ISIS leader killed in Iraq was head of extremist group's global operations
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Middle East Eye
28 minutes ago
- Middle East Eye
Arab countries condemn Netanyahu's 'Greater Israel' comment
Iraq has joined a growing list of Arab countries condemning Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's comments voicing support for a "Greater Israel" in an i24NEWS interview on Tuesday. The Iraqi foreign ministry said the comments revealed Israel's "expansionist ambitions" and were "a clear provocation to the sovereignty of countries". Other countries to condemn the statement include Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Kuwait, Qatar and Egypt. Saudi Arabia expressed on Wednesday "its total rejection of the ideas and plans for colonisation and expansion adopted by the Israeli occupation authorities", and Egypt called the comments a "rejection of the option of peace in the region". On Tuesday, in an interview with journalist Sharon Gal, Netanyahu said he felt "very" connected to the prospect of a "Greater Israel".
Middle East Eye
2 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
Israel's war on Gaza: Why do legal experts say it's genocide?
Is Israel committing genocide in Gaza? It's a question that has been asked repeatedly since Israel declared war on the Palestinian enclave on 7 October 2023 after Hamas-led attacks on southern Israel killed around 1,200 people. To date, more than 60,000 Palestinians have been killed, and the population of 2.2 million displaced repeatedly. The territory's infrastructure and services have been reduced to rubble. Israel has blocked aid, including food, water and medical supplies. There has been international condemnation amid scenes of starvation. The word 'genocide' is frequently used in discussions about Gaza. But it's important to understand that it is defined in international law, that it is recognised by courts globally, and that perpetrators can be held accountable. For academics and experts, whose life's work is the study of genocide, the consensus has grown that Israel has passed the point of committing genocide in Gaza. But there is division as to when. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Some, such as academic Raz Segal, identified it as starting in October 2023, describing Israel's military campaign as a 'textbook case of genocide'. Others put the date later: Holocaust scholar Omer Bartov reached the same conclusion in May 2024, when the scale and intensity of the destruction became impossible to ignore. And for Martin Shaw, genocide began in 1948 and the Nakba, the mass displacement and killing of Palestinians that established the state of Israel. People flee after an Israeli strike hits camp for displaced Palestinians in northern Khan Yunis, southern Gaza Strip, in April 2025 (AFP) This divergence has sparked academic tensions. Nimer Sultany says that the evidence was 'overwhelming from the start' and has criticised academics who reached the conclusion months into the war. His views echo broader frustration among Palestinian scholars, who say that the slow pace of recognition reflects a double standard in how genocide is identified. Middle East Eye has interviewed legal experts throughout the war and at length (much of the content can be found at the international law section or the Expert Witness podcast series). Below, we look at what experts have said about Israel and genocide, and how they reached their conclusions. First, some essentials. What is the definition of genocide? Genocide is widely recognised as 'the crime of crimes'. It is legally defined in the Genocide Convention (1948), as well as the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (1998). Article I says that genocide is a crime under international law, which the states parties to the convention "undertake to prevent and to punish.' Article II states that "genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group'. There then follows a list: - Killing members of the group - Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group - Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part - Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group - Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group Nor does the perpetrator need to be directly involved: the convention also prohibits: - Conspiracy to commit genocide - Direct and public incitement to commit genocide - Any attempt to commit genocide - Complicity in genocide How do you prove genocide? There are three criteria: - The targeted group must have a shared characteristic as identified in the Genocide Convention. It could be national, ethnic, racial and/or religious - At least one of the acts mentioned in Article II must have been committed - There must have been a specific intention to commit the act or acts, through evidence such as statements or a pattern of conduct All the experts MEE has spoken to identified Israel as committing genocide. Francesca Albanese: Totality of genocidal violence Francesca Albanese is an Italian jurist and the UN's special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967. She is also an affiliate scholar at the Institute for the Study of International Migration at Georgetown University. On 9 July 2025, Albanese became the first UN expert to be sanctioned by the US for her work investigating human rights violations in occupied Palestine. When does Albanese think genocide began? Albanese was among the first scholars to warn of genocide in Gaza and to outline the legal case against Israel. She was also one of more than 30 UN experts since November 2023 who sounded the alarm about genocide. A month later, South Africa accused Israel of genocide before the International Court of Justice (ICJ). 