right of the ethnonationalist, apartheid and genocidal state of Israel to exist will be accused of antisemitism.
Sweeping claims The UA definition also makes the sweeping claim that “for most, but not all Jewish Australians, Zionism is a core part of their Jewish identity”.
But, as the JCA points out, Zionism is a national political ideology and is not a core part of Jewish identity historically or today, since many Jews do not support Zionism. The JCA warns that the UA definition “risks fomenting harmful stereotypes that all Jewish people think in a certain way”.
Moreover, JCA said, Jewish identities are already “a rightly protected category under all racial discrimination laws, whereas political ideologies such as Zionism and support for Israel are not”.
Like other aspects of politics, political ideologies, such as Zionism, and political stances, such as support for Israel, should be able to be discussed critically.
According to the UA definition, criticism of Israel can be antisemitic “when it holds Jewish individuals or communities responsible for Israel’s actions”.
While it would be wrong for any individual or community, because they are Jewish, to be held responsible for Israel’s actions, it is a fact that the International Criminal Court (ICC) has issued arrest warrants for Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former minister Yoav Gallant for Israel’s war crimes and crimes against humanity.
But under the UA definition, since Netanyahu and Gallant are Jewish, would holding them responsible be considered antisemitic?
The implication of the definition for universities, which teach law and jurisprudence, is that international law should not be applied to the Israeli state, because it is antisemitic to do so.
The UA’s definition is vague enough to have a chilling effect on any academic who wants to teach about genocide, apartheid and settler-colonialism. It states that “criticism of Israel can be antisemitic when it is grounded in harmful tropes, stereotypes or assumptions”.
What these are is not defined.
Anti-racism challenge Within the academy, there is a strong tradition of anti-racism and decolonial scholarship, particularly the concept of settler colonialism, which, by definition, calls into question the very notion of “statehood”.
With this new definition of antisemitism, will academics be prevented from teaching students the works of Chelsea Watego, Patrick Wolfe or Edward Said?
The definition will have serious and damaging repercussions for decolonial scholars and severely impinges the rights of scholars, in particular First Nations scholars and students, to critique empire and colonisation.
UA is the “peak body” for higher education in Australia, and represents and lobbies for capitalist class interests in higher education.
It is therefore not surprising that it has developed this particular definition, given its strong bilateral relations with Israeli higher education, including signing a 2013 memorandum of understanding with Association of University Heads, Israel.
All university students and staff committed to anti-racism, academic freedom and freedom of speech should join the campaign against the UA definition.
Local NTEU branches and student groups are discussing and passing motions rejecting the new definition and NTEU for Palestine has called a National Day of Action for March 26 with that as one of its key demands.
We will not be silenced on Palestine.
Jonathan Strauss and Markela Panegyres are members of the National Tertiary Education Union and the Socialist Alliance. Republished from Green Left with permission.
The Marshall Islands marked 71 years since the most powerful nuclear weapons tests ever conducted were unleashed over the weekend.
The Micronesian nation experienced 67 known atmospheric nuclear tests between 1946 and 1958, resulting in an ongoing legacy of death, illness, and contamination.
The country’s President Hilda Heine says her people continue to face the impacts of US nuclear weapons testing seven decades after the last bomb was detonated.
The Pacific Islands have a complex history of nuclear weapons testing, but the impacts are very much a present-day challenge, Heine said at the Pacific Islands Forum leaders’ meeting in Tonga last year.
She said that the consequences of nuclear weapons testing “in our own home” are “expensive” and “cross-cutting”.
“When I was just a young girl, our islands were turned into a big laboratory to test the capabilities of weapons of mass destruction, biological warfare agents, and unexploded ordinance,” she said.
“The impacts are not just historical facts, but contemporary challenges,” she added, noting that “the health consequences for the Marshallese people are severe and persistent through generations.”
“We are now working to reshape the narrative from that of being victims to one of active agencies in helping to shape our own future and that of the world around us,” she told Pacific leaders, where the United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres was a special guest.
President Hilda Heine and UN Secretary-General António Guterres at the Pacific Islands Forum leaders meeting in Nuku’alofa, Tonga, in August 2024 Image: RNZ Pacific/Lydia Lewis
She said the displacement of communities from ancestral lands has resulted in grave cultural impacts, hindering traditional knowledge from being passed down to younger generations.
“As well as certain traditional practices, customs, ceremonies and even a navigational school once defining our very identity and become a distant memory, memorialised through chance and storytelling,” President Heine said.
“The environmental legacy is contamination and destruction: craters, radiation, toxic remnants, and a dome containing radioactive waste with a half-life of 24,000 years have rendered significant areas uninhabitable.
“Key ecosystems, once full of life and providing sustenance to our people, are now compromised.”
Heine said cancer and thyroid diseases were among a list of presumed radiation-induced medical conditions that were particularly prevalent in the Marshallese community.
Displacement, loss of land, and psychological trauma were also contributing factors to high rates of non-communicable diseases, she said.
Runit Dome, also known as “The Tomb”, in the Marshall Islands . . , controversial nuclear waste storage. Image: RNZ Pacific
“Despite these immense challenges, the Marshallese people have shown remarkable resilience and strength. Our journey has been one of survival, advocacy, and an unyielding pursuit of justice.
“We have fought tirelessly to have our voices heard on the international stage, seeking recognition.”
In 2017, the Marshall Islands government created the National Nuclear Commission to coordinate efforts to address testing impacts.
“We are a unique and important moral compass in the global movement for nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation,” Heine said.
Kurt Campbell at the Pacific Islands Forum . . . “I think we understand that that history carries a heavy burden.” Image: RNZ Pacific/Lydia Lewis
The US Deputy Secretary of State in the Biden-Harris administration Kurt Cambell said that Washington, over decades, had committed billions of dollars to the damage and the rebuilding of the Marshall Islands.
“I think we understand that that history carries a heavy burden, and we are doing what we can to support the people in the [Compact of Free Association] states, including the Marshall Islands,” he said.
“This is not a legacy that we seek to avoid. We have attempted to address it constructively with massive resources and a sustained commitment,” he told reporters in Nuku’alofa.
A shared nuclear legacy The National Nuclear Commission chairperson Ariana Tibon-Kilma, a direct descendant of survivors of the nuclear weapons testing programme Project 4.1 — which was the top-secret medical lab study on the effects of radiation on human bodies — told RNZ Pacific that what occured in Marshall Islands should not happen to any country.
“This programme was conducted without consent from any of the Marshallese people,” she said.
“For a number of years, they were studied and monitored, and sometimes even flown out to the US and displayed as a showcase.
“The history and trauma associated with what happened to my family, as well as many other families in the Marshall Islands, was barely spoken of.
“What happened to the Marshallese people is something that we would not wish upon any other Pacific island country or any other person in humanity.”
She said the nuclear legacy was a shared one.
“We all share one Pacific Ocean and what happened to the Marshall Islands, I am, sure resonates throughout the Pacific,” Tibon-Kilma said.
UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights for the Pacific head Heike Alefsen at the Pacific Islands Forum . . . “I think compensation for survivors is key.” Image: RNZ Pacific/Lydia Lewis
Billions in compensation The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights for the Pacific head, Heike Alefsen, told RNZ Pacific in Nuku’alofa that “we understand that there are communities that have been displaced for a long time to other islands”.
“I think compensation for survivors is key,” she said.
“It is part of a transitional justice approach. I can’t really speak to the breadth and the depth of the compensation that would need to be provided, but it is certainly an ongoing issue for discussion.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
It said the humanitarian catastrophe was continuing in Gaza and hampering journalists’ work on a daily basis.
The Israeli army had killed their colleagues and destroyed their homes and newsrooms, said RSF in a statement.
Gaza’s remaining journalists, who had survived 15 months of intensive bombardment, continued to face immense challenges despite the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas that came into effect on 19 January 2025 with the first stage expiring last weekend.
Humanitarian aid, filtered by the Israeli authorities, is merely trickling into the blockaded territory, and Israel continues to deny entry access to foreign journalists, forbidding independent outlets from covering the aftermath of the war and the ongoing humanitarian catastrophe.
Exiled Palestinian journalists are also prevented from returning to the Gaza Strip.
“We urgently call for the blockade that is suffocating the press in Gaza to be lifted,” said RSF editorial director Anne Bocandé.
“Reporters need multimedia and security equipment, internet and electricity.
“Foreign reporters need access to the territory, and exiled Palestinian journalists need to be able to return.
“While the ceasefire in Gaza has put an end to an unprecedented massacre of journalists, media infrastructure remains devastated.
“RSF continues to campaign for justice and provide all necessary support to these journalists, to defend a free, pluralist and independent press in Palestine.”
Reporters face the shock of a humanitarian catastrophe
Working amid the rubble
“The scale of the destruction is immense, terrifying,” said Islam al-Zaanoun of Palestine TV.
“Life seems to have disappeared. The streets have become open-air rubbish dumps. With no place to work, no internet or electricity, I was forced to stop working for several days.”
Journalists must also contend with a severe fuel shortage, making travel within the country difficult and expensive. Like the rest of Gaza’s population, reporters have to spend long hours in queues every day to obtain water and food.
Israeli fire despite the ceasefire
“Entire areas are unreachable,” Al Jazeera correspondent Hani al-Shaer told RSF.
“The situation remains dangerous. We came under Israeli fire in Rafah.”
The journalist explained that due to an unrelenting series of crises, he was forced to choose which stories he covered.
“The destroyed infrastructure? The humanitarian crisis? Abandoned orphans?” he wondered.
Witnesses and targets: the double trauma of reporters
With at least 180 media professionals killed by the Israeli army in the course of 15 months of war, including at least 42 killed on the job, according to RSF figures, surviving journalists must face their trauma while continuing their news mission.
Gaza media sources put the journalist death toll at more than 200.
“We covered this tragedy, but we were also part of it. Often, we were the target,” stressed Islam al-Zaanoun.
“We still can’t rest or sleep. We’re still terrified that the war will start again,” adds Hani al-Shaer.
The suspended lives of exiled journalists
From Egypt to Qatar, journalists who managed to escape the horror continue to live with the consequences, unable to return to their loved ones and homes.
“My greatest hope is to return home and see my loved ones again. But the border is closed and my house is destroyed, like those of most journalists,” lamented Ola al-Zaanoun, RSF Gaza correspondent, now based in Egypt.
The Gaza bureau chief of The New Arab, Diaa al-Kahlout is one of many who watched the Israeli Army destroy his house.
“When they arrested me, they bombed and set fire to my house and car. I’ve lost everything I’ve earned in my career as a journalist, and I’m starting all over again,” he told RSF.
A refugee in Doha, Qatar, he is still haunted by the abuse inflicted by Israeli forces during his month-long detention in December 2023, following his arbitrary arrest at his home in Beit Lahya, a city in the north of the Gaza Strip.
“No matter how many times I tell myself that I’m safe here, that I’m lucky enough to have my wife and children with me, I have trouble sleeping, working, making decisions,” confided the journalist, whose brother was killed in the war.
“I’m scared all the time,” he added.
Asia Pacific Media Network’s Pacific Media Watch project collaborates with Reporters Without Borders.
The Manurewa Local Board is developing its first Pan-Pacific strategy in Aotearoa New Zealand to amplify Pasifika voices in local decision-making.
A recent community workshop brought leaders and residents together to develop a strategy that will help guide how the board engages with Pasifika communities. The plan will then be presented in June.
Akerei Maresala-Thomson, an Auckland Council partner and facilitator of the workshop at Manurewa Library, described it as a listening session.
“A lot of work has gone into reaching this stage, with investment from both past and present board members. This will be the first Pasifika strategy for the board-a win for our community.”
The strategy aims to amplify Pacific voices in local decision-making, promote cultural recognition, improve access to services, and encourage Pasifika participation in governance.
Maresala-Thomson facilitated a similar workshop in 2019, laying the groundwork for this initiative.
The strategy, expected to be presented in June, will be informed by feedback from the workshop and an online community survey.
