Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) State Crime News
ALEXANDRIA, La. – Nine defendants involved in an Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (“OCDETF”) operation have all been sentenced for their involvement in a conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, announced Acting United States Attorney Alexander C. Van Hook. This investigation in the Avoyelles Parish area resulted in a total sentence of over 79 years in federal prison for these defendants who conspired together in this drug trafficking organization. United States District Judge Dee D. Drell sentenced the nine defendants as follows:
Darrell Joseph Sampson, Jr., 39, of Marksville, Louisiana, has been sentenced to 113 months (9 years, 5 months) in prison, for conspiracy to distribute and possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine.
Christopher Glynn Bradford, 46, of Marksville, was sentenced to 50 months (4 years, 2 months) in prison, for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine.
Travis Demond Carroll, 34, of Baton Rouge, was sentenced to 180 months (15 years) in prison, for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine.
Kelly Johnson, Jr., 32, of Lake Charles, was sentenced to 90 months (7 years, 6 months) in prison, for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine.
Troy Wayne Dominick, 42, of Mansura, was sentenced to 80 months (6 years, 8 months) in prison, for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine.
Arthor Francisco, 37, of Moreauville, was sentenced to 160 months (13 years, 4 months) in prison, for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine.
Desmond Dewayne Jordan, 46, of Alexandria, was sentenced to 225 months (18 years, 9 months) in prison, for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine.
Joseph Patrick Murray, III, 27, of Cottonport, was sentenced to 37 months (3 years, 1 month) in prison, for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine.
Tremayne Lee Lavalais, 34, of Bunkie, was sentenced to 20 months (1 year, 8 months) in prison, for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine.
Each defendant will serve a term of supervised release following their release from prison.
The FBI Central Louisiana Gang Task Force began an investigation into the distribution of methamphetamine in the Avoyelles Parish area. During their investigation, agents conducted surveillance of the defendants and observed them conducting drug transactions. Law enforcement agents received authorization to conduct wiretaps on phones which the defendants were using to conduct their drug trafficking business. Between January and September of 2023, numerous communications between the defendants wherein they discussed their narcotics trafficking were intercepted by law enforcement. This organization sourced the methamphetamine from the Houston, Texas area and distributed it throughout central and south Louisiana.
The case was investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Louisiana State Police, and prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys John W. Nickel and LaDonte A. Murphy.
The investigation and conviction of these defendants is part of an Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) investigation. OCDETF identifies, disrupts, and dismantles the highest-level drug traffickers, money launderers, gangs, and transnational criminal organizations that threaten the United States by using a prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach that leverages the strengths of federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies against criminal networks.
Demonstrators participate in a rally in Sanaa, Yemen, on March 17, 2025. On Monday, tens of thousands of people gathered in a massive rally in Sanaa, protesting against U.S. airstrikes in northern Yemen that have led to dozens of deaths. [Photo/Xinhua]
The U.S. military launched a new wave of airstrikes on Yemen, targeting several sites in and around the Red Sea port city of Hodeidah Monday evening, Houthi-run al-Masirah TV said.
“One airstrike targeted the Al-Arj area in Bajil district, east of the city, while another series of airstrikes hit and destroyed the Al-Habashi iron factory in the Salif district, northwest of the city,” the TV channel reported.
Residents described the airstrikes as extremely violent with explosions heard from miles away.
There were no immediate reports of casualties or the extent of the damage.
On Monday, thousands of people gathered in a massive rally at Sabeen Square in the Houthi-held Yemeni capital Sanaa, protesting against U.S. airstrikes in northern Yemen that have led to dozens of deaths.
Demonstrators, with many carrying snipers and Kalashnikov rifles, chanted slogans denouncing the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump, which ordered the airstrike campaign on Houthi targets starting Saturday evening.
“Death to America, death to Israel,” protesters cried at the square decorated by huge billboards showing the group’s leader, and other leaders from what the group called the “resistance axis.”
Addressing the crowd, Mohammed Ali al-Houthi, head of the group’s supreme revolutionary committee, said the group views the U.S. operations as “aggression and terrorism, and we will confront escalation with escalation.”
Over the past two days, dozens of Houthi-controlled military sites, as well as dozens of residential houses, have been targeted and bombed by U.S. fighter jets across Sanaa, and several other northern and western provinces under Houthi control.
Many families have fled the capital for fear of their lives.
According to the latest statement from the Houthi-run Health Ministry, the death toll from the U.S. airstrikes has increased to 53, including five children and two women. Search operations under the rubble of residential buildings were still ongoing.
In a televised speech Sunday, Houthi leader Abdulmalik al-Houthi threatened to launch attacks targeting U.S. naval and commercial ships if the U.S. military continued to conduct airstrikes on Houthi-held areas.
The White House on Sunday said in a televised statement that the U.S. military targeted and killed several senior Houthi leaders during the airstrikes. The Houthi group has yet to comment.
The U.S. airstrikes began Saturday evening as Trump vowed to continue air attacks until the Houthis stopped attacking international shipping lines and ships.
He also warned the Houthis that if they do not stop their attacks “starting today … hell will rain down upon you like nothing you have ever seen before.”
The renewed conflict comes after Israel halted the entry of goods and supplies into Gaza on March 2, coinciding with the end of the first phase of the ceasefire agreement.
On Tuesday, the Houthi group announced that it would resume launching attacks against any Israeli ship in the Red Sea, Arabian Sea, the Gulf of Aden, and the Bab al-Mandab Strait until the crossings of the Gaza Strip are reopened and aid allowed in.
From November 2023 to Jan. 19, the Houthi group launched dozens of drone and rocket attacks against Israel-linked ships and Israeli cities to show solidarity with Palestinians amid the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict. The attacks later expanded to include U.S. and British ships after the U.S.-British navy coalition started to intervene, launching air raids and missile strikes against Houthi targets to deter the group.
The Israeli army conducted on Tuesday intense airstrikes on the northern and central Gaza Strip, marking the most violent escalation since the ceasefire, according to local sources and eyewitnesses.
Palestinian medical and security sources told Xinhua that Israeli warplanes launched raids of unprecedented scale, triggering successive explosions in several areas of northern and central Gaza.
The sources said that the Israeli army has killed over 200 Palestinians in the coastal enclave.
In an initial statement, the Palestinian Civil Defense said that Israeli aircraft targeted homes, mosques, schools and shelters, resulting in significant casualties.
“Our crews are facing great difficulties due to the size and number of targets being struck simultaneously,” the civil defense added.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office announced early Tuesday that Netanyahu and the country’s Defense Minister Israel Katz had ordered the military to “operate against Hamas with increasingly powerful military force.”
According to the statement, the move followed what it described as Hamas’s “repeated refusal to release hostages” and rejection of proposals presented by U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff and other mediators.
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) was conducting “extensive strikes” on Hamas targets, it said.
The statement added that the strikes are being carried out under an operational plan presented by the IDF over the weekend and approved by the political leadership.
Katz warned in a separate statement that if Hamas does not release all hostages, “the gates of hell will open in Gaza,” and Hamas will encounter the Israeli military “with an intensity they have never known before.”
Israel’s state-owned Army Radio said that the move indicated the fragile ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, which took effect on Jan. 19, “has collapsed.”
The Israeli army killed at least 200 Palestinians and wounded dozens more during the intensifying airstrikes on various places in Gaza, the Hamas-run government media office said Tuesday.
In a press statement, the office said that the Israeli raids targeted densely populated residential areas in the south, north and center of the Strip, as well as camps for displaced persons.
“The strikes caused significant material damage and left dozens trapped under the rubble, while rescue teams faced severe challenges in reaching the victims due to the ongoing bombardment,” it said.
The past few hours have witnessed a sharp military escalation, with Israeli warplanes launching successive raids on residential neighborhoods in Gaza City, the southern city of Khan Yunis and the town of Jabalia in the north.
Palestinian eyewitnesses told Xinhua that they heard powerful explosions that echoed throughout the Strip as civil defense crews rushed to pull victims from beneath the debris.
Medical sources in Gaza said that hospitals are operating beyond capacity amid a severe shortage of medical supplies, making it increasingly difficult to treat heavy casualties.
Ambulance services have been disrupted as the ongoing airstrikes have destroyed roads and infrastructure, further complicating rescue efforts.
The latest escalation comes after Israel announced the resumption of attacks on Gaza, citing Hamas’s rejection of U.S.-brokered proposals to extend the first phase of the ceasefire agreement.
Hamas, in turn, accused Israel of violating the ceasefire that took effect on Jan. 19 and called on mediators to pressure Israel to halt the military campaign.
Source: State University of Management – Official website of the State –
The award ceremony will take place at the Open Day at the Information Technology Center of the State University of Management on March 23, 2025. It will start at 12:00.
The All-Russian scientific and practical tournament “Hi-Tech Breakthrough” started in the fall and was held in three stages. Its results were summed up last week. 180 participants from Russia, Tunisia, Kazakhstan, Belarus, Mali, Afghanistan, Iran, the Philippines, Sudan, Israel, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Congo, Turkmenistan, India, Vietnam and other countries demonstrated their talents in marketing.
Based on the results of the final, foreign citizens who showed the best results were recommended for admission to the Master’s program “High-Tech Marketing” of the Institute of Marketing within the quota approved by the Government. This year it was 60 places.
The finalists of the Tournament among Russians will also receive a pleasant bonus – additional points await them when they enter the “High-Tech Marketing” program.
Congratulations to the winners, we wish them successful admission to the Master’s program and a great career in marketing! And we are waiting for everyone who wants to try their hand at the Tournament of the next season, which starts on November 1.
Subscribe to the tg channel “Our State University” Announcement date: 03/18/2025
Дне открытых дверей в Центре информационных технологий ГУУ 23 марта 2025 года. Начало в 12.00….” data-yashareImage=”https://guu.ru/wp-content/uploads/Хай-тек-прорыв-2024-1.jpg” data-yashareLink=”https://guu.ru/%d0%b3%d1%83%d1%83-%d0%bf%d1%80%d0%b8%d0%b3%d0%bb%d0%b0%d1%88%d0%b0%d0%b5%d1%82-%d0%bf%d0%be%d0%b1%d0%b5%d0%b4%d0%b8%d1%82%d0%b5%d0%bb%d0%b5%d0%b9-%d0%b8-%d0%bf%d1%80%d0%b8%d0%b7%d1%91%d1%80%d0%be/”>
Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.
Reacting to donors’ pledges made at theBrussels conference on Syriatoday, Oxfam in Syria Country Director, Moutaz Adham, said:
“The pledges are appreciated but now donors must act on them, especially at this critical moment.
“The country has seen seismic changes and there is growing hope for a new Syria. Yet, the reality remains that most people face the choice between food, education or healthcare. Poverty coupled with persistent violence is shattering hope for recovery and peace. This is compounded by the uncertainty about Syria’s future and what awaits.
“The growing global trend of aid cuts is alarming. Donors must ensure there is enough aid so Syrians can rebuild their lives – both now and in the long-term. Syrians themselves must be at the forefront of all discussions on their country’s future. The peace process must be led by Syrians and inclusive of all groups.”
“Persisting violence, poverty and dwindling resilience are erasing hope for recovery, stability, and peace. Global leaders must stand firmly behind the Syrian people, now and in the future.
Spokespersons are available for interview.
Oxfam joined 150+ NGOS in signing onto astatementcalling for long-term support to Syrians ahead of the Brussels IX conference.
Since 2013, Oxfam has been working in Syria and with Syrians in neighbouring countries and the communities hosting them. Together with partners, we make sure people have clean water, distribute cash so people can put food on the table and cover their essential needs, support women to start their businesses, support farmers to start farming again by distributing seeds and doing trainings, and bakers to start baking again by fixing damaged bakeries.
UN Human Rights Council 58: UK Statement for the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran
Statement for the Joint Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran. Delivered by the UK’s Permanent Representative to the WTO & UN, Simon Manley.
Special Rapporteur,
Your report and presentation this morning are clear: the human rights situation in Iran remains appalling.
Iran has bolstered its surveillance practices to target women and girls. The temporary suspension of the hijab and chastity bill is simply not enough. Iran must repeal mandatory veiling laws and permanently cease plans for mandatory citizen surveillance.
Religious minorities continue to face systemic targeting and repression. The past year has seen an escalation in the arrest and detention of Baha’i women as authorities seek to suppress their religious identity and autonomy as women.
Executions have reached a critical level – over 900 people put to death last year – with an increasing number of them women. Many of those were put to death following unfair trials and for offences that simply do not meet the most serious crimes threshold. Only 10 per cent of these executions were publicly announced.
Mr President,
It has been more than 2 years since the Iranian people took to the streets to call for Woman Life Freedom. More than 2 years since the brutal crackdown on these nationwide protests. More than 2 years and accountability, sadly, remains a distant hope. The Fact Finding Mission has clearly stated – investigations must continue. This Council must not let impunity prevail. The Iranian people deserve justice.
Source: Moscow Government – Government of Moscow –
The IV Moscow Fashion Week is ending in the Central Exhibition Hall “Manezh”, which brought together Russian and foreign designers, students of specialized universities and other representatives of the industry. During the event, a professional showroom was opened, a market of Russian designers was held, and fashion shows took place.
This is an important event not only in the fashion industry, but also in the cultural life of the city: the week also included the World Fashion Shorts short film festival and an extensive educational program.
Member of the Moscow Fashion Week expert council, president of the Russian Association of Fashion Industry Participants Tatyana Belkevich noted that this time the designers approached participation with a greater understanding of the expert group’s requirements. This was facilitated by the holding of thematic lectures and the experience of past fashion weeks, where the current participants gained a lot of useful knowledge and understood how to properly present their brands on the catwalk.
“Now we can safely say that we have an industry not just of clothing and fashion production, which is tuned to the end consumer, but also a design industry. This is very clearly visible and can be seen in many collections. Those brands that were just starting out last fashion week have shown themselves very well this season. Experience is growing enormously. The demand for Russian brands is also growing. According to research, in 2024, 73 percent of consumers chose Russian brands with both their hearts and wallets,” said Tatyana Belkevich.
One of the participants of the opening of the IV Moscow Fashion Week was the brand of designer Igor Andreev. In the new collection, he focused on the modern Russian style, demonstrating a commitment to the folk, original and local. The public was presented with many knitted whole products or elements built into images. The podium itself was decorated with structures in the form of Russian window frames.
