Group claims responsibility for Syrian church bombing
DamascuscTypeface:> A little-known group, Saraya Ansar al-Sunna (Brigade of Sunni Supporters), claimed responsibility on Tuesday for the deadly suicide bombing that struck a church in the south of Damascus, killing at least 25 worshippers and injuring 63.
In a statement released on its social media platforms, the group claimed the assault was retaliation for what it described as 'provocations by Christians in Damascus.' It threatened further attacks, including suicide operations.
Previously, the group had issued sectarian threats targeting Christians, Alawites, Druze and Shiite Muslims.
It has claimed responsibility for a February attack on the village of Arzeh in Hama province and has threatened individuals linked to the UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. (DPA)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
12 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
NATO commits to major defence spending hike sought by Trump
NATO allies have agreed to massively boost military spending while affirming their 'ironclad commitment' to collective defence. Leaders from the 32-member bloc pledged to allocate up to 5 percent of their national GDP to defence and related sectors by 2035, describing the move as a 'quantum leap' in collective security. The new pledge was made in a summit communique agreed on Wednesday in The Hague. It stated that members would 'invest 5 percent of GDP annually on core defence requirements as well as defence- and security-related spending'. The commitment includes a review point in 2029, conveniently set for after the next US presidential election, to evaluate progress and reassess the threat posed by Russia. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte hailed the agreement as 'transformational', a sentiment echoed by several leaders, though it glossed over clear differences within the alliance. US President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly pushed for a higher NATO defence spending commitment, took credit for the shift. '[It's] something that no one really thought possible,' Trump said at the summit. 'They said, 'You did it, sir. You did it.' Well, I don't know if I did it, but I think I did.' In a move that will likely curry favour with Trump, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said on Wednesday that the United Kingdom expects to spend at least 4.1 percent on defence and security by 2027. Divisions over spending Not everyone is on board. Spain has already said it cannot meet the 5 percent target. Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez insisted that his government would stick with the existing 2 percent threshold — a benchmark first set following Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. 'Spain can carry out NATO's defence plans at 2 percent of GDP,' Sanchez said. 'This summit secures both our national security and the welfare of our citizens.' Spain is NATO's lowest spender on defence. In 2024, it spent 1.24 percent and was among the nine member countries to fall short of the 2 percent target. Trump was quick to criticise Madrid's stance, threatening retaliation through economic means. 'They want to stay at 2 percent. I think it's terrible,' the US president said. 'We're negotiating a trade deal with Spain — they'll end up paying double.' Belgium and Slovakia also raised objections. Brussels warned that the timeline was unrealistic, while Bratislava said it reserved the right to make independent decisions on its own military spending. Steep spending demands Despite the pushback, the declaration formalised new targets: 3.5 percent for NATO's 'core defence spending,' plus an additional 1.5 percent for broader security measures — from infrastructure upgrades like roads and ports to cyber defence and emergency response capabilities. Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store described the agreement as unprecedented. 'We struggled for years just to get past 2 percent,' he said. 'Now we're talking about 3.5 percent, which is necessary to build the capabilities we need.' The spending demands are steep. As the US increasingly shifts strategic focus to the Middle East and Indo-Pacific, European members are being urged to shoulder more of the military burden. The commitments come as the US remains engaged in multiple theatres, including ongoing arms support for Ukraine's fight against Russia, supporting Israel's war on Gaza, and backing continued strikes on Lebanon, Syria and Yemen. More recently, Israel's war with Iran has further stretched US military resources.
Al Jazeera
12 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Palestine Action are not terrorists. Israel is
The generation that marched in record numbers against the Iraq war learned one thing clearly: respectable protest alone does not work. On the issue of Palestine, too, the power elite has repeatedly ignored the popular will. The media pays little attention to hundreds of thousands marching, and the government remains unmoved despite public polls showing a majority support for an arms embargo on Israel. This democratic deficit in Britain makes direct action seem the only powerful way to oppose Western war‑mongering in the Middle East. And Britain's ongoing military support for Israel's genocide in Gaza is why I support Palestine Action – the group the Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, is planning to proscribe as a terrorist organisation after its activists vandalised a Ministry of Defence aircraft. I, too, have felt morally compelled to take direct action. In summer 2014, when Israel bombed Gaza for 51 days – killing more than 2,200 Palestinians – I was a member of the original London Palestine Action group. We occupied the roof of a drone‑engine factory owned by Elbit Systems, halting production for two days. It remains one of my proudest moments. But our group burned out and became dormant until relaunching under a different name in 2023. By contrast, the nationwide Palestine Action, founded in 2020, has mounted a sustained campaign against Elbit Systems, taking far greater personal risks. Inspired by Smash EDO, the Raytheon Nine, and the 1996 action that decommissioned Hawk jets to stop Suharto's bombing of East Timor, Palestine Action has destroyed millions of pounds' worth of military equipment. They have become a serious thorn in the side of the military–industrial complex. Many – often young women, queer people and people of colour – have been imprisoned, sacrificing their freedom as political prisoners. Crucially, Palestine Action has never harmed a human being. Their actions – non‑violent yet disruptive – have saved lives. By contrast, Israel's genocide in Gaza has killed or maimed at least 200,000 people, including tens of thousands of children. This constitutes state terror by any standard. These brave activists are acting to prevent it because their government refuses to. If the British government had never armed Israel, or had stopped doing so at any time in the past decade, Palestine Action would have had no target and might not have existed. Perhaps then, as I write, Israel would not be committing genocide in Gaza either. But Britain's attitude towards Palestinians has been rooted in colonial arrogance for over a century, originating with the Balfour Declaration. Palestine Action's direct intervention has exposed the contradictions in Britain's position on Israel. The Home Secretary's plan to proscribe the group as a terrorist organisation reveals the authoritarian nature of the current Labour government and the racialised social control underpinning the 'war on terror'. By branding non‑violent resisters as 'terrorists', the UK has taken a leaf directly from Israel's playbook. Just this month, Israel did the same to the Palestinian rights group Addameer. This tactic is increasingly used by authoritarian states around the world. It is the road to fascism – and it threatens to further erode the democratic freedoms we still have in Britain. But this tactic will not work. You can ban a group, but not a movement or an idea. Palestine Action has engaged acclaimed lawyer Gareth Pierce to challenge the proscription in court. And even if the ban stays in place, direct action will persist as long as Britain supports Israel's genocide. Yet direct action alone cannot end this atrocity. It will take all of us, from within and beyond institutional politics, pressuring Britain from every angle. It won't happen overnight, but it can happen. And when Palestine is free, history will remember clearly: Keir Starmer and his government as enablers of genocide, and Palestine Action as heroic peace activists who laid down their liberty – and their bodies – to oppose state terror. The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.
Al Jazeera
16 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Palestine Action calls UK ban 'terrifying' for civil liberties
Palestine Action calls UK ban 'terrifying' for civil liberties NewsFeed A spokesperson for UK activist group Palestine Action says the government's move to ban it is 'genuinely terrifying' for civil liberties in the UK. Video Duration 02 minutes 22 seconds 02:22 Video Duration 02 minutes 02 seconds 02:02 Video Duration 00 minutes 44 seconds 00:44 Video Duration 00 minutes 18 seconds 00:18 Video Duration 00 minutes 46 seconds 00:46 Video Duration 01 minutes 26 seconds 01:26 Video Duration 00 minutes 50 seconds 00:50