According to the 2023 Census, Pasifika make up nearly 40 percent of Manurewa’s approximately 39,450 residents. The consultation process involved gathering demographic information and identifying key priorities for the community.
“There was a diverse mix of expertise and perspectives in the room,” said Maresala-Thomson. “Some smaller Pasifika communities weren’t represented, and our youth were largely absent.
Notes from the workshop will help shape the final draft of the Pan-Pacific strategy, set for presentation in June. Image: LDR/Mary Afemata
“However, many contributed via the online survey, which helped guide our discussions.”
The local board wants a Pan-Pacific approach — not just input from the larger island groups but representation from all the diverse Pacific communities, he said.
“More often than not, and this is no fault of our own, our Samoan, Cook Island, and Tongan communities naturally make up the larger share of our population.
“But they wanted to make sure we also reached our smaller community groups, like our Niuean, Tuvaluan, Solomon Islands, and even Rotuman communities.”
The group received great representation from the Tuvaluan, Kiribati, Solomon Islands, and Niuean communities, in addition to the larger, traditional networks from Samoan and Tongan communities, he said.
‘Great networking opportunity’ One attendee, Kate*, who asked not to be identified, said she joined the workshop to understand how local boards align with Pasifika priorities.
“It was a great networking opportunity, but ultimately, I wanted to know how I can best support the community,” she said. “The issues raised today aren’t new. We’ve been talking about them for years.”
Kate believes many Pasifika families struggle to engage with local government because they don’t see the impact of their input.
“There’s access to these spaces, but people don’t know where to go or why it matters. We need better ways to bring the conversation into people’s homes,” she said.
Engaging Pasifika youth was another key discussion point.
“There are youth in different spaces, and we need to find the champions — whether through youth councils, community groups, or other networks-who can help share the message among their peers.”
Community educator Kathleen Guttenbeil-Vatuvei . . . “When you hear ‘strategy,’ you want to be involved in shaping solutions.” Image: Facebook/TP/LDR
Kathleen Guttenbeil-Vatuvei, a community educator and financial mentor at Vaiola Pacific Island Budgeting Service Trust, said she attended the event to ensure financial capability was part of the discussion.
“When you hear ‘strategy,’ you want to be involved in shaping solutions,” she said. “What is the local board going to do about these issues? Are they listening? How do we fit into this strategy, and do we have a voice?”
She stressed the importance of youth involvement.
“Youth should be equally represented. But sometimes, they feel intimidated around elders or community leaders. It’s important to create spaces where they feel comfortable contributing.”
Angela Dalton, Councillor for Manurewa-Papakura and former chair of the local board, received a message from Maresala-Thomson thanking her for initiating the strategy years ago.
“I always felt we weren’t turning words into tangible outcomes for Pasifika,” Dalton said.
“I was determined to build strong relationships to ensure we deliver projects that meet the needs of our growing Pasifika population.”
Auckland Council partner and facilitator Akerei Maresala-Thomson . . . facilitating a discussion on strengthening the relationship between the Manurewa Local Board and Pasifika communities. Image: LDR/Mary Afemata
Feedback will shape final draft Feedback will shape the final draft of the strategy. A subcommittee will refine the document before it is presented to the Manurewa Local Board.
The goal is to align its implementation with the 2025-2026 Local Board Plan, ensuring Pasifika priorities are embedded in decision-making.
A steering committee will oversee the project, ensuring it reflects the aspirations of Manurewa’s Pasifika communities and fosters meaningful engagement with local government.
Maresala-Thomson said: “What we get from today, from your feedback, which has been amazing, this will help to draft the strategic plan specifically for Pacific and Manurewa.”
Local Democracy Reporting (LDR) is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air. Asia Pacific Report is a community member of the LDR project.
The Green Party has called on Prime Minister Christopher Luxon to rule out Aotearoa New Zealand joining the AUKUS military technical pact in any capacity following the row over Ukraine in the White House over the weekend.
President Donald Trump’s “appalling treatment” of his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelenskyy was a “clear warning that we must avoid AUKUS at all costs”, said Green Party foreign affairs and Pacific issues spokesperson Teanau Tuiono.
“Aotearoa must stand on an independent and principled approach to foreign affairs and use that as a platform to promote peace.”
US President Donald Trump has paused all military aid for Ukraine after the “disastrous” Oval Office meeting with President Zelenskyy in another unpopular foreign affairs move that has been widely condemned by European leaders.
Oleksandr Merezhko, the chair of Ukraine’s Parliamentary Foreign Affairs Committee, declared that Trump appeared to be trying to push Kyiv to capitulate on Russia’s terms.
He was quoted as saying that the aid pause was worse than the 1938 Munich Agreement that allowed Nazi Germany to annex part of Czechoslovakia.
‘Danger of Trump leadership’ Tuiono, who is the Green Party’s first tagata moana MP, said: “What we saw in the White House at the weekend laid bare the volatility and danger of the Trump leadership — nothing good can come from deepening our links to this administration.
“Christopher Luxon should read the room and rule out joining any part of the AUKUS framework.”
Tuiono said New Zealand should steer clear of AUKUS regardless of who was in the White House “but Trump’s transactional and hyper-aggressive foreign policy makes the case to stay out stronger than ever”.
“Our country must not join a campaign that is escalating tensions in the Pacific and talking up the prospects of a war which the people of our region firmly oppose.
“Advocating for, and working towards, peaceful solutions to the world’s conflicts must be an absolute priority for our country,” Tuiono said.
Five Eyes network ‘out of control’ Meanwhile, in the 1News weekly television current affairs programme Q&A, former Prime Minister Helen Clark challenged New Zealand’s continued involvement in the Five Eyes intelligence network, describing it as “out of control”.
Her comments reflected growing concern by traditional allies and partners of the US over President Trump’s handling of long-standing relationships.
Clark said the Five Eyes had strayed beyond its original brief of being merely a coordinating group for intelligence agencies in the US, Canada, UK, Australia, and New Zealand.
“There’s been some talk in the media that Trump might want to evict Canada from it . . . Please could we follow?” she said.
“I mean, really, the problem with Five Eyes now has become a basis for policy positioning on all sorts of things.
“And to see it now as the basis for joint statements, finance minister meetings, this has got a bit out of control.”
AMY GOODMAN:And the Oscars were held Sunday evening. History was made in the best documentary category.
SAMUEL L. JACKSON: And the Oscar goes to ‘No Other Land’.
AMY GOODMAN:The Palestinian-Israeli film No Other Land won for best documentary. The film follows the struggles of Palestinians in the occupied West Bank community of Masafer Yatta to stay on their land amidst violent attacks by Israeli settlers aimed at expelling them. The film was made by a team of Palestinian-Israeli filmmakers, including the Palestinian journalist Basel Adra, who lives in Masafer Yatta, and the Israeli journalist Yuval Abraham.
Both filmmakers — Palestinian activist and journalist Basel Adra, who lives in Masafer Yatta, and Israeli journalist Yuval Abraham — spoke at the ceremony. Adra became the first Palestinian filmmaker to win an Oscar.
BASEL ADRA: Thank you to the Academy for the award. It’s such a big honor for the four of us and everybody who supported us for this documentary.
About two months ago, I became a father. And my hope to my daughter, that she will not have to live the same life I am living now, always fearing — always — always fearing settlers’ violence, home demolitions and forceful displacements that my community, Masafer Yatta, is living and facing every day under the Israeli occupation.
‘No Other Land’ reflects the harsh reality that we have been enduring for decades and still resist as we call on the world to take serious actions to stop the injustice and to stop the ethnic cleansing of Palestinian people.
YUVAL ABRAHAM: We made this — we made this film, Palestinians and Israelis, because together our voices are stronger.
We see each other — the atrocious destruction of Gaza and its people, which must end; the Israeli hostages brutally taken in the crime of October 7th, which must be freed.
When I look at Basel, I see my brother. But we are unequal. We live in a regime where I am free under civilian law and Basel is under military laws that destroy his life and he cannot control.
There is a different path: a political solution without ethnic supremacy, with national rights for both of our people. And I have to say, as I am here: The foreign policy in this country is helping to block this path.
And, you know, why? Can’t you see that we are intertwined, that my people can be truly safe if Basel’s people are truly free and safe? There is another way.
It’s not too late for life, for the living. There is no other way. Thank you.
Israeli and Palestinian documentary ‘No Other Land’ wins Oscar. Video: Democracy Now!
“Israel is trying to weasel its way out of the agreement because it doesn’t want to negotiate stage two which requires it to withdraw its troops from Gaza,” said Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) co-national chair John Minto.
“Israel signed the ceasefire agreement and it must be forced to follow it through,” he said in a statement today.
“Cutting off humanitarian aid is a blatant war crime and New Zealand must say so without equivocation.
“Our government has been complicit with Israeli war crimes for the past 16 months and has previously refused to condemn Israel’s use of humanitarian aid as a weapon of war.
“It’s time we got off our knees and stood up for international law and United Nations resolutions.”
Violation of Geneva Conventions Meanwhile, a Democrat senator, Peter Welch (vermont), yesterday joined the global condemnation of the Israeli “weaponisation” of humanitarian aid.
In a brief post on X, responding to Israel blocking the entry of all goods and supplies into Gaza, Senator Peter Welch, a Democrat from Vermont, simply said:
In a brief message on X, Senator Welch said: “This is a violation of the Geneva Conventions.”
In a statement, Guterres said the world must end this terrible war and lay the foundations for lasting peace, “one that ensures security for Israel, dignity and self-determination for the Palestinian people, and stability for the entire region”.
This required a clear political framework for Gaza’s recovery and reconstruction, he said.
“It requires immediate and irreversible steps towards a two-State solution — with Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, unified under a legitimate Palestinian authority, accepted and supported by the Palestinian people.
“And it requires putting an end to occupation, settlement expansion and threats of annexation.”
French Minister for Overseas Manuel Valls left New Caledonia at the weekend after a one-week stay which was marked by the resumption of inclusive political talks on the French territory’s future.
He has now submitted a “synthetical” working document to be discussed further and promised he would return later this month.
He has confirmed France’s main pillars for its assistance to New Caledonia, nine months after deadly and destructive riots broke out, leaving 14 dead, several hundred businesses destroyed, and thousands of job losses for a total estimated damage of 2.2 billion euros (NZ$4 billion).
The French aid confirmed so far mainly consisted of a loan of up to 1 billion euros (NZ$1.8 billion) as well as grants to rebuild all damaged schools and some public buildings.
Valls also announced French funding to pay unemployment benefits (which were to expire at the end of this month) were now to be extended until the end of June.
However, the main feature of his stay, widely regarded as the major achievement, was to manage to gather all political tendencies (both pro-independence and those in favour of New Caledonia remaining a part of France) around the same table.
The initial talks were first held at New Caledonia’s Congress on February 24.
Two days later, talks resumed at the French High Commission between Wednesday and Friday last week, in the form of “tripartite” discussions between pro-France, pro-independence local parties and the French State.
As some, especially the pro-independence umbrella FLNKS (Kanak and Socialist National Liberation Front), insisted that those sessions were “discussions”, not “negotiations”, there was a general feeling that all participants now seemed to recognise the virtues of the exchanges and that they had at least managed to openly and frankly confront their respective views.
Valls, who shared a feeling of relative success in view of what he described as a sense of “historic responsibility” from political stakeholders, even extended his stay by 24 hours.
Speaking at the weekend, he said he had now left all parties with a document that was now supposed to synthesise all views expressed and the main items remaining to be further discussed.
New Caledonia’s parties begin talks at the French High Commission in Nouméa last Wednesday. Image: RNZ Pacific/RRB
‘A situation no longer sustainable’ “Political deadlocks, economic and social stagnation, violence, fear, and the lack of prospects for the territory’s inhabitants create a situation that is no longer sustainable. Everyone agrees on this observation,” the document states.
A cautiously hopeful Valls said views would continue to be exchanged, sometimes by video conference.
Taking part in the same visit last week was Eric Thiers, a special adviser to French Prime Minister François Bayrou.
