NewzIntel.com

Category: Global

  • MIL-Evening Report: New Caledonia’s oldest party for independence rejects ‘Bougival’ deal

    By Patrick Decloitre, RNZ Pacific correspondent French Pacific Desk

    New Caledonia’s oldest pro-independence party, the Union Calédonienne (UC), has officially rejected a political agreement on the Pacific territory’s political future signed in Paris last month.

    The text, bearing the signatures of all of New Caledonia’s political parties represented in the local Congress — a total of 18 leaders, both pro-France and pro-independence — is described as a “project” for an agreement that would shape politics.

    Since it was signed in the city of Bougival, west of Paris, on July 12, after 10 days of intense negotiations, it has been dubbed a “bet on trust” and has been described by French Minister for Overseas Manuel Valls as a commitment from all signing parties to report to their respective bases and explain its contents.

    The Bougival document involves a series of measures and recognition by France of New Caledonia as a “State” which could become empowered with its own international relations and foreign affairs, provided they do not contradict France’s key interests.

    It also envisages dual citizenship — French and New Caledonian — provided future New Caledonian citizens are French nationals in the first place.

    It also describes a future devolution of stronger powers for each of the three provinces (North, South and Loyalty Islands), especially in terms of tax collection.

    Since it was published, the document, bearing a commitment to defend the text “as is”, was hailed as “innovative” and “historic”.

    New Caledonia’s leaders have started to hold regular meetings — sometimes daily — and sessions with their respective supporters and militants, mostly to explain the contents of what they have signed.

    The meetings were held by most pro-France parties and within the pro-independence camp, the two main moderate parties, UPM (Union Progressiste en Mélanésie) and PALIKA (Kanak Liberation Party).

    Over the past two weeks, all of these parties have strived to defend the agreement, which is sometimes described as a Memorandum of Agreement or a roadmap for future changes in New Caledonia.

    Most of the leaders who have inked the text have also held lengthy interviews with local media.

    Parties who have unreservedly pledged their support to and signed the Bougival document are:

    Pro-France side: Les Loyalistes, Rassemblement-LR, Wallisian-based Eveil Océanien and Calédonie Ensemble

    Pro-independence: UNI-FLNKS (which comprises UPM and PALIKA).

    But one of the main components of the pro-independence movement, the FLNKS (Kanak and Socialist National Liberation Front) — as its main pillar — the Union Calédonienne, has held a series of meetings indicating their resentment at their negotiators for having signed the contested document.

    UC held its executive committee on July 21, its steering committee on July 26, and FLNKS convened its political bureau on July 23.

    A ‘lure of sovereignty’
     All of these meetings concluded with an increasingly clear rejection of the Bougival document.

    Speaking at a news conference in Nouméa yesterday, UC leaders made it clear that they “formally reject” the agreement because they regard it as a “lure of sovereignty” and does not guarantee either real sovereignty or political balance.

    FLNKS chief negotiator Emmanuel Tjibaou, who is also UC’s chair, told local reporters he understood his signature on the document meant a commitment to return to New Caledonia, explain the text and obtain the approval of the political base.

    “I didn’t have a mandate to sign a political agreement, my mandate was to register the talks and bring them back to our people so that a decision can be made . . . it didn’t mean an acceptance on our part,” he said, mentioning it was a “temporary” document subject to further discussions.

    Tjibaou said some amendments his delegation had put on the table in Bougival “went missing” in the final text.

    Union Calédonienne chair and chief FLNKS negotiator Emmanuel Tjibaou . .. some amendments that his delegation had put on the table in Bougival “went missing” in the final text. Image: RNZ Pacific

    ‘Bougival, it’s over’
     “As far as we’re concerned, Bougival, it’s over”, UC vice-president Mickaël Forrest said.

    He said it was now time to move onto a “post-Bougival phase”.

    Meanwhile, the FLNKS also consulted its own “constitutionalists” to obtain legal advice and interpretation of the document.

    In a release about yesterday’s media conference, UC stated that the Bougival text could not be regarded as a balance between two “visions” for Kanaky New Caledonia, but rather a way of “maintaining New Caledonia as French”.

    The text, UC said, had led the political dialogue into a “new impasse” and it left several questions unanswered.

    “With the denomination of a ‘State’, a fundamental law (a de facto Constitution), the capacity to self-organise, and international recognition, this document is perceived as a project for an agreement to integrate (New Caledonia) into France under the guise of a decolonisation”.

    “The FLNKS has never accepted a status of autonomy within France, but an external decolonisation by means of accession to full sovereignty [which] grants us the right to choose our inter-dependencies,” the media release stated.

    The pro-independence party also criticised plans to enlarge the list of people entitled to vote at New Caledonia’s local elections — the very issue that triggered deadly and destructive riots in May 2024.

    It is also critical of a proposed mechanism that would require a vote at the Congress with a minimum majority of 64 percent (two thirds) before any future powers can be requested for transfer from France to New Caledonia.

    Assuming that current population trends and a fresh system of representation at the Congress will allow more representatives from the Southern province (about three quarters of New Caledonia’s population), UC said “in other words, it would be the non-independence [camp] who will have the power to authorise us — or not — to ask for our sovereignty”.

    They party confirmed that it had “formally rejected the Bougival project of agreement as it stands” following a decision made by its steering committee on July 26 “since the fundamentals of our struggle and the principles of decolonisation are not there”.

    Negotiators no longer mandated
     The decision also means that every member of its negotiating team who signed the document on July 12 is now de facto demoted and no longer mandated by the party until a new negotiating team is appointed, if required.

    “Union Calédonienne remains mobilised to arrive at a political agreement that takes into account the achievement of a trajectory towards full sovereignty”.

    On Tuesday, FLNKS president Christian Téin, as an invited guest of Corsica’s “Nazione” pro-independence movement, told French media he declared himself “individually against” the Bougival document, adding this was “far from being akin to full sovereignty”.

    Téin said that during the days that led to the signing of the document in Bougival “the pressure” exerted on negotiators was “terrible”.

    He said the result was that due to “excessive force” applied by “France’s representatives”, the final text’s content “looks like it is the French State and right-wing people who will decide the (indigenous) Kanak people’s future”.

    Facing crime-related charges, Téin is awaiting his trial, but was released from jail, under the condition that he does not return to New Caledonia.

    The leader of a CCAT (field action coordinating cell) created by Union Calédonienne late in 2023 to protest against a proposed French Constitutional amendment to alter voters’ rules of eligibility at local elections, was jailed for one year in mainland France. However, he was elected president of FLNKS in absentia in late August 2024.

    CCAT, meanwhile, was admitted as one of the new components of FLNKS.

    In a de facto split, the two main moderate pillars of FLNKS, UPM and PALIKA, at the same time, distanced themselves from the pro-independence UC-dominated platform, opening a rift within the pro-independence umbrella.

    The FLNKS is scheduled to hold an extraordinary meeting on August 9 (it was initially scheduled to be held on August 2), to “highlight the prospects of the pursuit of dialogue through a repositioning of the pro-independence movement’s political orientations”.

    French Minister for Overseas Manuel Valls (centre) shows signatures on the last page of New Caledonia’s new Bougival agreement earlier this month . . . “If tomorrow there was to be no agreement, it would mean the future, hope, would be put into question” Image: FB/RNZ Pacific

    Valls: ‘I’m not giving up’
     Reacting to the latest UC statements, Valls told French media he called on UC to have “a great sense of responsibility”.

    “If tomorrow there was to be no agreement, it would mean the future, hope, would be put into question. Investment, including for the nickel mining industry, would no longer be possible.”

    “I’m not giving up. Union Calédonienne has chosen to reject, as it stands, the Bougival accord project. I take note of this, but I profoundly regret this position.

    “An institutional void would be a disaster for [New Caledonia]. It would be a prolonged uncertainty, the risk of further instability, the return of violence,” he said.

    “But my door is not closed and I remain available for dialogue at all times. Impasse is not an option.”

    Valls said the Bougival document was “‘neither someone’s victory on another one, nor an imposed text: it was built day after day with partners around the table following months of long discussions.”

    In a recent letter specifically sent to Union Calédonienne, the French former Prime Minister suggested the creation of an editorial committee to start drafting future-shaping documents for New Caledonia, such as its “fundamental law”, akin to a Constitution for New Caledonia.

    Valls also stressed France’s financial assistance to New Caledonia, which last year totalled around 3 billion euros because of the costs associated to the May 2024 riots.

    The riots caused 14 dead, hundreds of injured and an estimated financial cost of more than 2 billion euros (NZ$5.8 billion) in damage.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Roch Wamytan: Paris political agreement for New Caledonia ‘not enough’ for Kanaks

    By Lydia Lewis, RNZ Pacific presenter/bulletin editor

    A former New Caledonia Congress president says there are “not enough” benefits for Kanaks in a new “draft” agreement he signed alongside pro and anti-independence stakeholders in France last month.

    Roch Wamytan said that, after 10 days of deadlock discussions in Paris, he failed to secure the pro-independence mandate.

    He told RNZ Pacific that he refused to sign a “final agreement”.

    Instead, he said, he opted for a “draft” agreement, which is what he signed. It has been hailed as “historic” by all parties involved.

    While France maintains its “neutrality”, Wamytan said that at the negotiating table it was two (France and New Caledonia’s pro-France bloc) against one (pro-Kanaky).

    A main point of tension was the electoral law changes, which sparked last year’s civil unrest.

    “We call on France to respect the provisions of international law, which remains our main protective shield until the process of decolonisation and emancipation is completed. Hence, our incessant interventions during negotiations on this subject [electoral law changes],” Wamytan told RNZ Pacific.

    He said it was difficult to understand whether France wanted to decolonise New Caledonia or not.

    Concrete measures
    “We have a lot of concrete measures in this proposed agreement, but the main question is a political question. Where are you [France] going with this? Independence or integration with France?”

    The document, signed in the city of Bougival, involves a series of measures and recognition by France of New Caledonia as a “State” as well as dual citizenship — French and New Caledonian — provided future New Caledonian citizens are French nationals in the first place.

    But this week, New Caledonia’s oldest pro-independence party, the Union Calédonienne (UC), officially rejected the political agreement signed in Paris.

    Wamytan maintains New Caledonia is not France. But the French ambassador to the Pacific has previously told RNZ Pacific New Caledonia is France.

    However, Sonia Backès, the leader of the Caledonian Republicans Party and the president of the Provincial Assembly of Southern Province, says the agreement signed in France is “final”.

    “Roch Wamytan and the pro-independence delegation signed an agreement in Bougival. Since their return to New Caledonia, their political supports have been fiercely critical of the agreement,” her office said via a statement.

    “As a result, radical pro-independence leaders like Roch Wamytan have chosen to renege on their commitment and withdraw their signature. This agreement is final; there is no other viable political balance outside of it.”

    So why did Wamytan sign?
     When asked why he signed the draft agreement when he did not agree with it, he said: “After the 10 days they obliged us to sign something.”

    “We told them that we [didn’t have] the mandate of our parties to sign an agreement, but only a ‘project’ or ‘draft’.

    “It was important for us to return with a paper and to show, to explain, to present, to debate, for the debate of our political party. This is the stage where we are at now, but for the moment, we do not agree with that.

    “We [tried] to explain to [France and pro-France bloc] that we have a problem [with electoral law change being included].

    “This is our problem. So we signed only for one reason . . . that we have to return back home and to explain where we are now, after 10 days of negotiation. [Did we] achieve the objectives, the mandate given by our political parties?”

    He said one thing he wanted to make clear was that what he had signed was not definitive and was now up for negotiation.

    An FLNKS (Kanak and Socialist National Liberation Front) Congress meeting is set down for this weekend with the Union Calédonienne Congress meeting held a weekend prior.

    Wamytan said that it was now up to the FLNKS members to have their say and decide where to next.

    “They will decide if we accept this draft agreement or we reject,” he said.

    “We have two options: we accept with certain conditions, for example, on the question of the right to vote on the electoral rule. Or for the question of the trajectory from here to independence, through a referendum or the framework proposed by President Macron.”

    “This is an important element to discuss with France, but after this round of discussions.”

    He expected further meetings with France after community consultations.

    Communication problem
     Wamytan admitted that the pro-independence negotiators did not communicate clearly about the agreement to their supporters.

    He said after signing the document, President Macron and the pro-France signatories were quick to communicate to the media and their supporters — and the messages filtered to his supporters resulting in anger and frustrations.

    He said the anger has mostly been around the signing itself, with people mistaking the draft proposal as final.

    “The political, pro-Kanaky party were very, very, very angry against us. We did not communicate and this I think is our problem.”

    Bribery allegations
     Wamytan has also dismissed unconfirmed reports that negotiators were bribed to sign a historic deal in Paris.

    He said he was aware of people “chucking accusations of bribery” around, but said they were false.

    “It has never been in the minds of Kanak independence leaders doing such practices,” he said.

    “After the signature of the Matignon Accord 37 years ago, with [FLNKS leader Jean-Marie Tjibaou] and with us after the signature of Nouméa accord in 1998, we heard about the same allegation and some rumours like this.”

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: NZ ‘lagging behind’ world by failing to recognise Palestinian statehood, says former PM Helen Clark

    By Craig McCulloch, RNZ News acting political editor

    New Zealand is lagging behind the rest of the world through its failure to recognise Palestinian statehood, says Former Prime Minister Helen Clark.

    Canada yesterday became the latest country to announce it would formally recognise the state of Palestine when world leaders met at the UN General Assembly in September.

    It follows recent similar commitments from the France and the United Kingdom.

    On Wednesday, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon suggested the discussion was a distraction and said the immediate focus should be on getting humanitarian aid into Gaza.

    But, speaking to RNZ Midday Report, Clark said New Zealand needed to come on board.

    “We are watching a catastrophe unfold in Gaza. We’re watching starvation. We’re watching famine conditions for many. Many are using the word genocide,” she said.

    “If New Zealand can’t act in these circumstances, when can it act?”

    Elders call for recognition
    “The Elders, a group of world leaders of which Clark is a part, last month issued a call for countries to recognise the state of Palestine, calling it the “beginning, not the end of a political pathway towards lasting peace”.

    Clark said the government seemed to be trying avoid the ire of the United States by waiting until the peace process was well underway or nearing its end.

    “That is no longer tenable,” she said.

    “New Zealand really is lagging behind.”

    Even before the recent commitments from France, Canada and the UK, 147 of the UN’s 193 member states had recognised the Palestinian state.

    Clark said the hope was that the series of recognitions from major Western states would first shift the US position and then Israel’s.

    “When the US moves, Israel eventually jumps because it owes so much to the United States for the support, financial, military and otherwise,” she said.

    “At some point, Israel has to smell the coffee.”

    Surprised over Peters
    Clark said she was “a little surprised” that Foreign Minister Winston Peters had not been more forward-leaning given he historically had strongly advocated New Zealand’s even-handed position.

    On Wednesday, New Zealand signed a joint statement with 14 other countries expressing a willingness to recognise the State of Palestine as a necessary step towards a two-state solution.

    However, later speaking in Parliament, Peters said that was conditional on first seeing progress from Palestine, including representative governance, commitment to non-violence, and security guarantees for Israel.

    “If we are to recognise the state of Palestine, New Zealand wants to know that what we are recognising is a legitimate, representative, viable, political entity,” Peters told MPs.

    Peters also agreed with a contribution from ACT’s Simon Court that recognising the state of Palestine could be viewed as “a reward [to Hamas] for acts of terrorism” if it was done before Hamas had returned hostages or laid down arms.

    Luxon earlier told RNZ New Zealand had long supported the eventual recognition of Palestinian statehood, but that the immediate focus should be on getting aid into Gaza rather than “fragmenting and talking about all sorts of other things that are distractions”.

    “We need to put the pressure on Israel to get humanitarian assistance unfettered, at scale, at volume, into Gaza,” he told RNZ.

    “You can talk about a whole bunch of other things, but for right now, the world needs to focus.”

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: ‘Glorious’ sisters showcase Auckland’s Polynesian experiences for tourists

    By Torika Tokalau, Local Democracy Reporter

    The sisters running Auckland’s first authentic Polynesian show for tourists say it’s not just for visitors, but also to help uplift Pacific people.

    Louisa Tipene Opetaia and Ama Mosese’s Glorious Tours was pooled as one of 10 new “Treasures of Tāmaki Makaurau”: a go-to guide by Tātaki Auckland Unlimited (TAU) for local Māori tourism.

    Their tour tells the story of how Auckland became the biggest Polynesian city in the world, and often starts with a drop in at a Pacific or Māori-owned cafe, a guided hīkoi up the Māngere mountain, hangi lunch, a haka show at the museum, then end with a kava-drinking experience.

    LOCAL DEMOCRACY REPORTING

    The tour, which has been running for a year, aims to give visitors an Auckland experience through local eyes, with Māori-led journeys and dining events.

    Opetaia said before they started their tour, tourists were travelling to Rotorua for a Pacific cultural experience.

    The only other regular Polynesian show for tourists in Auckland was at Auckland Museum, where there was a daily haka show.

    “We have rich culture gold in south Auckland,” she said.

    “All tourists fly here, in our backyard and we wanted to offer them something right here.”

    The sisters, who are of Māori and Samoan heritage, call themselves “cultural connectors”.

    ‘The space was lacking’
    “We’ve been working for these other companies for some time, some of them not even New Zealand-owned. And we felt we were the face of these companies but behind the scenes it wasn’t a local or Māori or indigenous business.

    “We decided to step into this space that we saw was lacking, and offer authentic indigenous cultural experiences here in Tāmaki Makaurau — the biggest Polynesian city in the world.”

    Glorious Tours is based out of Naumi Hotel, near the Auckland Airport in Māngere.

    “We tailor it to what they want, so if they like shopping we take them to places where they can buy authentic Pacific goods, or we take them to our local gallery in Māngere.