'This genocide case is particular because it's the first settler-colonial genocide that gets litigated before an international court,' she told MEE in November. Her analyses concluded that genocidal intent and acts were in place from the early days of the conflict. How did Albanese reach her conclusion? In the UN report Anatomy of Genocide, published in March 2024, Albanese stated that the threshold for genocide had been met. During the first five months of the military campaign in Gaza in 2023, she said that Israel had committed at least three of the underlying acts in the Genocide Convention against Palestinians as a protected group. Evidence of this Israeli intent came from statements made by Israeli officials, who dehumanised Palestinians or advocated their erasure as a group, including forced displacement. The patterns, scale and nature of the attacks also implied indirect objectives, Albanese said. In October 2024, she published Genocide As Colonial Erasure, which identified a 'totality triple lens' approach by Israel as evidence of its demonstrated genocidal intent. International law explained: What are genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity? Read More » 'While the scale and nature of the ongoing Israeli assault against the Palestinians vary by area, the totality of the Israeli acts of destruction directed against the totality of the Palestinian people, with the aim of conquering the totality of the land of Palestine, is clearly identifiable,' she wrote. 'That gives the broader picture, which inscribes itself in the long trajectory of colonial erasure that Israel has practised on the Palestinians,' Albanese told MEE following the publication. She said Palestinians were subjected to a 'settler-colonial genocide', a decades-long process aimed at displacing and replacing Palestinians as a group. In settler-colonial contexts, Albanese argued, control over land is central to both the colonisers' aims and Indigenous peoples' survival, identity, and self-determination. The forced displacement of Palestinians and the destruction of their cultural, economic and social ties to the land can signal genocidal intent, especially when aimed at preventing the group's reconstitution, she said. The patterns of violence against Palestinians as a group required the application of the Genocide Convention to prevent and punish genocide, Albanese concluded. Martin Shaw: This was not accidental Martin Shaw is a British sociologist and scholar. He is a research professor of international relations at the Institut Barcelona d'Estudis Internacionals, and emeritus professor of international relations and politics at Sussex University. When does Shaw think genocide began? Shaw told MEE that genocide was apparent from the outset of the current war, if not far earlier. 'It was evident not only in the provocative and genocidal rhetoric of Israeli leaders but also in the scale of destruction launched against Gaza following the Hamas attacks,' he told MEE. Shaw also argued that the Nakba of 1948 should be understood in the context of genocide (15 years ago, he was also one of the first scholars to describe the Nakba as a form of genocide). 'The Zionist project at that time sought to eliminate Palestinian society within the territory that would become Israel,' he said. 'This was not accidental; it was deliberate.' Palestinian populations, he said, were forced to flee and were unable to return - evidence of Israeli intent to destroy Palestinians as a group. How did Shaw reach his conclusion? Shaw believed Israel is committing genocide with 'the intent to destroy Gaza comprehensively, not only through the mass killing of Palestinians but also by dismantling the societal fabric'. Israel's actions, he said, have been deliberate. 'Even within the first few weeks of the assault, it was evident that this was not merely a military campaign against Hamas, but an effort to destroy the Palestinian society in Gaza.' Nimer Sultany: Israel acted in defiance Nimer Sultany is a Palestinian human rights lawyer, international law scholar, and the editor-in-chief of the Palestine Yearbook of International Law. He teaches law at Soas, University of London. When does Sultany think genocide began? Sultany told MEE in May 2025 that the war amounted to genocide from the start, and counters the idea that it only began after the ceasefire collapse in March 2025. 'This revisionism is merely an attempt to justify the prolonged silence of so many,' he said, 'and the reluctance, delay, and avoidance of different political, media, and academic elements in Western countries, who did not want to recognise the genocide, who did not have the courage to recognise and call it out earlier.' Instead, Sultany said, Israel's conduct after March 2025 was almost identical to that in October 2023, including the use of siege and the weaponisation of starvation. How did Sultany reach his conclusion? Sultany cited genocidal intent, the attempt to eliminate the Palestinian population, and the actions that fit the criteria for genocidal acts in the Genocide Convention. Since January 2024, the ICJ has issued three legally binding orders for Israel to prevent and punish acts of genocide, including preventing unimpeded access to humanitarian aid. But Sultany said that Israel's violation of the orders was itself an indictment of its actions and 'shows that what was initially a risk of genocide became an actual genocide over time.' 