Valls also stressed he would return to New Caledonia sometime later this month, maybe March 22-23, depending on how talks and remote exchanges were going to evolve.
In the meantime, the shared document would be subjected to many amendments and suggestions in order to take the shape of a fit-enough basis for a compromise acceptable by all.
The work-in-progress document details a wide range of subjects, such as self-determination, the relationship with France, the transfer of powers, who would be in charge of international relations, independence, a future system of governance (including the organisation of the three provinces), the electoral roll for local elections, the notion of citizenship (with a proposed system of “points-based” accession system), all these under the generic notion of “shared destiny”.
There was also a form of consensus on the fact that if a future text was to be submitted to popular approval by way of a referendum, it should not be based on a binary “yes” or “no” alternative, but on a comprehensive, wide-ranging “project”.
On each of those topics, the draft takes into account the different and sometimes opposing views expressed and enumerates a number of possible options and scenarios.
Based on this draft working document, the next round of talks would lead to a new agreement that is supposed to replace and offer a continuation to the ageing Nouméa Accord, signed in 1998 and install a new roadmap for New Caledonia’s future.
As part of discussions, another topic was the future of New Caledonia’s great council of chiefs, the Customary Senate, and possible changes from its until-now consultative status to a more executive role to turn New Caledonia’s legislative system from a Congress-only system to a bicameral one (Congress-Parliament and a chiefly Senate).
Struggling nickel mining industry The very sensitive question of New Caledonia’s nickel mining industry was also discussed, as the crucial industry, a very significant pillar of the economy, is undergoing its worst crisis.
Since August 2024, one of its three factories and smelters, Koniambo (KNS) in the north of the main island has been mothballed and is still up for sale after its majority stakeholder, Anglo-Swiss Glencore, decided to withdraw after more than a decade of losses (more than 13 billion euros — NZ$24 billion).
Another nickel-producing unit, in the South, Prony, is currently engaged in negotiations with potential investment companies, one South African, one from the United Arab Emirates and the other Indian.
New Caledonia’s historic nickel miner, Société le Nickel (SLN, a subsidiary of French giant Eramet), is still facing major hurdles to resume operations as it struggles to regain access to its mining sites.
The situation was compounded by a changing competition pattern on the world scale, New Caledonia’s production prices being too high and Indonesia now clearly emerging as a world leader, producing much cheaper first-class nickel and in greater quantities.
‘A new nickel strategy is needed’, Valls says While political parties involved in the talks (all parties represented at the Congress) remained tight-lipped and media-elusive throughout last week, they recognised a spirit of “constructive talks” with a shared goal of “listening to each other”.
However, the views remain radically opposed, even irreconcilable — pro-independence supporters’ most clear-cut position (notably that from the Union Calédonienne) consists of a demand for a quick, full independence, with a “Kanaky Accord” to be signed this year, to be followed by a five-year “transition” period.
On the pro-France side, one of the main bones of contention defended by the two main parties (Les Loyalistes and Rassemblement-LR) is to affirm that their determination to maintain New Caledonia as a part of France has been confirmed by three referenda (in 2018, 2020 and 2021) on self-determination.
Pro-independence parties argue, however, that the third and last referendum, in December 2021, was boycotted by the pro-independence movement and that it was not legitimate, even though it was ruled by the courts as valid.
They are also advocating for significant changes to be made in the way the three provinces are managed, a system described as “internal federalism” but decried by opponents as a form of separatism.
In the pro-France camp, the Calédonie Ensemble party holds relatively more open views.
In between are the more moderate pro-independence parties, PALIKA and UMP, which favour of a future status revolving around the notion of “independence in association with France”.
‘At least no one slammed the door’ “At least no one slammed the door and that, already, is a good thing,” said pro-France leader and French MP Nicolas Metzdorf.
“We’re still a long way away from a political compromise, but we have stopped moving further away from it,” he added, giving credit to Vall’s approach.
On his part, Valls stressed that he did not want to rush things in order to “maintain the thread” of talks, but that provincial elections were scheduled to take place no later than 30 October 2025.
“I don’t want to force things, I don’t want to break the thread . . . sometimes, we wanted to rush things, and that’s why it didn’t work,” he elaborated, in a direct reference to numerous and unsuccessful attempts by previous French governments, since 2022, to kick-start the comprehensive talks.
“Some work will be done by video conference. I will always take my responsibilities, because we have to move forward”, Valls told public broadcaster NC la 1ère.
He said France would then return with its proposals and offers.
“And we will take our responsibilities. The debate cannot last for months and months. We respect everyone, but we have to move forward. There is no deadline, but we all know that there are provincial elections.”
Those elections — initially scheduled in May 2024 and then in December 2024 — have already been postponed twice.
They are supposed to elect the members of New Caledonia’s three provinces (North, South and Loyalty Islands), which in turn makes up the territory’s Congress and the proportional makeup of the government and election of President.
All parties involved will now to consult with their respective supporters to get their go-ahead and a mandate to embark on full negotiations.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
The arrests, announced by Police Commissioner David Manning, follow a two-week investigation supported by forensic experts from the Australian Federal Police (AFP).
Margaret Gabriel, 32, was abducted from her home at Port Moresby’s Watermark Estate by more than 20 armed men. She was was later raped and murdered.
The attack sparked nationwide outrage, with calls for stronger protections for women and faster justice in gender-based violence cases.
Commissioner Manning confirmed the suspects were apprehended on February 27 and subjected to DNA and fingerprint testing.
“DNA evidence and fingerprints are conclusive forensic evidence and afford irrefutable evidence to ensure convictions in a court of law,” he said.
The nine men join three others already in custody, though police have not clarified their specific roles in the crime.
Forensic analysis AFP forensic specialists from Canberra assisted PNG’s Royal Papua New Guinea Constabulary (RPNGC) in analysing evidence.
Manning praised the collaboration, saying it underscored the integration of these advanced investigative techniques into PNG’s investigations is strengthening the cases put before the court.
Gender-based violence remains pervasive in PNG, with a 2023 UN report noting that more than two-thirds of women experience physical or sexual abuse in their lifetimes.
Limited forensic resources and slow judicial processes have historically hampered prosecutions.
Police increasingly rely on international partnerships, including a longstanding forensics programme with Australia, to address these gaps.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Protesters have scaled the building of an international weapons company in Rolleston, Christchurch, in resistance to it establishing a presence in Aotearoa New Zealand.
Two people from the group Peace Action Ōtautahi were on the roof of the NIOA building on Stoneleigh Drive, shown in a photo on social media, and banners were strung across the exterior.
Banners declared “No war profiteers in our city. NIOA supplies genocide” and “Shut NIOA down”.
In late December, the group hung a banner across the Bridge of Remembrance in a similar protest.
In 2023, the global munitions company acquired Barrett Firearms Manufacturing, an Australian-owned, US-based manufacturer of firearms and ammunition operating out of Tennessee.
According to the company’s website, its products are “used by civilian sport shooters, law enforcement agencies, the United States military and more than 80 State Department approved countries across the world”.
In a media release, Peace Action Ōtautahi said the aim was to highlight the alleged killing of innocent civilians with weapons supplied by NIOA.
NIOA has been approached for comment.
Police confirm action A police spokesperson said they were aware of the protest, and confirmed two people had climbed onto the roof, and others were surrounding the premises.
In a later statement, police said the people on the ground had moved. However, the two protesters remained on the roof.
“We are working to safely resolve the situation, and remove people from the roof,” they said.
“While we respect the right to lawful protest, our responsibility is to uphold the law and ensure the safety of those involved.”
Fire and Emergency staff were also on the scene, alongside the police Public Safety Unit and negotiation team.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
The Trump administration’s decision to eliminate more than 90 percent of the US Agency for International Development (USAID) funding means “nothing’s safe right now,” a regional political analyst says.
President Donald Trump’s government has said it is slashing about US$60 billion in overall US development and humanitarian assistance around the world to further its America First policy.
Last September, the former Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell said that Washington had “listened carefully” to Pacific Island nations and was making efforts to boost its diplomatic footprint in the region.
Campbell had announced that the US contributed US$25 million to the Pacific-owned and led Pacific Resilience Facility — a fund endorsed by leaders to make it easier for Forum members to access climate financing for adaptation, disaster preparedness and early disaster response projects.
However, Trump’s move has been said to have implications for the Pacific, which is one of the most aid-dependent regions in the world.
Research fellow at the Australian National University’s Development Policy Centre Dr Terence Wood told RNZ Pacific Waves that, in the Pacific, the biggest impacts of the aid cut are likley to be felt by the three island nations in a Compact of Free Association (COFA) with the US.
He said that while the compact “is safe” for three COFA states – Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, and Palau – “these are unprecedented times”.
“It would be unprecedented if the US just tore them up. But then again, the United States is showing very little regard for agreements that it has entered into in the past, so I would say that nothing’s safe right now.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Dr Terence Wood speaking to RNZ Pacific Waves. Video: RNZ Pacific
The Palestinian resistance group Hamas has accused Israel of “blackmail” over aid and urged the US government to act more like a neutral mediator in the ceasefire process.
“We call on the US administration to stop its bias and alignment with the fascist plans of the war criminal Netanyahu, which target our people and their existence on their land,” Hamas said in a statement.
“We affirm that all projects and plans that bypass our people and their established rights on their land, self-determination, and liberation from occupation are destined for failure and defeat.
“We reaffirm our commitment to implementing the signed agreement in its three stages, and we have repeatedly announced our readiness to start negotiations on the second stage of the agreement,” it said.
Al Jazeera Arabic reports that Israel sought a dramatic change to the terms of the ceasefire agreement with a demand that Hamas release five living captives and 10 bodies of dead captives in exchange for Palestinian prisoners and increased aid to the Gaza Strip.
It also sought to extend the first phase of the ceasefire by a week.
Hamas informed the mediators that it rejected the Israeli proposal and considered it a violation of what was agreed upon in the ceasefire.
Israel suspends humanitarian aid In response, Israel suspended the entry of humanitarian aid until further notice and Hamas claimed Tel Aviv “bears responsibility” for the fate of the 59 Israelis still held in the Gaza Strip.
Reports said Israeli attacks in Gaza on Sunday have killed at least four people and injured five people, according to medical sources.
“The occupation [Israel] bears responsibility for the consequences of its decision on the population of the Strip and for the fate of its prisoners,” Hamas spokesman Hazem Qassem said in a statement.
Hamas denounces blackmail headline on Al Jazeera news. Image: AJ screenshot APR
Under the agreed ceasefire, the second phase of the truce was intended to see the release of the remaining captives, the full withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza and a final end to the war.
However, the talks on how to carry out the second phase never began, and Israel said all its captives must be returned for fighting to stop.
In an interview with Al Jazeera, an analyst said that although the fragile ceasefire seemed on the brink of collapse, it was unlikely that US President Donald Trump would allow it to fail.
“I think the larger picture here is Trump is not interested in the resumption of war,” said Sami al-Arian, professor of public affairs at Istanbul Zaim University.
“He has a very long agenda domestically and internationally and if it is going to be dragged by Netanyahu and his fascist partners into another war of genocide with no strategic end, he knows this is going to be a no-win for him.
“And for one thing, Trump hates to lose.”
No game plan In another interview, Israeli political commentator Ori Goldberg told Al Jazeera that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was caught between seeing the Gaza ceasefire through and resorting to a costly all-out war that may prove unpopular at home.
“I’m not sure Netanyahu has a game plan,” Goldberg said.
“The reason he hasn’t made a decision is because . . . Israel is not equipped to go to war right now. Resilience is at an all-time low. Resources are at an all-time low.”
War crimes . . . a poster at a New Zealand pro-Palestinian rally in Auckland on Saturday. Image: Asia Pacific Report
In December, the UN agency for Palestinian refugees reported that more than 19,000 children had been hospitalised for acute malnutrition in four months.
In the first full year of the war — ending in October 2024 — 37 children died from malnutrition or dehydration.
Last September 21, The International Criminal Court (ICC) said there was reason to believe Israel was using “starvation as a method of warfare” when it issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant.