“Young designers are very actively exploiting the Russian cultural code in their works,” added Tatyana Belkevich. “This is wonderful, because it is really in our blood and it should be used. Famous designers, of course, also use ethnicity, some elements of the cultural code in their collections, but very carefully, very precisely, not like the youth, who have not yet taken flight and really want to make accents.”
Every year, lectures popularizing the Russian fashion industry and talking about the interaction of domestic designers, artists, models and industry specialists with great fashion houses are held as part of the fashion week. According to the curator of the Moscow Fashion Week lecture hall, fashion expert Anna Rykova, the lectures are designed for a wide range of listeners with the aim of popularizing the topic of fashion. Experts talk about the industry as a whole – as a large cultural layer not only in Russia, but also in the world, about how fashion influences people’s tastes and preferences, how it shapes business, reflects cultural, political and economic events, and reacts to various changes. The program includes lectures on the mark that domestic designers and artists have left on world fashion, national costumes and crafts.
“I think that Moscow has probably acquired its own stylistic face recently. Moscow remains less a city associated with strong luxury and more with individuality. It is generally accepted that we have a capital and a cultural capital, St. Petersburg. I think that any capital is cultural and directly connected with fashion. Fashion is connected with culture, culture is connected with fashion – these are two components that are absolutely impossible to separate at the moment. Therefore, culture is fashionable,” says Anna Rykova.
More than 180 brands (including over 100 from the capital) from 27 regions of Russia, including Moscow, Ivanovo, Leningrad, Nizhny Novgorod, Tambov and Tyumen regions, Krasnodar and Primorsky Krai, the republics of Buryatia, Dagestan, Komi, Sakha (Yakutia) and Tatarstan, are taking part in Moscow Fashion Week. Designers from China, Indonesia, South Africa, Turkey, India and other countries are also presenting their collections to a wide audience.
Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.
Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect
Manama, Bahrain –18th March 2025 – This week’s BD 100 million issue of Government Treasury Bills has been oversubscribed by 197%.
The bills, carrying a maturity of 12 months, are issued by the CBB, on behalf of the Kingdom of Bahrain.
The issue date of the bills is 20th March 2025, and the maturity date is 19th March 2026.
The weighted average rate of interest is 4.88% compared to 5.26% of the previous issue on 20th February 2025.
The approximate average price for the issue was 95.299% with the lowest accepted price being 94.913%.
This is issue No. 126 (ISIN BH00030F6I98) of Government Treasury Bills. With this, the total outstanding value of Government Treasury Bills is BD 2.110 billion.
MEASURES TO PREVENT DRUG ABUSE AND COMBAT ILLEGAL DRUG TRADE
Posted On: 18 MAR 2025 3:26PM by PIB Delhi
To address the problem of Drug Abuse, Government has formulated and implemented the National Action Plan for Drug Demand Reduction (NAPDDR) under which the Government is taking a sustained and coordinated action for arresting the problem of substance abuse. This includes:
Launched Nasha Mukt Bharat Abhiyaan (NMBA) in all districts of the country through more than 10000 master volunteers. It has reached out to more-than 14.79 crore people including 4.96 crore youth and 2.97 crore women.
350 Integrated Rehabilitation Centers for Addicts (IRCAs) are supported by the Government to provide treatment for the drug victims, preventive education, awareness generation, motivational counseling, detoxification/de-addiction, after care and re-integration into the social mainstream.
46 Community based Peer led Intervention (CPLI) Centers supported by the Government focuses on vulnerable and at risk children and adolescents.
74 Outreach and Drop In Centers (ODICs) supported by the Government provide safe and secure space for treatment, rehabilitation, screening, assessment, counseling, referral, linkage for treatment and rehabilitation services for substance users.
142 Addiction Treatment Facilities (ATFs) has been established in Government hospitals through All India Institute of Medical science (AIIMS), New Delhi.
124 District De-addiction Centres (DDACs) which provides all three facilities provided by IRCA, ODIC and CPLI under one roof have been set up so far.
A Toll-free Helpline for de-addiction, 14446 is operated for providing primary counseling and immediate assistance to persons seeking help.
Government through its autonomous body National Institute of Social Defense (NISD) and other collaborating agencies like State Counsel of Educational Research and Training (SCERTs), Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, etc. provides for regular awareness generation and sensitization sessions for all stakeholders including students, teachers, parents.
Navchetna Modules, teachers training modules have been developed by Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment (MoSJE) for sensitizing students (6th – 11th standard), teachers and parents on drug dependence, related coping strategies and life skills.
As per latest data published by National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) pertaining to the year 2022; Drug-wise seizures under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act during 2018 to 2022 is at Annexure-I.
The Government made various efforts to tackle the illegal drug trade in border areas, some of which are as under: –
A 4-tier Narco-Coordination Centre (NCORD) mechanism for ensuring better coordination between Central & State Drug Law Enforcement Agencies and other stakeholders in the field of controlling drug trafficking and drug abuse in India has been established. An all-in-one NCORD portal has been developed for information related to drug law enforcement.
A dedicated Anti-Narcotics Task Force (ANTF) headed by Additional Director General/ Inspector General level Police Officer has been established in each State/ Union Territory to function as the NCORD Secretariat for the State/ Union Territory and follow-up on compliance of decisions taken in NCORD meetings at different levels.
To monitor the investigation of important and significant seizures, a Joint Coordination Committee (JCC) under the Chairmanship of Director General, Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) has been set up.
National Investigation Agency (NIA) has been empowered under NDPS Act, 1985 in the year 2020 for investigation of narco-terrorism cases.
Border Guarding Forces (Border Security Force, Assam Rifles and Sashastra Seema Bal) have been empowered under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985 to carry out search, seizure and arrest for illicit trafficking of narcotic drugs at international border. Further, Railway Protection Force (RPF) has also been empowered under NDPS Act to check drug trafficking along the railway routes.
Narcotics Control Bureau coordinates with other agencies like, Navy, Coast Guard, Border Security Force, State ANTF, etc. to conduct joint operations to control the drug trafficking.
A high level dedicated group has been created in National Security Council Secretariat (NSCS) in November 2022 to analyze the drug trafficking through maritime routes, challenges and solutions (Maritime Security Group – NSCS).
Director General Level Talks are organized with neighboring and other countries such as Myanmar, Iran, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Singapore, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, etc. to resolve various issues on drug trafficking having international implications.
As a part of international co-operation, India has signed Bilateral Agreements with 27 countries, Memorandum of Understanding with 16 countries and Agreements on Security Cooperation with 02 countries for combating illicit trafficking of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) and Chemical Precursors as well as related offences.
India is closely associated with International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) and all its programs viz. PEN (Pre-Export Notification), PICS (Precursors Incident Communication System), and IONICS (International Operations on New Psychoactive Substances Incident Communication System).
Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) co-ordinates with various international organizations such as South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation- Drug Offences Monitoring Desk (SAARC-SDOMD), Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS), Colombo Plan, Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), ASEAN Senior Officials on Drug Matters (ASOD), Bay of Bengal Initiative For Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Co-Operation (BIMSTEC), Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC),
International Narcotics Control Board (INCB), etc. for sharing information and intelligence to combat trans-national drug trafficking.
NCB India takes part in real-time information sharing with various Drug Liaison Officers of other countries such as the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) of the United States of America, the National Crime Agency of the United Kingdom, Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) of Canada, Australian Federal Police (AFP) of Australia, Office Anti-Stupefiants (OFAST) of France, etc for operational and intelligence information.
This was stated by the Minister of State in the Ministry of Home Affairs Shri Nityanand Rai in a written reply to a question in the Lok Sabha.
When a ceasefire in the war between Hamas and Israel finally came into effect on January 19, the world breathed a collective sigh of relief.
However, that ceasefire agreement, and its associated negotiations, have now been cast aside by new Israeli attacks on Gaza.
A statement from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said the strikes came after Hamas’ “repeated refusals” to “release our hostages”, and the group’s rejection of all proposals presented by US President Donald Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff.
Even before Israel cut off all humanitarian aid and electricity to Gaza in the past two weeks, Hamas claimed it had not met the levels of humanitarian aid, shelter and fuel it agreed to provide in the terms of the ceasefire. However, this is a distraction from a larger issue.
This ceasefire was always more like a strangle contract than a negotiated agreement between equal parties. Israel, as the party with far greater military and political power, has always had the upper hand.
And while the first phase of the ceasefire, which lasted 42 days, saw the successful release of 33 hostages held by Hamas in exchange for nearly 1,800 Palestinian prisoners, the ceasefire also enabled Israel to use it for its own political and military ends.
Buying time
The most common conventional concern about ceasefires is that the parties to a conflict will use them for their own ends.
Typically, the worry is that non-state armed groups, such as Hamas, will use the halt in violence to buy time to regroup, rearm and rebuild their strength to continue fighting.
But states such as Israel have this ability, too. Even though they have standing armies that might not need to regroup and rearm in the same way, states can use this time to manoeuvre in the international arena – a space largely denied to non-state actors.
Trump’s rise to power in the US has seemingly given the Israeli government carte blanche to proceed in ways that were arguably off limits to previous US presidents who were also largely supportive of Israel’s actions.
This includes the plan of forcing Gaza’s population out of the strip. This plan was raised earlier in the war by Trump advisor Jared Kushner and Israeli officials as a supposed humanitarian initiative.
Trump has now repeated the call to relocate Palestinians from Gaza to Egypt and Jordan – or possibly other parts of Africa – and for the US to take “ownership” of the coastal strip and turn it into the “Riviera of the Middle East”.
On the face of it, this plan would be a war crime. But even if it is never fully implemented, the fact it is being promoted by Trump after many years of domestic Israeli and international opprobrium shows how political ideas once thought unacceptable can take on a life of their own.
Political and military maneouvering
Israel has also used the ceasefire to pursue larger political and military goals in Gaza, the West Bank, southern Lebanon and Syria.
Even though the ceasefire did reduce overall levels of violence in Gaza, Israel has continued to carry out attacks on targets in the strip.
It has also escalated the construction of settlements and carried out increasingly violent operations in the West Bank. In addition, there have been egregious attacks on Palestinian residents in Israel.
And though nearly 1,800 Palestinian prisoners were released during the ceasefire, Israel was holding more than 9,600 Palestinians in detention on “security grounds” at the end of 2024. Thousands more Palestinians are being held by Israel in administrative detention, which means without trial or charge.
During the ceasefire, Israel also accelerated efforts to evict the UN agency for Palestinian refugees, UNRWA, from its headquarters in East Jerusalem. And the Israeli government has also proposed increasinglydraconian laws aimed at restraining the work of Israeli human rights organisations.
On the military front, the ceasefire arguably alleviated some pressure on Israel, giving it time to consolidate its territorial and security gains against Hezbollah in southern Lebanon and in Syria.
In the past two months, two deadlines for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from southern Lebanon passed. Israel has instead proposed establishing a buffer zone on Lebanese territory and has begun destroying villages, uprooting olive trees and building semi-permanent outposts along the border.
In a speech in February, Netanyahu also demanded the “complete demilitarisation of southern Syria” following the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime. And Defence Minister Israel Katz said this month Israel would keep its troops in southern Syria to “protect” residents from any threats from the new Syrian regime.
Be careful what you wish for
While Palestinians are known for their sumud – usually translated as steadfastness or tenacity – there is a limit to what humans can endure. The war, and subsequent ceasefires, have created a situation in which Gazans may have to put the survival and wellbeing of themselves and their families above their desire to stay in Palestine.
There is a general assumption that ceasefires are positive and humanitarian in nature. But ceasefires are not panaceas. In reality, they are a least-worst option for stopping the violence of war for often just a brief period.
A ceasefire was never going to be the solution to the decades-old conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. Instead, it has turned out to be part of the problem.
Marika Sosnowski does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
When a ceasefire in the war between Hamas and Israel finally came into effect on January 19, the world breathed a collective sigh of relief.
However, that ceasefire agreement, and its associated negotiations, have now been cast aside by new Israeli attacks on Gaza.
A statement from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said the strikes came after Hamas’ “repeated refusals” to “release our hostages”, and the group’s rejection of all proposals presented by US President Donald Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff.
Even before Israel cut off all humanitarian aid and electricity to Gaza in the past two weeks, Hamas claimed it had not met the levels of humanitarian aid, shelter and fuel it agreed to provide in the terms of the ceasefire. However, this is a distraction from a larger issue.
This ceasefire was always more like a strangle contract than a negotiated agreement between equal parties. Israel, as the party with far greater military and political power, has always had the upper hand.
And while the first phase of the ceasefire, which lasted 42 days, saw the successful release of 33 hostages held by Hamas in exchange for nearly 1,800 Palestinian prisoners, the ceasefire also enabled Israel to use it for its own political and military ends.
Buying time
The most common conventional concern about ceasefires is that the parties to a conflict will use them for their own ends.
Typically, the worry is that non-state armed groups, such as Hamas, will use the halt in violence to buy time to regroup, rearm and rebuild their strength to continue fighting.
But states such as Israel have this ability, too. Even though they have standing armies that might not need to regroup and rearm in the same way, states can use this time to manoeuvre in the international arena – a space largely denied to non-state actors.
Trump’s rise to power in the US has seemingly given the Israeli government carte blanche to proceed in ways that were arguably off limits to previous US presidents who were also largely supportive of Israel’s actions.
This includes the plan of forcing Gaza’s population out of the strip. This plan was raised earlier in the war by Trump advisor Jared Kushner and Israeli officials as a supposed humanitarian initiative.
Trump has now repeated the call to relocate Palestinians from Gaza to Egypt and Jordan – or possibly other parts of Africa – and for the US to take “ownership” of the coastal strip and turn it into the “Riviera of the Middle East”.
On the face of it, this plan would be a war crime. But even if it is never fully implemented, the fact it is being promoted by Trump after many years of domestic Israeli and international opprobrium shows how political ideas once thought unacceptable can take on a life of their own.
Political and military maneouvering
Israel has also used the ceasefire to pursue larger political and military goals in Gaza, the West Bank, southern Lebanon and Syria.
Even though the ceasefire did reduce overall levels of violence in Gaza, Israel has continued to carry out attacks on targets in the strip.