'Israel acted in defiance of the provisional measures, with full knowledge of the effects of its actions on Palestinians.' Raz Segal: Comprehensive destruction Raz Segal is associate professor of Holocaust and genocide studies at Stockton University in New Jersey. He is a historian specialising in Jewish history and modern Europe, with research focusing on southeast Europe, particularly borderlands, and on Palestine and Israel. When does Segal think the genocide began? Segal was the first Holocaust and genocide studies scholar to warn about Israel's current assault on Gaza as genocide. In Jewish Currents on 13 October 2023, he described the attack as a 'textbook case of genocide'. He told MEE: 'As an Israeli-American scholar of Jewish history and the Holocaust, I take seriously the moral imperative of 'never again'. In Holocaust and genocide studies, we teach students to identify early warning signs of genocide: processes that escalate, red flags that demand intervention.' 'Critics asked why I used the term 'genocide' so early. My answer: because we were already seeing key indicators. Ethically and legally, the obligation to prevent genocide arises in the presence of significant risk, not just once mass killing is fully evident.' How did Segal reach his conclusion? Segal said that Israel's order on 13 October 2023, for more than a million Palestinians to go to southern Gaza within 24 hours, was an indicator of a clear risk of genocide. 'I argued then, and continue to argue, that this marked a transition into the realm of genocide, or at the very least a significant risk of genocide, which, under the Genocide Convention, is sufficient to activate the duty to prevent.' Segal also cited the total siege on Gaza declared by then-defence minister Yoav Gallant on 9 October 2023, which failed to distinguish civilians and combatants, and President Isaac Herzog's statement blaming the population of Gaza for Hamas' attack. Such comments, coupled with policies that targeted the civilian population indiscriminately, pointed to genocidal intent, he said. Israel's use of its most destructive munitions, including two-tonne US-made bombs, from the very start of the war was, he said, 'typical of genocidal campaigns'. And Segal also highlighted how targeting of children was also significant and related it to the ongoing ICJ case against Myanmar, which is accused of genocide intent through its targeting of the young. 'Israel's figures far exceed those in the Rohingya case, further strengthening the argument,' Segal said. Barry Trachtenberg: Call this what it is Barry Trachtenberg is a professor of Jewish history and Holocaust studies at Wake Forest University in North Carolina. When does Trachtenberg think the genocide began? 'It has been clear to me since mid-October 2023 that Israel's response to the attacks of 7 October fits squarely within the UN Convention's definition of genocide,' Trachtenberg told MEE. How did Trachtenberg reach his conclusion? 'From the very beginning, we saw genocidal statements made by Israeli leaders, which were soon followed by actions that aligned with those declarations of intent," Trachtenberg said. 'In most cases of genocidal violence, we don't have explicit statements from political and military leaders saying they will target civilians, refuse to distinguish between combatants and non-combatants, or hold an entire population responsible. But we've seen exactly that in this case.' He said that as a Holocaust and genocide studies scholar, it was important for him and his colleagues to speak out and 'call this violence what it is". Melanie O'Brien: Patterns of conduct Melanie O'Brien is an associate professor of international aaw at the University of Western Australia Law School, and the president of the International Association of Genocide Scholars. Her case studies include the Armenian Genocide, the Holocaust, the Cambodian Genocide, the Srebrenica Genocide, and the Rohingya Genocide. When does O'Brien think the genocide began? O'Brien told MEE she cannot pinpoint a specific date. 'In genocide studies, we refer to genocide as a process, not an event. We examine patterns of genocide over months or even years.' In the case of Gaza, there were 'years of persecution, discrimination, apartheid, and conflict' that predated the start of the current war. How did O'Brien reach her conclusion? 'Applying the legal definitions of genocide as found in the Genocide Convention and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, I would determine that what is happening in Gaza constitutes genocide,' she said. Often, the most difficult element of genocide to prove is that of 'special intent,' she explained. But since early October 2023, Israeli leaders have made statements about destroying Gaza and starving its population - and for O'Brien, these are clear expressions of intent. 