More than 180 remained in detention without a clear indication of when or if they would be released, the physicians’ report said.
“Detainees endure physical, psychological and sexual abuse as well as starvation and medical neglect amounting to torture,” the report said, denouncing a “deeply ingrained policy”.
Healthcare workers were beaten, threatened, and forced to sign documents in Hebrew during their detention, according to the report based on 20 testimonies collected in prison.
“Medical personnel were primarily questioned about the Israeli hostages, tunnels, hospital structures and Hamas’s activity,” it said.
“They were rarely asked questions linking them to any criminal activity, nor were they presented with substantive charges.”
New Zealand protesters calling for the continuation of the Gaza ceasefire and for peace and justice in Palestine in a march along the Auckland waterfront today. Image: Asia Pacific Report
Where does Trump stand on the Gaza ceasefire? With phase one of the ceasefire due to end today and negotiations barely started on phase two, serious fears are being raised over the viability of the ceasefire.
President Donald Trump took credit for the truce that his Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff helped push across the finish line after a year of negotiations led by the Biden administration, Egypt and Qatar, reports Al Jazeera.
Advocate Maher Nazzal at today’s New Zealand rally for Gaza in Auckland . . . he was elected co-leader of the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa last weekend. Image: Asia Pacific Report
However, Trump has since sent mixed signals about the deal.
Earlier last month, he set a firm deadline for Hamas to release all the captives, warning “all hell is going to break out” if it didn’t.
But he said it was ultimately up to Israel, and the deadline came and went.
Trump sowed further confusion by proposing that Gaza’s population of about 2.3 million be relocated to other countries and for the US to take over the territory and develop it.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu welcomed the idea, but it was universally rejected by Palestinians and Arab countries, including close US allies. Human rights groups said it could violate international law.
Trump stood by the plan in a Fox News interview over the weekend but said he was “not forcing it”.
Responding to DAWN’s referral of Biden, Blinken & Austin to the ICC for investigation for aiding Israeli war crimes, @alhaq_org‘s @SJabaren says:
“Finally, we see an effort to hold” accountable “US officials who have armed, financed and politically defended Israeli atrocities.” pic.twitter.com/yCpRaogE2I
‘Finally’ an effort to hold the US accountable, says Al-Haq director Palestinian human rights activist Shawan Jabarin has welcomed a plea by the US-based rights group DAWN for the International Criminal Court (ICC) to investigate Joe Biden and senior US officials for aiding Israeli war crimes in Gaza.
In a video posted by DAWN, Jabarin, director of the Palestinian rights group Al-Haq, said the effort was long overdue.
“For decades we have called on the international community to hold Israel accountable for its violations of international law, but time and again, the US has used its power and influence to block that accountability, to shield Israel from consequences and to ensure that it can continue its crimes with impunity,” Jabarin said.
“Now, finally, we see an effort to hold not just Israeli officials accountable but also those who have made these crimes possible: US officials who have armed, financed, and politically defended Israeli atrocities.”
A father piggybacks his sleepy child during the New Zealand solidarity protest for Palestine in Auckland’s Viaduct today. Image: Asia Pacific Report
In the year marking 40 years since the bombing of the Rainbow Warrior by French secret agents and 71 years since the most powerful nuclear weapons tested by the United States, Greenpeace is calling on Washington to comply with demands by the Marshall Islands for nuclear justice.
“The Marshall Islands bears the deepest scars of a dark legacy — nuclear contamination, forced displacement, and premeditated human experimentation at the hands of the US government,” said Greenpeace spokesperson Shiva Gounden.
To mark the Marshall Islands’ Remembrance Day today, the Greenpeace flagship Rainbow Warrior is flying the republic’s flag at halfmast in solidarity with those who lost their lives and are suffering ongoing trauma as a result of US nuclear weapons testing in the Pacific.
On 1 March 1954, the Castle Bravo nuclear bomb was detonated on Bikini Atoll with a blast 1000 times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb.
On Rongelap Atoll, 150 km away, radioactive fallout rained onto the inhabited island, with children mistaking it as snow.
The Rainbow Warrior is sailing to the Marshall Islands where a mission led by Greenpeace will conduct independent scientific research across the country, the results of which will eventually be given to the National Nuclear Commission to support the Marshall Islands government’s ongoing legal proceedings with the US and at the UN.
Still enduring fallout Marshall Islands communities still endure the physical, economic, and cultural fallout of the nuclear tests — compensation from the US has fallen far short of expectations of the islanders who are yet to receive an apology.
Former Marshall Islands Foreign Minister Tony deBrum’s “nuclear justice” speech as Right Livelihood Award Winner in 2009. Video: Voices Rising
“To this day, Marshall Islanders continue to grapple with this injustice while standing on the frontlines of the climate crisis — facing yet another wave of displacement and devastation for a catastrophe they did not create,” Gounden said.
“But the Marshallese people and their government are not just survivors — they are warriors for justice, among the most powerful voices demanding bold action, accountability, and reparations on the global stage.
“Those who have inflicted unimaginable harm on the Marshallese must be held to account and made to pay for the devastation they caused.
“Greenpeace stands unwaveringly beside Marshallese communities in their fight for justice. Jimwe im Maron.”
Rainbow Warrior crew members holding the Marshall Islands flag . . . remembering the anniversary of the devastating Castle Bravo nuclear test – 1000 times more powerful than Hiroshima – on 1 March 1954. Image: Greenpeace InternationalChair of the Marshall Islands National Nuclear Commission Ariana Tibon-Kilma . . . “the trauma of Bravo continues for the remaining survivors and their descendents.” Image: UN Human Rights Council
Ariana Tibon Kilma, chair of the Marshall Islands National Nuclear Commission, said that the immediate effects of the Bravo bomb on March 1 were “harrowing”.
“Hours after exposure, many people fell ill — skin peeling off, burning sensation in their eyes, their stomachs were churning in pain. Mothers watched as their children’s hair fell to the ground and blisters devoured their bodies overnight,” she said.
“Without their consent, the United States government enrolled them as ‘test subjects’ in a top secret medical study on the effects of radiation on human beings — a study that continued for 40 years.
“Today on Remembrance Day the trauma of Bravo continues for the remaining survivors and their descendents — this is a legacy not only of suffering, loss, and frustration, but also of strength, unity, and unwavering commitment to justice, truth and accountability.”
The new Rainbow Warrior will arrive in the Marshall Islands early this month.
Alongside the government of the Marshall Islands, Greenpeace will lead an independent scientific mission into the ongoing impacts of the US weapons testing programme.
Travelling across the country, Greenpeace will reaffirm its solidarity with the Marshallese people — now facing further harm and displacement from the climate crisis, and the emerging threat of deep sea mining in the Pacific.
Tongan community leaders and artists in New Zealand have criticised the Treaty Principles Bill while highlighting the ongoing impact of colonisation in Aotearoa and the Pacific.
Oral submissions continued this week for the public to voice their view on the controversial proposed bill, which aims to redefine the legal framework of the nation’s founding document, the 1840 Treaty of Waitangi.
Aotearoa Tongan Response Group member Pakilau Manase Lua echoed words from the Waitangi Day commemorations earlier this month.
“The Treaty of Waitangi Principles Bill and its champions and enablers represent the spirit of the coloniser,” he said.
Pakilau said New Zealand’s history included forcible takeovers of Sāmoa, Cook Islands, Niue and Tokelau.
“The New Zealand government, or the Crown, has shown time and again that it has a pattern of trampling on the mana and sovereignty of indigenous peoples, not just here in Aotearoa, but also in the Pacific region.”
Poet Karlo Mila spoke as part of a submission by a collective of artists, Mana Moana,
“Have you ever paused to wonder why we speak English here, half a world away from England? It’s a global history of Christian white supremacy, who, with apostolic authority, ordained the doctrine of discovery to create a new world order,” she said.
“Yes, this is where the ‘new’ in New Zealand comes from, invasion for advantage and profit, presenting itself as progress, as civilising, as salvation, as enlightenment itself — the greatest gaslighting feat of history.”
Bill used as political weapon She argued that the bill was being used as a political weapon, and government rhetoric was causing division.
“We watch political parties sow seeds of disunity using disingenuous history, harnessing hate speech and the haka of destiny, scapegoating ‘vulnerable enemies’ . . . Yes, for us, it’s a forest fire out there, and brown bodies are moving political targets, every inflammatory word finding kindling in kindred racists.”
Pakilau said that because Tonga had never been formally colonised, Tongans had a unique view of the unfolding situation.
“We know what sovereignty tastes like, we know what it smells like and feels like, especially when it’s trampled on.
“Ask the American Samoans, who provide more soldiers per capita than any state of America to join the US Army, but are not allowed to vote for the country they are prepared to die for.
“Ask the mighty 28th Maori Battalion, who field Marshal Erwin Rommel famously said, ‘Give me the Māori Battalion and I will rule the world’, they bled and died for a country that denied them the very rights promised under the Treaty.
“The Treaty of Waitangi Bill is essentially threatening to do the same thing again, it is re-traumatising Māori and opening old wounds.”
A vision for the future Mila, who also has European and Sāmoan ancestry, said the answer to how to proceed was in the Treaty’s Indigenous text.
“The answer is Te Tiriti, not separatist exclusion. It’s the fair terms of inclusion, an ancestral strategy for harmony, a covenant of cooperation. It’s how we live ethically on a land that was never ceded.”
Aotearoa Tongan Response Group chair Anahila Kanongata’a said Tongans were Tangata Tiriti (people of the Treaty), and the bill denigrated the rights of Māori as Tangata Whenua (people of the land).
“How many times has the Crown breached the Treaty? Too, too many times.
“What this bill is attempting to do is retrospectively annul those breaches by extinguishing Māori sovereignty or tino rangatiritanga over their own affairs, as promised to them in their Tiriti, the Te Reo Māori text.”
Kanongata’a called on the Crown to rescind the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill, honour Te Tiriti, and issue a formal apology to Māori, similar to what had been done for the Dawn Raids.
Hundreds gather at Treaty Grounds for the annual Waitangi Day dawn service. Image: PMN Digital/Joseph Safiti
“As a former member of Parliament, I am proud of the fact that an apology was made for the way our people were treated during the Dawn Raids.
“We were directly affected, yes, it was painful and most of our loved ones never got to see or hear the apology, but imagine the pain Māori must feel to be essentially dispossessed, disempowered and effectively disowned of their sovereignty on their own lands.”
The bill’s architect, Act Party leader David Seymour, sayid the nationwide discussion on Treaty principles was crucial for future generations.
“In a democracy, the citizens are always ready to decide the future. That’s how it works.”
As concerns continue to emerge over China’s “unusual” naval exercises in the Tasman Sea, raising eyebrows from New Zealand and Australia, the Cook Islands government was questioned for an update in Parliament.
This follows the newly established bilateral relations between the Cook Islands and China through a five-year agreement and Prime Minister Mark Brown’s accusations of the New Zealand media and experts looking down on the Cook Islands.
A Chinese Navy convoy held two live-fire exercises in the Tasman Sea between Australia and New Zealand on Friday and Saturday, prompting passenger planes to change course mid-flight and pressuring officials in both countries.
Akaoa MP Robert Heather queried the Prime Minister whether the government had spoken to Chinese embassy officials in New Zealand for a response in this breach of Australian waters?
“One thing I do know is that just in the recent weeks, New Zealand navy was part of an exercise with the Australians and Americans conducting naval exercises in the South China Sea and perhaps that’s why China decided to exercise naval exercises in the international waters off the coast of Australia,” he said.
“And I also know that in the last two weeks, the government of Australia and China signed a security treaty between the two countries.
“However in due course, we may be informed more about these naval exercises that these countries conduct in international waters off each other’s coasts.”
According to Brown, he had not been briefed by any government whether it’s New Zealand, Australia, or China about these developments.
Asking for an update He added that while the Minister of Foreign Affairs Elikana was currently in the Solomon Islands attending a forum on fisheries together with other ministers of the Pacific Region, he would ask him about whether he could make any inquiries to find out whether the government could be updated or briefed on this issue.