    This month, the sisters will launch a Polynesian dinner and dance show in Māngere, featuring local schools.

    “It’s not just for the tourists, it’s for our own people. Our kaupapa is to uplift our local people, especially our rangatahi.”

    TAU director of Māori outcomes Helen Te Hira said Treasures of Tāmaki Makaurau plays a vital role in ensuring Māori culture, businesses and leadership are central to the way Tāmaki Makaurau is experienced by visitors.

    “Every business on this platform brings something unique — a sense of purpose, cultural depth and creative excellence.”

    LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air. Asia Pacific Report is a partner.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Bloodshed at GHF-run Gaza aid sites ‘a great sin’, says former top UN official

    Asia Pacific Report

    A former senior UN aid official has condemned the bloodshed at the notorious US and Israel-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation’s aid food depots, describing the distribition system as having turned into a “catastrophe”.

    The number of aid seekers killed continues to climb daily beyond 1000.

    Martin Griffiths, director of Mediation Group International and the former Under Secretary General of the UN Humanitarian Affairs Office, said: “I think when many of us saw the first plans of the GHF to launch this operation in Gaza, we were immediately appalled by the way they were proposing to manage it.”

    “It was clearly militarised. They’d have their own security contractors,” he told Al Jazeera.

    “They’d have [Israeli military] camps placed right beside them. We know now that they are, in fact, under instructions by [the Israeli military].

    “All of this is a crime. All of this is a deep betrayal of humanitarian values.

    “But what I at least did not sufficiently anticipate was the killing and was the absolutely critical result of this operation, this sole humanitarian operation allowed by Israel in Gaza,” Griffiths added.

    “The 1000 killed are an incredible statistic. I had no idea it would go that high and it’s going on daily. It’s not stopping.

    “I think it’s a catastrophe more than a disappointment,” he said. “I think it’s a great sin. I think it’s a great crime.”

    Humanitarian aid advocate Martin Griffiths . . . We know now that [GHF] are, in fact, under instructions by [the Israeli military]. All of this is a crime.” Image: Wikipedia

    Commenting about US envoy Steve Witkoff and US ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee’s planned visit to GHF-run aid distribution sites in Gaza, he said this was “likely to be choreographed”.

    However, he acknowledged it was still an “important form of witness”.

    “I’m glad that they’re going,” Griffiths said.

    “Maybe they will see things that are unexpected. I can’t imagine because we’ve seen so much. But I don’t see it leading to a major change.

    “If I was one of the two million Gazans starving to death, this is a day I would like to go to an aid distribution point,” Griffiths added.

    “There’s slightly less risk probably than any other day.”

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: As protesters condemn Western media ‘complicity’, Gaza journalists struggle for survival

    Asia Pacific Report

    Protesters demonstrated outside several major US media outlets in Washington this week condemning their coverage of the genocide in Gaza, claiming they were to blame over misinformation and the worsening catastrophe.

    Banging pots and pans to spotlight the starvation crisis, they accused the media of “complicity in genocide”.

    Banners and placards proclaimed “Stop media complicity in genocide” and “US media manufactures consent for Israel’s crimes”, as the protesters demonstrated outside media offices that included NBC News and Fox News.

    But the irony was that while the protests appeared to have been ignored or overlooked by national media in the US – and certainly in New Zealand, they were strongly reported by at least one global news agency, Turkey’s Anadolu Agensi.

    The protests echoed a series of statements by various news media organisations, such as Agence France-Presse concerned about the safety of their journalists from both under fire and the risk of starvation, and media freedom advocacy groups.

    The Doha-based global television news network Al Jazeera, that has been producing arguably the best and most honest news coverage of Gaza and the occupied West Bank – which earned it being banned last year by both Israel and the Palestinian Authority from reporting inside their territory — called for global action to protect Gaza’s journalists.

    It said in a statement that Isael’s forced starvation of the besieged enclave that threatened Gaza’s entire population, including those “risking their lives to shed light on Israel’s atrocities”.

    Death toll passes 60,000
    On Tuesday this week, the world noted a grim milestone in Gaza, with the Health Ministry announcing that the death toll had surpassed 60,000 (this does not include the tens of thousands of people buried under the rubble and missing, presumed dead).

    Put in perspective, that is one in every 36 people in Gaza killed, and more than 90 people on average slaughtered every day.

    Also, 1157 people have been killed near the notorious Israel and US-backed Gaza “Humanitarian” Foundation food depots condemned as “death traps”, while 154 people have died from starvation, 89 of them children with the numbers rising.


    Israel’s genocide – ‘Everyone in Gaza is starving’       Video: Al Jazeera

    An episode of the weekly media watch programme, The Listening Post, took up the theme as well, criticising the failure of many high profile Western news services from adequately reporting the horror of Israel’s devastating and cruel policies.

    “When trying to stave off starvation becomes part of the job. What it means to be a Palestinian journalist in Gaza. The stories they are determined to tell, the incredible risks they are prepared to take,” said host Richard Gizbert when introducing the programme. He wasted no time firing a few caustic shots.

    Metropolitan police on watch for the pro-Palestinian protesters outside Fox News offices in Washington DC this week. Image: AA screenshot APR

    “What is unfolding in Gaza now has the appearance of a final solution, orchestrated by Israel and the United States, Israel’s other ally: The transformation of parts of the Gaza strip into starvation and concentration camps, a place where famine has been turned into a weapon of war,” he said.

    “Reporting on the reality of this genocide can amount to a death sentence. Palestinian journalists can easily identify with the suffering they are documenting since they too are going hungry.

    “They have been targeted because for [Israeli Prime Minister] Benjamin Netanyahu, like other genocidal leaders before him, starving a population is much easier to do when no one is watching.

    An Al Jazeera reporter ducks for cover as bombs hit a building behind her in a live broadcast from Gaza . . . featured in The Listening Post’s starvation report. Image: AA screenshot APR

    Perpetrator ‘left out’
    “Across Western mainstream media, news outlets have been unable to ignore this story of mass starvation in Gaza. But in report after report, they have made a habit of leaving out a key detail – naming the perpetrators of the famine, Israel.

    “The missing actors, the sanitised language, the use of the passive grammatical voice, it is all part of the playbook for far too many international news outlets and that is exactly what the few Palestinian journalists still standing are out to tell the world.”

    Gizbert explained that “journalists in Gaza already have the world’s toughest assignment”:
    “Job one for almost 22 months now has been survival; job two, telling heartbreaking stories; documenting a genocide while under fire.”

    Hossam Shabat reports on his colleague Anas al-Sharif’s experience at Al Shifa hospital and the starvation of babies in Gaza. Image: Instagram/@hossam_shbat

    Like, for example, Al Jazeera Arabic’s Anas al-Sharif who was reporting live from outside Al Shifa medical complex when a woman behind him collapsed at the hospital’s gate.

    Al-Sharif, who had reported on the genocide of his own people for more than 650 days without rest or complaint, through Israeli occupation airstrikes, drone attacks, and countless “scenes resembling hell”, suddenly could not take it anymore.

    He broke down: “People are falling to the ground from the severity of hunger,” al-Sharif said through his tears. “They need one sip of water. They need one loaf of bread.”

    Al-Sharif has also been threatened by the Israeli military, accusing him of being a “Hamas militant”, an accusation strongly denied by Al Jazeera, denouncing what it called Tel Aviv’s “campaign of incitement” against its reporters in the Gaza Strip.

    Discredited for bias
    Many Western mainstream media – including BBC, CNN, Sky, ITN, and Australia’s public broadcaster ABC — have been repeatedly discredited for their “pro-Israel bias” by scores of journalists who have acted as whistleblowers about the actions of their own news organisations.

    According to a Declassified UK report, for example, the journalists working for a range of outlets from across the political spectrum have “painted a consistent picture of the obstacles faced by reporters who want to humanise Palestinians or scrutinise Israeli government narratives”. The US media is also under attack and has been putting up a lame defence.

    Last week, more than 100 aid groups warned of “mass starvation” throughout Gaza — predictably denied by Israeli government in the face of overwhelming evidence — with their staff severely impacted by shortages and serious implications for journalists already being threatened with targeting by the Israeli military.

    Israel faces growing global pressure over the enclave’s dire humanitarian crisis, where more than two million people have endured 22 months of war. UN Security Council member France has led a group of countries announcing that they plan to recognise the Palestinian state at the UN in September, with United Kingdom, Canada, Malta and Finland among those following with the total number now almost 150 of the 193 UN member states.

    A statement with 111 signatories, including Doctors Without Borders (MSF), Save the Children and Oxfam, warned that “our colleagues and those we serve are wasting away”. The groups called for an immediate negotiated ceasefire, the opening of all land crossings and the free flow of aid through UN-led mechanisms.

    Al Jazeera’s Nour Odeh reported from Amman that the Israeli government had accused the UK of supporting the establishment of a “jihadi” state and of derailing efforts to reach a ceasefire.

    “But really,” she said, “the Israeli media, for example, is describing this as a political tsunami, a realisation of how significant the tide is, and how improbable it is to turn it back to countries withholding recognition because Israel said it doesn’t want it.”

    Calling for sanctions
    She also noted how 31 high-profile Israelis, including the former speaker of the Knesset, a former attorney general, and several recipients of Israel’s highest cultural award, were calling on world governments to impose crippling sanctions on Israel to stop the starvation of Palestinians in Gaza and their expulsion

    “This was taboo just a few days ago and has never really been done before, certainly not at this level of prominence of the signatories,” Odeh added.

    “Israel is starving Gazan journalists into silence,” says the CPJ. Image: CPJ screenshot APR

    The New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) added its voice to the appeal by aid agencies to call for an end to Israel’s starvation of journalists and other civilians in Gaza, backing the plea for states to “save lives before there are none left to save.”

    In a statement on its website, the CPJ accused Israel of “starving journalists into silence”.

    “Israel is starving Gazan journalists into silence. They are not just reporters, they are frontline witnesses, abandoned as international media were pulled out and denied entry,” said CPJ regional director Sara Qudah.

    “The world must act now: protect them, feed them, and allow them to recover while other journalists step in to help report. Our response to their courageous 650 plus-days of war reporting cannot simply be to let them starve to death.”

    ‘Bearing witness’ videos
    Also, last week the CPJ launched a “bearing witness” series of videos from Gaza giving voice to the challenges the journalists have been facing. In the first video, Moath al Kahlout described how his cousin had been shot dead while awaiting humanitarian aid.

    As Israel partially eased its 11-week total blockade of Gaza that began in May, CPJ published the testimony of six journalists who described how “starvation, dizziness, brain fog, and sickness” had threatened their ability to report.

    Among highlights cited by the CPJ:
    • On June 20, Al Jazeera correspondent Anas Al Sharif — the journalist cited earlier in this article — posted online: “I am drowning in hunger, trembling in exhaustion, and resisting the fainting that follows me every moment . . .  Gaza is dying. And we die with it.”
    • Sally Thabet, correspondent for Al-Kofiya satellite channel, told CPJ that she fainted consciousness after doing a live broadcast on July 20 because she had not eaten all day. She regained consciousness in Al-Shifa hospital, where doctors gave her an intravenous drip for rehydration and nutrition. In an online video, she described how she and her three daughters were starving.
    • Another Palestinian journalist, Shuruq As’ad said Thabet had been the third journalist to collapse on air from starvation that week, and posted a photograph of Thabet with the drip in her hand.
    • During a live broadcast on July 20, Al-Araby TV correspondent Saleh Al-Natour said: “We have no choice but to write and speak; otherwise, we will all die.”

    Little of this horrendous state of affairs has made it onto the pages of newspapers, websites of the television screens in the New Zealand mainstream media which seems to have a pro-Israel slant and rarely interviews Palestinian journalists or analysts for balance.

    “Stop media complicity in genocide” says the protest banner in Washington DC. Image: AA screenshot APR

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Fiji ‘failing’ the Gaza genocide and humanity test, says rights group

    Asia Pacific Report

    The NGO Coalition on Human Rights in Fiji has sharply criticised the Fiji government’s stance over Israel’s genocide in Gaza, saying it “starkly contrasts” with the United Nations and international community’s condemnation as a violation of international law and an impediment to peace.

    In a statement today, the NGO Coalition said that the way the government was responding to the genocide and war crimes in Gaza would set a precedent for how it would deal with crises and conflict in future.

    It would be a marker for human rights responses both at home and the rest of the world.

    “We are now seeing whether our country will be a force that works to uphold human rights and international law, or one that tramples on them whenever convenient,” the statement said.

    “Fiji’s position on the genocide in Gaza and the occupation of Palestinians starkly contrasts with the values of justice, freedom, and international law that the Fijian people hold dear.

    “The genocide and colonial occupation have been widely recognised by the international community, including the United Nations, as a violation of international law and an impediment to peace and the self-determination of the Palestinian people.”

    Last week, French President Emmanuel Macron announced that France would formally recognise the state of Palestine — the first of G7 countries to do so — at the UN general Assembly in September.

    142 countries recognise Palestine
    At least 142 countries out of the 193 members of the UN currently recognise or plan to recognise a Palestinian state, including European Union members Norway, Ireland, Spain and Slovenia.

    However, several powerful Western countries have refused to do so, including the United States, the United Kingdom and Germany.

    At the UN this week, Saudi Arabia and France opened a three-day conference with the goal of recognising Palestinian statehood as part of a peaceful settlement to end the war in Gaza.

    Last year, Fiji’s coalition government submitted a written statement in support of the Israeli genocidal occupation of Palestine, including East Jerusalem, noted the NGO coalition.

    Last month, Fiji’s coalition government again voted against a UN General Assembly resolution that demanded an immediate, unconditional, and permanent ceasefire in Gaza.

    Also recently, the Fiji government approved the allocation of $1.12 million to establish an embassy “in the genocidal terror state of Israel as Fijians grapple with urgent issues, including poverty, violence against women and girls, deteriorating water and health infrastructure, drug use, high rates of HIV, poor educational outcomes, climate change, and unfair wages for workers”.

    Met with ‘indifference’
    The NGO coalition said that it had made repeated requests to the Fiji government to “do the bare minimum and enforce the basic tenets of international law on Israel”.

    “We have been calling upon the Fiji government to uphold the principles of peace, justice, and human rights that our nation cherishes,” the statement said.

    “We campaigned, we lobbied, we engaged, and we explained. We showed the evidence, pointed to the law, and asked our leaders to do the right thing.

    “We’ve been met with nothing but indifference.”

    Instead, said the NGO statement, Fiji leaders had met with Israeli government representatives and declared support for a country “committing the most heinous crimes” recognised in international law.

    “Fijian leaders and the Fiji government should not be supporting Israel or setting up an embassy in Israel while Israel continues to bomb refugee tents, kill journalists and medics, and block the delivery of humanitarian aid to a population under relentless siege.

    “No politician in Fiji can claim ignorance of what is happening.”

    62,000 Palestinians killed
    More than 62,000 Palestinians have been killed in the war on Gaza, most of them women and children.

    “Many more have been maimed, traumatised, and displaced. Starvation is being used by Israel as weapon to kill babies and children.

    “Hospitals, churches, mosques,, refugee camps, schools, universities, residential neighbourhoods, water and food facilities have been destroyed.

    “History will judge how we respond as Fijians to this moment.

    “Our rich cultural heritage and shared values teach us the importance of always standing up for what is right, even when it is not popular or convenient.”

    Members of the Fiji NGO Coalition on Human Rights are Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre (chair), Fiji Women’s Rights Movement, Citizens’ Constitutional Forum, femLINKpacific, Social Empowerment and Education Programme, and Diverse Voices and Action (DIVA) for Equality Fiji.

    Also, Pacific Network on Globalisation (PANG) is an observer.

    The NGO coalition said it stood in solidarity with the Palestinian people out of a shared belief in humanity, justice, and the inalienable human rights of every individual.

    “Silence is not an option,” it added.

    Fijians for Palestine Solidarity Network said it supported this NGO coalition statement.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: ‘We pose no threat – our aim is to break the siege’: Tan Safi on joining the Handala Gaza flotilla

    No New Zealanders were on board the Handala in the latest arrest and abductions of Freedom Flotilla crew on humanitarian siege-busting missions to Gaza. However, two Australians were and one talks to The New Arab just before the attack on Saturday.

    INTERVIEW: By Sebastian Shehadi

    The Handala, a 1968 Norwegian trawler repurposed by the Freedom Flotilla Coalition (FFC), set sail for Gaza from southern Italy on July 20, carrying around 21 people and a cargo of food, medical kits, baby formula, water desalination units and more.

    The ship is named after the iconic Palestinian cartoon figure, Handala, who symbolises Palestinian identity, resilience and the ongoing struggle against displacement and occupation.

    Just hours before departure, the crew uncovered deliberate sabotage: a rope tightly bound around the propeller and a sulfuric acid swap mistaken for water, leading to chemical burns in two people.

    Despite this alarming start, the mission continued, echoing the defiance of past flotilla efforts such as the interception of the Madleen in June and the Israeli drone strike on the Conscience in May.

    However, contact with the vessel was reported lost on July 24, with coalition officials warning that communications have been jammed and drones have been seen near the ship, raising concerns about interception or further hostile action.

    The mission resumed following the brief two-hour communications blackout. “Connection has now been re-established. ‘Handala’ is continuing its mission and is currently less than 349 nautical miles from Gaza,” the Freedom Flotilla Coalition (FFC) announced on Telegram on July 25.

    Then on Saturday, the Israeli military attacked the ship and violently detained and “abducted” the entire crew and issued a statement saying they were “safe” and on their way to Israel.

    The New Arab spoke to one of Handala’s crew, Lebanese-Australian filmmaker, human rights activist and journalist Tan Safi, before the arrest to find out more about the mission and why she chose to be on board this mission:

    The New Arab: How’s the mood on the ship at the moment?
     Tan Safi: The morale of everyone at the moment is high, as everyone is happy to be here. Of course, different emotions come up, and we talk them out, but as a collective, we’re all looking out for one another. Everyone is very caring and kind.