'We also see intent through patterns of conduct, including indiscriminate bombings, mass casualties, the destruction of healthcare and essential infrastructure, and the denial of humanitarian aid, all of which are acts listed under the Genocide Convention,' she said. This deliberate denial of essentials for life, including water and food, medicine, shelter, and healthcare, all pointed to genocidal intent. Iva Vukusic: Meets the criteria of genocide Iva Vukusic is an assistant professor in international history at Utrecht University in the Netherlands. She is a legal historian and has spent two decades working on investigations and prosecutions of international crimes, including war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide in the former Yugoslavia, particularly Bosnia. When does Vuvusic think the genocide began? 'For several months, I struggled with what I was seeing,' she told MEE. 'I discussed it with colleagues, unsure whether it was my place to speak definitively. I typically wait for judicial rulings - courts that review evidence independently. 'But I came to realise those processes will take years, and civilians are dying now, under bombs and from starvation. So I felt increasingly that what we are witnessing likely constitutes genocide.' How did Vuvusic reach her conclusion? For Vukusic, her conclusion is based on the pattern of attacks on civilian targets such as hospitals and schools, destruction of water facilities, and the systematic deprivation of basic needs. These actions have been accompanied by statements from Israeli officials indicating an intent to drive out the population of Gaza, she added. 'That combination, the violence itself and the expressed intent, meets the criteria of genocide in my view.' Omer Bartov: Making Gaza uninhabitable Omer Bartov is a professor of Holocaust and genocide studies at Brown University. He has been working and writing on war crimes, genocide, the Holocaust, and, most recently, Israel-Palestine, since the 1980s. He was born and raised in Israel, in what he described as 'a Zionist family', and served for four years in the Israeli army during the early 1970s. When does Bartov think the genocide began? Bartov says that Israel's war on Gaza passed the threshold of genocidal intent by May 2024. 'My view has become that the war goals that Israel declared -which were to destroy Hamas and to free the hostages, by the spring of 2024, turned out not to be the actual war goals,' he told MEE. 'The IDF was not actually trying to destroy Hamas and free the hostages. What it was trying to do was to make Gaza uninhabitable for its population.' How did Bartov reach his conclusion? Bartov cites evidence, including statements by Israeli leaders, as well as the 'pattern of operations that indicated both intent and the implementation of that intent'. He also believes that Israel's destruction of homes, educational buildings, hospitals, museums and places of worship fits the definition, since these are 'the places that could make for the existence of a group: for its health, for its education, for its collective memory'. The course of events after May 2024 has also reinforced Bartov's opinion that genocide was occurring, including the forcible removal of the population of northern Gaza to the south and starving whoever is left, as part of the controversial General's Plan. The total siege imposed in March 2025 and the food distribution system run by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation provided further evidence of genocidal intent. This was compounded, he said, by how the Israeli army then threatened the safe zones to which the civilians fled, before forcing them to leave again. 'The goal is to force a population through hunger, violence, forcible removal, to leave the Gaza Strip and to destroy it in a way that would make it impossible to ever reconstitute it as a place for Palestinians.' Amos Goldberg: Legally, it's genocide Amos Goldberg is an Israeli professor of Holocaust history at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He teaches Holocaust and genocide history. When does Goldberg think the genocide began? In April 2024, Goldberg concluded that Israel was committing genocide in an article that he wrote in Hebrew. 'At first, I supported self-defence, even some retaliation. But by 10 October, with mass aerial bombardment, I said: this is unjustified,' he told MEE in May 2025. 'Still, I hesitated to call it genocide. I thought it was a criminal overreaction. Because I didn't want to believe it. I wanted to believe that we were capable of many things, but not genocide.' How did he Goldberg his conclusion? For Goldberg, Israel is committing at least three of the underlying acts in the Genocide Convention: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; and deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part. He cited the killing of Palestinians, with the intent of destroying them as a group. 'Destruction doesn't have to be of every individual, it can be of a substantial part of the group,' he said, referencing the convention. 'Even if Israel says it does not intend to kill every Palestinian, legally, it's still genocide.' He also cited imposing conditions aimed at the total destruction of Palestinians in Gaza, including the destruction of homes, infrastructure and hospitals, and the deliberate starvation of civilians before and after the ceasefire. 'The Genocide Convention says creating conditions to destroy the group is an act of genocide - and that's happening. Yes, it is a genocide, a very cruel and heinous genocide.'