Meanwhile, New Zealand Foreign Minister Winston Peters said after a meeting with his Chinese counterpart in Beijing, that lack of sufficient warning from China about the live-fire exercises was a “failure” in the New Zealand-China relationship.
A spokesperson for China’s Ministry of National Defence, Wu Qian explained that China’s actions were entirely in accordance with international law and established practices and would not impact on aviation safety.
He added that the live-fire training was conducted with repeated safety notices that had been issued in advance.
The family of a Papua New Guinea police constable, killed in an ambush last month, has blocked a section of the Highlands Highway in Goroka, Eastern Highlands Province, demanding justice for his death.
Constable Harry Gorano succumbed to his injuries in intensive care two weeks ago after spending three weeks in a coma.
He was attacked alongside colleagues in the Southern Highlands in January, during which fellow officer Constable Noel Biape was fatally shot.
Gorano’s relatives, frustrated by the lack of arrests in the case, staged the roadblock early today, halting traffic on a key transit route.
They have repeatedly called for authorities to arrest those responsible for the ambush.
Additional personnel have been deployed to Goroka to assist local officers in managing tensions.
Forces in neighboring regions have also been placed on standby amid concerns that the protest could spark broader unrest.
The incident highlights the ongoing risks faced by PNG’s police force.
The Western media went into overdrive this week to work the laconic Kiwis into a mild frenzy over three Chinese naval vessels conducting exercises in the Tasman Sea a few thousand kilometres off our shores.
What was really behind this orchestrated campaign?
The New Zealand government led the rhetorical charge over the Hengyang, the Zunyi and the Weishanhu in mare nostrum (“Our Sea”, as the Romans liked to call the Mediterranean).
“We cannot hide at this end of the world anymore,” Defence Minister Judith Collins said in light of three Chinese boats in the Tasman.
Warrior academics were next . “We need to go to the cutting edge, and we need to do that really, really fast,” the ever-reliable China hawk Anne-Marie Brady of Canterbury University said, telling 1 News the message of the live-firing exercises was that China wants to rule the waves.
The British Financial Times chimed in with a warning that “A confronting strategic future is arriving fast”.
Could this have anything to do with the fact we are fast approaching the New Zealand government’s 2025 budget and that they — and their Australian, US and UK allies — are intent on a major increase in Kiwi defence funding, moving from around 1.2 percent of GDP to possibly two percent? A long-anticipated Defence Capability Review is also around the corner and is likely to come with quite a shopping list of expensive gear.
The New Zealand government led the rhetorical charge over the Hengyang, the Zunyi and the Weishanhu in mare nostrum (“Our Sea”, as the Romans liked to call the Mediterranean). Image: www.solidarity.co.nz
What’s good for the goose . . . It is worth pointing out that New Zealand and Australian warships sailed through the contested Taiwan Strait and elsewhere in the South China Sea as recently as September 2024. What’s good for the goose is good for the Panda.
And, of course, at any one time about 20 US nuclear submarines are prowling in the deep waters of the Pacific Ocean and South China Sea. Each can carry missiles the equivalent of over 1000 Hiroshima bombs — truly apocalyptic.
Veteran New Zealand peace campaigner Mike Smith (a friend) was not in total disagreement with the hawks when it came to the argy-bargy in the Tasman.
“The emergence apparently from nowhere of a Chinese naval expedition in our waters I think may be intended to demonstrate that they have a large and very capable blue water navy now and won’t be penned in by AUKUS submarines when and if they arrive off their coast.
“I think the main message is to the Australians: if you want to homebase nuclear-capable B-52s we have more than one way to come at you. That was also the message of the ICBM they sent into the Pacific: Australia is no longer an unsinkable aircraft carrier.”
According to the Asia Times, China fired the ICBM — the first such shot into the Pacific by China — just days after HMNZS Aotearoa sailed through the Taiwan Strait with Australian vessel HMAS Sydney.
Smith says our focus should be on building positive relationships in the Pacific on our terms. “Buying expensive popguns will not save us.”
China Scare a page out of Australia’s Red Scare playbook For people good at pattern recognition this week’s China Scare was obviously a page or two out of the same playbook that duped a majority of Australians into believing China was going to invade Australia. They were lulled into a false sense of insecurity back in 2021 — the mediascape flooded with Red Alert, China panic stories about imminent war with the rising Asian power.
As a sign of how successful the mainstream media can be in generating fear that precedes major policy shifts: research by Australia’s Institute of International & Security Affairs showed that more Australians thought that China would soon attack Australia than Taiwanese believed China would attack Taiwan!
Once the population was conditioned, they woke one morning in September 2021 with the momentous news that Australia had ditched a $90 billion submarine defence deal with France and the country was now part of a new anti-Chinese military alliance called AUKUS. This was the playbook that came to mind last week.
There are strong, rational arguments that could be made to increase our spending at this time. But I loathe and decry this kind of manipulation, this manufacturing of consent.
I also fear what those billions of dollars will be used for. Defending our coastlines is one thing; joining an anti-Chinese military alliance to please the US is quite another.
Prime Minister Luxon has called China — our biggest trading partner — a strategic competitor. He has also suggested, somewhat ludicrously, that our military could be a “force multiplier” for Team AUKUS.
We are hitching ourselves to the US at the very time they have proven they treat allies as vassals, threatened to annex Greenland and the Panama Canal, continue to commit genocide in Gaza, and are now imposing an unequal treaty on Ukraine.
Australia’s ABC News on Foreign Minister Winston Peter’s talks in China. Video: ABC
Whose side – or calmer independence? Whose side should we be on? Or should we return to a calmer, more independent posture?
And then there’s the question of priorities. The hawks may convince the New Zealand population that the China threat is serious enough that we should forgo spending money on child poverty, fixing our ageing infrastructure, investing in health and education and instead, as per pressure from our AUKUS partners, spend some serious coin — billions of dollars more — on defence.
Climate change is one battle that is being fought and lost. Will climate funding get the bullet so we can spend on military hardware? That would certainly get a frosty reaction from Pacific nations at the front edge of sea rise.
The government in New Zealand is literally taking the food out of children’s mouths to fund weapons systems. The Ka Ora, Ka Ako programme provides nutritious lunches every day to a quarter of a million of New Zealand’s most needy children.
Its funding has recently been slashed by over $100 million by the government despite its own advisors telling it that such programmes have profound long-term wellbeing benefits and contribute significantly to equity. In the next breath we are told we need to boost funding for our military.
The US appears determined to set itself on a collision course with China but we don’t have to be crash test dummies sitting alongside them. Prudence, preparedness, vigilance and risk-management are all to be devoutly wished for; hitching our fate to a hostile US containment strategy is bad policy both in economic and defence terms.
In the absence of a functioning media — one that showcases diverse perspectives and challenges power rather than works hand-in-glove with it — populations have been enlisted in the most abhorrent and idiotic campaigns: the Red Peril, the Jewish Peril and the Black Peril (in South Africa and the southern states of the USA), to name three.
Our media-political-military complex is at it again with this one — a kind of Yellow Peril Redux.
New Zealand trails behind both Australia and China in development assistance to the Pacific. If we wish to “counter” China, supporting our neighbours would be a better investment than encouraging an unwinnable arms race.
In tandem, I would advocate for a far deeper diplomatic and cultural push to understand and engage with China; that would do more to keep the region peaceful and may arrest the slow move in China towards seeking other markets for the high-quality primary produce that an increasingly bellicose New Zealand still wishes to sell them.
Let’s be friends to all, enemies of none. Keep the Pacific peaceful, neutral and nuclear-free.
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 his public policy website Solidarity and he is a regular contributor to Asia Pacific Report and Café Pacific.
The re-election of Donald Trump is proof that the Right’s most powerful weapon is media manipulation, ensuring the public sphere is not engaged in rational debate, reports the Independent Australia.
COMMENTARY:By Victoria Fielding
I once heard someone say that when the Left and the Right became polarised — when they divorced from each other — the Left got all the institutions of truth including science, education, justice and democratic government.
The Right got the institution of manipulation: the media. This statement hit me for six at the time because it seemed so clearly true.
What was also immediately clear is that there was an obvious reason why the Left sided with the institutions of truth and the Right resorted to manipulation. It is because truth does not suit right-wing arguments.
The existence of climate change does not suit fossil fuel billionaires. Evidence that wealth does not trickle down does not suit the capitalist class. The idea that diversity, equity and inclusion (yes, I put those words in that order on purpose) is better for everyone, rather than a discriminatory, hateful, destructive, divided unequal world is dangerous for the Right to admit.
The Right’s embrace of the media institution also makes sense when you consider that the institutions of truth are difficult to buy, whereas billionaires can easily own manipulative media.
Just ask Elon Musk, who bought Twitter and turned it into a political manipulation machine. Just ask Rupert Murdoch, who is currently engaged in a bitter family war to stop three of his children opposing him and his son Lachlan from using their “news” organisations as a form of political manipulation for right-wing interests.
Right-wingers also know that truthful institutions only have one way of communicating their truths to the public: via the media. Once the media environment is manipulated, we enter a post-truth world.
Experts derided as untrustworthy ‘elitists’ This is the world where billionaire fossil fuel interests undermine climate action. It is where scientists create vaccines to save lives but the manipulated public refuses to take them. Where experts are derided as untrustworthy “elitists”.
And it is where the whole idea of democratic government in the US has been overthrown to install an autocratic billionaire-enriching oligarchy led by an incompetent fool who calls himself the King.
Once you recognise this manipulated media environment, you also understand that there is not — and never has been — such as thing as a rational public debate. Those engaged in the institutions of the Left — in science, education, justice and democratic government — seem mostly unwilling to accept this fact.
Instead, they continue to believe if they just keep telling people the truth and communicating what they see as entirely rational arguments, the public will accept what they have to say.
I think part of the reason that the Left refuses to accept that public debate is not rational and rather, is a manipulated bin fire of misleading information, including mis/disinformation and propaganda, is because they are not equipped to compete in this reality. What do those on the Left do with “post-truth”?
They seem to just want to ignore it and hope it goes away.
A perfect example of this misunderstanding of the post-truth world and the manipulated media environment’s impact on the public is this paper, by political science professors at the Australian National University Ian McAllister and Nicholas Biddle.
Stunningly absolutist claim Their research sought to understand why polling at the start of the 2023 Indigenous Voice to Parliament Referendum showed widespread public support for the Voice but over the course of the campaign, this support dropped to the point where the Voice was defeated with 60 per cent voting “No” and 40 per cent, “Yes”.
In presenting their study’s findings, the authors make the stunningly absolutist claim that:
‘…the public’s exposure to all forms of mass media – as we have measured it here – had no impact on the result’.
A note is then attached to this finding with the caveat:
‘As noted earlier, given the data at hand we are unable to test the possibility that the content of the media being consumed resulted in a reinforcement of existing beliefs and partisanship rather than a conversion.’
This caveat leaves a gaping hole in the finding by failing to account for how media reinforcing existing beliefs is an important media effect – as argued by Neil Gavin here. Since it was not measured, how can they possibly say there was no effect?
Furthermore, the very premise of the author’s sweeping statement that media exposure had no impact on the result of the Referendum is based on two naive assumptions:
that voters were rational in their deliberations over the Referendum question; and
that the information environment voters were presented with was rational.
Dual assumption of rationality This dual assumption of rationality – one that the authors interestingly admit is an assumption – is evidenced in their hypothesis which states:
‘Voters who did not follow the campaign in the mass media were more likely to move from a yes to a no vote compared to voters who did follow the campaign in the mass media.’
This hypothesis, the authors explain, is premised on the assumption ‘that those with less information are more likely to opt for the status quo and cast a no vote’, and therefore that less exposure to media would change a vote from “Yes” to “No”.What this hypothesis assumes is that if a voter received more rational information in the media about the Referendum, that information would rationally drive their vote in the “Yes” direction. When their data disproved this hypothesis, the authors used this finding to claim that the media had no effect.
To understand the reality of what happened in the Referendum debate, the word “rational” needs to be taken out of the equation and the word “manipulated” put in.