It has also escalated the construction of settlements and carried out increasingly violent operations in the West Bank. In addition, there have been egregious attacks on Palestinian residents in Israel.
And though nearly 1,800 Palestinian prisoners were released during the ceasefire, Israel was holding more than 9,600 Palestinians in detention on “security grounds” at the end of 2024. Thousands more Palestinians are being held by Israel in administrative detention, which means without trial or charge.
During the ceasefire, Israel also accelerated efforts to evict the UN agency for Palestinian refugees, UNRWA, from its headquarters in East Jerusalem. And the Israeli government has also proposed increasinglydraconian laws aimed at restraining the work of Israeli human rights organisations.
On the military front, the ceasefire arguably alleviated some pressure on Israel, giving it time to consolidate its territorial and security gains against Hezbollah in southern Lebanon and in Syria.
In the past two months, two deadlines for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from southern Lebanon passed. Israel has instead proposed establishing a buffer zone on Lebanese territory and has begun destroying villages, uprooting olive trees and building semi-permanent outposts along the border.
In a speech in February, Netanyahu also demanded the “complete demilitarisation of southern Syria” following the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime. And Defence Minister Israel Katz said this month Israel would keep its troops in southern Syria to “protect” residents from any threats from the new Syrian regime.
Be careful what you wish for
While Palestinians are known for their sumud – usually translated as steadfastness or tenacity – there is a limit to what humans can endure. The war, and subsequent ceasefires, have created a situation in which Gazans may have to put the survival and wellbeing of themselves and their families above their desire to stay in Palestine.
There is a general assumption that ceasefires are positive and humanitarian in nature. But ceasefires are not panaceas. In reality, they are a least-worst option for stopping the violence of war for often just a brief period.
A ceasefire was never going to be the solution to the decades-old conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. Instead, it has turned out to be part of the problem.
Marika Sosnowski does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
STEPHANIE DALZELL, HOST: Returning to our top story today, the government says it will investigate the child care sector after Four Corners exposed systemic issues and cases of abuse and neglect. Let’s bring in the Early Childhood Education Minister, Anne Aly, to discuss this further. Anne, thanks for joining us. This Four Corners investigation exposed a flawed and inconsistent regulatory system for child care centres with allegations of abuse. Can I just ask you, firstly, what was your initial reaction when you saw the story?
MINISTER ANNE ALY: Yeah, look, I think the behaviours that were reported in last night’s story are deeply, deeply concerning and I want to make it very clear that there is no tolerance for those kinds of behaviours in early childhood education and care sector. We care deeply and are committed to child wellbeing and safety and understand that parents rightly expect that when they drop off their children in early childhood education and care, that their children are well looked after, that they’re safe and that they’re secure.
I might point out that the vast majority of providers, and the vast majority of early childhood educators, are dedicated professionals who care deeply about safety and child development and child education.
I would also point out that I expect that state and territory governments fulfil their regulatory obligations and ensure that services operating within their jurisdictions comply with the National Quality Framework.
Now, this afternoon, I have asked the CEO of the National Quality Authority to give some immediate advice on what more can be done around child safety and security, building on the 2023 recommendations of the report that myself and the Minister for Education, Jason Clare commissioned. That gives us a range of recommendations for improving child safety in early childhood education and care. All state and territory ministers and the Commonwealth Government have agreed on those recommendations and we’re making good progress in implementing those recommendations. And we’ll continue working with state and territory governments to ensure that child safety and wellbeing are front and centre of our early childhood education and care system.
DALZELL: You mentioned the state and territory regulators. Given how systemic these failures and breaches have been here, does the Federal Government need to take over regulation to ensure children’s safety?
ALY: Well, early childhood education and care and the regulation of early childhood education and care services is a shared responsibility. The states have a responsibility and the Federal Government has a responsibility. And so, I would reiterate that I expect state and territory governments to fulfil their regulatory obligations and ensure that services within their jurisdictions comply with the National Quality Framework.
DALZELL: The Commonwealth pays Child Care Subsidies. You’re writing the cheques. Wouldn’t it make sense for you to also fund the regulators upholding these national standards?
ALY: As I said, it’s a shared responsibility between state and Federal Governments. The Federal Government has a responsibility for the National Quality Framework. The state governments have a responsibility for the regulation. Embedded within the National Quality Framework are safety, security and child health and wellbeing measures. And I expect that state and territory governments fulfil that regulatory responsibility.
DALZELL: The Prime Minister says he supports an investigation into the sector. I know it’s early days, but what are you anticipating that might look like? The Greens are calling for a Royal Commission. Why won’t you consider that? And what will this investigation look like?
ALY: Well, the Prime Minister, as the Prime Minister said, Royal Commissions take years. Now, these are not issues that have just cropped up in early childhood education and care. They are long-standing issues. But this is the first time we have a Federal Government, in the Federal Labor Government, that is taking reform seriously and that has a program of reform. We have already commissioned a review by the ACCC, a review by the Productivity Commission. We have in 2023, as I mentioned, the review into child safety and wellbeing in early childhood education and care. Those reviews are informing our pathway to a system, a universal early childhood education and care system, that is based on quality, affordability and accessibility for every child in Australia. We’ll continue to refer to the reviews that we have done and the consultations that we have with the sector, with families, with educators to chart that pathway to universal early childhood education and care, which is quality, which is affordable and which is accessible.
DALZELL: Anne on another topic, Israel has begun striking Gaza again today, the biggest attack since the start of this ceasefire. How concerned are you about this and the status of the ceasefire?
ALY: I’m deeply concerned. I think the ceasefire gave hope of the stages towards a more lasting peace between Palestine and Israel. I have said before, and I will say it again, there is absolutely no justification for the collective punishment of Palestinian civilians by the Israeli Defence Forces. And you know, this is deeply, deeply concerning. I continue to push for, and I know Australia will continue to push for, an end to the hostilities, a lasting ceasefire and a lasting peace.
DALZELL: Can I also ask you about Peter Dutton’s idea for a referendum to deport dual citizens that have committed serious crimes? We just heard Shadow Trade Minister Kevin Hogan say that one person is too many to be a dual citizen that’s committed a serious crime like terrorism. What’s your response to that?
ALY: Well, our constitution is very clear. A citizen is a citizen, and all citizens should be treated equally. You know, I think the Prime Minister describes this as a thought bubble. I would add to that that Peter Dutton likes to punch down, and he likes to utilise the politics of division and politics of fear for what he sees to be as political gain. I agree with the Prime Minister that this is a thought bubble.
DALZELL: What would the government do, or what is the government doing to deal with dual citizens who have committed crimes like terrorism?
ALY: We have laws in place, and we continue to follow the letter of the law. What we’re talking about here is Peter Dutton wanting to spend millions of taxpayer dollars on a referendum to change our constitution, to give himself the power to take away, strip away citizenship as he sees fit. You know, I think that many Australians would find that idea of a single politician having the power to strip them of their citizenship to be quite untasteful.
DALZELL: When pressing Kevin Hogan about this idea earlier, he didn’t have any specific figures on exactly how many dual citizens might have committed crimes like terrorism. Are you concerned about the Coalition putting this on the table without those details in place?
ALY: I’m concerned that it will be a free-for-all. You know, where does it stop? Who decides? If Peter Dutton wants the power to decide who gets citizenship and who doesn’t, or who gets their citizens stripped and who doesn’t get their citizens stripped, I think all Australians should be concerned about that.
DALZELL: Anne Aly, thanks so much for your time. We really appreciate it.
The Greens have heaped a lot of pressure on the government during this term, from issues of the environment, housing, and Medicare, to the war in the Middle East.
With the polls close to a dead heat and minority government appearing a real possibility, would the Greens push a minority Labor government even harder in pursuit of their agenda?
To talk about the Greens’ policies and prospects, we’re joined by South Australian Greens senator Barbara Pocock, who is the party’s spokeswoman on employment, the public sector and finance.
After their efforts in this term, Pocock says the Greens would be just as tough in pushing a possible Labor minority government next term:
People can judge us on our record in the last few years. People saw us really fight hard on housing – we wanted to see something meaningful. It is the most significant post-war crisis in housing that is affecting millions of Australians’ lives and certainly an intergenerational crisis.
So we held out for a long time to try and push Labor to improve its offering on public housing [and] on housing spending and we achieved some real wins there. We will fight hard for the things that matter.
We will push very hard on those core issues of a better health system, putting dental into Medicare. We pushed very hard on that in the last time there was a minority government and won it for kids. We want to see everyone be able to get to the dentist, and we really want to see reductions in student debt.
However, Pocock stresses that keeping Peter Dutton out of government remains a key focus:
We are very focused on preventing a Dutton Coalition government, because everything we hear from that stable sends a shiver down my spine.
Pocock did a lot of work during the Senate inquiry investigating consulting services and she warns Dutton’s policy to cut 36,000 public servants would lead to a return to consultants:
In that last year of the Morrison government, we saw a spend of $20 billion on consulting and labour hire and a hollowing out in the public sector. We are still seeing a slow regrowth of the capability of the federal public sector following the scandals relating to the consulting industry and the way it worked with government.
I am very worried about the Coalition’s proposals for a 36,000 cut in the public sector. That’s one in five public sector workers gone and that means services like Centrelink, Veterans Affairs, services that Australians depend on cannot deliver on what they suggest. And we also need to remember that a very significant number – something like two-thirds of our public service, federal public service – actually live outside Canberra.
All they would be doing is taking that money, which pays for public servants, doing a whole range of many different things and taking it across to, in many cases, their supporters and buddies and donors in the consulting and labour hire industry and it’s a very bad value-for-money proposition for the Australian voter.
As spokeswoman on employment, Pocock is a strong advocate for the Greens policies on a four-day work week:
If we go right back to 1856 when Australia led the world on reducing working hours, and the eight-hour day, now we were the first to adopt that internationally for stonemasons in Melbourne. And in the last 40 years, [we] have not seen any reduction in average working time. It’s been 38 hours now since 1983. In that 40 years, we’ve seen massive changes in technology. We have seen increases in productivity. And in the last 10 years, we’ve seen private profit increase by 97% while wages have gone up by 50%. And what we’re saying is, let’s look at the length of the average full-time working week and let’s see how we can move the dial on that.
We’d certainly like to see a wide range of pilots, diverse experimentation, real change, working with those who are ready for it, who are up for it, but making sure we collect the evidence and then move over time towards a national test case, which is the way in which over decades we have slowly ratcheted back the length of the working week.
On the attack from the opposition and others that the Greens are anti-Semitic, Pocock defends the Greens as an anti-racist party.
I think there are diverse views out there in the community and certainly, and we can see it every day, but I think that there are also many people, including many Jewish people, who understand that you can have a critique of a war that’s had such a terrible consequence for civilian women and children in Gaza, and you can still take a very strong position in relation to the kinds of attacks we’ve seen on the Jewish community, for example.
We are an anti-racist party. We want to call out behaviour which is wrong wherever it happens and we have certainly been critical of the behaviour of the Israeli state, their military, and the way they continue to conduct a war against the civilians in Gaza.
Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
When a ceasefire in the war between Hamas and Israel finally came into effect on January 19, the world breathed a collective sigh of relief.
However, that ceasefire agreement, and its associated negotiations, have now been cast aside by new Israeli attacks on Gaza.
A statement from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said the strikes came after Hamas’ “repeated refusals” to “release our hostages”, and the group’s rejection of all proposals presented by US President Donald Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff.
Even before Israel cut off all humanitarian aid and electricity to Gaza in the past two weeks, Hamas claimed it had not met the levels of humanitarian aid, shelter and fuel it agreed to provide in the terms of the ceasefire. However, this is a distraction from a larger issue.
This ceasefire was always more like a strangle contract than a negotiated agreement between equal parties. Israel, as the party with far greater military and political power, has always had the upper hand.
And while the first phase of the ceasefire, which lasted 42 days, saw the successful release of 33 hostages held by Hamas in exchange for nearly 1,800 Palestinian prisoners, the ceasefire also enabled Israel to use it for its own political and military ends.
Buying time
The most common conventional concern about ceasefires is that the parties to a conflict will use them for their own ends.
Typically, the worry is that non-state armed groups, such as Hamas, will use the halt in violence to buy time to regroup, rearm and rebuild their strength to continue fighting.
But states such as Israel have this ability, too. Even though they have standing armies that might not need to regroup and rearm in the same way, states can use this time to manoeuvre in the international arena – a space largely denied to non-state actors.
Trump’s rise to power in the US has seemingly given the Israeli government carte blanche to proceed in ways that were arguably off limits to previous US presidents who were also largely supportive of Israel’s actions.
This includes the plan of forcing Gaza’s population out of the strip. This plan was raised earlier in the war by Trump advisor Jared Kushner and Israeli officials as a supposed humanitarian initiative.
Trump has now repeated the call to relocate Palestinians from Gaza to Egypt and Jordan – or possibly other parts of Africa – and for the US to take “ownership” of the coastal strip and turn it into the “Riviera of the Middle East”.
On the face of it, this plan would be a war crime. But even if it is never fully implemented, the fact it is being promoted by Trump after many years of domestic Israeli and international opprobrium shows how political ideas once thought unacceptable can take on a life of their own.
Political and military maneouvering
Israel has also used the ceasefire to pursue larger political and military goals in Gaza, the West Bank, southern Lebanon and Syria.
Even though the ceasefire did reduce overall levels of violence in Gaza, Israel has continued to carry out attacks on targets in the strip.
It has also escalated the construction of settlements and carried out increasingly violent operations in the West Bank. In addition, there have been egregious attacks on Palestinian residents in Israel.
And though nearly 1,800 Palestinian prisoners were released during the ceasefire, Israel was holding more than 9,600 Palestinians in detention on “security grounds” at the end of 2024. Thousands more Palestinians are being held by Israel in administrative detention, which means without trial or charge.
During the ceasefire, Israel also accelerated efforts to evict the UN agency for Palestinian refugees, UNRWA, from its headquarters in East Jerusalem. And the Israeli government has also proposed increasinglydraconian laws aimed at restraining the work of Israeli human rights organisations.
On the military front, the ceasefire arguably alleviated some pressure on Israel, giving it time to consolidate its territorial and security gains against Hezbollah in southern Lebanon and in Syria.