    We are a group of 21 people from 10 different countries. We have a very proud grandmother, as well as MPs, nurses, a human rights lawyer, a comedian, an actor, human rights activists and more. We’re from many different walks of life, and we pose absolutely no threat to anyone.

    We’re simply trying to challenge something illegal. Like previous Freedom Flotilla actions, we will be sailing through international waters into Palestinian territorial waters.

    Australian Handala crew member Tan Safi . . . “Back in 2010, we sent a flotilla that was caught in a deadly raid. The Israelis came in a helicopter, boarded the ship and killed nine people instantaneously, while another person died from a coma years later.” Image: FFC

    How are you preparing for the very real threat of Israeli violence?
     Back in 2010, we sent a flotilla that was caught in a deadly raid. The Israelis came in a helicopter, boarded the ship and killed nine people instantaneously, while another person died from a coma years later.

    So we know very well that Israel poses a real threat.

    More importantly, we’ve seen what they’re capable of over the last two years. The most horrific things imaginable. Israeli soldiers are committing endless crimes against Gazan children, and then going into the homes of the Palestinians they’ve murdered and taking selfies in women’s lingerie. We know what they’re capable of.

    Any interception of our vessel would violate international maritime law. The ICJ [International Court of Justice] itself ordered Israel not to interfere with any delivery of international aid. Of course, we know that Israel gets to exist in this world by hopping over international law, without any accountability, without any real sanctions.

    In terms of processing, what might happen to me? I’ve had to do it time and time again whenever I’ve joined FFC missions over the last two years. I’ve had to say goodbye to my friends and family, but also try to keep them reassured.

    Sometimes I feel like I’m lying, to be honest. I tell them that “everything will be okay”. But it’s psychologically impossible to explain.

    Are you worried that Handala is less protected than the last ship, Madleen, which had the global media attention (and protection) of having Greta Thunberg on board?

    A Gaza Freedom Flotilla Instagram poster. Image: Instagram/@loremresists

    No matter how many Instagram followers you have, your life is just as important as the next person’s. We have people on this boat who have Instagram. We have people who do.

    The lives of all these people are as valuable as everyone else’s. I would just try to focus on the fact that we’re all human beings, just as every Palestinian in Gaza is. I’m more worried that Israel’s violence will expand until it’s too late, and people wish that they had done more. The time is now.

    What is your message to global or Australian leaders?
     I’m Lebanese, but I grew up in so-called Australia, a country that has such a dark history. What our politicians forget is that so-called Australia was not theirs to begin with. Australia was, and will always be, Aboriginal land. They can try to hide their dark truths, just like Israel used to as well. But the truth will become exposed in time.

    To this day, Aboriginal people are abused and discriminated against by the state. My message to Australia’s leadership is: how can you watch tens of thousands of men, women and children being slaughtered and still be enabling Israel’s siege and genocide?

    The Australian embassy in Israel sent me a message urging me to “please reconsider your decision to join a humanitarian aid trip to Gaza”. If they’re so concerned about the two Australians on this boat, I would urge them to be more concerned with the millions of Palestinians who are suffering daily.

    The Palestinian cartoon character Handala . . . reimagined with deliberate starvation by the Israeli military forces. Image: X/@RimaHas

    Can you tell us more about daily life and organisation on the ship?
     We all put our hands up to volunteer for various tasks throughout the day. Some of us are more skilled in certain areas than others. For example, we have someone here from France who is a nurse, and they’re helping anyone who is feeling sick.

    We have the proud grandmother, Vigdis from Norway, who loves to cook. And then someone will put their hand up to do the dishes. No one is too good to clean the toilets.

    We’re all helping out to keep this ship organised. We also do shifts, helping out with the crew when needed. No one is sitting around. And if someone is, it’s because it’s really hot or the seas are rough.

    What do you hope Handala will achieve, beyond potentially breaking the siege?
     I hope this action will encourage all forms of solidarity and, more importantly, inspire direct action. I know that protests and non-direct actions serve a purpose, but we have talked and talked and talked at length. I don’t know how people are finding the strength.

    Sometimes when I’m asked to talk at events, I just don’t know what to say, because if you need me to explain this, maybe you will never understand.

    But what we clearly need to do is disrupt the financial flow that enables and fuels this genocide. The BDS movement is huge. People used to look down on it and question its efficacy. But now we’re able to quantify that it’s actually affecting real, big business.

    I’ve always been advocating for that and asking people to be aware of the companies they consume from, such as Unilever, Nestle and Coke. This is having a real impact on these companies that are profiteering from unethical practices to begin with, that extends far beyond the genocide in Gaza.

    Direct action could also involve blockading shipments of weapons from ports and docks, as seen in Greece. It’s amazing to see more countries step up. However, we often see a lot of lip service as well. It takes everyday people to actually stand up and say: “I’m able-bodied. I’m sick to my stomach. I’m gonna listen to my instinct and explore other options”.

    If protesting is not working, explore other options. If there is no direct action group, create one. All it takes is one person to begin.

    Are there any final or other messages you’d like to convey?
     The Handala ship is the 37th boat from the FFC to travel to Gaza. There are thousands of people behind each of these journeys who make these voyages happen.

    The FFC has existed for as many years as Israel’s siege on Gaza has. The FFC exists only because of Israel’s illegal siege.

    We are people from around the world who are united in our shared consciousness and care for Palestine. We pose no threat. I’m looking at a bunch of toys and baby formula. We have as much food as we can carry, but our main goal is to break Israel’s illegal siege of Gaza because you need to fix a problem at the root of the cause.

    Sebastian Shehadi is a freelance journalist and a contributing writer at the New Statesman. This article was first published by The New Arab. Follow Shehadi on X: @seblebanon

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Debunking the theological gaslighting of Israel-supporting Imams

    Muslims, and the global community, must rally around the Palestinian people’s inalienable rights: to exist, to return home, and to live free from occupation.

    ANALYSIS: By Shadee ElMasry

    In our world today, one would be hard-pressed to find a reputable, well-known scholar or group of scholars who support Israel. Of course, the keywords here are “well-known” and “reputable”, after a “misguided” delegation of European Imams travelled to Israel to placate the Israeli occupation and sponsor the genocide of the Palestinian people.

    It is increasingly common to find these figures, Muslim apologists for Israel, who have breached the Islamic tenet of standing against injustice, laundering their authority to provide cover for Israel’s crimes against humanity against their brothers and sisters in Palestine and across the wider Arab world.

    We live in a world of shameless opportunism, where the poisoned fruit of “normalising” relations with the Israeli occupation is weighed against moral conviction and our duty to stand with the afflicted Palestinians.

    A few weeks ago, this tradeoff played out across our screens.

    The delegation’s visit, which included 15 European Imams, was led by the controversial Hassen Chalghoumi (known for supporting Nicolas Sarkozy’s burqa ban) and involved meetings with Israeli President Isaac Herzog, who has been accused of inciting genocide.

    Clearly, their consciences weren’t troubled by the catastrophic famine now gripping Gaza, a “hell on earth” where women and children are killed for scrambling to get flour, and men are killed without rhyme or reason.

    I, like many companions across mosques and online feeds, was dumbfounded by the delegation’s complicity. This visit happened at a time when we as Muslims, and the global community, must rally around the Palestinian people’s inalienable rights: to exist, to return home, and to live free from occupation, especially as they face an existential threat.

    Delegation swiftly denounced
    The delegation was swiftly denounced. Al-Azhar University stressed that they “do not represent Islam and Muslims.” Worshippers walked out of UK mosques. A Dutch Imam was suspended.

    But this isn’t just about them. We need to ask how this happened and ensure it does not repeat with us. As one scholar said, if an Imam sees the community fall into usury, then gives his Friday sermon on adultery, the Imam has betrayed his congregation.

    The same is the case with Muslim apologists for Israel.

    To understand their motives, we must examine three theological “traps” these figures use to justify their support for Israel, or at least the very least, their silence over Palestine. The first of which is the “Greater Good Trap”.

    They claim that “speaking up against Israel will result in more harm than good”. But only the Prophet Muhammad’s silence constitutes tacit approval. Their reasoning doesn’t hold up.

    A weak-willed person will always accept this reasoning because it allows them to have their proverbial cake and eat it: they gain spiritual cover for remaining silent. As we’ve seen, the scholar will say: “Yes, I can speak, but then our school will get shut down, or we’ll lose funding. For the sake of the greater good, I must remain silent.”

    Israel, I’m sure, is delighted by this self-censorship. But we should also ask how it is that so many non-scholars, non-Muslims, and non-Arabs are speaking the truth about the Gaza genocide, while Islamic scholars remain silent.

    It raises eyebrows, at the very least.

    ‘Pure theology’ trap
    The second trap is the “Pure Theology” trap. Here, the scholar says: “Sound belief is the most important thing. How can we support the Palestinians when they resort to armed conflict? Their theology is flawed. I prioritise the truth, what’s wrong with that?”

    But what they overlook is that falsehood has degrees. It is foolish to denounce one error while ignoring a greater one.

    To attack a people’s doctrinal shortcomings while staying silent on their oppression is not principled; it is a failure to understand the fiqh of priorities.

    This trap lies in misplacing truths: loudly condemning the religious mistakes of Israel’s victims while conveniently forgetting the far graver injustice of Israel itself and the violent context that brought it into being.

    The final, and most sophisticated, trap that Muslim apologists for Israel use is metaphysical: they attempt to misdirect Muslims to a higher order of spiritual thought about the Divine will.

    They ask what sounds like a noble question: “Why is Allah doing this to us? It must be because of our sins. Israel is merely a tool God is using to punish us or purify us.”

    But the catch here is that the spiritual angle often (but not always) becomes a cover for pacifism. These figures that travelled to Israel, for instance, actively promote inaction. They showed no emotion, no voice, when witnessing the oppression of their own; only when it came to their sponsors did they find something to say.

    Suffer in silence
    The idea here is to suffer in silence, to clothe disengagement in the language of spiritual endurance.

    In the end, this is precisely what Israel and its supporters want: to keep the spotlight off themselves. Any diversion, theological or otherwise, is welcome. As we know, the oppressor laughs at those who fixate on what is bad while ignoring what is worse. And that is the danger behind all three traps.

    Yet despite these efforts, something far more powerful holds. The drive within the hearts and minds of Muslims to carry the burden of the Palestinian people, to speak their truth and fight for their freedom has not been extinguished.

    It is sustained by faith, shared memory, and the belief that justice is not a slogan but a sacred duty. We ask Allah for continued guidance and protection, and the strength to continue this noble and just cause. Ameen.

    Dr Shadee Elmasry has taught at several universities in the United States. Currently, he serves as scholar in residence at the New Brunswick Islamic Center in New Jersey. He is also the founder and head of Safina Society, an institution dedicated to the cause of traditional Islamic education in the West. This article was first published by The New Arab.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Gaza condemns Israeli ‘piracy’ over storming of Handala aid ship

    Asia Pacific Report

    The Gaza Government Media Office has condemned “in the strongest terms” Israel’s storming of the Handala aid ship, calling it an act of “maritime piracy”, reports Al Jazeera.

    “This blatant aggression represents a flagrant violation of international law and maritime navigation rules,” the office said in a statement.

    “It reaffirms once again that the [illegal Israeli] occupation acts as a thuggish force outside the law, targeting every humanitarian initiative seeking to rescue more than 2.4 million besieged and starving Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.”

    The office also called on the international community, including the United Nations and rights groups, “to take an urgent and firm stance against this aggression and to work to secure international protection for the convoys”.

    Israel’s Foreign Ministry confirmed in a statement today that the Israeli navy had intercepted the Gaza-bound Handala, and it was now heading towards Israel.

    “The Israeli navy has stopped the vessel Navarn from illegally entering the maritime zone of the coast of Gaza,” said the statement, using the aid ship’s original name.

    “The vessel is safely making its way to the shores of Israel,” it added. “All passengers are safe.”

    Freedom Flotilla slams ‘abductions’
    A statement by the Freedom Flotilla Coalition accused Israel military of “abducting” the 21 crew members of the Handala, saying the ship had been “violently intercepted by the Israeli military in international waters about 40 nautical miles from Gaza.

    “At 23:43 EEST Palestine time, the Occupation cut the cameras on board Handala and we have lost all communication with our ship.

    “The unarmed boat was carrying life-saving supplies when it was boarded by Israeli forces, its passengers abducted, and its cargo seized.

    “The interception occurred in international waters outside Palestinian territorial waters off Gaza, in violation of international maritime law.”

    The Handala carried a shipment of critical humanitarian aid for Palestinians in Gaza, including baby formula, diapers, food, and medicine, the statement said.

    “All cargo was non-military, civilian, and intended for direct distribution to a population facing deliberate starvation and medical collapse under Israel’s illegal blockade.”

    The Handala carried 21 civilians representing 12 countries, including parliamentarians, lawyers, journalists, labour organisers, environmentalists, and other human rights defenders.

    Seized crew members, journalists
    The seized crew includes:

    United States: Christian Smalls — Amazon Labor Union founder; Huwaida Arraf — Human rights attorney (Palestine/US); Jacob Berger — Jewish-American activist; Bob Suberi — Jewish US war veteran; Braedon Peluso — sailor and direct action activist; Dr Frank Romano — International lawyer and actor (France/US).

    France: Emma Fourreau — MEP and activist (France/Sweden); Gabrielle Cathala — Parliamentarian and former humanitarian worker; Justine Kempf — nurse, Médecins du Monde; Ange Sahuquet — engineer and human rights activist.

    Italy: Antonio Mazzeo — teacher, peace researcher, journalist; Antonio “Tony” La Picirella — climate and social justice organiser.

    Spain: Santiago González Vallejo — economist and activist; Sergio Toribio — engineer and environmentalist.

    Australia: Robert Martin — human rights activist; Tania “Tan” Safi — Journalist and organiser of Lebanese descent.

    Norway: Vigdis Bjorvand — 70-year-old lifelong justice activist.

    United Kingdom/France: Chloé Fiona Ludden — former UN staff and scientist.

    Tunisia: Hatem Aouini — Trade unionist and internationalist activist.

    The two journalists on board:

    Morocco: Mohamed El Bakkali — senior journalist with Al Jazeera (based in Paris).

    Iraq/United States: Waad Al Musa — cameraman and field reporter with Al Jazeera.

    The attack on Handala is the third violent act by Israeli forces against Freedom Flotilla missions this year alone, said the statement.

    “It follows the drone bombing of the civilian aid ship Conscience in European waters in May, which injured four people and disabled the vessel, and the illegal seizure of the Madleen in June, where Israeli forces abducted 12 civilians, including a Member of the European Parliament.

    “Shortly before their abduction, the Handala‘s crew affirmed that they would be hunger-striking if detained by Israeli forces and not accepting any food from the Israeli Occupation Forces.”

    Israeli officials have ignored the International Court of Justice’s binding orders that require the facilitation of humanitarian access to Gaza.

    The continued attacks on peaceful civilian missions represent a grave violation of international law, said the Freedom Flotilla Coalition.

    Kia Ora Gaza support for Handala
    In Auckland, Kia Ora Gaza spokesperson Roger Fowler, who is recovering from cancer treatment, said in a statement:

    “Kia Ora Gaza is a longtime member of the Freedom Flotilla Coalition and supports the current Handala civil mission to break Israel’s illegal siege of Gaza and end Israel’s campaign to wipe out the Palestinian population.

    “All governments must urgently take strong effective action to stop the genocide and occupation and end all complicity with Israel. There are no Kiwis on the Handala which was intercepted under an enforced communications blackout today.”

    Activists on board the Handala aid ship before leaving Italy’s Gallipoli Port on July 20, 2025. Image: Valeria Ferraro/Anadolu

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Gaza: Global community must act amid reports of starvation of journalists, says IPI

    By Jamie Wiseman

    The International Press Institute (IPI) has joined calls for urgent action to halt the unfolding humanitarian crisis in Gaza as global news organisations warn that their journalists there are experiencing starvation.

    Israel must immediately allow life-saving food aid to reach journalists and other civilians in Gaza, IPI said in a statement today.

    “The international community must also put effective pressure on Israel to allow all journalists to enter and exit the territory and to document the ongoing catastrophe,”it said.

    In an unprecedented joint statement this week, the Associated Press, Agence France-Presse, BBC News, and Reuters — four of the world’s leading news agencies — said their journalists on the ground “are increasingly unable to feed themselves and their families”.

    The news outlets added: “Journalists endure many deprivations and hardships in warzones. We are deeply alarmed that the threat of starvation is now one of them.”

    Separately, Al Jazeera Media Network said in a statement that journalists on the ground “now find themselves fighting for their own survival” due to mass starvation.

    Harrowing accounts
    AFP and Al Jazeera journalists shared harrowing accounts of conditions on the ground.

    One AFP photographer was quoted as saying, “I no longer have the strength to work for the media. My body is thin and I can’t work anymore.”

    Al Jazeera Arabic’s Gaza correspondent said he was “drowning in hunger”.

    In an interview with NPR, AFP global news director Phil Chetwynd said that the news agency had been working to evacuate its remaining contributors from Gaza, which requires Israeli permission.

    The dramatic warnings come as more than 100 international humanitarian organisations said that mass starvation in Gaza was now threatening the lives of humanitarian aid workers themselves, while the civilian death toll continues to rise.


    Gaza under siege — a journalist reports on daily survival   Video: Al Jazeera

    Meanwhile, Israel continues to refuse to allow international reporters into Gaza to report and cover the war and humanitarian situation independently, obstructing the free flow of news and limiting coverage of the humanitarian crisis.

    The ongoing conflict has taken a devastating toll on journalists and media outlets in Gaza.