We know, of course, that the Referendum was awash with manipulative information, which all supported the “No” campaign. For example, my study of News Corp’s Voice coverage — Australia’s largest and most influential news organisation — found that News Corp actively campaigned for the “No” proposition in concert with the “No” campaign, presenting content more like a political campaign than traditional journalism and commentary.
A study by Queensland University of Technology’s Tim Graham analysed how the Voice Referendum was discussed on social media platform, X. Far from a rational debate, Graham identified that the “No” campaign and its supporters engaged in a participatory disinformation propaganda campaign, which became a “truth market” about the Voice.
The ‘truth market’ This “truth market” was described as drawing “Yes” campaigners into a debate about the truth of the Voice, sidetracking them from promoting their own cause.
What such studies showed was that, far from McAllister and Biddle’s assumed rational information environment, the Voice Referendum public debate was awash with manipulation, propaganda, disinformation and fear-mongering.
The “No” campaign that delivered this manipulation perfectly demonstrates how the Right uses media to undermine institutions of truth, to undermine facts and to undermine the rationality of democratic debates.
The completely unfounded assumption that the more information a voter received about the Voice, the more likely they would vote “Yes”, reveals a misunderstanding of the reality of a manipulated public debate environment present across all types of media, from mainstream news to social media.
It also wrongly treats voters like rational deliberative computers by assuming that the more information that goes in, the more they accept that information. This is far from the reality of how mediated communication affects the public.
The reason the influence of media on individuals and collectives is, in reality, so difficult to measure and should never be bluntly described as having total effect or no effect, is that people are not rational when they consume media, and every individual processes information in their own unique and unconscious ways.
One person can watch a manipulated piece of communication and accept it wholeheartedly, others can accept part of it and others reject it outright.
Manipulation unknown No one piece of information determines how people vote and not every piece of information people consume does either. That’s the point of a manipulated media environment. People who are being manipulated do not know they are being manipulated.
Importantly, when you ask individuals how their media consumption impacted on them, they of course do not know. The decisions people make based on the information they have ephemerally consumed — whether from the media, conversations, or a wide range of other information sources, are incredibly complex and irrational.
Surely the re-election of Donald Trump for a second time, despite all the rational arguments against him, is proof that the manipulated media environment is an incredibly powerful weapon — a weapon the Right, globally, is clearly proficient at wielding.
It is time those on the Left caught up and at least understood the reality they are working in.
Dr Victoria Fielding is an Independent Australia columnist. This article was first published by the Independent Australia and is republished with the author’s permission.
Prime Minister Mark Brown has survived a motion in the Cook Islands Parliament aimed at ousting his government, the second Pacific Island leader to face a no-confidence vote this week.
In a vote yesterday afternoon (Tuesday, Cook Islands time), the man who has been at the centre of controversy in the past few weeks, defeated the motion by 13 votes to 9. Two government ministers were absent for the vote.
The motion was put forward by the opposition MP Teariki Heather, the leader of the Cook Islands United Party.
Ahead of the vote, Heather acknowledged that Brown had majority support in Parliament.
“These are the merits that I am presenting before this House. We have the support of our people and those living outside the country, and so it is my challenge. Where do you stand in this House?” Heather said.
Brown said his country has been so successful in its development in recent years that it graduated to first world status in 2020.
‘Engage on equal footing’ “We need to stand on our own two feet, and we need to engage with our partners on an equal footing,” he said.
“Economic and financial independence must come first before political independence, and that was what I discussed and made clear when I met with the New Zealand prime minister and deputy prime minister in Wellington in November.”
Brown said the issues Cook Islanders faced today were not just about passports and agreements but about Cook Islands expressing its self-determination.
“This is not about consultation. This is about control.”
“We cannot compete with New Zealand. When their one-sided messaging is so compelling that even our opposition members will be swayed.
“We never once talked to the New Zealand government about cutting our ties with New Zealand but the message our people received was that we were cutting our ties with New Zealand.
“We have been discussing the comprehensive partnership with New Zealand for months. But the messaging that got out is that we have not consulted.
‘We are not a child’ “We are a partner in the relationship with New Zealand. We are not a child.”
He said the motion of no confidence had been built on misinformation to the extent that the mover of the motion has stated publicly that he was moving this motion in support of New Zealand.
“The influence of New Zealand in this motion of no confidence should be of concern to all Cook Islands who value . . . who value our country.
“My job is not to fly the New Zealand flag. My job is to fly my own country’s flag.”
Last week, hundreds of Cook Islanders opposing Brown’s political decisions rallied in Avarua, demanding that he step down for damaging the relationship between Aotearoa and Cook Islands.
The Cook Islands is a self-governing state in free association with New Zealand. It is part of the Realm of New Zealand, sharing the same Head of State.
This year, the island marks its 60th year of self-governance.
According to Cook Islands 2021 Census, its population is less than 15,000.
New Zealand remains the largest home to the Cook Islands community, with over 80,000 Cook Islands Māori, while about 28,000 live in Australia.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
An independent Jewish body has condemned the move by Australia’s 39 universities to endorse a “dangerous and politicised” definition of antisemitism which threatens academic freedom.
The Jewish Council of Australia, a diverse coalition of Jewish academics, lawyers, writers and teachers, said in a statement that the move would have a “chilling effect” on legitimate criticism of Israel, and risked institutionalising anti-Palestinian racism.
The council also criticised the fact that the universities had done so “without meaningful consultation” with Palestinian groups or diverse Jewish groups which were critical of Israel.
The definition was developed by the Group of Eight (Go8) universities and adopted by Universities Australia.
“By categorising Palestinian political expression as inherently antisemitic, it will be unworkable and unenforceable, and stifle critical political debate, which is at the heart of any democratic society,” the Jewish Council of Australia said.
“The definition dangerously conflates Jewish identities with support for the state of Israel and the political ideology of Zionism.”
The council statement said that it highlighted two key concerns:
Mischaracterisation of criticism of Israel The definition states: “Criticism of Israel can be antisemitic when it is grounded in harmful tropes, stereotypes or assumptions and when it calls for the elimination of the State of Israel or all Jews or when it holds Jewish individuals or communities responsible for Israel’s actions.”
The definition’s inclusion of “calls for the elimination of the State of Israel” would mean, for instance, that calls for a single binational democratic state, where Palestinians and Israelis had equal rights, could be labelled antisemitic.
Moreover, the wording around “harmful tropes” was dangerously vague, failing to distinguish between tropes about Jewish people, which were antisemitic, and criticism of the state of Israel, which was not, the statement said.
Misrepresentation of Zionism as core to Jewish identity The definition states that for most Jewish people “Zionism is a core part of their Jewish identity”.
The council said it was deeply concerned that by adopting this definition, universities would be taking and promoting a view that a national political ideology was a core part of Judaism.
“This is not only inaccurate, but is also dangerous,” said the statement.
“Zionism is a political ideology of Jewish nationalism, not an intrinsic part of Jewish identity.
“There is a long history of Jewish opposition to Zionism, from the beginning of its emergence in the late-19th century, to the present day. Many, if not the majority, of people who hold Zionist views today are not Jewish.”
In contrast to Zionism and the state of Israel, said the council, Jewish identities traced back more than 3000 years and spanned different cultures and traditions.
Jewish identities were a rightly protected category under all racial discrimination laws, whereas political ideologies such as Zionism and support for Israel were not, the council said.
Growing numbers of dissenting Jews “While many Jewish people identify as Zionist, many do not. There are a growing number of Jewish people worldwide, including in Australia, who disagree with the actions of the state of Israel and do not support Zionism.
“Australian polling in this area is not definitive, but some polls suggest that 30 percent of Australian Jews do not identify as Zionists.
“A recent Canadian poll found half of Canadian Jews do not identify as Zionist. In the United States, more and more Jewish people are turning away from Zionist beliefs and support for the state of Israel.”
Sarah Schwartz, a human rights lawyer and the Jewish Council of Australia’s executive officer, said: “It degrades the very real fight against antisemitism for it to be weaponised to silence legitimate criticism of the Israeli state and Palestinian political expressions.
“It also risks fomenting division between communities and institutionalising anti-Palestinian racism.”
A rally on the steps of the Victorian Parliament under the banner of Jews for a Free Palestine was arranged for Sunday, February 9. At 11:11pm on the eve of that rally, Mark Leibler —a lawyer who claims to have a high profile and speak on behalf of Jews by the totally unelected organisation AIJAC — put out a tweet on X (and paid for an advertisement of the same posting) as follows:
Nothing, but nothing, is worse than those Jews who level totally unfounded allegations of genocide and ethnic cleansing against the State of Israel. They are repulsive and revolting human beings. Their relatives who were murdered by the Nazis – the role models for Hamas – will…
As someone Jewish, the son of Holocaust survivors and members of whose family were murdered by the Nazis, it is hard to know whether to characterise Mark Leibler’s tweet as offensive, appalling, contemptuous, insulting or a disgusting, shameful and grievous introduction of the Holocaust, and those who were murdered by the Nazis, into his tweet — or all of the foregoing!
Leibler’s tweet is most likely a breach of recently passed legislation in Australia, both federally and in various state Parliaments, making hateful words and actions, and doxxing, criminal offences. It will be “interesting” to see how the police deal with the complaint taken up with the police alleging Leibler’s breach of the legislation.
In the end, Leibler’s attempted intimidation of those who might have been thinking of going to the rally failed — miserably!
There are many Jews who abhor what Israel is doing in Gaza (and the West Bank) but feel intimidated by the Leiblers of this world who accuse them of being antisemitic for speaking out against Israel’s actions and not those rusted-on 100 percent supporters of Israel who blindly and uncritically support whatever Israel does, however egregious.
Leibler, and others like him, who label Jews as antisemites because they dare speak out about Israel’s actions, certainly need to be called out.
As a lawyer, Leibler knows that actions have consequences. A group of concerned Jews (this writer included) are in the process of lodging a complaint about Leibler’s tweet with the Commonwealth Human Rights Commission.
Separately from that, this week will see full-page adverts in both the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age — signed by hundreds of Jews — bearing the heading:
“Australia must reject Trump’s call for the removal of Palestinians from Gaza. Jewish Australians say NO to ethnic cleansing.”
Jeffrey Loewenstein, LLB, was a member of the Victorian Bar and a one-time chair of the Anti-Defamation Commission and member of the Jewish Community Council of Victoria. This article was first published by Pearls & Irritations public policy journal and is republished here with permission.
This full-page ad appears in today’s @smh and @theage with the names of 500 Jews, many more signed but couldn’t fit onto the page!, to clearly say that they’re utterly opposed to removing Palestinians from Gaza. Notice the silence from most “mainstream” Jewish groups? It’s… pic.twitter.com/GuUqvVMWNZ
The Papua New Guinea government wants to have everyone on their National Identity (NID) card system by the country’s 50th anniversary on 16 September 2025.
While the government has been struggling to set up the NID programme for more than 10 years, in January the Prime Minister, James Marape, announced they aimed to have 100 percent of Papua New Guineans signed up by September 16.
However, an academic with the University of PNG, working in conjunction with the Australian National University, Andrew Anton Mako, said there was no chance the government could achieve this goal.
Anton Mako spoke with RNZ Pacific senior journalist Don Wiseman:
ANDREW ANTON MAKO: The NID programme was established in November 2014, so it’s 10 years now. I wouldn’t know the mechanics of the delay, why it has taken this long for the project to not deliver on the outcomes, but I can say a lot of money has been invested into the programme.
By the end of this year, the national government would have spent about 500 million kina (over NZ$211 million). That’s a lot of money to be spent on a particular project, and then it would have only registered about 30 to 40 percent of the total population. So there’s a serious issue there. The project has failed to deliver.
DON WISEMAN: Come back to that in a moment. But why does the government think that a national ID card is so important?
AAM: It’s got some usefulness to achieve. If it was well established and well implemented, it would address a number of issues. For example, on doing business and a form of identity that will help people to do business, to apply for jobs in Papua New Guinea or elsewhere, and all that. I believe it has got merit towards it, but I think just that it has not been implemented properly.