The National
4 hours ago
- The National
Iraq security deal with Iran sparks tension with US
A security agreement between Iran and Iraq has faced backlash from Washington, which for years has opposed Tehran's close ties with Baghdad. The deal comes as Ali Larijani, head of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, visited Iraq on Monday amid deep divisions in the country over a proposed law that would further formalise the role of the Popular Mobilisation Forces, a coalition composed mainly of pro-Iran paramilitary groups. Baghdad has been under pressure from Washington to rein in the Iranian-backed militias. 'We support genuine Iraqi sovereignty, not legislation that would turn Iraq into an Iranian satellite state,' US State Department spokesman Tammy Bruce said late on Tuesday. She added that Washington opposes any deal that is inconsistent with US goals and that would 'counter' its efforts to strengthen state institutions in Iraq. 'We've been clear, in this particular instance certainly and others, that the future of nations should be in the hands of the people of those nations,' she said. 'Our commitment here, as we've made clear, this particular dynamic runs counter to what our commitment has been regarding security in general." In response, Iran 's embassy in Baghdad described the comments made by Washington as "interfering remarks". The statements reflect 'ongoing efforts by American decision-makers to sow division among neighbouring and Muslim people", the embassy said in a statement published by Iranian media. The embassy also reaffirmed the 'shared determination' of Iran and Iraq to deepen relations based on mutual respect. Iraq's embassy in Washington said on Wednesday that Baghdad has the right to independently draw up agreements with any sides. Iraq 'has the right to enter into agreements in accordance with its constitution and national laws, in a manner consistent with its supreme interests", state news reported. The country is "not subordinate to the policies of any other state" and Baghdad's actions are based on its 'independent national will', the statement added. What is the deal about? The agreement signed on Monday aims to tighten border security co-operation between Iran and Iraq. A statement from the office of Iraq 's National Security Adviser, Qasim Al Araji, said he held talks with Mr Larijani on the implementation of the agreement, as well as Israel's war on Gaza. The office of Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia Al Sudani said in a statement that he oversaw the signing of the deal. The agreement is a continuation of a pact made in March 2023 to increase security in the Iraqi Kurdistan region, which Tehran accuses of harbouring armed opposition groups. Officials in Baghdad have said the agreement aims to curb cross-border infiltration by Kurdish groups that Iran says has caused unrest. "Iraq has a security protocol with the Islamic Republic of Iran, signed on March 19, 2023, known as the Joint Security Agreement on border security and the specific measures to neutralise the Iranian Kurdish opposition present in the Kurdistan Region," said a statement given to The National by Mr Al Sudani's office. "The coordination was carried out to convert this security protocol, or memorandum of understanding (MoU), to the same content regarding border security, security cooperation, and matters related to the Iranian Kurdish opposition and its five parties," said the statement. Iran suffered blows during a 12-day war with Israel in which the US also launched attacks on its major nuclear sites.