    Highest media death toll
    Since October 2023, at least 186 journalists and media workers have been killed in Gaza — Al Jazeera puts the figure as at least 230 — the West Bank, Israel, and Lebanon, according to monitoring by the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ).

    This is the largest number of journalists to be killed in any armed conflict in this span of time.

    Independent investigations such as those conducted by Forbidden Stories have found more than a dozen cases in which journalists were intentionally targeted and killed by the Israeli military — which constitutes a war crime under international law.

    IPI has made repeated calls, in conjunction with its partners, urging the international community to take immediate measures to protect journalists and allow unimpeded access to the strip from international media.

    Today, IPI has strongly and urgently reiterated these calls, as humanitarian conditions in Gaza rapidly deteriorate and as journalists and other civilians face man-made starvation.

    The international community must use all diplomatic means at its disposal to pressure Israel to ensure the safe flow of food aid to journalists and other civilians, said IPI in a statement.

    “The response by the international community in this critical moment could be the difference between life and death. There is no more time to lose,” IPI said.

    Jamie Wiseman is a journalist of the Vienna-based International Press Institute.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Gaza: Global community must act amid reports of starvation of journalists, says IPI

    By Jamie Wiseman

    The International Press Institute (IPI) has joined calls for urgent action to halt the unfolding humanitarian crisis in Gaza as global news organisations warn that their journalists there are experiencing starvation.

    Israel must immediately allow life-saving food aid to reach journalists and other civilians in Gaza, IPI said in a statement today.

    “The international community must also put effective pressure on Israel to allow all journalists to enter and exit the territory and to document the ongoing catastrophe,”it said.

    In an unprecedented joint statement this week, the Associated Press, Agence France-Presse, BBC News, and Reuters — four of the world’s leading news agencies — said their journalists on the ground “are increasingly unable to feed themselves and their families”.

    The news outlets added: “Journalists endure many deprivations and hardships in warzones. We are deeply alarmed that the threat of starvation is now one of them.”

    Separately, Al Jazeera Media Network said in a statement that journalists on the ground “now find themselves fighting for their own survival” due to mass starvation.

    Harrowing accounts
    AFP and Al Jazeera journalists shared harrowing accounts of conditions on the ground.

    One AFP photographer was quoted as saying, “I no longer have the strength to work for the media. My body is thin and I can’t work anymore.”

    Al Jazeera Arabic’s Gaza correspondent said he was “drowning in hunger”.

    In an interview with NPR, AFP global news director Phil Chetwynd said that the news agency had been working to evacuate its remaining contributors from Gaza, which requires Israeli permission.

    The dramatic warnings come as more than 100 international humanitarian organisations said that mass starvation in Gaza was now threatening the lives of humanitarian aid workers themselves, while the civilian death toll continues to rise.


    Gaza under siege — a journalist reports on daily survival   Video: Al Jazeera

    Meanwhile, Israel continues to refuse to allow international reporters into Gaza to report and cover the war and humanitarian situation independently, obstructing the free flow of news and limiting coverage of the humanitarian crisis.

    The ongoing conflict has taken a devastating toll on journalists and media outlets in Gaza.

    Highest media death toll
    Since October 2023, at least 186 journalists and media workers have been killed in Gaza — Al Jazeera puts the figure as at least 230 — the West Bank, Israel, and Lebanon, according to monitoring by the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ).

    This is the largest number of journalists to be killed in any armed conflict in this span of time.

    Independent investigations such as those conducted by Forbidden Stories have found more than a dozen cases in which journalists were intentionally targeted and killed by the Israeli military — which constitutes a war crime under international law.

    IPI has made repeated calls, in conjunction with its partners, urging the international community to take immediate measures to protect journalists and allow unimpeded access to the strip from international media.

    Today, IPI has strongly and urgently reiterated these calls, as humanitarian conditions in Gaza rapidly deteriorate and as journalists and other civilians face man-made starvation.

    The international community must use all diplomatic means at its disposal to pressure Israel to ensure the safe flow of food aid to journalists and other civilians, said IPI in a statement.

    “The response by the international community in this critical moment could be the difference between life and death. There is no more time to lose,” IPI said.

    Jamie Wiseman is a journalist of the Vienna-based International Press Institute.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Leaked document reveals proposed law revisions in NZ, as Western defence of Zionist genocide threatens Pacific

    SPECIAL REPORT: By Mick Hall

    A leaked document has revealed secretive plans to revise terror laws in New Zealand so that people can be charged over statements deemed to constitute material support for a proscribed organisation.

    It shows the government also wants to widen the criteria for proscribing organisations to include groups that are judged to “facilitate” or “promote and encourage” terrorist acts.

    The changes would see the South Pacific nation falling in line with increasingly repressive Western countries like the UK, where scores of independent journalists and anti-genocide protesters have been arrested and charged under terrorism laws in recent months.

    The consultation document, handed over to the New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties (NZCCL), reveals the government has been in contact with a small number of unnamed groups this year over plans to legally redefine what material support involves, so that public statements or gestures involving insignia like flags can lead to charges if construed as support for proscribed groups.

    As part of a proposal to revise the Terrorism Suppression Act, the document suggests the process for designating organisations as terror groups should be changed by “expanding the threshold to enable more modern types of entities to be designated, such as those that ‘facilitate’ or ‘promote and encourage’ terrorist acts”.

    The Ministry of Justice has been contacted in an attempt to ascertain which groups it has been consulting with and why it believed the changes were necessary.

    NZCCL chairman Thomas Beagle told Mick Hall In Context his group was concerned the proposed changes were a further attempt to limit the rights of New Zealanders to engage in political protest.

    ‘What’s going on?’
    “When you look at the proposal to expand the Terrorism Suppression Act, alongside the Police and IPCA conspiring to propose a law change to ban political protest without government permission, you really have to wonder what’s going on,” he said.

    A report by the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) in February proposed to give police the right to ban protests if they believed there was a high chance of public disorder and threats to public safety.

    That would potentially mean bans on Palestinian solidarity protests if far right counter protestErs posed a threat of violent confrontation.

    The stand-alone legislation would put New Zealand in line with other Five Eyes and NATO-aligned security jurisdictions such as Australia, the United Kingdom, and Canada.

    Beagle points out proposed changes to terror laws would suppress freedom of speech and further undermine freedom of assembly and the right to protest.

    “We’ve seen what’s happening with the state’s abuse of terrorism suppression laws in the UK and are horrified that they have sunk so far and so quickly,” he said.

    More than 100 people were arrested across the UK on suspicion of supporting Palestine Action, a non-violent protest group proscribed as a terrorist organisation by the British government earlier this month.

    Arrests in social media clips
    Social media clips showed pensioners aggressively arrested while attending rallies in Liverpool, London, Manchester, Edinburgh, Bristol and Truro over the weekend.

    Independent journalists and academics have also faced state repression under the UK’s Terrorism Act.

    Among those targeted was Electronic Intifada journalist Asa Winstanley, who had his home raided and devices seized in October last year as part of the opaque counter-terror drive “Operation Incessantness”.

    Independent journalist Asa Winstanley . . . his home was raided and devices seized in October last year as part of “Operation Incessantness”. Image: R Witts Photography/mickhall.substack.com

    In May, the country’s Central Criminal Court ruled the raid was unlawful.

    Journalist Richard Medhurst has had a terror investigation hanging over his head since being detained at Heathrow Airport in August last year and charged under section 8 of the Terrorism Act. Activist and independent journalist Sarah Wilkinson had her house raided in the same month.

    Others have faced similar intimidation and threats of jail. In November 2024, Jewish academic Haim Bresheeth was charged after police alleged he had expressed support for a “proscribed organisation” during a speech outside the London residence of the Israeli ambassador to the UK.

    Meanwhile, dozens of members of Palestine Action are in jail facing terror charges. The vast majority are being held on remand where they may wait two years before going to trial — a common state tactic to take activists off the street and incarcerate them, knowing the chances of conviction are slim when they eventually go to court.

    ‘Targeted amendments’
    The document says the New Zealand government wants to progress “targeted amendments” to the Act, creating or amending offences “to capture contemporary behaviours and activities of concern” like “public expressions of support for a terrorist act or designated entities, for example by showing insignia or distributing propaganda or instructional material.”

    Protesters highlight the proscription of Palestine Action outside the British Embassy at The Hague on July 20. No arrests were made following 80 arrests by Dutch police the week before. Image: Defend Our Juries/mickhall.substack.com

    It suggests that the existing process for proscribing an organisation is slow and cumbersome, noting that: “Specific provisions need to be followed to designate entities not on a UN list, but the decision-making process is lengthy and the designation period is short. This impacts timely decision-making and the usefulness of designation as a tool to prevent terrorism.”

    It proposes to improve “the timeliness of the process, by considering changes to who the decision-maker is” and extending the renewal period from three to five years.

    The document suggests consulting the Attorney-General over designation-related decisions to ensure legal requirements are met may not be required and questions whether the designation process requiring the Prime Minister to review decisions twice is necessary. It asks whether others, like the Foreign Minister, should be involved in the decision-making process.

    Beagle believes the secretive proposals pose a threat to New Zealand’s liberal democracy.

    “Political protest is an important part of New Zealand’s history,” he said.

    “Whether it’s the environment, worker’s rights, feminism, Māori issues, homosexual law reform or any number of other issues, political protest has had a big part in forming what Aotearoa New Zealand is today.

    Protected under Bill of Rights
    “It’s a right protected by New Zealand’s Bill of Rights and is a critical part of being a functioning democracy.”

    The terror laws revision forms part of a wider trend of legislating to close down dissent over New Zealand’s foreign policy, now closely aligned with NATO and US interests.

    The government is also widening the definition of foreign interference in a way that could see people who “should have known” that they were being used by a foreign state to undermine New Zealand’s interests prosecuted.

    The Crimes (Countering Foreign Interference) Amendment Bill, which passed its first reading in Parliament on November 19, would criminalise the act of foreign interference, while also increasing powers of unwarranted searches by authorities.

    The Bill is effectively a reintroduction of the country’s old colonial sedition laws inherited from Britain, the broadness of the law having allowed it to be used against communists, trade unionists and indigenous rights activists.

    Republished from Mick Hall in Context on Substack with permisson.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Leaked document reveals proposed law revisions in NZ, as Western defence of Zionist genocide threatens Pacific

    SPECIAL REPORT: By Mick Hall

    A leaked document has revealed secretive plans to revise terror laws in New Zealand so that people can be charged over statements deemed to constitute material support for a proscribed organisation.

    It shows the government also wants to widen the criteria for proscribing organisations to include groups that are judged to “facilitate” or “promote and encourage” terrorist acts.

    The changes would see the South Pacific nation falling in line with increasingly repressive Western countries like the UK, where scores of independent journalists and anti-genocide protesters have been arrested and charged under terrorism laws in recent months.

    The consultation document, handed over to the New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties (NZCCL), reveals the government has been in contact with a small number of unnamed groups this year over plans to legally redefine what material support involves, so that public statements or gestures involving insignia like flags can lead to charges if construed as support for proscribed groups.

    As part of a proposal to revise the Terrorism Suppression Act, the document suggests the process for designating organisations as terror groups should be changed by “expanding the threshold to enable more modern types of entities to be designated, such as those that ‘facilitate’ or ‘promote and encourage’ terrorist acts”.

    The Ministry of Justice has been contacted in an attempt to ascertain which groups it has been consulting with and why it believed the changes were necessary.

    NZCCL chairman Thomas Beagle told Mick Hall In Context his group was concerned the proposed changes were a further attempt to limit the rights of New Zealanders to engage in political protest.

    ‘What’s going on?’
    “When you look at the proposal to expand the Terrorism Suppression Act, alongside the Police and IPCA conspiring to propose a law change to ban political protest without government permission, you really have to wonder what’s going on,” he said.

    A report by the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) in February proposed to give police the right to ban protests if they believed there was a high chance of public disorder and threats to public safety.

    That would potentially mean bans on Palestinian solidarity protests if far right counter protestErs posed a threat of violent confrontation.

    The stand-alone legislation would put New Zealand in line with other Five Eyes and NATO-aligned security jurisdictions such as Australia, the United Kingdom, and Canada.

    Beagle points out proposed changes to terror laws would suppress freedom of speech and further undermine freedom of assembly and the right to protest.

    “We’ve seen what’s happening with the state’s abuse of terrorism suppression laws in the UK and are horrified that they have sunk so far and so quickly,” he said.

    More than 100 people were arrested across the UK on suspicion of supporting Palestine Action, a non-violent protest group proscribed as a terrorist organisation by the British government earlier this month.

    Arrests in social media clips
    Social media clips showed pensioners aggressively arrested while attending rallies in Liverpool, London, Manchester, Edinburgh, Bristol and Truro over the weekend.

    Independent journalists and academics have also faced state repression under the UK’s Terrorism Act.

    Among those targeted was Electronic Intifada journalist Asa Winstanley, who had his home raided and devices seized in October last year as part of the opaque counter-terror drive “Operation Incessantness”.

    Independent journalist Asa Winstanley . . . his home was raided and devices seized in October last year as part of “Operation Incessantness”. Image: R Witts Photography/mickhall.substack.com

    In May, the country’s Central Criminal Court ruled the raid was unlawful.

    Journalist Richard Medhurst has had a terror investigation hanging over his head since being detained at Heathrow Airport in August last year and charged under section 8 of the Terrorism Act. Activist and independent journalist Sarah Wilkinson had her house raided in the same month.

    Others have faced similar intimidation and threats of jail. In November 2024, Jewish academic Haim Bresheeth was charged after police alleged he had expressed support for a “proscribed organisation” during a speech outside the London residence of the Israeli ambassador to the UK.

    Meanwhile, dozens of members of Palestine Action are in jail facing terror charges. The vast majority are being held on remand where they may wait two years before going to trial — a common state tactic to take activists off the street and incarcerate them, knowing the chances of conviction are slim when they eventually go to court.

    ‘Targeted amendments’
    The document says the New Zealand government wants to progress “targeted amendments” to the Act, creating or amending offences “to capture contemporary behaviours and activities of concern” like “public expressions of support for a terrorist act or designated entities, for example by showing insignia or distributing propaganda or instructional material.”

    Protesters highlight the proscription of Palestine Action outside the British Embassy at The Hague on July 20. No arrests were made following 80 arrests by Dutch police the week before. Image: Defend Our Juries/mickhall.substack.com

    It suggests that the existing process for proscribing an organisation is slow and cumbersome, noting that: “Specific provisions need to be followed to designate entities not on a UN list, but the decision-making process is lengthy and the designation period is short. This impacts timely decision-making and the usefulness of designation as a tool to prevent terrorism.”

    It proposes to improve “the timeliness of the process, by considering changes to who the decision-maker is” and extending the renewal period from three to five years.

    The document suggests consulting the Attorney-General over designation-related decisions to ensure legal requirements are met may not be required and questions whether the designation process requiring the Prime Minister to review decisions twice is necessary. It asks whether others, like the Foreign Minister, should be involved in the decision-making process.

    Beagle believes the secretive proposals pose a threat to New Zealand’s liberal democracy.

    “Political protest is an important part of New Zealand’s history,” he said.

    “Whether it’s the environment, worker’s rights, feminism, Māori issues, homosexual law reform or any number of other issues, political protest has had a big part in forming what Aotearoa New Zealand is today.

    Protected under Bill of Rights
    “It’s a right protected by New Zealand’s Bill of Rights and is a critical part of being a functioning democracy.”

    The terror laws revision forms part of a wider trend of legislating to close down dissent over New Zealand’s foreign policy, now closely aligned with NATO and US interests.

    The government is also widening the definition of foreign interference in a way that could see people who “should have known” that they were being used by a foreign state to undermine New Zealand’s interests prosecuted.

    The Crimes (Countering Foreign Interference) Amendment Bill, which passed its first reading in Parliament on November 19, would criminalise the act of foreign interference, while also increasing powers of unwarranted searches by authorities.

    The Bill is effectively a reintroduction of the country’s old colonial sedition laws inherited from Britain, the broadness of the law having allowed it to be used against communists, trade unionists and indigenous rights activists.

    Republished from Mick Hall in Context on Substack with permisson.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Leaked document reveals proposed law revisions in NZ, as Western defence of Zionist genocide threatens Pacific

    SPECIAL REPORT: By Mick Hall

    A leaked document has revealed secretive plans to revise terror laws in New Zealand so that people can be charged over statements deemed to constitute material support for a proscribed organisation.

    It shows the government also wants to widen the criteria for proscribing organisations to include groups that are judged to “facilitate” or “promote and encourage” terrorist acts.

    The changes would see the South Pacific nation falling in line with increasingly repressive Western countries like the UK, where scores of independent journalists and anti-genocide protesters have been arrested and charged under terrorism laws in recent months.

    The consultation document, handed over to the New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties (NZCCL), reveals the government has been in contact with a small number of unnamed groups this year over plans to legally redefine what material support involves, so that public statements or gestures involving insignia like flags can lead to charges if construed as support for proscribed groups.

    As part of a proposal to revise the Terrorism Suppression Act, the document suggests the process for designating organisations as terror groups should be changed by “expanding the threshold to enable more modern types of entities to be designated, such as those that ‘facilitate’ or ‘promote and encourage’ terrorist acts”.

    The Ministry of Justice has been contacted in an attempt to ascertain which groups it has been consulting with and why it believed the changes were necessary.

    NZCCL chairman Thomas Beagle told Mick Hall In Context his group was concerned the proposed changes were a further attempt to limit the rights of New Zealanders to engage in political protest.

    ‘What’s going on?’
    “When you look at the proposal to expand the Terrorism Suppression Act, alongside the Police and IPCA conspiring to propose a law change to ban political protest without government permission, you really have to wonder what’s going on,” he said.

    A report by the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) in February proposed to give police the right to ban protests if they believed there was a high chance of public disorder and threats to public safety.

    That would potentially mean bans on Palestinian solidarity protests if far right counter protestErs posed a threat of violent confrontation.