DW: Does the population like the idea?
AAM: I think generally when it started, people were on board. But when it got delayed, you see a lot of people venting frustration on the NID Facebook page. I think [it’s] popularity has actually fallen over the years.
DW: It’s money that could go into a whole lot of other, perhaps, more important things?
AAM: Exactly, there’s pressing issues for the country, in terms of law and order, health and education. Those important sectors have actually fallen over the years. So that 500 million kina would have been better spent.
DW: So now the government wants the entire country within this system by September 16, and they’re not going to get anywhere near it. They must have realised they wouldn’t get anywhere near it when the Prime Minister made that statement. Surely?
AAM: It’s not possible. The numbers do not add up. They’ve spent more than 460 million kina over the last 10 years or so, and they’ve only registered 36 percent of the total — 3.3 million people. And then of the 3.3 million people, they’ve only issued an ID card to about 30 to 40 perCent of them . . .
DW: 30 to 40 percent of those who have already signed up. So it’s what, 10 percent of the country?
AAM: That’s right, about 1.2 million people have been issued an ID card, including a duplicate card. It is not possible to register the entire country, the rest of the country, in just six, seven or eight months.
DW: It’s not the first time that the government has come out with what is effectively like a wish list without fully backing it, financially?
AAM: That’s right. The ambitions that the government and the Prime Minister, their intentions are good, but there is no effective strategy how to get there.
The resources that are needed to be allocated. It’s just not possible to realise the the end results. For example, the Prime Minister and his government promised that by this year, we would stop importing rice. That was a promise that was made in 2019, so the thing is that the government has not clearly laid out a plan as to how the country will realise that outcome by this year.
If you are going to promise something, then you have to deliver on it. You have to deliver on the ambitions. Then you have to set up a proper game plan and proper indicators and things like this.
I think that’s the issue, that you have promised something [and] you must deliver. But you must chart out a proper pathway to deliver that.
Israel has now banned another European Union parliamentarian from entering the country, reports Al Jazeera.
The government gave no reasons why Lynn Boylan, who chairs the European Parliament EU-Palestine delegation, was denied entry.
“This utter contempt from Israel is the result of the international community failing to hold them to account,” Boylan, an Irish MP in Brussels, said in a statement.
“Israel is a rogue state, and this disgraceful move shows the level of utter disregard that they have for international law.
“Europe must now hold Israel to account.”
Boylan said she had planned to meet with Palestinian Authority officials, representatives of civil society organisations, and people living under Israeli occupation.
She is a member of the Sinn Fein party in Ireland, which has been among the most vocal countries in criticising the Israeli government over its treatment of Palestinians.
France’s Hassan also refused Earlier, EU lawmaker Rima Hassan was also refused entry at Ben-Gurion airport and ordered to return to Europe.
“Hassan, who is expected to land from Brussels in the coming hour, consistently works to promote boycotts against Israel in addition to numerous public statements both on social media and in media interviews,” said Israeli Interior Minister Moshe Arbel’s office.
Hassan is a French national of Palestinian origin known for her support of the Palestinian cause and for speaking out against Israel’s war on Gaza.
Kaja Kallas, the EU foreign policy chief, outlined a range of worries about the situation in war-battered Gaza and the occupied West Bank.
“We have constantly called on all parties, including Israel, to respect international humanitarian law,” she said, adding that Europe “cannot hide our concern when it comes to the West Bank”.
ICC raps Merz over warrants Meanwhile, the International Criminal Court (ICC) has declared that states cannot unilaterally “determine soundness” of its rulings
Earlier, it was reported that Germany’s election winner Friedrich Merz was saying he planned to invite Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to visit the country — despite an ICC war crimes warrant issued for his arrest, which Merz claimed did not apply.
The ICC responded by saying states had a legal obligation to enforce its decisions, and any concerns they may have should be addressed with the court in a timely and efficient manner.
“It is not for states to unilaterally determine the soundness of the court’s legal decisions,” said the ICC in a statement.
Israel rejects the jurisdiction of the court and denies war crimes were committed during its devastating war on Gaza.
Germans feel a special responsibility towards Israel because of the legacy of the Holocaust, and Merz has made clear he is a strong ally. But Germany also has a strong tradition of support for international justice for war crimes.
Amnesty slams ‘shameful silence’ Amnesty International and 162 other civil society organisations and trade unions have signed a joint letter calling on the EU to ban trade and business with Israel’s settlements in occupied Palestinian territory.
“Despite EU consensus about the settlements’ illegality and their link to serious abuses, the EU continues to trade and allow business with them,” the letter said.
This contributes to “the serious and systemic human rights and other international law abuses underpinning the settlement enterprise”, it added.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) in July issued a landmark advisory opinion affirming that states must not recognise, aid or assist the unlawful situation arising from Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory.
The EU’s shameful silence on threats to the ICC gives the firm impression that the EU has prioritized relations with a government implicated in the commission of genocide and war crimes, over support to an institution which is pursuing individual accountability for these crimes.
Samoan Prime Minister Fiame Naomi Mata’afa has survived a vote of no confidence after weeks of political turmoil.
In a vote today, she defeated the motion by 34 votes in favour and 15 against.
The motion was prompted by a split in the ruling FAST Party, which saw Fiame leading a minority government.
But in a shock move today, FAST members voted alongside Fiame’s faction to register a resounding defeat against Opposition Leader Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi’s motion.
The Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, Papalii Lio Masipua, had granted the opposition’s formal request for a vote of no confidence against Fiame on Friday.
Tuilaepa, who is also the head of the Human Rights Protection Party (HRPP), confirmed that the Speaker approved the motion in writing and allowed five members from the opposition bench to speak on it.
According to Samoa’s constitutional requirements, the MP who commands the majority of MPs should be elected as Prime Minister or continue as Prime Minister.
‘Another desperate attempt’ However, the Samoan government stated Tuilaepa’s move was “another desperate attempt to stir political drama” ahead of the no-confidence vote.
Political upheaval hit Samoa just three days into 2025 when the chair of the ruling FAST party and Samoa’s Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries La’auli Leuatea Schmidt confirmed he was facing criminal charges.
FAST Party chair Laauli Leuatea Schmidt (left to right), Prime Minister Fiame Naomi Mata’afa, and Opposition Leader Tuilaepa Sa’ilele Malielegaoi. Image: RNZ Pacific/123RF/Samoa Government/FAST Party
On January 10, Mata’afa removed La’auli’s ministerial portfolio and subsequently removed three of her Cabinet ministers.
But La’auli remained chair of the FAST Party, and went on to announce the removal of the prime minister and five Cabinet ministers from the ruling party.
This decision was reportedly challenged by the removed members.
Fiame then removed 13 of her associate ministers.
Laauli acknowledged the challenge of holding a vote of no confidence, but refrained from disclosing the party’s position, stating they would wait until Tuesday.
First female prime minister Fiame is Samoa’s first female prime minister. She had heritage — her father, Fiame Mata’afa Faumuina Mulinu’u, was the country’s first prime minister.
The caretaker HRPP government locked the doors to Parliament in an attempt to stop the then prime minister-elect from being sworn into office following her FAST Party’s one-seat election win.
Two governments claimed a mandate to rule, and the United Nations urged the party leaders to find a solution through discussion.
The Court of Appeal ruled that the country had a new government after it judged the impromptu swearing-in by the newcomer FAST party on May 24 was legitimate under the doctrine of necessity.
It took until July for the incumbent, Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi, to concede.
Fiame went to school and university in Wellington, New Zealand, but her studies were interrupted in 1977 when she returned to Samoa to help with court cases around the succession of her father’s titles following his death in 1975.
In 1985, she was elected as MP for Lotofaga, the same seat held by her father and then her mother after his death.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
French Minister for Overseas Manuel Valls’ first two days in New Caledonia have been marred by several clashes with local pro-France, anti-independence movements, who feared he would side with their pro-independence opponents.
However, he remained confident that all stakeholders would eventually come and sit together at the table for negotiations.
Valls arrived in the French Pacific territory on Saturday with a necessary resumption of crucial political talks regarding New Caledonia’s political future high on his agenda, nine months after the deadly May 2024 civil unrest.
His visit comes as tensions have risen in the past few days against a backdrop of verbal escalations and rhetoric, the pro-France camp opposing independence stressing that three referendums had resulted in three rejections of independence in 2018, 2020, and 2021.
But the third referendum in December 2021 was boycotted by a large part of the pro-independence, mainly Kanak community, and they have since disputed the validity of its result (even though it was deemed valid in court rulings).
On Saturday, the first day of his visit to the Greater Nouméa city of Mont-Dore, during a ceremony paying homage to a French gendarme who was killed at the height of the riots last year, Valls and one of the main pro-France leaders, French MP Nicolas Metzdorf, had a heated and public argument.
‘First Nation’ controversy Metzdorf, who was flanked by Sonia Backès, another major pro-France local leader, said Valls had “insulted” the pro-France camp because he had mentioned the indigenous Kanak people as being the “first people” in New Caledonia — equivalent to the notion of “First Nation” people.
Hours before, Valls had just met New Caledonia’s Custom Senate (a traditional gathering of Kanak chiefs) and told them that “nothing can happen in New Caledonia without a profound respect towards [for] the Melanesian people, the Kanak people, and the first people”.
French Minister for Overseas Manuel Valls (second from left) meets pro-France supporters as he arrives in New Caledonia on Saturday as French High Commissioner Louis Le Franc looks on. Image: NC la 1ère
Metzdorf told Valls in an exchange that was filmed on the road and later aired on public broadcaster NC la 1ère: “When you say there are first people, you don’t respect us! Your statements are insulting.”
“If there are first peoples, it means there are second peoples and that some are more important than others.”
To which Valls replied: “When you are toying with these kinds of concepts, you are making a mistake.”
🗣 Manuel Valls en Nouvelle-Calédonie : échange tendu entre le ministre des Outre-mer et des personnalités non-indépendantistes
👉 Nicolas Metzdorf et Sonia Backès lui reprochent certaines prises de position depuis la reprise des discussions
Every word counts The 1998 Nouméa Accord’s preamble is largely devoted to the recognition of New Caledonia’s indigenous community (autochtone/indigenous).
On several occasions, Valls faced large groups of pro-France supporters with French tricolour flags and banners (some in the Spanish language, a reference to Valls’s Spanish double heritage), asking him to “respect their democratic (referendum) choice”.
Some were also chanting slogans in Spanish (“No pasaran”), or with a Spanish accent.
“I’m asking for just one thing: for respect towards citizens and those representing the government,” an irate Valls told the crowd.
Questions have since been raised from local organisations and members of the general public as to why and how an estimated 500 pro-France supporters had been allowed to gather while the French High Commissioner still maintains a ban on all public gatherings and demonstrations in Nouméa and its greater area.
“We voted three times no. No means no,” some supporters told the visiting minister, asking him not to “let them down”.
“You shouldn’t believe what you’ve been told. Why wouldn’t you remain French?”, Valls told protesters.
“I think the minister must state very clearly that he respects those three referendums and then we’ll find a solution on that basis,” said Backès.
However, both Metzdorf and Backès reaffirmed that they would take part in “negotiations” scheduled to take place this week.
“We are ready to make compromises”, said Backès.
Valls carried on schedule Minister Valls travelled to Northern parts and outer islands of New Caledonia to pay homage to the victims during previous insurrections in New Caledonia, including French gendarmes and Kanak militants who died on Ouvéa Island (Loyalty group) in the cave massacre in 1988.
During those trips, he also repeatedly advocated for rebuilding New Caledonia and for every stakeholder to “reconcile memories” and sit at the negotiation table “without hatred”.
Valls believes ‘everyone will be at the table’ In an interview with local public broadcaster NC la 1ère yesterday, the French minister said he was confident “everyone will be at the table”.
The first plenary meeting is to be held this afternoon.
It will be devoted to agreeing on a “method”.
“I believe everyone will be there,” he said.