In the past two months, two deadlines for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from southern Lebanon passed. Israel has instead proposed establishing a buffer zone on Lebanese territory and has begun destroying villages, uprooting olive trees and building semi-permanent outposts along the border.
In a speech in February, Netanyahu also demanded the “complete demilitarisation of southern Syria” following the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime. And Defence Minister Israel Katz said this month Israel would keep its troops in southern Syria to “protect” residents from any threats from the new Syrian regime.
Be careful what you wish for
While Palestinians are known for their sumud – usually translated as steadfastness or tenacity – there is a limit to what humans can endure. The war, and subsequent ceasefires, have created a situation in which Gazans may have to put the survival and wellbeing of themselves and their families above their desire to stay in Palestine.
There is a general assumption that ceasefires are positive and humanitarian in nature. But ceasefires are not panaceas. In reality, they are a least-worst option for stopping the violence of war for often just a brief period.
A ceasefire was never going to be the solution to the decades-old conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. Instead, it has turned out to be part of the problem.
Marika Sosnowski does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
When a ceasefire in the war between Hamas and Israel finally came into effect on January 19, the world breathed a collective sigh of relief.
However, that ceasefire agreement, and its associated negotiations, have now been cast aside by new Israeli attacks on Gaza.
A statement from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said the strikes came after Hamas’ “repeated refusals” to “release our hostages”, and the group’s rejection of all proposals presented by US President Donald Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff.
Even before Israel cut off all humanitarian aid and electricity to Gaza in the past two weeks, Hamas claimed it had not met the levels of humanitarian aid, shelter and fuel it agreed to provide in the terms of the ceasefire. However, this is a distraction from a larger issue.
This ceasefire was always more like a strangle contract than a negotiated agreement between equal parties. Israel, as the party with far greater military and political power, has always had the upper hand.
And while the first phase of the ceasefire, which lasted 42 days, saw the successful release of 33 hostages held by Hamas in exchange for nearly 1,800 Palestinian prisoners, the ceasefire also enabled Israel to use it for its own political and military ends.
Buying time
The most common conventional concern about ceasefires is that the parties to a conflict will use them for their own ends.
Typically, the worry is that non-state armed groups, such as Hamas, will use the halt in violence to buy time to regroup, rearm and rebuild their strength to continue fighting.
But states such as Israel have this ability, too. Even though they have standing armies that might not need to regroup and rearm in the same way, states can use this time to manoeuvre in the international arena – a space largely denied to non-state actors.
Trump’s rise to power in the US has seemingly given the Israeli government carte blanche to proceed in ways that were arguably off limits to previous US presidents who were also largely supportive of Israel’s actions.
This includes the plan of forcing Gaza’s population out of the strip. This plan was raised earlier in the war by Trump advisor Jared Kushner and Israeli officials as a supposed humanitarian initiative.
Trump has now repeated the call to relocate Palestinians from Gaza to Egypt and Jordan – or possibly other parts of Africa – and for the US to take “ownership” of the coastal strip and turn it into the “Riviera of the Middle East”.
On the face of it, this plan would be a war crime. But even if it is never fully implemented, the fact it is being promoted by Trump after many years of domestic Israeli and international opprobrium shows how political ideas once thought unacceptable can take on a life of their own.
Political and military maneouvering
Israel has also used the ceasefire to pursue larger political and military goals in Gaza, the West Bank, southern Lebanon and Syria.
Even though the ceasefire did reduce overall levels of violence in Gaza, Israel has continued to carry out attacks on targets in the strip.
It has also escalated the construction of settlements and carried out increasingly violent operations in the West Bank. In addition, there have been egregious attacks on Palestinian residents in Israel.
And though nearly 1,800 Palestinian prisoners were released during the ceasefire, Israel was holding more than 9,600 Palestinians in detention on “security grounds” at the end of 2024. Thousands more Palestinians are being held by Israel in administrative detention, which means without trial or charge.
During the ceasefire, Israel also accelerated efforts to evict the UN agency for Palestinian refugees, UNRWA, from its headquarters in East Jerusalem. And the Israeli government has also proposed increasinglydraconian laws aimed at restraining the work of Israeli human rights organisations.
On the military front, the ceasefire arguably alleviated some pressure on Israel, giving it time to consolidate its territorial and security gains against Hezbollah in southern Lebanon and in Syria.
In the past two months, two deadlines for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from southern Lebanon passed. Israel has instead proposed establishing a buffer zone on Lebanese territory and has begun destroying villages, uprooting olive trees and building semi-permanent outposts along the border.
In a speech in February, Netanyahu also demanded the “complete demilitarisation of southern Syria” following the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime. And Defence Minister Israel Katz said this month Israel would keep its troops in southern Syria to “protect” residents from any threats from the new Syrian regime.
Be careful what you wish for
While Palestinians are known for their sumud – usually translated as steadfastness or tenacity – there is a limit to what humans can endure. The war, and subsequent ceasefires, have created a situation in which Gazans may have to put the survival and wellbeing of themselves and their families above their desire to stay in Palestine.
There is a general assumption that ceasefires are positive and humanitarian in nature. But ceasefires are not panaceas. In reality, they are a least-worst option for stopping the violence of war for often just a brief period.
A ceasefire was never going to be the solution to the decades-old conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. Instead, it has turned out to be part of the problem.
Marika Sosnowski does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
A national Palestinian advocacy group has called on the Aotearoa New Zealand government to immediately condemn Israel for its resumption today of “genocidal attacks” on the almost 2 million Palestinians trapped in the besieged Gaza enclave.
Media reports said that more than 230 people had been killed — many of them children — in a wave of predawn attacks by Israel to break the fragile ceasefire that had been holding since mid-January.
The renewed war on Gaza comes amid a worsening humanitarian crisis that has persisted for 16 days since March 1.
This followed Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s decision to block the entry of all aid and goods, cut water and electricity, and shut down the Strip’s border crossings at the end of the first phase of the ceasefire agreement.
“Immediate condemnation of Israel’s resumption of attacks on Gaza must come from the New Zealand government”, said co-national chair John Minto of the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) in a statement.
“Israel has breached the January ceasefire agreement multiple times and is today relaunching its genocidal attacks against the Palestinian people of Gaza.”
Israeli violations He said that in the last few weeks Israel had:
refused to negotiate the second stage of the ceasefire agreement with Hamas which would see a permanent ceasefire and complete withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza;
Issued a complete ban on food, water, fuel and medical supplies entering Gaza — “a war crime of epic proportions”; and
Cut off the electricity supply desperately needed to, for example, operate desalination plants for water supplies.
“The government is out of touch with New Zealanders but in touch with US/Israel.
“Foreign Minister Winston Peters seems to be explaining his silence as ‘keeping his nerve’.
Minto said that for the past 17 months, minister Peters had condemned every act of Palestinian resistance against 77 years of brutal colonisation and apartheid policies.
“But he has refused to condemn any of the countless war crimes committed by Israel during this time — including the deliberate use of starvation as a weapon of war.
“Speaking out to condemn Israel now is our opportunity to force it to reconsider and begin negotiations on stage two of the ceasefire agreement Israel is trying to walk away from.
“Palestinians and New Zealanders deserve no less.”
A Netanyahu “Wanted” sign at last Saturday’s pro-Palestinian rally in “Palestinian Corner”, Auckland . . . in reference to the International Criminal Court arrest warrants issued last November against the Israeli Prime Minister and former defence minister Yoav Gallant. Image: APR
‘Devastating sounds’ Al Jazeera reporter Maram Humaid said from Gaza: “We woke up to the devastating sounds of multiple explosions as a series of air attacks targeted various areas across the Gaza Strip, from north to south, including Jabalia, Gaza City, Nuseirat, Deir el-Balah and Khan Younis.”
“The strikes hit homes, residential buildings, schools sheltering displaced people and tents, resulting in a significant number of casualties, including women and children, especially since the attacks occurred during sleeping hours.
The Palestinian Ministry of Health in Gaza said at least 232 people had been killed in today’s Israeli raids.
The Palestinian resistance group Hamas called on people of Arab and Islamic nations — and the “free people of the world” — to take to the streets in protest over the devastating attack.
Hamas urged people across the world to “raise their voice in rejection of the resumption of the Zionist war of extermination against our people in the Gaza Strip”.
Keith Rankin, trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.
Former ambassador Phil Goff is the latest (so far) and (probably) the least of many ‘statesmen’ who have invoked Munich and the ‘resolute’ Winston Churchill (a backbench MP in 1938) in the cause of good-war mongering. (Refer Winston Peters sacks Phil Goff as UK High Commissioner RNZ 6 March 2025, and What Was Actually Wrong With What Phil Goff Said?, Giles Dexter, RNZ and Scoop, 7 March 2025.)
The Munich narrative is central to the ‘Good War’ morality trope, through which democracies (especially the United States) justified wars of aggression; what used to be called ‘gunboat-diplomacy’ in the British days of empire. It’s the now-commonplace narrative that frames any putative war to be fought by a ‘liberal democracy’ against an ‘autocracy’ (ie fought by us against them) as a contest between Good and Evil; and if we don’t “stand up to” Evil – anywhere and everywhere – then Evil goes on to ‘win’, and subsequently to dominate and exact tribute as a regional or global hegemon.
The corollary of the Munich narrative is that Good should never give up, even if Evil is winning on the battlefield; Good neither surrenders to Evil nor negotiates with Evil. Not ‘at any cost’. The logical conclusion of this is that, if that’s what it requires for Good to prevail, life on Planet Earth could be forfeit; better Dead than Red or Black. Earth’s tombstone, left for a future intergalactic explorer to discover, might read: “At Least ‘Atila the Hun’ [substitute any Eurasian ‘Devil’] Did Not Win”. Peter Hitchen (see below, p.27) notes: “one day, this dangerous fable of the glorious anti-fascist war against evil may destroy us all [through our rulers’ vanity]”.
Phil Goff is an example of persons who know just enough fragments of popular history to think they can use a historical argument to substantiate their rhetoric. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, meaning that superficial knowledge may be more problematic than ignorance. On the Munich question, Phil Goff is in good company. Peter Hitchens, in The Phoney Victory (p8, p20), cites the former Prince of Wales (now King) as making the same mistaken views about World War Two and the Ukraine-Russia War, as moral crusades.
(Meanwhile, as well as trying to cut disability benefits as a result of boxing itself into a corner, Keir Starmer UK government – unlike the political leadership of Canada and the European Union – is doing everything it can to appease Donald Trump on international trade and other matters.)
For readers’ interest, Stevan and Hugh Eldred-Grigg have written a New Zealand take on World War Two that does not follow the ‘Good War’ trope: Phoney Wars: New Zealand Society during the Second World War, Otago University Press 2017.
Were Neville Chamberlain’s actions at the September 1938 Munich Conference wrong?
No, neither with foresight nor hindsight. If Britain and/or France had signed a pact with Czechoslovakia similar to the one they signed with Poland in 1939, they would have been committed to declaring at most a phoney war. Neither had the capacity to wage war on Germany nor to come to Czechoslovakia’s aid. At best, British hostilities against Germany in 1938 would have been as ineffective as they were in Archangel, Russia, in 1918.
Popular sentiment was absent in 1938 in the United Kingdom towards war with Germany. That situation had changed by March 1939 after Germany fully annexed Bohemia and Moravia, the territories that make up twenty-first century Czechia. Due in part to changed popular sentiment, the British and French responded differently when Poland was similarly threatened in 1939. The western ‘powers’ declared war on Germany following the first attack on Poland, but did almost nothing to fight Germany or to protect Poland during what became known as the ‘Phoney War’. (The phoney war ended with the German conquest of France in May 1940.)
The 1939 declaration of war was arguably more duplicitous than the 1938 declaration of peace. Poland’s half-century-long tragedy – far worse than anyone today, except for a few professional and amateur historians, realise – began to unfold. (France briefly invaded Germany’s Saarland in 1939, southeast of Luxembourg, before withdrawing. Nowhere near Poland.) The war in 1939 in Poland, remote to the United Kingdom, was far from ‘phoney’.
Examples of invoking or evoking ‘appeasement’ and /or ‘Munich’ and/or Churchill on behalf of ‘democracy’:
Peter Hitchens gives these post-WW2 examples (pp.13-17):
President Harry S Truman, in December 1950, re the continuation of the Korean War
Anthony Eden, 1956, to justify the Suez War (which first brought Israel into an external war of aggression)
President Lyndon Johnson in July 1965, justifying the escalation of the Vietnam War
US Secretary of State George Shultz in February 1984, re conflict in Nicaragua
US Deputy Secretary of State, Lawrence Eagleburger, in August 1989, before the US invasion of Panama
George Bush (senior) in June 1990, re the first war against Iraq (noting that the initial response to the immanent invasion of Kuwait was not unlike Churchill’s lesser-known response in 1938, to the German reoccupation of the Rhineland [“more talks”])
Bill Clinton’s 1999 comparison of Slobodan Milosevic to Hitler, in the context of the probable secession of Kosovo from Milosevic’s Serbia
UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, in 2003, justifying the second invasion of Iraq
President Trump’s aids in June 2017, referring to Barack Obama’s Cuba initiative
Winston Churchill’s worst Appeasement, and Atrocities
The worst act of appeasement that I can think of was Winston Churchill’s kowtowing to Joseph Stain at Yalta (Crimea) in the second week of February 1945 (ref Hitchens p.6 and Wikipedia citing Leo McKinstry, “Attlee and Churchill: Allies in War, Adversaries in Peace”, Atlantic Books, 2019, Ch 22). According to McKinstry “When Churchill arrived at Yalta on 4 February 1945, the first question that Stalin put to him was: ‘Why haven’t you bombed Dresden?’.”
Ten days later, Churchill did indeed firebomb Dresden, immolating 25,000 people – mostly civilians and refugees. Stalin (metaphorically) said “jump”, Churchill said “how high?”. And Churchill delivered.
Dresden was far from Churchill’s only actual or intended atrocity. Operation Gomorrah, on Hamburg at the end of July 1943, was a worse 24-hour atrocity than Dresden. The malevolent intent of that ‘raid’ lies in the biblical name given to the operation. While it was largely a test-run and forerunner for later bombings – including a forerunner of the firebombing of Tokyo exactly 80 years ago – it killed more than 35,000 mostly civilians “in their homes”.