    The stand-alone legislation would put New Zealand in line with other Five Eyes and NATO-aligned security jurisdictions such as Australia, the United Kingdom, and Canada.

    Beagle points out proposed changes to terror laws would suppress freedom of speech and further undermine freedom of assembly and the right to protest.

    “We’ve seen what’s happening with the state’s abuse of terrorism suppression laws in the UK and are horrified that they have sunk so far and so quickly,” he said.

    More than 100 people were arrested across the UK on suspicion of supporting Palestine Action, a non-violent protest group proscribed as a terrorist organisation by the British government earlier this month.

    Arrests in social media clips
    Social media clips showed pensioners aggressively arrested while attending rallies in Liverpool, London, Manchester, Edinburgh, Bristol and Truro over the weekend.

    Independent journalists and academics have also faced state repression under the UK’s Terrorism Act.

    Among those targeted was Electronic Intifada journalist Asa Winstanley, who had his home raided and devices seized in October last year as part of the opaque counter-terror drive “Operation Incessantness”.

    Independent journalist Asa Winstanley . . . his home was raided and devices seized in October last year as part of “Operation Incessantness”. Image: R Witts Photography/mickhall.substack.com

    In May, the country’s Central Criminal Court ruled the raid was unlawful.

    Journalist Richard Medhurst has had a terror investigation hanging over his head since being detained at Heathrow Airport in August last year and charged under section 8 of the Terrorism Act. Activist and independent journalist Sarah Wilkinson had her house raided in the same month.

    Others have faced similar intimidation and threats of jail. In November 2024, Jewish academic Haim Bresheeth was charged after police alleged he had expressed support for a “proscribed organisation” during a speech outside the London residence of the Israeli ambassador to the UK.

    Meanwhile, dozens of members of Palestine Action are in jail facing terror charges. The vast majority are being held on remand where they may wait two years before going to trial — a common state tactic to take activists off the street and incarcerate them, knowing the chances of conviction are slim when they eventually go to court.

    ‘Targeted amendments’
    The document says the New Zealand government wants to progress “targeted amendments” to the Act, creating or amending offences “to capture contemporary behaviours and activities of concern” like “public expressions of support for a terrorist act or designated entities, for example by showing insignia or distributing propaganda or instructional material.”

    Protesters highlight the proscription of Palestine Action outside the British Embassy at The Hague on July 20. No arrests were made following 80 arrests by Dutch police the week before. Image: Defend Our Juries/mickhall.substack.com

    It suggests that the existing process for proscribing an organisation is slow and cumbersome, noting that: “Specific provisions need to be followed to designate entities not on a UN list, but the decision-making process is lengthy and the designation period is short. This impacts timely decision-making and the usefulness of designation as a tool to prevent terrorism.”

    It proposes to improve “the timeliness of the process, by considering changes to who the decision-maker is” and extending the renewal period from three to five years.

    The document suggests consulting the Attorney-General over designation-related decisions to ensure legal requirements are met may not be required and questions whether the designation process requiring the Prime Minister to review decisions twice is necessary. It asks whether others, like the Foreign Minister, should be involved in the decision-making process.

    Beagle believes the secretive proposals pose a threat to New Zealand’s liberal democracy.

    “Political protest is an important part of New Zealand’s history,” he said.

    “Whether it’s the environment, worker’s rights, feminism, Māori issues, homosexual law reform or any number of other issues, political protest has had a big part in forming what Aotearoa New Zealand is today.

    Protected under Bill of Rights
    “It’s a right protected by New Zealand’s Bill of Rights and is a critical part of being a functioning democracy.”

    The terror laws revision forms part of a wider trend of legislating to close down dissent over New Zealand’s foreign policy, now closely aligned with NATO and US interests.

    The government is also widening the definition of foreign interference in a way that could see people who “should have known” that they were being used by a foreign state to undermine New Zealand’s interests prosecuted.

    The Crimes (Countering Foreign Interference) Amendment Bill, which passed its first reading in Parliament on November 19, would criminalise the act of foreign interference, while also increasing powers of unwarranted searches by authorities.

    The Bill is effectively a reintroduction of the country’s old colonial sedition laws inherited from Britain, the broadness of the law having allowed it to be used against communists, trade unionists and indigenous rights activists.

    Republished from Mick Hall in Context on Substack with permisson.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Historic ICJ climate ruling ‘just the beginning’, says Vanuatu’s Regenvanu

    By Ezra Toara in Port Vila

    Vanuatu’s Minister of Climate Change Adaptation, Ralph Regenvanu, has welcomed the historic International Court of Justice (ICJ) climate ruling, calling it a “milestone in the fight for climate justice”.

    The ICJ has delivered a landmark advisory opinion on states’ obligations under international law to act on climate change.

    The ruling marks a major shift in the global push for climate justice.

    Vanuatu — one of the nations behind the campaign — has pledged to take the decision back to the UN General Assembly (UNGA) to seek a resolution supporting its full implementation.

    Climate Change Minister Regenvanu said in a statement: “We now have a common foundation based on the rule of law, releasing us from the limitations of individual nations’ political interests that have dominated climate action.

    “This moment will drive stronger action and accountability to protect our planet and peoples.”

    The ICJ confirmed that state responsibilities extend beyond voluntary commitments under the UNFCCC and Paris Agreement.

    It ruled that customary international law also requires states to prevent environmental and transboundary harm, protect human rights, and cooperate to address climate change impacts.

    Duties apply to all states
    These duties apply to all states, whether or not they have ratified specific climate treaties.

    Violations of these obligations carry legal consequences. The ICJ clarified that climate damage can be scientifically traced to specific polluter states whose actions or inaction cause harm.

    As a result, those states could be required to stop harmful activities, regulate private sector emissions, end fossil fuel subsidies, and provide reparations to affected states and individuals.

    “The implementation of this decision will set a new status quo and the structural change required to give our current and future generations hope for a healthy planet and sustainable future,” Minister Regenvanu added.

    He said high-emitting nations, especially those with a history of emissions, must be held accountable.

    Despite continued fossil fuel expansion and weakening global ambition — compounded by the United States’ withdrawal from the Paris Agreement — Regenvanu said the ICJ ruling was a powerful tool for campaigners, lawyers, and governments.

    “Vanuatu is proud and honoured to have spearheaded this initiative,” he said.

    ‘Powerful testament’
    “The number of states and civil society actors that have joined this cause is a powerful testament to the leadership of Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and youth activists.”

    The court’s decision follows a resolution adopted by consensus at the UNGA on 29 March 2023. That campaign was initiated by the Pacific Island Students Fighting Climate Change and backed by the Vanuatu government, calling for greater accountability from high-emitting countries.

    The ruling will now be taken to the UNGA in September and is expected to be a central topic at COP30 in Brazil this November.

    Vanuatu has committed to working with other nations to turn this legal outcome into coordinated action through diplomacy, policy, litigation, and international cooperation.

    “This is just the beginning,” Regenvanu said. “Success will depend on what happens next. We look forward to working with global partners to ensure this becomes a true turning point for climate justice.”

    Republished from the Vanuatu Daily Post with permission.

    The International Court of Justice (ICJ) delivers its historic climate ruling in The Hague on Tuesday. Image: VDP

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Keep fighting for a nuclear-free Pacific, Helen Clark warns Greenpeace over global storm clouds

    Asia Pacific Report

    Former New Zealand prime minister Helen Clark warned activists and campaigners in a speech on the deck of the Greenpeace environmental flagship Rainbow Warrior III last night to be wary of global “storm clouds” and the renewed existential threat of nuclear weapons.

    Speaking on her reflections on four decades after the bombing of the original Rainbow Warrior on 10 July 1985, she said that New Zealand had a lot to be proud of but the world was now in a “precarious” state.

    Clark praised Greenpeace over its long struggle, challenging the global campaigners to keep up the fight for a nuclear-free Pacific.

    “For New Zealand, having been proudly nuclear-free since the mid-1980s, life has got a lot more complicated for us as well, and I have done a lot of campaigning against New Zealand signing up to any aspect of the AUKUS arrangement because it seems to me that being associated with any agreement that supplies nuclear ship technology to Australia is more or less encouraging the development of nuclear threats in the South Pacific,” she said.

    “While I am not suggesting that Australians are about to put nuclear weapons on them, we know that others do. This is not the Pacific that we want.

    “It is not the Pacific that we fought for going back all those years.

    “So we need to be very concerned about these storm clouds gathering.”

    Lessons for humanity
    Clark was prime minister 1999-2008 and served as a minister in David Lange’s Labour government that passed New Zealand’s nuclear-free legislation in 1987 – two years after the Rainbow Warrior bombing by French secret agents.

    She was also head of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in 2009-2017.

    “When you think 40 years on, humanity might have learned some lessons. But it seems we have to repeat the lessons over and over again, or we will be dragged on the path of re-engagement with those who use nuclear weapons as their ultimate defence,” Clark told the Greenpeace activists, crew and guests.

    “Forty years on, we look back with a lot of pride, actually, at how New Zealand responded to the bombing of the Rainbow Warrior. We stood up with the passage of the nuclear-free legislation in 1987, we stood up with a lot of things.

    “All of this is under threat; the international scene now is quite precarious with respect to nuclear weapons. This is an existential threat.”


    Nuclear-free Pacific reflections with Helen Clark         Video: Greenpeace

    In response to Tahitian researcher and advocate Ena Manuireva who spoke earlier about the legacy of a health crisis as a result of 30 years of French nuclear tests at Moruroa and Fangataufa, she recalled her own thoughts.

    “It reminds us of why we were so motivated to fight for a nuclear-free Pacific because we remember the history of what happened in French Polynesia, in the Marshall Islands, in the South Australian desert, at Maralinga, to the New Zealand servicemen who were sent up in the navy ships, the Rotoiti and the Pukaki, in the late 1950s, to stand on deck while the British exploded their bombs [at Christmas Island in what is today Kiribati].

    “These poor guys were still seeking compensation when I was PM with the illnesses you [Ena] described in French Polynesia.

    Former NZ prime minister Helen Clark . . . “I remember one of the slogans in the 1970s and 1980s was ‘if it is so safe, test them in France’.” Image: Asia Pacific Report

    Testing ground for ‘others’
    “So the Pacific was a testing ground for ‘others’ far away and I remember one of the slogans in the 1970s and 1980s was ‘if it is so safe, test them in France’. Right? It wasn’t so safe.

    “Mind you, they regarded French Polynesia as France.

    “David Robie asked me to write the foreword to the new edition of his book, Eyes of Fire: The Last Voyage and Legacy of the Rainbow Warrior, and it brought back so many memories of those times because those of you who are my age will remember that the 1980s were the peak of the Cold War.

    “We had the Reagan administration [in the US] that was actively preparing for war. It was a terrifying time. It was before the demise of the Soviet Union. And nuclear testing was just part of that big picture where people were preparing for war.

    “I think that the wonderful development in New Zealand was that people knew enough to know that we didn’t want to be defended by nuclear weapons because that was not mutually assured survival — it was mutually assured destruction.”

    New Zealand took a stand, Clark said, but taking that stand led to the attack on the Rainbow Warrior in Auckland harbour by French state-backed terrorism where tragically Greenpeace photographer Fernando Pereira lost his life.

    “I remember I was on my way to Nairobi for a conference for women, and I was in Zimbabwe, when the news came through about the bombing of a boat in Auckland harbour.

    ‘Absolutely shocking’
    “It was absolutely shocking, we had never experienced such a thing. I recall when I returned to New Zealand, [Prime Minister] David Lange one morning striding down to the party caucus room and telling us before it went public that it was without question that French spies had planted the bombs and the rest was history.

    “It was a very tense time. Full marks to Greenpeace for keeping up the struggle for so long — long before it was a mainstream issue Greenpeace was out there in the Pacific taking on nuclear testing.

    “Different times from today, but when I wrote the foreword for David’s book I noted that storm clouds were gathering again around nuclear weapons and issues. I suppose that there is so much else going on in a tragic 24 news cycle — catastrophe day in and day out in Gaza, severe technology and lethal weapons in Ukraine killing people, wherever you look there are so many conflicts.

    “The international agreements that we have relied are falling into disrepair. For example, if I were in Europe I would be extremely worried about the demise of the intermediate range missile weapons pact which has now been abandoned by the Americans and the Russians.

    “And that governs the deployment of medium range missiles in Europe.

    “The New Start Treaty, which was a nuclear arms control treaty between what was the Soviet Union and the US expires next year. Will it be renegotiated in the current circumstances? Who knows?”

    With the Non-proliferation Treaty, there are acknowledged nuclear powers who had not signed the treaty — “and those that do make very little effort to live up to the aspiration, which is to negotiate an end to nuclear weapons”.

    Developments with Iran
    “We have seen recently the latest developments with Iran, and for all of Iran’s many sins let us acknowledge that it is a party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty,” she said.

    “It did subject itself, for the most part, to the inspections regime. Israel, which bombed it, is not a party to the treaty, and doesn’t accept inspections.

    “There are so many double standards that people have long complained about the Non-Proliferation Treaty where the original five nuclear powers are deemed okay to have them, somehow, whereas there are others who don’t join at all.

    “And then over the Ukraine conflict we have seen worrying threats of the use of nuclear weapons.”

    Clark warned that we the use of artificial intelligence it would not be long before asking it: “How do I make a nuclear weapon?”

    “It’s not so difficult to make a dirty bomb. So we should be extremely worried about all these developments.”

    Then Clark spoke about the “complications” facing New Zealand.

    Mangareva researcher and advocate Ena Manuireva . . . “My mum died of lung cancer and the doctors said that she was a ‘passive smoker’. My mum had not smoked for the last 65 years.” Image: Asia Pacific Report

    Teariki’s message to De Gaulle
    In his address, Ena Manuireva started off by quoting the late Tahitian parliamentarian John Teariki who had courageously appealed to General Charles De Gaulle in 1966 after France had already tested three nuclear devices:

    “No government has ever had the honesty or the cynical frankness to admit that its nuclear tests might be dangerous. No government has ever hesitated to make other peoples — preferably small, defenceless ones — bear the burden.”

    “May you, Mr President, take back your troops, your bombs, and your planes.

    “Then, later, our leukemia and cancer patients would not be able to accuse you of being the cause of their illness.

    “Then, our future generations would not be able to blame you for the birth of monsters and deformed children.

    “Then, you would give the world an example worthy of France . . .

    “Then, Polynesia, united, would be proud and happy to be French, and, as in the early days of Free France, we would all once again become your best and most loyal friends.”

    ‘Emotional moment’
    Manuireva said that 10 days earlier, he had been on board Rainbow Warrior III for the ceremony to mark the bombing in 1985 that cost the life of Fernando Pereira – “and the lives of a lot of Mā’ohi people”.

    “It was a very emotional moment for me. It reminded me of my mother and father as I am a descendant of those on Mangareva atoll who were contaminated by those nuclear tests.

    “My mum died of lung cancer and the doctors said that she was a ‘passive smoker’. My mum had not smoked for the last 65 years.

    “French nuclear testing started on 2 July 1966 with Aldebaran and lasted 30 years.”

    He spoke about how the military “top brass fled the island” when winds start blowing towards Mangareva. “Food was ready but they didn’t stay”.

    “By the time I was born in December 1967 in Mangareva, France had already exploded 9 atmospheric nuclear tests on Moruroa and Fangataufa atolls, about 400km from Mangareva.”

    France’s most powerful explosion was Canopus with 2.6 megatonnes in August 1968. It was a thermonuclear hydrogen bomb — 150 times more powerful than Hiroshima.

    Greenpeace Aotearoa executive director Russel Norman . . . a positive of the campaign future. Image: Asia Pacific Report

    ‘Poisoned gift’
    Manuireva said that by France “gifting us the bomb”, Tahitians had been left “with all the ongoing consequences on the people’s health costs that the Ma’ohi Nui government is paying for”.

    He described how the compensation programme was inadequate, lengthy and complicated.

    Manuireva also spoke about the consequences for the environment. Both Moruroa and Fangataufa were condemned as “no go” zones and islanders had lost their lands forever.

    He also noted that while France had gifted the former headquarters of the Atomic Energy Commission (CEP) as a “form of reconciliation” plans to turn it into a museum were thwarted because the building was “rife with asbestos”.

    “It is a poisonous gift that will cost millions for the local government to fix.”

    Greenpeace Aotearoa executive director Russel Norman spoke of the impact on the Greenpeace organisation of the French secret service bombing of their ship and also introduced the guest speakers and responded to their statements.

    A Q and A session was also held to round off the stimulating evening.

    A question during the open mike session on board the Rainbow Warrior. Image: Asia Pacific Report

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Keep fighting for a nuclear-free Pacific, Helen Clark warns Greenpeace over global storm clouds

    Asia Pacific Report

    Former New Zealand prime minister Helen Clark warned activists and campaigners in a speech on the deck of the Greenpeace environmental flagship Rainbow Warrior III last night to be wary of global “storm clouds” and the renewed existential threat of nuclear weapons.

    Speaking on her reflections on four decades after the bombing of the original Rainbow Warrior on 10 July 1985, she said that New Zealand had a lot to be proud of but the world was now in a “precarious” state.

    Clark praised Greenpeace over its long struggle, challenging the global campaigners to keep up the fight for a nuclear-free Pacific.

    “For New Zealand, having been proudly nuclear-free since the mid-1980s, life has got a lot more complicated for us as well, and I have done a lot of campaigning against New Zealand signing up to any aspect of the AUKUS arrangement because it seems to me that being associated with any agreement that supplies nuclear ship technology to Australia is more or less encouraging the development of nuclear threats in the South Pacific,” she said.

    “While I am not suggesting that Australians are about to put nuclear weapons on them, we know that others do. This is not the Pacific that we want.

    “It is not the Pacific that we fought for going back all those years.