“All groups, political, economic, social, all New Caledonians, I’m convinced, are a majority who wish to keep a strong link within France,” he said.
He also reiterated that following New Caledonia’s Matignon (1988) and Nouméa (1998) peace accords, the French Pacific territory’s envisaged future was to follow a path to “full sovereignty”.
“The Nouméa Accord is the foundation. Undeniably, there have been three referendums. And then there was May 13.
“There is a before and and after [the riots]. My responsibility is to find a way. We have the opportunity of these negotiations, let’s be careful of the words we use,” he said, asking every stakeholder for “restraint”.
“I’ve also seen some pro-independence leaders say that [their] people’s sacrifice and death were necessary to access independence. And this, also, is not on.”
Valls also said the highly sensitive issue of “unfreezing” New Caledonia’s special voters’ roll for local elections (a reform attempt that triggered the May 2024 riots) was “possible”, but it will be part of a wider, comprehensive agreement on the French Pacific entity’s political future.
A mix of ‘fear and hatred’ Apart from the planned political negotiations, Valls also intends to devote significant time to New Caledonia’s dire economic situation, in post-riot circumstances that have not only caused 14 dead, but also several hundred job losses and total damage estimated at some 2.2 billion euros (NZ$4 billion).
A first, much-expected economic announcement also came yesterday: Valls said the State-funded unemployment benefits (which were supposed to cease in the coming days) woud now be extended until June 30.
For the hundreds of businesses which were destroyed last year, he said a return to confidence was essential and a prerequisite to any political deal . . . And vice-versa.
“If there’s no political agreement, there won’t be any economic investment.
“This may cause the return of fresh unrest, a form of civil war. I have heard those words coming back, just like I’ve heard the words racism, hatred . . . I can feel hope and at the same time a fear of violence.
“I feel all the ferments of a confrontation,” he said.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
A new narrative is being aggressively pushed by Israel and its apologists to justify resuming the Gaza genocide, conveniently just as an important deadline for ceasefire negotiations draws near.
The Israeli “Defence” Force (IDF) is now claiming that the Israeli children Kfir and Ariel Bibas “were both brutally murdered by terrorists while being held hostage in Gaza, no later than November 2023.”
IDF spokesman Daniel Hagari told the press on Friday that, “Contrary to Hamas’ lies, Ariel and Kfir were not killed in an airstrike. Ariel and Kfir Bibas were murdered by terrorists in cold blood.
“The terrorists did not shoot the two young boys, they killed them with their bare hands. Afterward, they committed horrific acts to cover up these atrocities.”
Anyone who has been following the events in Gaza over the last year and a half will be unsurprised to learn that Israel provided no evidence to support these incendiary claims.
Benjamin Netanyahu released a video statement in his signature American English waving around an enlarged photograph of the children and talking about what savage monsters the Palestinians are.
“Hamas murdered them in cold blood,” Netanyahu says, while the camera zooms in on the adorable little redheads. “As the prime minister of Israel, I vow that I will not rest until the savages who executed our hostages are brought to justice. They do not deserve to walk this earth.
“Nothing will stop me. Nothing.”
Sabotaging ceasefire negotiations This happens just as Netanyahu has been working to sabotage ceasefire negotiations by adding new non-starter demands that were not in the original agreement, just as sources in Israeli media predicted he would do upon his return from Washington earlier this month.
The six-week-long first stage of the ceasefire deal with Hamas is set to expire at the beginning of March next weekend
This is obvious babies-on-bayonets atrocity propaganda, being released at the most convenient of times. After Israel has been caught lying about beheaded babies and mass rapes and so much more, only an idiot would take any of these claims on faith.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu:
“Today is a tragic day. It’s a day of boundless sorrow, of indescribable pain.
Four-year-old Ariel Bibas, his baby brother one-year-old Kfir and 84-year-old Oded Lifshitz were brutally murdered by Hamas savages. pic.twitter.com/7TMchvOZ9E
But it’s doing the job. Now everywhere you look you’ll see Israel supporters calling to end the ceasefire and reignite the Gaza holocaust to avenge these innocent children. I just saw an article from Tablet Magazine titled “Their Time Is Up,” subtitled “The murder of the Bibas children caps off an 18-month catalog of horrors that has told us exactly who our Palestinian neighbors are.
“Backed by a friend in the White House, Israel must secure its future through strong unilateral action.”
Most likely cause of death All this despite the fact that we know the most likely cause of the children’s death was the fact that their own government was raining military explosives on places where hostages were being held during that time.
Hamas reported back in November 2023 that the Bibas children had been killed in an Israeli airstrike along with their mother. In December 2023 it was reported in the mainstream press that Hamas had offered to return their bodies to Israel but Israel had refused, telling the press that “Israel will not address propaganda-based reports coming from Hamas”.
You don’t need to trust Hamas or anyone else to deduce that a woman and two children being killed by Israeli airstrikes in an area where many women and children were being killed by Israeli airstrikes every day is a much more likely scenario than Palestinian resistance fighters spontaneously deciding to murder children with their bare hands instead of using them as negotiating leverage as planned.
As journalist Muhammad Shehada recently noted on Twitter, Israel already has an established track record of lying about Hamas killing hostages who were actually killed in Israeli airstrikes.
In December 2023, Israel informed the families of three hostages that they had been murdered by Hamas. The mother of one of the hostages kept digging and eventually discovered that they had died of asphyxiation when IDF troops “gassed” the tunnel they were hiding in.
Last September, the IDF admitted that they had killed the hostages in an airstrike and lied about it.
Three weeks ago Shehada correctly predicted in an article with Zeteo that Israel was preparing to use the Bibas deaths as an excuse to terminate the ceasefire, long before any of this started.
Shehada noticed the way pro-Israel narrative managers had been pushing the line that great vengeance must be exacted upon Gaza if it turns out the Bibas children have been harmed, despite Hamas having announced their deaths more than a year ago.
They knew those children were dead, so after the ceasefire was announced in late January they began circulating the narrative that discovery of their demise would be a valid reason to end it.
🚨BREAKING | Israeli forces shot and killed two Palestinian children, ages 12 and 13, in the illegally occupied West Bank today. Both were reportedly shot in the back. https://t.co/6iqVf7Nasg
Israel forces shoot dead 2 Palestinian children Israeli forces shot and killed two Palestinian children in the West Bank just yesterday — both of them shot in the back. You could be forgiven for not knowing that this happened, because the Western political/media class has been too focused on the deaths of two little white kids to pay attention to such trivialities.
Israel needs to keep “discovering” new Hamas atrocities from 2023 because otherwise it just looks like one-sided atrocities being committed by Israel this whole time. First it was beheaded babies, then later it was “We’ve discovered Hamas did mass rapes!”, and now it’s the Bibas kids.
They need to do this because the Hamas attack was the last time anything happened where Israel could frame itself as the victim, so they’ve been milking it and milking it and milking it for as long as possible while committing orders of magnitude worse abuse in Gaza.
It’s all designed to drum up outrage, and to draw sympathy toward Israel and away from the obvious victims who Israel has been abusing, displacing and mass murdering for a year and a half.
As calls to rain vengeance upon Gaza grow louder, remember this: the Bibas kids aren’t the reason, they’re the excuse. The excuse to advance pre-planned agendas against the Palestinians that have been in place since long before those children were born.
Prime Minister James Marape has issued a strong appeal to all young men and boys in Papua New Guinea — stop abusing girls, mothers, and sisters.
He made the plea yesterday before flying to Australia, emphasising the importance of respecting women and children in society.
Marape urged young men to take their issues to him instead of resorting to violence against women and children.
Marape also called for the nation to rise in consciousness to preserve the values and achievements of their fathers and mothers who fought for independence 50 years ago.
“We want to give a special recognition to the fathers and mothers of our country, a generation and people of our country to be proud to be here today,” he said.
He expressed his pain at seeing the continued cycle of abuse and disrespect towards women and children in the country.
Marape’s message was clear: violence and abuse towards women and children would not be tolerated, and the nation must come together to ensure the safety and well-being of all its citizens.
‘Don’t do it to our sisters’ “These are not two things that we want to take on. For every young boy out there, if you have an issue in society, I don’t mind you taking it upon me. But please don’t do it to the girls in the neighbourhood,” he said.
“Don’t do it to our sisters in the neighbourhood. Don’t do it to our mothers and aunties in the neighbourhood.
“In a time when our nation is facing a 50th anniversary, I call for our nation to rise in a consciousness to preserve what our fathers and mothers did 50 years ago.
“Lawlessness, disrespect for each other, especially women and children amongst us. This is something that I speak at great lengths and speak from the depth of my heart.
“It pains me to see girls, women, and children continue to face a vicious cycle of abuse and total abhorrence, abuse of children, rape,” he said.
“I just thought these are important activities coming up. I want to conclude by asking our country through the media.
“We are in another state of our 50th anniversary year.
‘Let us take responsibility’ “We have many challenges in our country. But all of us, we take responsibility of our country. As government, we are trying our absolute best.
“Citizens, public servants, private sector, all of us have responsibility to our country. Unless you have another country to go and live in, if property is your country in the first instance, I call out to all citizens, take responsibility in your corner of property.
“Privacy alone cannot be able to do everything that you expect it to do.
“I’m not omnipotent. I’m not omniscient. I’m not omnipresent.
“I’m but only one person coordinating at the top level. Call for every citizen of our country.
“As we face our 49th year and as we welcome our 50th of September 16,) we call this on every one of us.”
Republished from the PNG Post-Courier with permission.
The BBC has removed its documentary Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone from iPlayer after it was revealed that its teenage narrator is the son of a Hamas official.
The broadcaster stated that it was conducting “further due diligence” following mounting scrutiny.
The film, which aired on BBC Two last Monday, follows 13-year-old Abdullah Al-Yazouri as he describes life in Gaza.
However, it later emerged that his father, Ayman Al-Yazouri, serves as the Hamas Deputy Minister of Agriculture in Gaza.
In a statement yesterday, the BBC defended the documentary’s value but acknowledged concerns.
“There have been continuing questions raised about the programme, and in light of these, we are conducting further due diligence with the production company,” the statement said.
The revelation sparked a backlash from figures including Friday Night Dinner actress Tracy-Ann Oberman, literary agent Neil Blair, and former BBC One boss Danny Cohen, who called it “a shocking failure by the BBC and a major crisis for its reputation”.
On Thursday, the BBC admitted that it had not disclosed the family connection but insisted it followed compliance procedures. It has since added a disclaimer acknowledging Abdullah’s ties to Hamas.
UK’s Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy said that she would discuss the issue with the BBC, particularly regarding its vetting process.
However, the International Centre of Justice for Palestinians urged the broadcaster to “stand firm against attempts to prevent firsthand accounts of life in Gaza from reaching audiences”.
Others also defended the importance of the documentary made last year before the sheer scale of devastation by the Israeli military forces was exposed — and many months before the ceasefire came into force on January 19.
‘This documentary humanised Palestinian children’ Chris Doyle, director of the Council for Arab-British Understanding (CAABU), criticised the BBC’s decision.
“It’s very regrettable that this documentary has been pulled following pressure from anti-Palestinian activists who have largely shown no sympathy for persons in Gaza suffering from massive bombardment, starvation, and disease,” Middle East Eye quoted him as saying.
Doyle also praised the film’s impact, saying, “This documentary humanised Palestinian children in Gaza and gave valuable insights into life in this horrific war zone.”
Journalist Richard Sanders, who has produced multiple documentaries on Gaza, called the controversy a “huge test” for the BBC and condemned its response as a “cowardly decision”.
Earlier this week, 45 Jewish journalists and media figures, including former BBC governor Ruth Deech, urged the broadcaster to pull the film, calling Ayman Al-Yazouri a “terrorist leader”.
The controversy underscores wider tensions over media coverage of the Israel-Gaza war, with critics accusing the BBC of a vetting failure, while others argue the documentary sheds crucial light on Palestinian children’s suffering.
Another teenager who appears in the Gaza documentary . . . she has o global online following for her social media videos on cooking and life amid the genocide. Image: BBC screenshot APR