(As a single event the firebombing of Tokyo on the night of 9 March 1945 – Operation Meetinghouse – caused easily more deaths [100,000] than Dresden, Hamburg, Hiroshima [70,000] or Nagasaki [35,000]. In the mainstream media, I saw no 80th-anniversary commemoration stories of this ‘worst-ever in the history of the world’ attack on civilians. Now is a timely time for us to be reminded about this kind of aerial megadeath.)
The third Churchill atrocity to mention was the Bengal famine of 1943, which killed three million people. Encyclopedia Britannica says that “the 1942 halt in rice imports to India did not cause the famine, and the 1943 crop yield was actually sufficient to feed the people of Bengal. It was ultimately special wartime factors that caused this difficult situation to become a disastrous famine. Fearing Japanese invasion, British authorities stockpiled food to feed defending troops, and they exported considerable quantities to British forces in the Middle East”. Churchill’s atrocities have been justified on the basis that the casualties were to them while saving some of our lives. But the people of Bengal were, at least notionally part of us, citizens and civilians of the British Empire.
In Wikipedia: “Madhusree Mukerjee makes a stark accusation: “The War Cabinet’s shipping assignments made in August 1943, shortly after Amery had pleaded for famine relief, show Australian wheat flour travelling to Ceylon, the Middle East, and Southern Africa – everywhere in the Indian Ocean but to India.” Indeed, Bengal was required to export rice to Ceylon to support British naval operations there. Of Churchill’s major atrocities, this was the only one to be mentioned in Netflix’s recent over-the-top account Churchill at War.
The Netflix ‘docuseries’ does at least mention Churchill being sidelined by the Americans in late 1943 and 1944. Churchill was sidelined from the top table of war-command largely on the basis of his penchant for atrocities and his unwillingness to confront Germany head-on (an unwillingness that could have been interpreted as ‘appeasement’, and probably was understood as such by the Americans). Churchill indulged in a number of side-wars, including a successful invasion of Madagascar in 1942; an invasion that put paid forever to the 1940 German fantasy of resettling Eastern European Jews there.
The Americans took much longer than Churchill to become convinced about the merits of holocaust-scale bombing than did the British. It would seem that the British burning of Hamburg – which was bombed because it was there, easily accessible from Britain – left quite a bad taste upon some American commanders, and indeed upon President Roosevelt himself. (We note that the atrocious American incendiary bombings of Japan in March 1945 were undertaken after Harry Truman became Vice President, and in the context that Roosevelt was seriously ill, and died soon after the February Yalta ‘Peace’ Conference.)
Churchill’s final atrocity to mention here never actually happened, except to create an environmental disaster on a Scottish Island (Gruinard, Britain’s mysterious WW2 ‘island of death’ Myles Burke, BBC, 22 April 2024). It partly explains some of Churchill’s reticence towards the D-Day invasion of Occupied France. Churchill had another plan, which he seems to have kept secret from his Allies: biological warfare, Anthrax.
“The plan was to infect linseed cakes with Anthrax spores and drop them by plane into cattle pastures around Germany. … The proposed plan would have decimated Germany’s meat supply, and triggered a nationwide anthrax contamination, resulting in an enormous [civilian] death toll. … The secret trials carried on until 1943, when the military deemed them a success, and scientists packed up and returned to Porton Down. As a result, five million linseed cakes laced with Anthrax were produced but the plan was ultimately abandoned as the Allies’ Normandy invasion progressed, leading the cakes to be destroyed after the war.” The test programme on Gruinard was cynically called ‘Operation Vegetarian’. “Gruinard was not the only site where the UK conducted secret biological warfare tests, but it was the first. The consequences of what happened there stand as a grim testament to both the dangers of biological warfare and humanity’s capacity for destruction.”
Have Bill Clinton and subsequent US presidents drawn inspiration from Brezinski’s 1997 essay as a clarion call for world domination?
Zbigniew Brezinski’s call for US world hegemony seems not much different to what Richard Evans claims was Hitler’s aim: “Hitler’s obvious drive for European and eventually world conquest.” (Zbigniew Brzezinski, “A Geostrategy for Eurasia,” Foreign Affairs, 76:5, September/October 1997; review of Peter Hitchens’s Eurosceptic take on the Second World War, by Richard J Evans, New Statesman, 26 Sep 2018.)
Evans’ claim about Hitler is obvious hyperbole; Germany never could have had the capacity to “conquer” the world. (Think of the socio-geographic limits to the Roman Empire.) But the Nazi imperial vision for Germany was to create a mega-state in Central Eurasia that would have hegemony over the rest of the world. Is there any country in the twentieth or twenty-first century which has sought such ‘unipolarity’; sought to be the world’s one-and-only superpower, which expects other countries to say “how high?” whenever it says “jump”?
Perhaps there is? Did Brezinski – Henry Kissinger’s 1970s’ foreign policy rival – spell it out in 1997?
Finally
‘Appeasement’ is like ‘Antisemitism’; the powers-that-be only have to say either word to silence commonsense debate about peace and war and genocide. As Hitchens points out (p.27): “We have mythologised the experience so completely that [politicians] only have to say the word ‘appeasement’ to silence opponents and bring legislators and journalists to their side, on any wild adventure.” Phil Goff is a hapless victim of what Joseph Mali and Shlomo Sand have called “mythistory”.
Wars since the 1930s are no more ‘moral’ than were wars before that time. (Indeed, if we wish to personalise it, WW2 at its core was a war between Hitler and Stalin; neither men are commonly described as ‘moral’.) In fact, recent wars are less moral. WW2 became the first major war in which civilians were actively targeted as a predominant military gambit. This approach to war is now becoming entrenched, with drones replacing soldiers, and civilians evermore in the firing line.
We should not be coerced into supporting wars on the basis of narratives by powerful know-not-much persons or cliques dropping words like ‘appeasement’, ‘Munich’, ‘Churchill’ or ‘Hitler’. Wars are very costly, but the costs are not usually paid – at least in the short term – by those elites who promote them from far away.
*******
Keith Rankin (keith at rankin dot nz), trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.
“Immediate condemnation of Israel’s resumption of attacks on Gaza must come from the New Zealand government”, says Co National Chair of PSNA John Minto. “Israel has breached the January ceasefire agreement multiple times and is today relaunching its genocidal attacks against the Palestinian people of Gaza”
In the last few weeks Israel has:
refused to negotiate the second stage of the ceasefire agreement with Hamas which would see a permanent ceasefire and complete withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza
Issued a complete ban on food, water, fuel and medical supplies entering Gaza – a war crime of epic proportions
Cut off the electricity supply desperately needed to, for example, operate desalination plants for water supplies
“The government is out of touch with New Zealanders but in touch with the US/Israel”
“Foreign Minister Winston Peters seems to be explaining his silence as “keeping his nerve”
“For the past 17 months Peters has condemned every act of Palestinian resistance against 77 years of brutal colonisation and apartheid policies but he has refused to condemn any of the countless war crimes committed by Israel during this time – including the deliberate use of starvation as a weapon of war.
“Speaking out to condemn Israel now is our opportunity to force it to reconsider and begin negotiations on stage two of the ceasefire agreement Israel is trying to walk away from”
The Palestine Forum of New Zealand strongly condemns Israel’s resumption of military aggression in Gaza. This reckless escalation further endangers innocent lives and deepens the humanitarian catastrophe faced by the Palestinian people.
We call on the New Zealand government and the international community to take immediate action to hold Israel accountable for its ongoing violations of international law and to demand an end to the assault on Gaza. The people of Palestine deserve justice, peace, and the right to live in dignity and security.
Keith Rankin, trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.
As most of us appreciate, there is a whole geopolitical world that overlays the formal political world of about 200 ‘nation states’ (aka ‘polities’). Geopolitical fractures – a result of the ‘big games’ over and above the ‘rules-based order’ – occur in all sorts of places, sometimes through provinces, even counties. Their significances wax and wane, as geopolitics itself is a dynamic game of changing exceptions and allegiances, and the expansions or contractions of ‘real estate assets’.
How about this one, given the apparent detaching of the United States of America from the liberal democratic western alliance? (Is the western alliance – which includes Canada – in the process of becoming a set of American proxies, like certain Latin American countries, rather than a partnership? Or is it a process of divorce?) Point Roberts is a United States enclave within the Greater Vancouver urban area. Should Canada – or British Columbia – file for Point Roberts? It would be the tidy thing to do, as part of the divorce settlement.
Geopolitics operates on at least two levels. There are the big fractures, where potential world wars – hot and cold – are simmering. Then there are the smaller fractures, such as those between the European Union and its neighbours: Northern Ireland, Gibraltar, Cyprus. And those within the world’s mini-empires: Denmark vis-à-vis Greenland; Australia vis-à-vis Norfolk Island; New Zealand vis-à-vis Cook Islands; France vis-à-vis New Caledonia.
At an intermediate level are boundary disputes between Japan and Russia (Kuril Islands), India and Pakistan (Kashmir), India and China (Himalayas), and Rwanda and the DRC (Democratic Republic of Congo). Then there are new hot-fractures being created through civil wars; such as that between the Arabic and African worlds within Sudan, Islamic and Buddhist populations within Myanmar, and different ethno-cultural minorities within (and on the edges of) Syria and in the west of China.
There’s also a growing north-south sectarian divide in Nigeria (reflecting complex geopolitical game-playing in the Sahel, to Nigeria’s north and northwest), Africa’s most populous country. And there are geopolitical pushes and pulls in the non-EU Balkans. Albania, Kosovo and Bosnia-Herzegovina (European countries with majority Islamic populations) have become effective proxies of the United States; the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina is fractured almost fifty-fifty, the other part being the autonomous though unrecognised Russian-aligned Republika Srpska. (China is currently building a north-south railway through the Balkans from Piraeus in Greece to Budapest in Hungary, while the European Union is sponsoring a new railway from Albania in the Adriatic Sea to Bulgaria’s Black Sea coast.)
Finally, there’s a big geopolitical tension within the core Islamic world, which has led to the long-running civil war in Yemen; the two sides being proxies for Iran and for Saudi Arabia; for Tehran and for Riyadh.
The players – the ‘Great Powers’
At present, it would seem, the United States of America, which sees itself as the world’s preeminent geopolitical player, is impatient for conflicts in Ukraine and Palestine to end, so that it can get on with its ‘game of choice’, namely the ‘new cold war’ conflict with China.
We should note that, in Geopolitics, the players are typically identified by the countries’ capital cities. Thus, the United States becomes Washington, the United Kingdom becomes London, and the European Union becomes Berlin or Brussels. Sometimes the players are or have been referred to by power-centres within cities, such as the Kremlin (Moscow), or the Quai d’Orsay (Paris). (The New Zealand equivalent might be ‘Bowen Street’!)
Beijing and Taiwan; and Washington
I saw this Daily Telegraph story in the New Zealand Herald last weekend: Chinese navy practices amphibious landings with new barges in South China Sea. To this end Taiwan is the American proxy through which the conflict may be waged; just as Ukraine and Israel are American proxies; proxies in the most visible of the world’s current geopolitical hot wars.
From the story: ‘Emma Salisbury, a sea power research fellow at the Council on Geostrategy’ says “The fact Beijing has permitted details of these barges to become public signals the threat China poses in the region.” No, it doesn’t. It indicates that China is – had has been for decades – playing the geopolitical game of ‘optics’. Beijing is saying to Washington “don’t mess with us”, rather than “we are going to mess with you”.
Kinmen and Lienchiang Counties, Fujian. But what country?
Is this the world’s least understood geopolitical faultline?
The central piece of geography in the New Cold War is understood to be the Taiwan Strait; indeed we routinely see pictures of that Strait on our news bulletins. Usually, they look like these BBC versions:
The clear tale being told here in these maps is that there is a simple border in the Taiwan Strait between Taiwan and China, and that there are two countries, Taiwan and China. The constitutional reality is that there are two regimes claiming constitutional sovereignty over a single estate. We may call these regimes China-Taipei and China-Beijing. (In the Olympic Games and other sports, Taiwan competes as Chinese-Taipei.) The official name of the two regimes are Republic of China (RoC), and Peoples Republic of China (PRC). (I once watched a story on TV3 News involving some Beijing-Chinese people in New Zealand. TV3 mistakenly showed pictures of a China Airlinesaircraft, when it should have been Air China.)
The BBC’s two-country optics are neat and tidy (compared to the one-territory two-regime reality), but is negated by the presence of two Taiwanese counties in the territory of Fujian province, PRC; Kinmen and Lienchiang (although Kinmen is sometimes called Jinmen or Quemoy, and in China Lienchiang is spelt ‘Lianjiang’). At its closest point, Kinmen (Taiwan) is 4km from the large Chinese city of Xiamen (and 190 km from the Taiwanese mainland); indeed Kinmen is located in Xiamen harbour, just as Rangitoto Island is in Auckland’s Waitemata Harbour. (Xiamen has the same population size as New Zealand, just over five million people.) Lienchieng is the Taiwanese portion of Lianjiang county, a subdivision of Fujian. (We note that Taiwan still uses the ‘postal’ style of anglicisation of Chinese names that was generally used before the 1970s; eg Peking instead of the Pinyin form, Beijing.)
From the inception of the United nations in 1945, until 1971, China-Taipei (aka Taiwan) held a permanent seat on the Security Council, with the right of veto). This only changed in 1971 after US President Nixon, committing to reality over narrative, moved towards rapprochement towards China (although the United States was not ready for the UN recognition switch in 1971); while at the same time fudging the issue of the status of Taiwan. That fudge remains the official status quo in the international ‘rules-based-order’.
We should also note that Taiwan (RoC) withdrew from the Montreal 1976 Olympic Games, due to its erosion of status as a recognised nation-state, with particular note that Prime Minister Trudeau of Canada, had led the realpolitik move, recognising China in 1970.
This map correctly shows all of Taiwan, noting the black dashed lines. And this shows Taiwanese Fujian. This huge geopolitical boundary between West and East passes through the Chinese province of Fujian.
Geopolitical Implications
Presumably the people in these counties, for the most part, prefer the status quo and hope that it can be maintained indefinitely, and without military hostilities.
If there was a push for Taipei to repudiate its constitutional claim to all of China – for example as a means to de jureindependence as its own sovereign state – it is difficult to see how this could happen without Taipei ceding Kinmen and Lienchiang counties to Beijing. That would indeed be the minimum price Taipei would have to pay for Beijing to abandon its claim over all of Taiwan.