    “So we need to be very concerned about these storm clouds gathering.”

    Lessons for humanity
    Clark was prime minister 1999-2008 and served as a minister in David Lange’s Labour government that passed New Zealand’s nuclear-free legislation in 1987 – two years after the Rainbow Warrior bombing by French secret agents.

    She was also head of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in 2009-2017.

    “When you think 40 years on, humanity might have learned some lessons. But it seems we have to repeat the lessons over and over again, or we will be dragged on the path of re-engagement with those who use nuclear weapons as their ultimate defence,” Clark told the Greenpeace activists, crew and guests.

    “Forty years on, we look back with a lot of pride, actually, at how New Zealand responded to the bombing of the Rainbow Warrior. We stood up with the passage of the nuclear-free legislation in 1987, we stood up with a lot of things.

    “All of this is under threat; the international scene now is quite precarious with respect to nuclear weapons. This is an existential threat.”


    Nuclear-free Pacific reflections with Helen Clark         Video: Greenpeace

    In response to Tahitian researcher and advocate Ena Manuireva who spoke earlier about the legacy of a health crisis as a result of 30 years of French nuclear tests at Moruroa and Fangataufa, she recalled her own thoughts.

    “It reminds us of why we were so motivated to fight for a nuclear-free Pacific because we remember the history of what happened in French Polynesia, in the Marshall Islands, in the South Australian desert, at Maralinga, to the New Zealand servicemen who were sent up in the navy ships, the Rotoiti and the Pukaki, in the late 1950s, to stand on deck while the British exploded their bombs [at Christmas Island in what is today Kiribati].

    “These poor guys were still seeking compensation when I was PM with the illnesses you [Ena] described in French Polynesia.

    Former NZ prime minister Helen Clark . . . “I remember one of the slogans in the 1970s and 1980s was ‘if it is so safe, test them in France’.” Image: Asia Pacific Report

    Testing ground for ‘others’
    “So the Pacific was a testing ground for ‘others’ far away and I remember one of the slogans in the 1970s and 1980s was ‘if it is so safe, test them in France’. Right? It wasn’t so safe.

    “Mind you, they regarded French Polynesia as France.

    “David Robie asked me to write the foreword to the new edition of his book, Eyes of Fire: The Last Voyage and Legacy of the Rainbow Warrior, and it brought back so many memories of those times because those of you who are my age will remember that the 1980s were the peak of the Cold War.

    “We had the Reagan administration [in the US] that was actively preparing for war. It was a terrifying time. It was before the demise of the Soviet Union. And nuclear testing was just part of that big picture where people were preparing for war.

    “I think that the wonderful development in New Zealand was that people knew enough to know that we didn’t want to be defended by nuclear weapons because that was not mutually assured survival — it was mutually assured destruction.”

    New Zealand took a stand, Clark said, but taking that stand led to the attack on the Rainbow Warrior in Auckland harbour by French state-backed terrorism where tragically Greenpeace photographer Fernando Pereira lost his life.

    “I remember I was on my way to Nairobi for a conference for women, and I was in Zimbabwe, when the news came through about the bombing of a boat in Auckland harbour.

    ‘Absolutely shocking’
    “It was absolutely shocking, we had never experienced such a thing. I recall when I returned to New Zealand, [Prime Minister] David Lange one morning striding down to the party caucus room and telling us before it went public that it was without question that French spies had planted the bombs and the rest was history.

    “It was a very tense time. Full marks to Greenpeace for keeping up the struggle for so long — long before it was a mainstream issue Greenpeace was out there in the Pacific taking on nuclear testing.

    “Different times from today, but when I wrote the foreword for David’s book I noted that storm clouds were gathering again around nuclear weapons and issues. I suppose that there is so much else going on in a tragic 24 news cycle — catastrophe day in and day out in Gaza, severe technology and lethal weapons in Ukraine killing people, wherever you look there are so many conflicts.

    “The international agreements that we have relied are falling into disrepair. For example, if I were in Europe I would be extremely worried about the demise of the intermediate range missile weapons pact which has now been abandoned by the Americans and the Russians.

    “And that governs the deployment of medium range missiles in Europe.

    “The New Start Treaty, which was a nuclear arms control treaty between what was the Soviet Union and the US expires next year. Will it be renegotiated in the current circumstances? Who knows?”

    With the Non-proliferation Treaty, there are acknowledged nuclear powers who had not signed the treaty — “and those that do make very little effort to live up to the aspiration, which is to negotiate an end to nuclear weapons”.

    Developments with Iran
    “We have seen recently the latest developments with Iran, and for all of Iran’s many sins let us acknowledge that it is a party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty,” she said.

    “It did subject itself, for the most part, to the inspections regime. Israel, which bombed it, is not a party to the treaty, and doesn’t accept inspections.

    “There are so many double standards that people have long complained about the Non-Proliferation Treaty where the original five nuclear powers are deemed okay to have them, somehow, whereas there are others who don’t join at all.

    “And then over the Ukraine conflict we have seen worrying threats of the use of nuclear weapons.”

    Clark warned that we the use of artificial intelligence it would not be long before asking it: “How do I make a nuclear weapon?”

    “It’s not so difficult to make a dirty bomb. So we should be extremely worried about all these developments.”

    Then Clark spoke about the “complications” facing New Zealand.

    Mangareva researcher and advocate Ena Manuireva . . . “My mum died of lung cancer and the doctors said that she was a ‘passive smoker’. My mum had not smoked for the last 65 years.” Image: Asia Pacific Report

    Teariki’s message to De Gaulle
    In his address, Ena Manuireva started off by quoting the late Tahitian parliamentarian John Teariki who had courageously appealed to General Charles De Gaulle in 1966 after France had already tested three nuclear devices:

    “No government has ever had the honesty or the cynical frankness to admit that its nuclear tests might be dangerous. No government has ever hesitated to make other peoples — preferably small, defenceless ones — bear the burden.”

    “May you, Mr President, take back your troops, your bombs, and your planes.

    “Then, later, our leukemia and cancer patients would not be able to accuse you of being the cause of their illness.

    “Then, our future generations would not be able to blame you for the birth of monsters and deformed children.

    “Then, you would give the world an example worthy of France . . .

    “Then, Polynesia, united, would be proud and happy to be French, and, as in the early days of Free France, we would all once again become your best and most loyal friends.”

    ‘Emotional moment’
    Manuireva said that 10 days earlier, he had been on board Rainbow Warrior III for the ceremony to mark the bombing in 1985 that cost the life of Fernando Pereira – “and the lives of a lot of Mā’ohi people”.

    “It was a very emotional moment for me. It reminded me of my mother and father as I am a descendant of those on Mangareva atoll who were contaminated by those nuclear tests.

    “My mum died of lung cancer and the doctors said that she was a ‘passive smoker’. My mum had not smoked for the last 65 years.

    “French nuclear testing started on 2 July 1966 with Aldebaran and lasted 30 years.”

    He spoke about how the military “top brass fled the island” when winds start blowing towards Mangareva. “Food was ready but they didn’t stay”.

    “By the time I was born in December 1967 in Mangareva, France had already exploded 9 atmospheric nuclear tests on Moruroa and Fangataufa atolls, about 400km from Mangareva.”

    France’s most powerful explosion was Canopus with 2.6 megatonnes in August 1968. It was a thermonuclear hydrogen bomb — 150 times more powerful than Hiroshima.

    Greenpeace Aotearoa executive director Russel Norman . . . a positive of the campaign future. Image: Asia Pacific Report

    ‘Poisoned gift’
    Manuireva said that by France “gifting us the bomb”, Tahitians had been left “with all the ongoing consequences on the people’s health costs that the Ma’ohi Nui government is paying for”.

    He described how the compensation programme was inadequate, lengthy and complicated.

    Manuireva also spoke about the consequences for the environment. Both Moruroa and Fangataufa were condemned as “no go” zones and islanders had lost their lands forever.

    He also noted that while France had gifted the former headquarters of the Atomic Energy Commission (CEP) as a “form of reconciliation” plans to turn it into a museum were thwarted because the building was “rife with asbestos”.

    “It is a poisonous gift that will cost millions for the local government to fix.”

    Greenpeace Aotearoa executive director Russel Norman spoke of the impact on the Greenpeace organisation of the French secret service bombing of their ship and also introduced the guest speakers and responded to their statements.

    A Q and A session was also held to round off the stimulating evening.

    A question during the open mike session on board the Rainbow Warrior. Image: Asia Pacific Report

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Israel waging ‘horror show’ starvation campaign in Gaza, says UN chief

    This is Democracy Now!. I’m Amy Goodman.

    More than 100 humanitarian groups are demanding action to end Israel’s siege of Gaza, warning mass starvation is spreading across the Palestinian territory.

    The NGOs, including Amnesty International, Oxfam, Doctors Without Borders, warn, “illnesses like acute watery diarrhea are spreading, markets are empty, waste is piling up, and adults are collapsing on the streets from hunger and dehydration.”

    Their warning came as the Palestinian Ministry of Health said the number of starvation-related deaths has climbed to at least 111 people.

    This is Ghada al-Fayoumi, a displaced Palestinian mother of seven in Gaza City.

    GHADA AL-FAYOUMI: “[translated] My children wake up sick every day. What do I do? I get saline solution for them. What can I do?

    “There’s no food, no bread, no drinks, no rice, no sugar, no cooking oil, no bulgur, nothing. There is no kind of any food available to us at all.”

    AMY GOODMAN: Thousands of antiwar protesters marched on Tuesday in Tel Aviv outside Israel’s military headquarters, demanding an end to Israel’s assault and a lifting of the Gaza siege. This is Israeli peace activist Alon-Lee Green with the group Standing Together.

    ALON-LEE GREEN: “We are marching now in Tel Aviv, holding bags of flour and the pictures of these children that have been starved to death by our government and our army.

    “We demand to stop the starvation in Gaza. We demand to stop the annihilation of Gaza. We demand to stop the daily killing of children and innocent people in Gaza.

    “This cannot go on. We are Israelis, and this does not serve us. This only serves the Messianic people that lead us.”

    AMY GOODMAN: This comes as the World Health Organisation has released a video showing the Israeli military attacking WHO facilities in central Gaza’s Deir al-Balah. A WHO spokesperson condemned the attack, called for the immediate release of a staff member abducted by Israeli forces.

    TARIK JAŠAREVIĆ: “Male staff and family members were handcuffed, stripped, interrogated on the spot and screened at gunpoint.

    “Two WHO staff and two family members were detained.”

    AMY GOODMAN: Meanwhile, health officials in Gaza say Israeli attacks over the past day killed more than 70 people, including five more people seeking food at militarised aid sites. Amid growing outrage worldwide, UN Secretary-General António Guterres said on Tuesday the situation in Gaza right now is a “horror show”.

    UN SECRETARY-GENERAL ANTÓNIO GUTERRES: “We need look no further than the horror show in Gaza, with a level of death and destruction without parallel in recent times.

    “Malnourishment is soaring. Starvation is knocking on every door.”

    AMY GOODMAN: For more, we’re joined by Michael Fakhri, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food. He is a professor of law at University of Oregon, where he leads the Food Resiliency Project.


    Israel waging ‘fastest starvation campaign’ in modern history    Video: Democracy Now!

    Dr Michael Fakhri, welcome back to Democracy Now! If you can respond to what’s happening right now, the images of dying infants starving to death, the numbers now at over 100, people dropping in the streets, reporters saying they can’t go on?

    Agence France-Presse’s union talked about they have had reporters killed in conflict, they have had reporters disappeared, injured, but they have not had this situation before with their reporters starving to death.

    DR MICHAEL FAKHRI: Amy, the word “horror” — I mean, we’re running out of words of what to say. And the reason it’s horrific is it was preventable. We saw this coming. We’ve seen this coming for 20 months.

    Israel announced its starvation campaign back in October 2023. And then again, Prime Minister Netanyahu announced on March 1 that nothing was to enter Gaza. And that’s what happened for 78 days. No food, no water, no fuel, no medicine entered Gaza.

    And then they built these militarised aid sites that are used to humiliate, weaken and kill the Palestinians. So, what makes this horrific is it has been preventable, it was predictable. And again, this is the fastest famine we’ve seen, the fastest starvation campaign we’ve seen in modern history.

    AMY GOODMAN: So, can you talk about what needs to be done at this point and the responsibility of the occupying power? Israel is occupying Gaza right now. What it means to have to protect the population it occupies?

    DR FAKHRI: The International Court of Justice outlined Israel’s duties in its decisions over the last year. So, what Israel has an obligation to do is, first, end its illegal occupation immediately. This came from the court itself.

    Second, it must allow humanitarian relief to enter with no restrictions. And this hasn’t been happening. So, usually, we would turn to the Security Council to authorise peacekeepers or something similar to assist.

    But predictably, again, the United States keeps vetoing anything to do with a ceasefire. When the Security Council is in a deadlock because of a veto, the General Assembly, the UN General Assembly, has the authority to call for peacekeepers to accompany humanitarian convoys to enter into Gaza and to end Israel’s starvation campaign against the Palestinian people.

    AMY GOODMAN: People actually protested outside the house of UN Secretary-General António Guterres yesterday. People protested all over the world yesterday against the Palestinians being starved and bombed to death. Those in front of the UN Secretary-General’s house said they don’t dispute that he has raised this issue almost every day, but they say he can do more.

    Finally, Michael Fakhri, what does the UN need to do — the US, Israel, the world?

    DR FAKHRI: So, as I mentioned, first and foremost, they can authorise peacekeepers to enter to stop the starvation. But, second, they need to create consequences.

    The world has a duty to prevent this starvation. The world has a duty to prevent and end this genocide. And as a result, then, what the world can do is impose sanctions.

    And again, this is supported by the International Court of Justice. The world needs to impose wide-scale sanctions against the state of Israel to force it to end the starvation and genocide of civilians, of Palestinian civilians in Gaza today.

    AMY GOODMAN: Well, I want to thank you so much for being with us, Michael Fakhri, UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, speaking to us from Eugene, Oregon.

    Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: UN’s highest court finds countries can be held legally responsible for emissions

    By Jamie Tahana in The Hague for RNZ Pacific

    The United Nations’ highest court has found that countries can be held legally responsible for their greenhouse gas emissions, in a ruling highly anticipated by Pacific countries long frustrated with the pace of global action to address climate change.

    In a landmark opinion delivered yesterday in The Hague, the president of the International Court of Justice, Yuji Iwasawa, said climate change was an “urgent and existential threat” that was “unequivocally” caused by human activity with consequences and effects that crossed borders.

    The court’s opinion was the culmination of six years of advocacy and diplomatic manoeuvring which started with a group of Pacific university students in 2019.

    They were frustrated at what they saw was a lack of action to address the climate crisis, and saw current mechanisms to address it as woefully inadequate.

    Their idea was backed by the government of Vanuatu, which convinced the UN General Assembly to seek the court’s advisory opinion on what countries’ obligations are under international law.

    The court’s 15 judges were asked to provide an opinion on two questions: What are countries obliged to do under existing international law to protect the climate and environment, and, second, what are the legal consequences for governments when their acts — or lack of action — have significantly harmed the climate and environment?

    The International Court of Justice in The Hague yesterday . . . landmark non-binding rulings on the climate crisis. Image: X/@CIJ_ICJ

    Overnight, reading a summary that took nearly two hours to deliver, Iwasawa said states had clear obligations under international law, and that countries — and, by extension, individuals and companies within those countries — were required to curb emissions.

    Iwasawa said the environment and human rights obligations set out in international law did indeed apply to climate change.

    ‘Precondition for human rights’
    “The protection of the environment is a precondition for the enjoyment of human rights,” he said, adding that sea-level rise, desertification, drought and natural disasters “may significantly impair certain human rights, including the right to life”.

    To reach its conclusion, judges waded through tens of thousands of pages of written submissions and heard two weeks of oral arguments in what the court said was the ICJ’s largest-ever case, with more than 100 countries and international organisations providing testimony.

    They also examined the entire corpus of international law — including human rights conventions, the law of the sea, the Paris climate agreement and many others — to determine whether countries have a human rights obligation to address climate change.

    The president of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), Yuji Iwasawa, delivering the landmark rulings on climate change. Image: X/@CIJ_ICJ

    Major powers and emitters, like the United States and China, had argued in their testimonies that existing UN agreements, such as the Paris climate accord, were sufficient to address climate change.

    But the court found that states’ obligations extended beyond climate treaties, instead to many other areas of international law, such as human rights law, environmental law, and laws around restricting cross-border harm.

    Significantly for many Pacific countries, the court also provided an opinion on what would happen if sea levels rose to such a level that some states were lost altogether.

    “Once a state is established, the disappearance of one of its constituent elements would not necessarily entail the loss of its statehood.”

    Significant legal weight
    The ICJ’s opinion is legally non-binding. But even so, advocates say it carries significant legal and political weight that cannot be ignored, potentially opening the floodgates for climate litigation and claims for compensation or reparations for climate-related loss and damage.

    Individuals and groups could bring lawsuits against their own countries for failing to comply with the court’s opinion, and states could also return to the International Court of Justice to hold each other to account.

    The opinion would also be a powerful precedent for legislators and judges to call on as they tackle questions related to the climate crisis, and give small countries greater weight in negotiations over future COP agreements and other climate mechanisms.

    Outside the court, several dozen climate activists, from both the Netherlands and abroad, had gathered on a square as cyclists and trams rumbled by on the summer afternoon. Among them was Siaosi Vaikune, a Tongan who was among those original students to hatch the idea for the challenge.

    “Everyone has been waiting for this moment,” he said. “It’s been six years of campaigning.

    “Frontline communities have demanded justice again and again,” Vaikune said. “And this is another step towards that justice.”

    Vanuatu’s Climate Change Minister Ralph Regenvanu (cenbtre) speaks to the media after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) rulings on climate change in The Hague yesterday. Image: X/CIJ_ICJ

    ‘It gives hope’
     Vanuatu’s Climate Minister Ralph Regenvanu said the ruling was better than he expected and he was emotional about the result.