In effect, these two counties are hostages to both regimes. If the United States or any other United States’ aligned nation-state invaded China, then it would be realistic to expect that Kinmen and Lienchiang would be snaffled-up by Beijing; maybe one county immediately and, for leverage, the other staying on as a hostage.
On the other hand, if the United States was to escalate its optical war against Beijing into a fully-fledged ‘cold war’, it might install threatening military equipment into Kinmen or Lienchiang, much as the Soviet Union did in Cuba in 1962. Thus these counties represent leverage of Taipei (acting as a proxy for the United States) over China.
It would be hard to see China not-responding to such provocation. Further, in such a hostile context, China would be tempted to activate its claim over the whole of Taiwan, and not just the two counties in Fujian.
So, the untidy one-country two-regime status quo should be simply left as it is. Speculative political rhetoric against Beijing or Taipei should be treated by the international community as tantamount to diplomatic ‘hate-speech’. And simplistic media stories which represent Taiwan only as an island 100 kilometres away from China, should be corrected. Responsible media – unlike the BBC or the Daily Telegraph – do not distort the known truth.
We don’t want to end up in a major geopolitical conflict as a result of politicians and political journalists not even knowing or understanding the location of the China/Taiwan border. The border anomalies result from the pragmatic settlement of a military conflict between the two Chinese regimes; a conflict that took place in the decade after 1949.
Lessons for the Ukraine-Russia conflict
The present military boundary between Ukraine and Russia passes inside three recognised provincial boundaries of Ukraine: Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson. (The provinces of Luhansk and Crimea should be off the negotiating table; the world has to accept that they are now, for better or worse, de facto or de jure, territories of Russia; albeit unrecognised in the same way that South Ossetia and Abkhazia are Russian territories unrecognised by the United Nations. (And Northern Cyprus for that matter, as an unrecognised Turkish territory inside the European Union nation of Cyprus; a territory which untidily passes through the Cyprus’s capital, Nicosia.)
Successful negotiations to end wars have to take account of military realities. China’s 1950s’ concessions to Taiwan over Kinmen and Lienchiang show that such splits need not impede a long-lasting and workable peace. What does impede a transition to peace is the insistence on substantial one-sided deviations from the military reality at the time of a ‘cease-fire’; certainly, the side that is at a military disadvantage should not be demanding one-sided concessions from the other side.
Lessons for Palestine-Israel conflict
In 1967 and 1973, there were major wars between, in essence, Israel and Egypt. The lands most under contention were those that we call ‘Occupied Palestine’ (and ‘Occupied East Jerusalem’) today; though other lands were captured (especially the Sinai Peninsula from Egypt and the Golan Heights from Syria). The 1967 War was started by Israel under the pretext that Egypt was about to invade Israel. Israel unambiguously won this war. (In 1967, Israel even attacked – deliberately – an American naval vessel: USS Liberty.)
Israel had not thought-through the strategic consequences of its annexation (from Egypt and Jordan) of Gaza and the West Bank. Israel was working towards an acceptable way of incorporating Palestinian Israelis into the ‘Jewish State’. Now, all of a sudden, they found themselves with an enlarged country with a majority (or near-majority) Palestinian population. A legal fiction – replacing the language of ‘annexation’ with that of ‘occupation’ – enabled the non-Jewish populations of the ‘occupied territories’ to be treated as, at best, third -class citizens.
The 1973 War – started by Egypt, principally to regain its Sinai territory – triggered changes to the global architecture of capitalism. After the advantage switched from Egypt to Israel, Israeli troops crossed the Suez Canal and were heading towards Cairo when the cease-fire was called. Subsequent negotiations, over six years, saw Israel’s military successes eroded into something like the present situation in which Palestinians living in Palestine are citizens of nowhere.
After two military victories, through the 1978 Camp David Accords, Israel found that it had forfeited almost all its military gains; for Israel it felt like they had won the war but lost the peace. The result of the process was a substantial and unfortunate switch to the Right in Israeli politics. Since then, especially since the 1990s, Israel has been looking for ways to annex a Palestine free of Palestinians; to cleanse Palestine of Palestinians as part of an unapologetic annexation process undertaken with the full blessing of its geopolitical patron.
Proxy Warfare
Most wars today, including ‘civil wars’, are proxy-wars funded (on one side at least) by external patrons. While Ukraine has been a proxy of the United States for most of this century, Ukraine is now morphing into a proxy of Brussels and London; of the barely-elected Starmer (one-third of the vote in a low turn-out election) and an unelected Ursula von de Leyen (a bureaucrat who’s not even a Member of the European Parliament).
On Al Jazeera News (6am New Zealand summer time, 18 March 2025), it was reported that Donald Trump posted this message on his favoured social-media platform: “Every shot fired by the Houthis will be looked upon, from this point forward, as being a shot fired from the weapons and leadership of IRAN, and IRAN will be held responsible, and suffer the consequences, and those consequences will be dire!” (See this quote on U.S. Air Campaign Against Houthis Continues Into Third Day, TWZ, The War Zone.)
This is a clear statement that the United States President, at least, believes that the patrons of proxies are the real antagonists, and should be deemed responsible – indeed ‘criminally responsible’ for misdeeds of aggression – for acts performed by their proxies. It should be quite easy to apply this dictum, at least allegorically, to the big hot wars of the moment: Ukraine and Palestine.
Conclusion
We can avoid most wars by finding pragmatic solutions to geopolitical conflicts, accepting realities as they stand, and avoiding inflammatory rhetoric towards others. We have avoided violent conflict in and around the Fujian geopolitical faultline by not, so far, trying to find and impose final tidy solutions.
Likewise, to find peace in the world’s current military hotspots, we have to accept and negotiate around the current realities of those situations. Most importantly, we follow the ‘first law of holes’: ‘if you are in a hole, stop digging’. Inflaming sensitive situations through speculative assertions about the other side’s escalating malevolence are unhelpful.
In today’s wars the western ‘liberal democratic’ side is not even close to being the ‘good guys’ in wars framed as good-versus-evil. The conflicts in Ukraine and Palestine demonstrate that these wars – like most past wars – represent the ‘hot’ phases of geopolitical game playing; wars are ‘bad guys’ versus ‘bad guys’, and such wars end through transactional deals. (The antagonists may be different shades of bad; and there are always good victims, though many of these are not ‘perfect victims’.) The ‘bad guys’ include the patrons of the proxies. Further, contemporary warfare targets civilians rather than soldiers.
*******
Keith Rankin (keith at rankin dot nz), trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.
BANGLADESH
The Secretary-General wrapped up his visit to Bangladesh on Saturday by talking to the press and saying that, as Bangladesh undergoes a significant transition under the leadership of Chief Adviser Muhammad Yunus, he recognizes the people’s hopes for a future of greater democracy, justice, and prosperity. He said that the UN stands ready to assist in fostering peace, national dialogue, trust and healing.
The Secretary-General warned that with the announced cuts in financial assistance, we are facing the dramatic risk of having only 40 per cent in 2025 of the resources available for humanitarian aid in 2024. This would have terrible consequences, starting with the drastic reduction of food rations.
That would be an unmitigated disaster, he said. People would suffer and people would die. More funding is absolutely essential to guarantee the minimum support to the Rohingya population in Bangladesh.
YEMEN
The UN has expressed its concern on Sunday at the launching of multiple strikes on Houthi-controlled areas in Yemen by the United States in recent days. According to the Houthis, the airstrikes resulted in 53 deaths and 101 injuries, reported from Sana’a City, Sa’ada and Al Baydah governorates, including reports of civilian casualties, and led to disruptions in the power supply in nearby localities.
The UN is also concerned about the continued threats by the Houthis to resume their attacks targeting merchant and commercial vessels in the Red Sea, as well as about their reported attacks against military vessels in the area.
The UN calls for utmost restraint and a cessation of all military activities. Any additional escalation could exacerbate regional tensions, fuel cycles of retaliation that may further destabilize Yemen and the region and pose grave risks to the already dire humanitarian situation in the country.
The UN emphasizes that international law, including international humanitarian law as applicable, must be respected by all parties at all times.
The UN underscores that UN Security Council resolution 2768 (2025) related to Houthi attacks against merchant and commercial vessels, must be fully respected.
YEMEN – HUMANITARIAN
Over the last couple of days, the UN Special Envoy, Hans Grundberg, has been in close contact with Yemeni, regional and international stakeholders. He has called for utmost restraint and adherence to international humanitarian law, and he has pushed for a refocus on diplomacy to avoid uncontrollable destabilization in Yemen and in the region. Further contacts are held by his office on numerous levels.
The Envoy further called for support from the international community so that the UN-led mediation efforts can deliver results despite the complexity of the regional dimension of this situation, including the situation in the Red Sea.
Full Highlights: https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/noon-briefing-highlight?date%5Bvalue%5D%5Bdate%5D=17%20March%202025
New Zealand’s National-led coalition government’s policy on Gaza seems caught between a desire for a two-state diplomatic solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and closer alignment with the US, which supports a Netanyahu government strongly opposed to a Palestinian state
In the last 17 months, Gaza has been the scene of what Thomas Merton once called the unspeakable — human wrongdoing on a scale and a depth that seems to go beyond the capacity of words to adequately describe.
The latest Gaza conflict began with a horrific Hamas terrorist attack on Israel on 7 October 2023 that prompted a relentless Israel ground and air offensive in Gaza with full financial, logistical and diplomatic backing from the Biden administration.
During this period, around 50,000 people – 48,903 Palestinians and 1706 Israelis – have been reported killed in the Gaza conflict, according to the official figures of the Gaza Health Ministry, as well as 166 journalists and media workers, 120 academics,and more than 224 humanitarian aid workers.
Moreover, a fragile ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, signed in mid-January, seems to be hanging by a thread.
Israel has resumed its blockade of humanitarian aid to Gaza and cut off electricity after Hamas rejected an Israeli proposal to extend phase 1 of the ceasefire deal (to release more Israeli hostages) without any commitment to implement phase 2 (that envisaged ending the conflict in Gaza and Israel withdrawing its troops from the territory).
Hamas insists on negotiating phase 2 as signed by both parties in the January ceasefire agreement
Over the weekend, Israel reportedly launched air-strikes in Gaza and the Trump administration unleashed a wave of attacks on Houthi rebel positions in Yemen after the Houthis warned Israel not to restart the war in Gaza.
New Zealand and the Gaza conflict Although distant in geographic terms, the Gaza crisis represents a major moral and legal challenge to New Zealand’s self-image and its worldview based on the strengthening of an international rules-based order.
New Zealand’s founding document, the 1840 Treaty of Waitangi, emphasised partnership and cooperation between indigenous Māori and European settlers in nation-building.
While the aspirations of the Treaty have yet to be fully realised, the credibility of its vision of reconciliation at home depends on New Zealand’s willingness to uphold respect for human rights and the rule of law in the international arena, particularly in states like Israel where tensions persist between the settler population and Palestinians in occupied territories like the West Bank.
New Zealand’s declaratory stance towards Gaza In 2023 and 2024, New Zealand consistently backed calls in the UN General Assembly for humanitarian truces or ceasefires in Gaza. It also joined Australia and Canada in February and July last year to demand an end to hostilities.
The New Zealand Foreign Minister, Winston Peters, told the General Assembly in April 2024 that the Security Council had failed in its responsibility “to maintain international peace and security”.
He was right. The Biden administration used its UN Security Council veto four times to perpetuate this brutal onslaught in Gaza for nearly 15 months.
In addition, Peters has repeatedly said there can be no military resolution of a political problem in Gaza that can only be resolved through affirming the Palestinian right to self-determination within the framework of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian dispute.
The limitations of New Zealand’s Gaza approach Despite considerable disagreement with Netanyahu’s policy of “mighty vengeance” in Gaza, the National-led coalition government had few qualms about sending a small Defence Force deployment to the Red Sea in January 2024 as part of a US-led coalition effort to counter Houthi rebel attacks on commercial shipping there.
While such attacks are clearly illegal, they are basically part of the fallout from a prolonged international failure to stop the US-enabled carnage in Gaza.
In particular, the NZDF’s Red Sea deployment did not sit comfortably with New Zealand’s acceptance in September 2024 of the ICJ’s ruling that Israel’s continued presence in the occupied Palestinian territory (East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza) was “unlawful”.
At the same time, the National-led coalition government’s silence on US President Donald Trump’s controversial proposal to “own” Gaza, displace two million Palestinian residents and make the territory the “Riviera” of the Middle East was deafening.
Furthermore, while Wellington announced travel bans on violent Israeli settlers in the West Bank in February 2024, it has had little to say publicly about the Netanyahu government’s plans to annex the West Bank in 2025. Such a development would gravely undermine the two-state solution, violate international law, and further fuel regional tensions.
New Zealand’s low-key policy On balance, the National-led coalition government’s policy towards Gaza appears to be ambivalent and lacking moral and legal clarity in a context in which war crimes have been regularly committed since October 7.
Peters was absolutely correct to condemn the UNSC for failing to deliver the ceasefire that New Zealand and the overwhelming majority of states in the UN General Assembly had wanted from the first month of this crisis.
But the New Zealand government has had no words of criticism for the US, which used its power of veto in the UNSC for more than a year to thwart the prospect of a ceasefire and provided blanket support for an Israeli military campaign that killed huge numbers of Palestinian civilians in Gaza.
By cooperating with the Biden administration against Houthi rebels and adopting a quietly-quietly approach to Trump’s provocative comments on Gaza and his apparent willingness to do whatever it takes to help Israel “to get the job done’, New Zealand has revealed a selective approach to upholding international law and human rights in the desperate conditions facing Gaza
Professor Robert G. Patman is an Inaugural Sesquicentennial Distinguished Chair and his research interests concern international relations, global security, US foreign policy, great powers, and the Horn of Africa. This article was first published by The Spinoff and is republished here with the author’s permission.
The price of eggs has risen dramatically in recent years across the US. A dozen eggs cost US$1.20 (92p) in June 2019, but the price is now around US$4.90 (with a peak of US$8.17 in early March).
Some restaurants have imposed surcharges on egg-based dishes, bringing even more attention to escalating costs. And there are also shortages on supermarket shelves.
In the coming months, the US plans to import up to 100 million of this consumer staple. Government officials are approaching countries from Turkey to Brazil with enquiries about eggs for export.
Agriculture secretary Brooke Rollins, who previously said that one option to the crisis was for people to get a chicken for their backyard, suggested in the Wall Street Journal that prices are unlikely to stabilise for some months. And Donald Trump recently shared an article on Truth Social calling on the public to “shut up about egg prices”.
The main cause of the problem is an outbreak of avian flu that has resulted in over 166 million birds in the US being slaughtered. Around 98% of the nation’s chickens are produced on factory farms, which are ripe for contagion.
According to the Centers for Disease Control, the flu has already spread to several hundred dairy cattle and to one human. The USDA recently announced a US$1 billion plan to counter the problem, with funding for improved bio-security, vaccine research and compensation to farmers.
In January 2025, Donald Trump’s White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, blamed the previous administration for high egg prices. It is true that birds were slaughtered on President Joe Biden’s watch, but this was and remains standard practice at times of bird flu outbreaks and had also been the case during the Obama and first Trump administrations.
However, this points to the way the rising price of eggs has become a political touchstone. It was referred to regularly in campaign speeches and press briefings as a sign of things going wrong and a symbol of the US economy faced. Donald Trump promised to fix the price of eggs swiftly if elected, but so far the issue shows no sign of going away.
Prices are still trending up. Even when prices suddenly drop, as they have this week, the public know how much cheaper they used to be until recently, and do not tend to feel better.
There are a number of reasons why egg prices have become an important to US politicians. First, almost everyone buys eggs. So the shortage and subsequent price rise is newsworthy and affects consumers in all income brackets.
Secondly, they are a measure of broader economic vulnerabilities, so egg-related problems tend to be part of a larger story about how weak the economy is. And thirdly, egg prices are political because of Trump’s promise to bring them down.
Polls showed that the economy and inflation were key factors in voter choice on election day 2024. In February 2025, Donald Trump did an interview with NBC News in which he said he won the election on the border and groceries.
On immigration, voters often base their opinions on what they perceive to be true. For example, tough rhetoric on building a wall may equate with a sense of feeling that the president is taking strong action, whether anything tangible actually materialises or not.
With groceries, reality trumps perception. The price of eggs is printed on the box and the cost is paid directly by voters.
Donald Trump on what he’s doing on egg prices and the economy.
Then there are the egg producers. US farmers tended to overwhelmingly support Trump on election day, so it is prudent for him to feel their pain, or at least appear to. Farming areas voted for him increasingly in his three election efforts, even increasing their support for him in 2020 after trade wars and price increases which would have negatively impacted them.
Another factor that may push up egg prices is that an estimated 70% of the factory farm workforce is immigrant labour, and as many as 40% are undocumented. Should the administration’s plans for high tariffs and mass deportations come to fruition, the industry would struggle to function.
Further food price increases will be inevitable, with potential exacerbation via the funding freezes for some USDA programmes that Trump has enacted. As of March 2025, US$1 billion in cuts has been announced, the consequences of which are already being felt by farmers. The “pain now for gain later” message is a tricky political sell.
Even in the current era of international turbulence, elections are largely won on more pedestrian matters. Specifically, “kitchen-table” economics is relatable to every voter, regardless of how grand, or not, their table is.
Americans will be aware that in neighbouring Canada, egg prices have not risen dramatically and there have not been shortages. But prices in Canada have been traditionally higher than the US, this is in part at least because farming standards differ.
The US does not have high welfare standards for agricultural workers or animals, and this shortcoming needs to be addressed in order to help reduce future risk of flu, but this is likely to also raise prices.
Blaming the previous incumbent is not a durable stance for Donald Trump. As former president Harry Truman might remind him: “The buck stops here.” Right at his desk.
Clodagh Harrington does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
News story
PS752: International Civil Aviation Organisation Vote
The UK Government has issued a statement following the outcome of the International Civil Aviation Organisation hearing on the case of Flight PS752.
A UK Government spokesperson said:
“Today, on 17 March 2025, the Council of the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) rejected Iran’s preliminary objection in the case of Flight PS752.
“Canada, Sweden, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom welcome the decision by the ICAO Council to accept jurisdiction in the case.
“This decision takes us a step closer to holding Iran to account for its illegal downing of Flight PS752 in January 2020. We will now proceed to the next phase in our case against Iran at ICAO.
“We remain committed to seeking justice, transparency, and accountability for the 176 innocent victims and their families.”
Fourteen years of war have left Syria’s people in desperate need – but international support is dwindling, UN Secretary-General António Guterres warned on Monday, calling for urgent investment in the country’s recovery.
In a video message to the conference Standing with Syria: Meeting the Needs for a Successful Transition, organized by the European Union in Brussels, he underlined the gravity of the situation.
“This is a watershed moment,” said the UN chief, stressing that the future of Syria depends on ensuring access to food, shelter, healthcare and sustainable livelihoods.
Over two-thirds of the population requires humanitarian assistance. However, critical aid efforts are in jeopardy due to severe underfunding.
The $1.25 billion UN-coordinated humanitarian response for the country is only 12.5 percent funded, with vital sectors such as shelter, non-food relief, water and sanitation, and agriculture and nutrition suffering from lack of resources.
Reconsider funding cuts
Mr. Guterres underscored the need for support from the international community.
Donors must urgently expand humanitarian support and reconsider funding cuts, he said. They must also invest in Syria’s recovery – including addressing sanctions and other restrictions – alongside helping an orderly and inclusive political transition.
“Let us work together to help the people of Syria as they take these momentous next steps in their journey towards a free, prosperous and peaceful future,” he added.
People cross back into Syria from Lebanon through the Masnaa border point.
Commentary aside
UN Emergency Relief Coordinator Tom Fletcher reinforced the Secretary-General’s call for action, warning that humanitarian operations face a severe funding gap.
“The people of Syria do not need us to be commentators and problem observers – they need us to move with urgency,” he said.
Despite these challenges, the UN has expanded its reach, delivering aid to millions, including areas previously inaccessible due to conflict.
More humanitarian convoys have entered Syria from Türkiye this year than in all of 2024, and assistance is now reaching former frontline areas in rural Idlib, Latakia and Aleppo. However, ongoing funding cuts threaten these gains, with essential services at risk of collapse.
“After so long waiting for hope, the people of Syria…expect us to meet this moment with decisive action, with generosity and with solidarity. The price of failure will be much greater for all of us than the cost of success,” he warned.
Refugees returning, but to what?
Filippo Grandi, UN High Commissioner for Refugees, highlighted a significant shift – the return of Syrian refugees.
Since the fall of the Assad regime in December 2024, more than one million displaced Syrians have returned home, including 350,000 from neighbouring countries. Surveys suggest that up to 3.5 million more could return in the coming months.
However, Mr. Grandi cautioned that without adequate support, these returns may not be sustainable.
“If we fail to help them stay in Syria, make no mistake: the impact will be disastrous,” he said, warning that refugees unable to rebuild their lives may be forced to leave again.
In Damascus, UNFPA Director Arakaki listens to women affected by conflict in Syria talk about their situations and the support they need.
Healthcare, protection for women at risk
Meanwhile within Syria, the humanitarian crisis remains acute, especially for women and girls.
Having concluded a mission to the country, Shoko Arakaki, Humanitarian Director at the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) highlighted the devastating impact of war on Syria’s healthcare system, with four in ten hospitals damaged or destroyed.
Lack of resources have further complicated the situation and recent funding cuts have forced the closure of over 100 UN-supported health facilities in northwest Syria.
She warned that gender-based violence has become “normalised” after years of conflict, but financial constraints may force UNFPA to withdraw support for protection efforts such as safe spaces for women.
“Women and youth in Syria still need our support,” she stressed, urging donors to invest in healthcare, protection, livelihoods and education.
Hope amid the apprehension
“These are deeply uncertain times for Syria,” she said, adding that in the midst of apprehension, she sensed a feeling of hope.
She noted her meetings with “extraordinary women” providing lifesaving reproductive health services, protecting survivors of violence, offering vocational training – even while they themselves are vulnerable.
“[I felt] hope in the Syrian people who are defying the odds to help each other, despite immense hardship,” she added.
The UN on Monday expressed concern over the continued threat posed to shipping in the Red Sea by Houthi attacks from their bases in Yemen as well as recent airstrikes by the United States which have left over 50 reportedly dead.
In a statement released to correspondents in New York, the UN denounced the Houthis’ targeting of merchant and commercial vessels in the key waterway which includes the Suez Canal and reported attacks against military vessels.
The UN is concerned about the continued threats by the Houthis to resume their attacks targeting merchant and commercial vessels in the Red Sea, as well as about their reported attacks against military vessels in the area, calling for “full freedom of navigation.”
US strikes
“We reiterate our concern at the launching of multiple strikes on Houthi-controlled areas in Yemen by the United States in recent days,” the statement continued.
“According to the Houthis, the airstrikes over the weekend resulted in 53 deaths and 101 injuries, reported from Sana’a City, Sa’ada and Al Baydah governorates, including reports of civilian casualties, and led to disruptions in the power supply in nearby localities.”
The Houthis who control large swathes of Yemen including the capital, began targeting Israeli-linked shipping in the waterway out of solidarity with Hamas and the Palestinian people, following the start of the war in Gaza in October 2023. Last week they said attacks would resume due to the continuing aid blockade of the enclave.
The UN called for restraint on all sides and an end to “all military activities”
“Any additional escalation could exacerbate regional tensions, fuel cycles of retaliation that may further destabilize Yemen and the region and pose grave risks to the already dire humanitarian situation in the country,” the statement continued.
It emphasised that international law must be respected by all parties, including Security Council resolution 2768 (2025) related to Houthi attacks against merchant and commercial vessels.
Top envoy urges restraint
UN Special Envoy, Hans Grundberg, has been in close contact with Yemeni, regional and international stakeholders in recent days.
“He has called for utmost restraint and adherence to international humanitarian law, and he has pushed for a refocus on diplomacy to avoid uncontrollable destabilization in Yemen and in the region. Further contacts are held by his office on numerous levels,” said UN deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq.
Mr. Grundberg called for support from the international community so that UN-led mediation efforts can “deliver results”.
Gaza: Israeli blockade continues to hamper relief efforts
The UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) warned on Monday that nearly all the 2.4 million children in the occupied Palestinian territory have been affected by the ongoing conflict and violence.
UNICEF Middle East and North Africa Regional Director Edouard Beigbeder expressed deep concern at the situation in Gaza at the end of a four-day assessment mission.
He said that roughly one million children now live without the very basics they need to survive because of the Israeli aid blockade.
This includes more than 180,000 doses of essential childhood routine vaccines, enough to fully vaccinate and protect 60,000 children under two, as well as 20 lifesaving ventilators for neonatal intensive care units.
It has now been more than two weeks since Israeli authorities closed all crossings into Gaza.
Olga Cherevko from UN aid coordination office, OCHA, reminded that when the ceasefire began “we were able to deliver life-saving support to hundreds of thousands of families.”
They also “delivered hope” – but that is now turning into fear and concern: “Time is not on our side. It is imperative that the flow of supply is restored. Aid must be allowed to enter.”
Prices surging
The World Food Programme (WFP) reported that aid crossing closures have led to a surge in prices. This month, the cost of cooking gas soared by up to 200 per cent compared to February and is now only available on the black market.
Aid partners are also reporting a lack of cash. “Shop owners are unable to restock or pay their suppliers. The situation is particularly acute in North Gaza and Khan Younis,” said deputy UN spokesperson Farhan Haq.
“Despite the suspension of cargo entering Gaza, the UN and its partners continue to provide life-saving services for as many vulnerable people as possible.
More than 3,000 children have been screened by aid partners for malnutrition across Gaza in the past two weeks and only a small number of cases of acute malnutrition have been identified, Mr. Haq added.
But they warn that the situation could worsen if the halt on aid into Gaza continues.
UNICEF says large quantities of critical supplies are stalled just a few dozen kilometres outside the Strip, including 20 ventilators for neonatal intensive care units and more than 180,000 doses of essential childhood routine vaccines.
Interest payments outweigh climate investments in almost all developing countries
Finally, a warning from UN economists at UNCTAD that almost all developing countries pay more in interest on their debts than essential climate resilience investments.
UNCTAD chief Rebeca Grynspan said that today’s global financial architecture comes at a high cost to developing countries who suffer from chronic under-investment.
There is still no universal safety net to shield countries from external shocks, or any multilateral financial system to provide affordable long-term resources at scale, Ms. Grynspan continued.
UNCTAD data shows that 3.3 billion people live in countries that spend more on servicing their debt than on health or education.
In 2023, the average developing country spent 16 per cent of their export earnings to service their debt, which is more than three times the limit set for Germany’s post-war reconstruction, Ms. Grynspan explained at the start of the UN agency’s International Debt Management Conference seeking solutions for the management of public debt, transparency and good governance.
NEW ORLEANS, LA – ActingU.S. Attorney Michael M. Simpson announced that JEREMY TALBERT (a/k/a “J-Nasty,” a/k/a “Jay Nastie”) (“TALBERT”),age 29, from Memphis, Tenn., was sentenced on March 12, 2025, after previously pleading guilty to Sex Trafficking of a Minor, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1591(a)(1), 1591(b)(2), 1594(a), and 2, by U.S. District Judge Lance M. Africk to 220 months in prison. TALBERT was also sentenced to ten (10) years of supervised release after release from prison. Judge Africk further ordered TALBERT to pay $47,000 in restitution to the victim, and a $100 mandatory special assessment fee. TALBERT will also have to register as a sex offender.
According to court documents, TALBERT brought a fourteen-year-old female (“Minor Victim”) from Memphis to New Orleans to have her engage in commercial sex acts between in or about October 2020 and on or about December 17, 2020. During this time, TALBERT was aware of Minor Victim’s age from her mother, who informed TALBERT that Minor Victim was missing. TALBERT falsely told Minor Victim’s mother that he would help locate Minor Victim and bring her home.