    “The most pleasing aspect is [the ruling] was so strong in the current context where climate action and policy seems to be going backwards,” Regenvanu told RNZ Pacific.

    “It gives such hope to the youth, because they were the ones who pushed this.

    “I think it will regenerate an entire new generation of youth activists to push their governments for a better future for themselves.”

    Regenvanu said the result showed the power of multilateralism.

    “There was a point in time where everyone could compromise to agree to have this case heard here, and then here again, we see the court with the judges from all different countries of the world all unanimously agreeing on such a strong opinion, it gives you hope for multilateralism.”

    He said the Pacific now has more leverage in climate negotiations.

    “Communities on the ground, who are suffering from sea level rise, losing territory and so on, they know what they want, and we have to provide that,” Regenvanu said.

    “Now we know that we can rely on international cooperation because of the obligations that have been declared here to assist them.”

    The director of climate change at the Pacific Community (SPC), Coral Pasisi, also said the decision was a strong outcome for Pacific Island nations.

    “The acknowledgement that the science is very clear, there is a direct clause between greenhouse gas emissions, global warming and the harm that is causing, particularly the most vulnerable countries.”

    She said the health of the environment is closely linked to the health of people, which was acknowledged by the court.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Indonesian military set to complete Trans-Papua Highway under Prabowo’s rule

    By Julian Isaac

    The Indonesian Military (TNI) is committed to supporting the completion of the Trans-Papua Highway during President Prabowo Subianto’s term in office.

    While the military is not involved in construction, it plays a critical role in securing the project from threats posed by pro-independence Papuan resistance groups in “high-risk” regions.

    Spanning a total length of 4330 km, the Trans-Papua road project has been under development since 2014.

    However, only 3446 km of the national road network has been connected after more than a decade of construction.

    “Don’t compare Papua with Jakarta, where there are no armed groups. Papua is five times the size of Java, and not all areas are secure,” TNI spokesman Major-General Kristomei Sianturi told a media conference at the Ministry of Public Works on Monday.

    One of the currently active segments is the Jayapura–Wamena route — specifically the Mamberamo–Elim section, which stretches 50 km.

    The project is being carried out through a public-private partnership and was awarded to PT Hutama Karya, with an investment of Rp3.3 trillion (about US$202 million) and a 15-year concession. The segment is expected to be completed within two years, targeting finalisation next year.

    Security an obstacle
    General Kristomei said that one of the main obstacles was security in the vicinity of construction sites.

    Out of 50 regencies/cities in Papua, at least seven are considered high-risk zones. Since its inception, the Trans-Papua road project has claimed 17 lives, due to clashes in the region.

    In addition to security challenges, the delivery of construction materials remains difficult due to limited infrastructure.

    “Transporting goods from one point to another in Papua is extremely difficult because there are no connecting roads. We’re essentially building from scratch,” General Kristomei said.

    In May 2024, President Joko Widodo convened a limited cabinet meeting at the Merdeka Palace to discuss accelerating development in Papua. The government agreed on the urgent need to improve education, healthcare, and security in the region.

    The Minister of National Development Planning, Suharso Monoarfa, announced that the government would ramp up social welfare programmes in Papua in coordination with then Vice-President Ma’ruf Amin, who chairs the Agency for the Acceleration of Special Autonomy in Papua (BP3OKP).

    ‘Welfare based approaches’
    “We are gradually implementing welfare-based approaches, including improvements in education and health, with budgets already allocated to the relevant ministries and agencies,” Suharso said in May last year.

    As of March 2023, the Indonesian government has disbursed Rp 1,036 trillion for Papua’s development.

    This funding has supported major infrastructure initiatives such as the 3462 km Trans-Papua Highway, 1098 km of border roads, the construction of the 1.3 km Youtefa Bridge in Jayapura, and the renovation of Domine Eduard Osok Airport in Sorong.

    Republished from the Indonesia Business Post.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Gaza – an open question for NZ’s foreign minister Winston Peters

    OPEN QUESTION: By Bryan Bruce

    Dear Rt Hon Winston Peters,

    There was a time when New Zealanders stood up for what was morally right. There are memorials around our country for those who died fighting fascism, we wrote parts of the UN Charter of Human Rights, we took an anti-nuclear stance in 1984, and three years prior to that, many of us stood against apartheid in South Africa by boycotting South African products and actively protesting against the 1981 Springbok Rugby Tour.

    To call out the Israeli government for genocide and ethnic cleansing in Gaza is not to be antisemitic. Nor is it to be pro- Hamas. It is to simply to be pro-human.

    While acknowledging the peace and humanitarian initiatives on the Foreign Affairs website, I note there is no calling out of the genocide and ethnic cleansing that cannot be denied is happening in Gaza.

    The Israeli government is systematically demolishing whole towns and cities — including churches, mosques, even removing trees and vegetation — to deprive the Palestinian people the opportunity to return to their homeland; and there have been constant blocks to humanitarian aid as part of a policy forced starvation.

    There is no doubt crimes against international law have been committed, which is why the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague has issued warrants for the arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, his former defence minister, for alleged crimes against humanity.

    So, my question to you is: why are you not pictured standing in this photograph (below) alongside the representatives from 33 nations at the July 16 2025 Gaza emergency conference in Bogotá?

    The nations that took part in the Gaza emergency summit in were:

    Norway, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, Colombia, South Africa, Bolivia, Cuba, Honduras, Malaysia, Namibia, Algeria, Bangladesh, Botswana, Brazil, Chile, China, Djibouti, Indonesia, Iraq, Ireland, Lebanon, Libya, Mexico, Nicaragua, Oman, Pakistan, Palestine, Qatar, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Uruguay and Venezuela.

    Representatives from 33 nations at the July 16 2025 Gaza emergency conference in Bogotá. Image: bryanbruce.substack.com

    Is your policy simply to fall in behind the USA denying there is genocide and ethnic cleansing happening in Gaza?

    If not, are you prepared to endorse the six coordinated diplomatic, legal and economic measures already signed up to by 12 of the participating countries in the Bogetà summit, to restrain Israel’s assault on the Occupied Palestinian Territories and defend international law at large?

    Remaining countries, which could still include New Zealand, have a deadline of September 20, to coincide with the 80th UN General Assembly, for additional states to join them.

    The 6 agreed measures are:
     Prevent the provision or transfer of arms, munitions, military fuel, related military equipment, and dual-use items to Israel.

    Prevent the transit, docking, and servicing of vessels at any port
     in all cases where there is a clear risk of the vessel being used to carry arms, munitions, military fuel, related military equipment, and dual-use items to Israel

    Prevent the carriage of arms, munitions, military fuel, related military equipment, and dual-use items to Israel on vessels bearing our flag . . .  and ensure full accountability, including de-flagging, for non-compliance with this prohibition.

    Commence an urgent review of all public contracts, to prevent public institutions and funds from supporting Israel’s illegal occupation of the Palestinian Territory and entrenching its unlawful presence.

    Comply with obligations to ensure accountability for the most serious crimes under international law, through robust, impartial and independent investigations and prosecutions at national or international levels, to ensure justice for all victims and the prevention of future crimes.

    Support universal jurisdiction mandates, as and where applicable in national legal frameworks and judiciaries, to ensure justice for victims of international crimes committed in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

    In addition, are you prepared to specifically support the enforcement of the International Criminal Court arrest warrants issued last year for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, his former defence minister, for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza including murder and forced starvation, in a war that has left more than 211,000 Palestinians, including many children, dead, maimed, or missing since October 2023, according to the Gaza Health Ministry? (That’s a figure that is approximately the entire population of Hamiton and Rotorua).

    What then is the NZ government’s policy? Are we going to support International Law and call out the Israeli government’s acts of genocide in Gaza, or not?

    Yours sincerely,

    Bryan Bruce
     Investigative documentary maker, journalist and podcaster.
     Auckland.

    Bryan Bruce is a New Zealand investigative journalist and documentary maker. Republished from Bruce’s substack page.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Gaza – an open question for NZ’s foreign minister Winston Peters

    OPEN QUESTION: By Bryan Bruce

    Dear Rt Hon Winston Peters,

    There was a time when New Zealanders stood up for what was morally right. There are memorials around our country for those who died fighting fascism, we wrote parts of the UN Charter of Human Rights, we took an anti-nuclear stance in 1984, and three years prior to that, many of us stood against apartheid in South Africa by boycotting South African products and actively protesting against the 1981 Springbok Rugby Tour.

    To call out the Israeli government for genocide and ethnic cleansing in Gaza is not to be antisemitic. Nor is it to be pro- Hamas. It is to simply to be pro-human.

    While acknowledging the peace and humanitarian initiatives on the Foreign Affairs website, I note there is no calling out of the genocide and ethnic cleansing that cannot be denied is happening in Gaza.

    The Israeli government is systematically demolishing whole towns and cities — including churches, mosques, even removing trees and vegetation — to deprive the Palestinian people the opportunity to return to their homeland; and there have been constant blocks to humanitarian aid as part of a policy forced starvation.

    There is no doubt crimes against international law have been committed, which is why the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague has issued warrants for the arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, his former defence minister, for alleged crimes against humanity.

    So, my question to you is: why are you not pictured standing in this photograph (below) alongside the representatives from 33 nations at the July 16 2025 Gaza emergency conference in Bogotá?

    The nations that took part in the Gaza emergency summit in were:

    Norway, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, Colombia, South Africa, Bolivia, Cuba, Honduras, Malaysia, Namibia, Algeria, Bangladesh, Botswana, Brazil, Chile, China, Djibouti, Indonesia, Iraq, Ireland, Lebanon, Libya, Mexico, Nicaragua, Oman, Pakistan, Palestine, Qatar, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Uruguay and Venezuela.

    Representatives from 33 nations at the July 16 2025 Gaza emergency conference in Bogotá. Image: bryanbruce.substack.com

    Is your policy simply to fall in behind the USA denying there is genocide and ethnic cleansing happening in Gaza?

    If not, are you prepared to endorse the six coordinated diplomatic, legal and economic measures already signed up to by 12 of the participating countries in the Bogetà summit, to restrain Israel’s assault on the Occupied Palestinian Territories and defend international law at large?

    Remaining countries, which could still include New Zealand, have a deadline of September 20, to coincide with the 80th UN General Assembly, for additional states to join them.

    The 6 agreed measures are:
     Prevent the provision or transfer of arms, munitions, military fuel, related military equipment, and dual-use items to Israel.

    Prevent the transit, docking, and servicing of vessels at any port
     in all cases where there is a clear risk of the vessel being used to carry arms, munitions, military fuel, related military equipment, and dual-use items to Israel

    Prevent the carriage of arms, munitions, military fuel, related military equipment, and dual-use items to Israel on vessels bearing our flag . . .  and ensure full accountability, including de-flagging, for non-compliance with this prohibition.

    Commence an urgent review of all public contracts, to prevent public institutions and funds from supporting Israel’s illegal occupation of the Palestinian Territory and entrenching its unlawful presence.

    Comply with obligations to ensure accountability for the most serious crimes under international law, through robust, impartial and independent investigations and prosecutions at national or international levels, to ensure justice for all victims and the prevention of future crimes.

    Support universal jurisdiction mandates, as and where applicable in national legal frameworks and judiciaries, to ensure justice for victims of international crimes committed in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

    In addition, are you prepared to specifically support the enforcement of the International Criminal Court arrest warrants issued last year for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, his former defence minister, for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza including murder and forced starvation, in a war that has left more than 211,000 Palestinians, including many children, dead, maimed, or missing since October 2023, according to the Gaza Health Ministry? (That’s a figure that is approximately the entire population of Hamiton and Rotorua).

    What then is the NZ government’s policy? Are we going to support International Law and call out the Israeli government’s acts of genocide in Gaza, or not?

    Yours sincerely,

    Bryan Bruce
     Investigative documentary maker, journalist and podcaster.
     Auckland.

    Bryan Bruce is a New Zealand investigative journalist and documentary maker. Republished from Bruce’s substack page.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: ICJ climate crisis ruling: Will world’s top court back Pacific-led call to hold governments accountable?

    By Jamie Tahana in The Hague for RNZ Pacific

    In 2019, a group of law students at the University of the South Pacific, frustrated at the slow pace with which the world’s governments were moving to address the climate crisis, had an idea — they would take the world’s governments to court.

    They arranged a meeting with government ministers in Vanuatu and convinced them to take a case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the United Nations’ top court, where they would seek an opinion to clarify countries’ legal obligations under international law.

    Six years after that idea was hatched in a classroom in Port Vila, the court will today (early Thursday morning NZT) deliver its verdict in the Dutch city of The Hague.

    More than 100 countries – including New Zealand, Australia and all the countries of the Pacific – have testified before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), alongside civil society and intergovernmental organisations. Image: UN Web TV/screengrab

    If successful — and those involved are quietly confident they will be — it could have major ramifications for international law, how climate change disputes are litigated, and it could give small Pacific countries greater leverage in arguments around loss and damage.

    Most significantly, the claimants argue, it could establish legal consequences for countries that have driven climate change and what they owe to people harmed.

    “Six long years of campaigning have led us to this moment,” said Vishal Prasad, the president of Pacific Island Students Fighting Climate Change, the organisation formed out of those original students.

    “For too long, international responses have fallen short. We expect a clear and authoritative declaration,” he said.

    “[That] climate inaction is not just a failure of policy, but a breach of international law.”

    More than 100 countries — including New Zealand, Australia and all the countries of the Pacific — have testified before the court, alongside civil society and intergovernmental organisations.

    And now today they will gather in the brick palace that sits in ornate gardens in this canal-ringed city to hear if the judges of the world’s top court agree.

    What is the case?
     The ICJ adjudicates disputes between nations and issues advisory opinions on big international legal issues.

    In this case, Vanuatu asked the UN General Assembly to request the judges to weigh what exactly international law requires states to do about climate change, and what the consequences should be for states that harm the climate through actions or omissions.

    Over its deliberations, the court has heard from more than 100 countries and international organisations hoping to influence its opinion, the highest level of participation in the court’s history.

    That has included the governments of low-lying islands and atolls in the Pacific, which say they are paying the steepest price for a crisis they had little role in creating.

    These nations have long been frustrated with the current mechanisms for addressing climate change, like the UN COP conferences, and are hoping that, ultimately, the court will provide a yardstick by which to measure other countries’ actions.

    Vanuatu’s Minister of Climate Change Ralph Regenvanu . . . “This may well be the most consequential case in the history of humanity.” Image: IISD-ENB

    “I choose my words carefully when I say that this may well be the most consequential case in the history of humanity,” Vanuatu’s Minister for Climate Change Ralph Regenvanu said in his statement to the court last year.

    “Let us not allow future generations to look back and wonder why the cause of their doom was condoned.”

    But major powers and emitters, like the United States and China, have argued in their testimonies that existing UN agreements, such as the Paris climate accord, are sufficient to address climate change.

    “We expect this landmark climate ruling, grounded in binding international law, to reflect the critical legal flashpoints raised during the proceedings,” said Joie Chowdhury, a senior attorney at the US-based Centre for International Environmental Law (which has been involved with the case).

    “Among them: whether States’ climate obligations are anchored in multiple legal sources, extending far beyond the Paris Agreement; whether there is a right to remedy for climate harm; and how human rights and the precautionary principle define States’ climate obligations.”

    Pacific youth climate activist at a demonstration at COP27 in November 2022 . . . “We are not drowning. We are fighting.” Image: Facebook/Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change

    What could this mean?
     Rulings from the ICJ are non-binding, and there are myriad cases of international law being flouted by countries the world over.

    Still, the court’s opinion — if it falls in Vanuatu’s favour — could still have major ramifications, bolstering the case for linking human rights and climate change in legal proceedings — both international and domestic — and potentially opening the floodgates for climate litigation, where individuals, groups, Indigenous Peoples, and even countries, sue governments or private companies for climate harm.

    An advisory opinion would also be a powerful precedent for legislators and judges to call on as they tackle questions related to the climate crisis, and give small countries a powerful cudgel in negotiations over future COP agreements and other climate mechanisms.

    “This would empower vulnerable nations and communities to demand accountability, strengthen legal arguments and negotiations and litigation and push for policies that prioritise prevention and redress over delay and denial,” Prasad said.

    In essence, those who have taken the case have asked the court to issue an opinion on whether governments have “legal obligations” to protect people from climate hazards, but also whether a failure to meet those obligations could bring “legal consequences”.

    At the Peace Palace today, they will find out from the court’s 15 judges.

    “[The advisory opinion] is not just a legal milestone, it is a defining moment in the global climate justice movement and a beacon of hope for present and future generations,” said Vanuatu Prime Minister Jotham Napat in a statement ahead of the decision.

    “I am hopeful for a powerful opinion from the ICJ. It could set the world on a meaningful path to accountability and action.”

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Gaza not a religious issue – it’s a massive violation of international law, say accord critics

    Asia Pacific Report

    Groups that have declined to join the government-sponsored “harmony accord” signed yesterday by some Muslim and Jewish groups, say that the proposed new council is “misaligned” with its aims.

    The signed accord was presented at Government House in Auckland.

    About 70 people attended, including representatives of the New Zealand Jewish Council, His Highness the Aga Khan Council for Australia and New Zealand and the Jewish Community Security Group, reports RNZ News.

    The initiative originated with government recognition that the consequences of Israel’s actions in Gaza are impacting on Jewish and Muslim communities in Aotearoa, as well as the wider community.

    While agreeing with that statement of purpose, other Muslim and Jewish groups have chosen to decline the invitation, said some of the disagreeing groups in a joint statement.

    They believe that the council, as formulated, is misaligned with its aims.

    “Gaza is not a religious issue, and this has never been a conflict between our faiths,” Dr Abdul Monem, a co-founder of ICONZ said.