Instead, TALBERT advertised Minor Victim on websites commonly used to advertise sexual services in exchange for money. TALBERT directed and supervised Minor Victim when she performed commercial sex acts including, setting the fee sexual acts, waiting in a nearby vehicle while Minor Victim solicited “dates,” requiring Minor Victim to share her location via phone with him, and providing condoms for her use during commercial sex dates. TALBERT required Minor Victim to earn approximately $1,000 per day from commercial sex acts and, kept all or most of the money she earned.
TALBERT trafficked Minor Victim until December 17, 2020, when law enforcement officers encountered them during the execution of a search warrant at a hotel in New Orleans. During the search warrant, agents seized approximately $1,223 in United States currency, a black handgun, and TALBERT’s Phone, which connected him to the trafficking of Minor Victim.
This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse. Led by the United States Attorneys’ Offices and the Criminal Division’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state, and local resources to locate, apprehend, and prosecute individuals who sexually exploit children, and to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.usdoj.gov/psc. For more information about internet safety education, please visit www.usdoj.gov/psc and click on the tab “resources.”
Acting U.S. Attorney Simpson praised the work of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the New Orleans Police Department, and the Memphis Police Department, in investigating this matter. Assistant United States Attorneys Maria Carboni of the Financial Crimes Unit and Jordan Ginsberg, Chief of the Public Integrity Unit, are in charge of the prosecution.
Authorities threatened women, warning them against gathering for International Women’s Day
Since 8 March, five women’s rights activists arrested, arbitrarily detained in solitary confinement and interrogated without their lawyers
Journalists and singers also targeted – amale singer was flogged 74 times for performing a protest song
‘Women in Iran are held captive by authorities who fear the power of women…The women’s movement has passed the point of no return…’ – Leila Pashaei, activist
‘Instead of addressing systemic discrimination and violence against women and girls, they are attempting to crush Iran’s women’s rights movement’ – Diana Eltahawy
Iranian authorities have escalated their crackdown on women’s rights defenders, journalists, singers and other activists demanding equality or who defy compulsory veiling using arbitrary detention, unjust prosecution, flogging, and even the death penalty in a bid to quash Iran’s women’s rights movement, Amnesty International said today.
Since International Women’s Day (IWD) on 8 March, the Iranian authorities have arbitrarily arrested at least five women’s rights activists. These arrests come amid an intensified crackdown that has included summoning women’s rights activists and journalists for interrogation, and arresting women singers for performing without the mandatory hijab while shutting down their social media accounts. In the lead up to IWD, the authorities flogged a male singer 74 times for performing a protest song against Iran’s discriminatory compulsory veiling laws and, in February, a women’s rights activist was sentenced to death.
Diana Eltahawy, Amnesty International’s Deputy Director for Middle East and North Africa Regional, said:
“In the wake of the Woman Life Freedom uprising of 2022, the Iranian authorities consider the widespread defiance of women and girls demanding their rights as an existential threat to the political and security establishment. Instead of addressing systemic discrimination and violence against women and girls, they are attempting to crush Iran’s women’s rights movement.
“The international community must use their leverage to press the Iranian authorities to stop harassing women’s rights activists and immediately release those arbitrarily detained. They must also pursue legal pathways to hold accountable Iranian officials reasonably suspected of committing widespread and systematic human rights violations against women and girls, including through the implementation of compulsory veiling.”
The mandates of the Fact-Finding Mission and the Special Rapporteur are set for renewal at the ongoing 58th session of the UN Human Rights Council (24 February to 4 April). On 18 March, the Council is set to hold a joint interactive dialogue with both mandates.
Women’s rights activists arrested for participating in IWD events
In the lead up to IWD, the Iranian authorities threatened women, warning them against gathering and demanding their rights.
Since 10 March 2025, Ministry of Intelligence agents arrested four Kurdish women’s rights activists, namely Leila Pashaei, Baran Saedi, Sohaila Motaei and Souma Mohammadrezaei after they participated in IWD events in Kurdistan province. They are being arbitrarily detained in solitary confinement cells at a detention centre in Sanandaj, Kurdistan province, and have been interrogated without their lawyers.
Baran Saediwas arrested from her family home in Sanandaj on 10 March. She was previously detained during the Woman Life Freedom uprising of 2022 and released on bail after two months.
Mohammadrezaeiwas arrested at her workplace in Sanandaj on 10 March. Security forces had previously summoned and threatened her on multiple occasions in relation to her women’s rights activism.
Sohaila Motaeiwas arrested in Dehgolan on the evening of 10 March.She was previously briefly arrested in January for protesting death sentences against women prisoners. She was also detained during theWoman Life Freedom uprising andsentenced to five years in prison for charges including “spreading propaganda against the system.”
Leila Pashaeiwas arrested from her home in Sanandaj on 10 March after speaking against compulsory veiling, child marriage, violence against women, and executions of women in Iran during an event on IWD. During the speech she said:
“Women in Iran are held captive by authorities who fear the power of women…The women’s movement has passed the point of no return…. Women worldwide, especially in the Middle East, will never be silenced again.”
Pattern of Suppression and Intimidation
The recent arrests occurred within the context of a broader campaign to suppress women’s rights activism and defiance of compulsory veiling through a range of coercive measures. Activists, journalists, singers and other public figures are among those targeted through arbitrary detention, torture through flogging, coercive interrogations and threats, and shutting down social media accounts.
On 11 March, Nina Golestani, a writer and women’s rights activist, was arbitrarily arrested at her parents’ home in Gilan province by the Intelligence Unit of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). According to a statement by her husband, Javad Sajadi Rad, on Instagram, IRGC agents stormed her parents’ home, searched it and confiscated her personal belongings. They then took her away for interrogations and subsequently transferred her to Lakan prison in Rasht, Gilan province. She was released on bail on 16 March.
On 7 March, a day after several women journalists participated at a media event in Tehran without headscarves, the judiciary’s Mizan News Agency issued a statement calling their actions “contrary to public decency”. The journalists were interrogated at the office of the prosecutor in Tehran’s Evin prison and judicial cases were opened against them.
On 5 March, singer Mehdi Yarrahi’s flogging sentence of 74 lashes was carried out in connection to his song called “Your Headscarf (Roosarito)” commemorating the first anniversary of the Woman Life Freedom uprising.
On 27 February, singer Hiwa Seyfizade was arrested during a live performance in Tehran. An official announced that she was arrested for “unauthorised solo singing”, which is banned for women in Iran. She was released on bail on 1 March 2025. Her Instagram account has since been closed, with two posts from the Public Security Police on her page stating: “This page has been blocked [by order of the judicial authorities] due to the production of criminal content.”
In February, imprisoned women’s rights activist Sharifeh Mohammadi was sentenced to death for a second time on the charge of “armed rebellion against the state” (baghi), solely in relation to her human rights activities, including supporting women’s rights. The Supreme Court had overturned a prior death sentence by a Revolutionary Court in October 2024, sending the case back to lower courts.
On 14 December 2024, singer Parastoo Ahmadi was detained after she livestreamed a concert in which she appeared unveiled in public in a shoulder-baring dress. The video went viral, amassing two and a half million views. She was released on bail several hours later.
On 13 December 2024, Reza Khandan, a human rights defender, was arrested to serve an unjust prison sentence in relation to his campaigning against compulsory veiling. Reza Khandan, who is the husband of lawyer Nasrin Sotoudeh, was sentenced to six years in prison by a Revolutionary Court in January 2019.
Compulsory veiling laws
Iran’s compulsory veiling laws, which apply to girls as young as seven, violate a whole host of rights, including the rights to equality, freedom of expression, religion and belief, privacy, equality and non-discrimination, personal and bodily autonomy. These laws also inflict severe pain and suffering amounting to torture or other forms of ill-treatment.
In its March 2024 report, the Fact-Finding Mission found that the Iranian authorities have “committed a series of extensive, sustained and continuing acts that individually constitute human rights violations, directed against women [and] girls…and, cumulatively, constitute what the mission assesses to be persecution.”
Iranian authorities have escalated their crackdown on women’s rights defenders, journalists, singers and other activists demanding equality or who defy compulsory veiling using arbitrary detention, unjust prosecution, flogging, and even the death penalty in a bid to quash Iran’s women’s rights movement, Amnesty International said today.
Since International Women’s Day (IWD) on 8 March, the Iranian authorities have arbitrarily arrested at least five women’s rights activists. These arrests come amid an intensified crackdown that has included summoning women’s rights activists and journalists for interrogation, and arresting women singers for performing without the mandatory hijab while shutting down their social media accounts. In the lead up to IWD, the authorities flogged a male singer 74 times for performing a protest song against Iran’s discriminatory compulsory veiling laws and, in February 2025, sentenced a women’s rights activist to death.
“In the wake of the Woman Life Freedom uprising of 2022, the Iranian authorities consider the widespread defiance of women and girls demanding their rights as an existential threat to the political and security establishment. Instead of addressing systemic discrimination and violence against women and girls, they are attempting to crush Iran’s women’s rights movement,” said Diana Eltahawy, Amnesty International’s Deputy Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa Regional Office.
“Ahead of a key UN Human Rights Council session tomorrow to deliver findings on the human rights situation in Iran, and in the context of the Council’s ongoing negotiations to extend the mandates of the Special Rapporteur on Iran and the UN Fact-Finding Mission on Iran, the international community must stand up against impunity and for the rights of women and girls in the country.
Instead of addressing systemic discrimination and violence against women and girls, they are attempting to crush Iran’s women’s rights movement
Diana Eltahawy, MENA Deputy Regional Director
“States must use their leverage to press the Iranian authorities to stop harassing women’s rights activists and immediately release those arbitrarily detained. They must also pursue legal pathways to hold accountable Iranian officials reasonably suspected of committing widespread and systematic human rights violations against women and girls, including through the implementation of compulsory veiling.”
The mandates of the Fact-Finding Mission and the Special Rapporteur are set for renewal at the ongoing 58th session of the UN Human Rights Council (24 February to 4 April 2025). On 18 March, the Council is set to hold a joint interactive dialogue with both mandates.
Women’s rights activists arrested for participating in IWD events
In the lead up to IWD, the Iranian authorities threatened women, warning them against gathering and demanding their rights.
Since 10 March 2025, Ministry of Intelligence agents arrested four Kurdish women’s rights activists, namely Leila Pashaei, Baran Saedi, Sohaila Motaei and Soma Mohammadrezaeiafter they participated in IWD events in Kurdistan province. They are being arbitrarily detained in solitary confinement cells at a detention centre in Sanandaj, Kurdistan province, and have been interrogated without their lawyers.
Baran Saedi was arrested from her family home in Sanandaj on 10 March 2025. She was previously detained during the Woman Life Freedom uprising of 2022 and released on bail after two months.
Soma Mohammadrezaei was arrested at her workplace in Sanandaj on 10 March. Security forces had previously summoned and threatened her on multiple occasions in relation to her women’s rights activism.
Sohaila Motaei was arrested in Dehgolan on the evening of 10 March. She was previously briefly arrested in January 2025 for protesting death sentences against women prisoners. She was also detained during the Woman Life Freedom uprising and sentenced to five years in prison for charges including “spreading propaganda against the system.”
Leila Pashaei was arrested from her home in Sanandaj on 10 March 2025 after speaking against compulsory veiling, child marriage, violence against women, and executions of women in Iran during an event on IWD. During the speech she said: “Women in Iran are held captive by authorities who fear the power of women…The women’s movement has passed the point of no return…. Women worldwide, especially in the Middle East, will never be silenced again.”
Pattern of Suppression and Intimidation
The recent arrests occurred within the context of a broader campaign to suppress women’s rights activism and defiance of compulsory veiling through a range of coercive measures. Activists, journalists, singers and other public figures are among those targeted through arbitrary detention, torture through flogging, coercive interrogations and threats, and shutting down social media accounts.
On 11 March 2025, Nina Golestani, a writer and women’s rights activist, was arbitrarily arrested at her parents’ home in Gilan province by the Intelligence Unit of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). According to a statement by her husband, Javad Sajadi Rad, on Instagram, IRGC agents stormed her parents’ home, searched it and confiscated her personal belongings. They then took her away for interrogations and subsequently transferred her to Lakan prison in Rasht, Gilan province. She was released on bail on 16 March 2025.
On 7 March 2025, a day after several women journalists participated at a media event in Tehran without headscarves, the judiciary’s Mizan News Agency issued a statement calling their actions “contrary to public decency”. The journalists were interrogated at the office of the prosecutor in Tehran’s Evin prison and judicial cases were opened against them.
On 5 March 2025, singer Mehdi Yarrahi’s flogging sentence of 74 lashes was carried out in connection to his song called “Your Headscarf (Roosarito)” commemorating the first anniversary of the Woman Life Freedom uprising.
On 27 February 2025, singer Hiwa Seyfizade was arrested during a live performance in Tehran. An official announced that she was arrested for “unauthorized solo singing”, which is banned for women in Iran. She was released on bail on 1 March 2025. Her Instagram account has since been closed, with two posts from the Public Security Police on her page stating: “This page has been blocked [by order of the judicial authorities] due to the production of criminal content.”
In February 2025, imprisoned women’s rights activist Sharifeh Mohammadi was sentenced to death for a second time on the charge of “armed rebellion against the state” (baghi), solely in relation to her human rights activities, including supporting women’s rights. The Supreme Court had overturned a prior death sentence by a Revolutionary Court in October 2024, sending the case back to lower courts.
On 14 December 2024, singer Parastoo Ahmadi was detained after she livestreamed a concert in which she appeared unveiled in public in a shoulder-baring dress. The video went viral, amassing two and a half million views. She was released on bail several hours later.
On 13 December 2024, Reza Khandan, a human rights defender, was arrested to serve an unjust prison sentence in relation to his campaigning against compulsory veiling. Reza Khandan, who is the husband of lawyer Nasrin Sotoudeh, was sentenced to six years in prison by a Revolutionary Court in January 2019.
Background
Iran’s compulsory veiling laws, which apply to girls as young as seven, violate a whole host of rights, including the rights to equality, freedom of expression, religion and belief, privacy, equality and non-discrimination, personal and bodily autonomy. These laws also inflict severe pain and suffering amounting to torture or other forms of ill-treatment.
In its March 2024 report, the Fact-Finding Mission found that the Iranian authorities have “committed a series of extensive, sustained and continuing acts that individually constitute human rights violations, directed against women [and] girls…and, cumulatively, constitute what the mission assesses to be persecution.”
For more information or to arrange an interview please contact[email protected]