    ‘Horrifying humanitarian consequences’
    “In Gaza we see a massive violation of international law with horrifying humanitarian consequences.

    “We place Israel’s annihilating campaign against Gaza, the complicity of states and economies at the centre of our understanding — not religion.

    “The first action to address the suffering in Gaza and ameliorate its effects here in Aotearoa must be government action. Our government needs to comply with international courts and act on this humanitarian calamity.

    “That does not require a new council.”

    The impetus for this initiative clearly linked international events with their local impacts, but the document does not mention Gaza among the council’s priorities, said the statement.

    “Signatories are not required to acknowledge universal human rights, nor the courts which have ruled so decisively and created obligations for the New Zealand government. Social distress is disconnected from its immediate cause.”

    The council was open to parties which did not recognise the role of international humanitarian law in Palestine, nor the full human and political rights of their fellow New Zealanders.

    ‘Overlooks humanitarian law’
    Marilyn Garson, co-founder of Alternative Jewish Voices said: “It has broad implications to overlook our rights and international humanitarian law.

    “As currently formulated, the council includes no direct Palestinian representation. That’s not good enough.

    “How can there be credible discussion of Aotearoa’s ethnic safety — let alone advocacy for international action — without Palestinians?

    “Law, human rights and the dignity of every person’s life are not opinions. They are human entitlements and global agreements to which Aotearoa has bound itself.

    “No person in Aotearoa should have to enter a room — especially a council created under government auspices — knowing that their fundamental rights will not be upheld. No one should have to begin by asking for that which is theirs.”

    The groups outside this new council said they wished to live in a harmonious society, but for them it was unclear why a new council of Jews and Muslims should represent the path to harmony.

    “Advocacy that comes from faith can be a powerful force. We already work with numerous interfaith community initiatives, some formed at government initiative and waiting to really find their purpose,” said Dr Muhammad Sajjad Naqvi, president of ICONZ.

    Addressing local threats
    “Those existing channels include more of the parties needed to address local threats, including Christian nationalism like that of Destiny Church.

    “Perhaps government should resource those rather than starting something new.”

    The groups who declined to join the council said they had “warm and enduring relationships” with FIANZ and Dayenu, which would take seats at this council table.

    “All of the groups share common goals, but not this path,” the statement said.

    ICONZ is a national umbrella organisation for New Zealand Shia Muslims for a unified voice. It was established by Muslims who have been born in New Zealand or born to migrants who chose New Zealand to be their home.

    Alternative Jewish Voices is a collective of Aotearoa Jews working for Jewish pluralism and anti-racism. It supports the work of Palestinians who seek liberation grounded in law and our equal human rights.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Gaza: Empty rhetoric from New Zealand and other Western countries

    In a joint statement, more than two dozen Western countries, including New Zealand, have called for an immediate end to the war on Gaza. But the statement is merely empty rhetoric that declines to take any concrete action against Israel, and which Israel will duly ignore. 

    AGAINST THE CURRENT: By Steven Cowan

    The New Zealand government has joined 27 other countries calling for an “immediate end” to the war in Gaza. The joint statement says  “the suffering of civilians in Gaza has reached new depths”.

    It goes on to say that the drip feeding of aid and the inhumane killing of civilians, including children, seeking to meet their most basic needs of water and food.

    But many of the countries that have signed this statement stand condemned for actively enabling Israel to pursue its genocidal assault on Gaza. Countries like Britain, Canada and Australia, continue to supply Israel with arms, have continued to trade with Israel, and have turned a blind eye to the atrocities and war crimes Israel continues to commit in Gaza.

    It’s more than ironic that while Western countries like Britain and New Zealand are calling for an end to the war in Gaza, they continue to be hostile toward the anti-war protest movements in their own countries.

    The British government recently classified the protest group Palestine Action as a “terrorist” group.

    In New Zealand, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Winston Peters, has denounced pro-Palestine protesters as “left wing fascists” and “communist, fascist and anti-democratic losers”. He has pushed back against the growing demands that the New Zealand government take direct action against Israel, including the cutting of all diplomatic ties.

    The New Zealand government, which contains a number of Zionists within its cabinet, including Act leader David Seymour and co-leader Brooke van Velden, will be more than comfortable with a statement that proposes to do nothing.

    ‘Statement lacks leadership’
    Its call for an end to the war is empty rhetoric, and which Israel will duly ignore — as it has ignored other calls for its genocidal war to end.  As Amnesty International has said, ‘the statement lacks any resolve, leadership, or action to help end the genocide in Gaza.’

    “This is cruelty – this is not a war,” says this young girl’s placard quoting the late Pope Francis in an Auckland march last Saturday . . . this featured in an earlier report. Image: Asia Pacific Report

    New Zealand has declined to join The Hague Group alliance of countries that recently met in Colombia.

    It announced six immediate steps it would be taking against Israel. But since The Hague Group has already been attacked by the United States, it’s never been likely that New Zealand would join it.

    The National-led coalition government has surrendered New Zealand’s independent foreign policy in favour of supporting the interests of a declining American Empire.

    Republished from Steven Cowan’s blog Against The Current with permission.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Sky TV to buy channel Three owner Discovery NZ for $1

    By Anan Zaki, RNZ News business reporter

    Sky TV has agreed to fully acquire TV3 owner Discovery New Zealand for $1.

    Discovery NZ is a part of US media giant Warner Bros Discovery, and operates channel Three and online streaming platform ThreeNow.

    NZX-listed Sky said the deal would be completed on a cash-free, debt-free basis, with completion expected on August 1.

    Sky expected the deal to deliver revenue diversification and uplift of around $95 million a year.

    Sky expected Discovery NZ’s operations to deliver sustainable underlying earnings growth of at least $10 million from the 2028 financial year.

    Sky chief executive Sophie Moloney said it was a compelling opportunity for the company, with net integration costs of about $6.5 million.

    “This is a compelling opportunity for Sky that directly supports our ambition to be Aotearoa New Zealand’s most engaging and essential media company,” she said.

    Confidential advance notice
    Sky said it gave the Commerce Commission confidential advance notice of the transaction, and the commission did not intend to consider the acquisition further.

    Warner Bros Discovery Australia and NZ managing director Michael Brooks said it was a “fantastic outcome” for both companies.

    “The continued challenges faced by the New Zealand media industry are well documented, and over the past 12 months, the Discovery NZ team has worked to deliver a new, more sustainable business model following a significant restructure in 2024,” Brooks said.

    “While this business is not commercially viable as a standalone asset in WBD’s New Zealand portfolio, we see the value Three and ThreeNow can bring to Sky’s existing offering of complementary assets.”

    Sky said on completion, Discovery NZ’s balance sheet would be clear of some long-term obligations, including property leases and content commitments, and would include assets such as the ThreeNow platform.

    Sky said irrespective of the transaction, the company was confident of achieving its 30 cents a share dividend target for 2026.

    ‘Massive change’ for NZ media – ThreeNews to continue
     Founder of The Spinoff and media commentator Duncan Greive said the deal would give Sky more reach and was a “massive change” in New Zealand’s media landscape.

    He noted Sky’s existing free-to-air presence via Sky Open (formerly Prime), but said acquiring Three gave it the second-most popular audience outlet on TV.

    “Because of the inertia of how people use television, Three is just a much more accessible channel and one that’s been around longer,” Greive said.

    “To have basically the second-most popular channel in the country as part of their stable just means they’ve got a lot more ad inventory, much bigger audiences.”

    It also gave Sky another outlet for their content, and would allow it to compete further against TVNZ, both linear and online, Greive said.

    He said there may be a question mark around the long-term future of Three’s news service, which was produced by Stuff.

    No reference to ThreeNews
    Sky made no reference to ThreeNews in its announcement. However, Stuff confirmed ThreeNews would continue for now.

    “Stuff’s delivery of ThreeNews is part of the deal but there are also now lots of new opportunities ahead that we are excited to explore together,” Stuff owner Sinead Boucher said in a statement.

    On the deal itself, Boucher said she was “delighted” to see Three back in New Zealand ownership under Sky.

    “And who doesn’t love a $1 deal!” Boucher said, referring to her own $1 deal to buy Stuff from Australia’s Nine Entertainment in 2020.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: NZ and allies condemn ‘inhumane’, ‘horrifying’ killings in Gaza and ‘drip feeding’ of aid

    RNZ News

    New Zealand has joined 24 other countries in calling for an end to the war in Gaza, and criticising what they call the inhumane killing of Palestinians.

    The countries — including Britain, France, Canada and Australia plus the European Union — also condemed the Israeli government’s aid delivery model in Gaza as “dangerous”.

    “We condemn the drip feeding of aid and the inhumane killing of civilians, including children, seeking to meet their most basic needs of water and food.”

    They said it was “horrifying” that more than 800 civilians had been killed while seeking aid, the majority at food distribution sites run by a US- and Israeli-backed foundation.

    “We call on the Israeli government to immediately lift restrictions on the flow of aid and to urgently enable the UN and humanitarian NGOs to do their life saving work safely and effectively,” it said.

    Foreign Minister Winston Peters . . . “The tipping point was some time ago . . . it’s gotten to the stage where we’ve just lost our patience.” Image: RN/Mark Papalii

    “Proposals to remove the Palestinian population into a ‘humanitarian city’ are completely unacceptable. Permanent forced displacement is a violation of international humanitarian law.”

    The statement said the countries were “prepared to take further action” to support an immediate ceasefire.

    Reuters reported Israel’s foreign ministry said the statement was “disconnected from reality” and it would send the wrong message to Hamas.

    “The statement fails to focus the pressure on Hamas and fails to recognise Hamas’s role and responsibility for the situation,” the Israeli statement said.

    Having NZ voice heard
    Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters told RNZ Morning Report, New Zealand had chosen to be part of the statement as a way to have its voice heard on the “dire” humanitarian situation in Gaza.

    “The tipping point was some time ago . . .  it’s gotten to the stage where we’ve just lost our patience . . . ”

    Peters said he wanted to see what the response to the condemnation was.

    “The conflict in the Middle East goes on and on . . .  It’s gone from a situation where it was excusable, due to the October 7 conflict, to inexcusable as innocent people are being swept into it,” he said.

    “I do think there has to be change. It must happen now.”

    The war in Gaza was triggered when Hamas-led militants attacked Israel on October 7, 2023, killing 1200 people and taking 251 hostages, according to Israeli tallies.

    Israel’s subsequent air and ground war in Gaza has killed more than 59,000 Palestinians — including at least 17,400 children, according to the enclave’s Health Ministry, while displacing almost the entire population of more than 2 million and spreading a hunger crisis.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: NZ and allies condemn ‘inhumane’, ‘horrifying’ killings in Gaza and ‘drip feeding’ of aid

    RNZ News

    New Zealand has joined 24 other countries in calling for an end to the war in Gaza, and criticising what they call the inhumane killing of Palestinians.

    The countries — including Britain, France, Canada and Australia plus the European Union — also condemed the Israeli government’s aid delivery model in Gaza as “dangerous”.

    “We condemn the drip feeding of aid and the inhumane killing of civilians, including children, seeking to meet their most basic needs of water and food.”

    They said it was “horrifying” that more than 800 civilians had been killed while seeking aid, the majority at food distribution sites run by a US- and Israeli-backed foundation.

    “We call on the Israeli government to immediately lift restrictions on the flow of aid and to urgently enable the UN and humanitarian NGOs to do their life saving work safely and effectively,” it said.

    Foreign Minister Winston Peters . . . “The tipping point was some time ago . . . it’s gotten to the stage where we’ve just lost our patience.” Image: RN/Mark Papalii

    “Proposals to remove the Palestinian population into a ‘humanitarian city’ are completely unacceptable. Permanent forced displacement is a violation of international humanitarian law.”

    The statement said the countries were “prepared to take further action” to support an immediate ceasefire.

    Reuters reported Israel’s foreign ministry said the statement was “disconnected from reality” and it would send the wrong message to Hamas.

    “The statement fails to focus the pressure on Hamas and fails to recognise Hamas’s role and responsibility for the situation,” the Israeli statement said.

    Having NZ voice heard
    Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters told RNZ Morning Report, New Zealand had chosen to be part of the statement as a way to have its voice heard on the “dire” humanitarian situation in Gaza.

    “The tipping point was some time ago . . .  it’s gotten to the stage where we’ve just lost our patience . . . ”

    Peters said he wanted to see what the response to the condemnation was.

    “The conflict in the Middle East goes on and on . . .  It’s gone from a situation where it was excusable, due to the October 7 conflict, to inexcusable as innocent people are being swept into it,” he said.

    “I do think there has to be change. It must happen now.”

    The war in Gaza was triggered when Hamas-led militants attacked Israel on October 7, 2023, killing 1200 people and taking 251 hostages, according to Israeli tallies.

    Israel’s subsequent air and ground war in Gaza has killed more than 59,000 Palestinians — including at least 17,400 children, according to the enclave’s Health Ministry, while displacing almost the entire population of more than 2 million and spreading a hunger crisis.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Why has a bill to relax NZ foreign investment rules had so little scrutiny?

    ANALYSIS: By Jane Kelsey, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

    While public attention has been focused on the domestic fast-track consenting process for infrastructure and mining, Associate Minister of Finance David Seymour has been pushing through another fast-track process — this time for foreign investment in New Zealand.

    But it has had almost no public scrutiny.

    If the Overseas Investment (National Interest Test and Other Matters) Amendment Bill becomes law, it could have far-reaching consequences. Public submissions on the bill close tomorrow.

    A product of the ACT-National coalition agreement, the bill commits to amend the Overseas Investment Act 2005 “to limit ministerial decision making to national security concerns and make such decision making more timely”.

    There are valid concerns that piecemeal reforms to the current act have made it complex and unwieldy. But the new bill is equally convoluted and would significantly reduce effective scrutiny of foreign investments — especially in forestry.

    A three-step test
     Step one of a three-step process set out in the bill gives the regulator — the Overseas Investment Office which sits within Land Information NZ — 15 days to decide whether a proposed investment would be a risk to New Zealand’s “national interest”.

    If they don’t perceive a risk, or that initial assessment is not completed in time, the application is automatically approved.

    Transactions involving fisheries quotas and various land categories, or any other applications the regulator identifies, would require a “national interest” assessment under stage two.

    These would be assessed against a “ministerial letter” that sets out the government’s general policy and preferred approach to conducting the assessment, including any conditions on approvals.

    Other mandatory factors to be considered in the second stage include the act’s new “purpose” to increase economic opportunity through “timely consent” of less sensitive investments. The new test would allow scrutiny of the character and capability of the investor to be omitted altogether.

    If the regulator considers the national interest test is not met, or the transaction is “contrary to the national interest”, the minister of finance then makes a decision based on their assessment of those factors.

    Inadequate regulatory process
     Seymour has blamed the current screening regime for low volumes of foreign investment. But Treasury’s 2024 regulatory impact statement on the proposed changes to international investment screening acknowledges many other factors that influence investor decisions.

    Moreover, the Treasury statement acknowledges public views that foreign investment rules should “manage a wide range of risks” and “that there is inherent non-economic value in retaining domestic ownership of certain assets”.

    Treasury officials also recognised a range of other public concerns, including profits going offshore, loss of jobs, and foreign control of iconic businesses.

    The regulatory impact statement did not cover these factors because it was required to consider only the coalition commitment. The Treasury panel reported “notable limitations” on the bill’s quality assurance process.

    A fuller review was “infeasible” because it could not be completed in the time required, and would be broader than necessary to meet the coalition commitment to amend the act in the prescribed way.

    The requirement to implement the bill in this parliamentary term meant the options officials could consider, even within the scope of the coalition agreement, were further limited.

    Time constraints meant “users and key stakeholders have not been consulted”, according to the Treasury statement. Environmental and other risks would have to be managed through other regulations.

    There is no reference to te Tiriti o Waitangi or mana whenua engagement.

    Forestry ‘slash’ after Cyclone Gabrielle in 2023 . . . no need to consider foreign investors’ track records. Image: Getty/The Conversation

    No ‘benefit to NZ’ test
     While the bill largely retains a version of the current screening regime for residential and farm land, it removes existing forestry activities from that definition (but not new forestry on non-forest land). It also removes extraction of water for bottling, or other bulk extraction for human consumption, from special vetting.

    Where sensitive land (such as islands, coastal areas, conservation and wahi tapu land) is not residential or farm land, it would be removed from special screening rules currently applied for land.

    Repeal of the “special forestry test” — which in practice has seen most applications approved, albeit with conditions — means most forestry investments could be fast-tracked.

    There would no longer be a need to consider investors’ track records or apply a “benefit to New Zealand” test. Regulators may or may not be empowered to impose conditions such as replanting or cleaning up slash.

    The official documents don’t explain the rationale for this. But it looks like a win for Regional Development Minister Shane Jones, and was perhaps the price of NZ First’s support.

    It has potentially serious implications for forestry communities affected by climate-related disasters, however. Further weakening scrutiny and investment conditions risks intensifying the already devastating impacts of international forestry companies. Taxpayers and ratepayers pick up the costs while the companies can minimise their taxes and send profits offshore.

    Locked in forever?
     Finally, these changes could be locked in through New Zealand’s free trade agreements. Several such agreements say New Zealand’s investment regime cannot become more restrictive than the 2005 act and its regulations.

    A “ratchet clause” would lock in any further liberalisation through this bill, from which there is no going back.

    However, another annex in those free trade agreements could be interpreted as allowing some flexibility to alter the screening rules and criteria in the future. None of the official documents address this crucial question.

    As an academic expert in this area I am uncertain about the risk.

    But the lack of clarity underlines the problems exemplified in this bill. It is another example of coalition agreements bypassing democratic scrutiny and informed decision making. More public debate and broad analysis is needed on the bill and its implications.

    Dr Jane Kelsey is emeritus professor of law, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –