Gaza civil defence says Israeli strikes kill 30
Civil defence spokesman Mahmud Bassal said the strikes were carried out overnight and into the morning and "targeted a number of citizens' homes" in the Nuseirat refugee camp.
The local Al-Awda hospital said it had received 30 bodies, including 14 women and 12 children.
At the weekend, under pressure from international opinion to head off the territory's slide into famine, Israel declared a series of "tactical pauses" which began on Sunday to allow aid deliveries.
According to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office, the pause in military operations covers "key populated areas" between 10am and 8pm local time every day.
Designated aid convoy routes will be secure from 6am to 11pm, Mr Netanyahu's office said.
Overnight, however, strikes continue.
COGAT, an Israeli defence ministry body in charge of civil affairs in the Palestinian territories, said that more than 200 truckloads of aid were distributed by the UN and aid agencies yesterday.
Another 260 trucks were permitted to cross into Gaza to deposit aid at collection points, four UN tankers brought in fuel and 20 pallets of aid were airdropped from Jordanian and Emirati planes, COGAT said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Examiner
2 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Slovenia introduces ban on imports from Israeli-occupied territories
Slovenia on Wednesday introduced a ban on imports of goods produced in Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories and approved an additional aid package for Palestinians in Gaza, the government said in a statement. "The government today banned the import of goods originating from settlements in the occupied territories, including a ban on circumventing the ban on these imports," the statement on the government website said. The statement did not specify whether the ban refers to all goods produced in the territories or just Israeli goods. The government also instructed the competent ministries to consider banning the export of goods from Slovenia intended for these Israeli-occupied settlements. "Israeli government's actions, including the construction of illegal settlements, expropriations, the forced displacement of the Palestinian population, the destruction of their serious and repeated violations of international humanitarian law," Prime Minister Robert Golob said in statement quoted by the STA news agency. "These actions not only threaten the lives and dignity of the Palestinian population, but also the foundations of the international order." The news agency said the volume of goods affected is extremely low at under €2,000 in 2023. Most of the international community considers the settlements illegal. The Israeli government deems settlements legal under its own laws, while some so-called "outposts" are illegal but often tolerated and sometimes later legalised. The government also said on Wednesday it would provide material assistance in the form of food and blankets, estimated to be worth up to 879,490 euros, to the Palestinians affected by the war between Israel and the militant group Hamas in Gaza. Slovenia recognised a Palestinian state in June last year, following Spain, Ireland and Norway. It last week imposed an embargo on exports, imports and the transit of arms to Israel, two weeks after it declared Israeli ministers persona non grata. Reuters
RTÉ News
4 hours ago
- RTÉ News
Will recognition of Palestine as a state make a real difference?
Analysis: The growing wave of recognition of Palestine marks a strategic turning point which could open new opportunities for Palestinian statehood The recent recognition of Palestine by France has attracted global attention and has subsequently influenced the stance of the UK, Canada and several EU member states. This follows the recognition of Palestine as a state by Ireland in May 2024. While most countries have welcomed these decisions, viewing them as important tools to pressure Israel to halt the genocide in Gaza, many pro-Palestinian groups see these acts of political recognition as merely symbolic and performative. The US and Israel oppose the recognition of Palestine, claiming it undermines rather than helps conflict resolution. Will this recent wave of recognition of Palestine make a real difference? From RTÉ Radio 1's This Week, will a promise by three G7 countries to recognise the State of Palestine change anything in Gaza? What does diplomatic recognition mean? Diplomatic recognition is seen as a double-edged phenomenon in world politics. It can lead to the birth or even the demise of a state. It can be the cause of both war and peace. It can be a source of justice, but it can also lead to discrimination and oppression. It can act as a constraint on expanding the state and international order, but it can also foster collective self-determination and liberation. In essence, it can reinforce existing state systems but also serve as an open space for normative change and emancipation. The recognition of a state is loosely regulated in international law, and it has been subject to many debates and controversies. There is no consensus on who is entitled to statehood and recognition, who is authorised to recognise states, how many and whether diplomatic recognition makes states. States do not have codified policies and often coat their political decisions with different normative and geopolitical justifications. Thus, recognition has always been and likely will continue to be a flexible political instrument: a bargaining chip for national interests, a retaliatory measure to discipline norm-breaking states, a symbol of shifting alliances, or, on the positive side, an empowering act to foster peace, justice, and address past injustices. 'A powerful tool in diplomacy' Yet diplomatic recognition has proven to be a powerful tool in diplomacy time and again. Opponents of Palestine recognition tend to minimise the significance of such acts, while supporters view it as insufficient to end the war, establish peace and achieve Palestinian statehood. But both are mistaken. Although recognition might be a performative speech act, it is not disconnected from the real world. It is a spoken and written declaration that creates new political realities and has tangible real-world consequences. Recognition acts as a foundation for diplomatic relations. It is a commitment that forms contractual ties, sets expectations, and has legal and political consequences, paving the way for other connections. Therefore, contrary to sceptics, Palestine's recognition by Ireland, Norway, and Spain last year, along with the recent announcements of recognition by France, the UK, Canada, and others carries legal, diplomatic, and moral significance. A stepping stone to full UN membership? For states such as Palestine, membership of the United Nations is far more than a mere badge of diplomatic prestige. It is a vital bulwark against the coercion and marginalisation that non-member territories so often endure. As a collective recognition of statehood, UN membership confers not only moral legitimacy but tangible legal protections. From RTÉ News, what does Ireland's formal recognition of the state of Palestine actually mean? By contrast, states locked out of the UN fold - barred not by choice, but by the vetoes and veto-wielding politics of more powerful capitals - find themselves condemned to limbo. They are cut off from essential UN agencies and trade networks, vulnerable to annexation and isolation and prey to the geopolitical whims of patron states. However, Palestine has been recognised bilaterally by more than 75% of UN member states. It warrants full UN membership on both normative and procedural grounds. Nonetheless, the US remains the main obstacle to full membership as it holds the veto power in recommending Palestine's admission to the UN General Assembly. Yet, due to extensive bilateral recognition, primarily from Muslim states and the Global South, Palestine has held non-member Permanent Observer status at the UN since 2012, granting it nearly full membership rights and access to UN bodies and agencies. Now that France and the UK are likely to formalise their announced recognition of Palestine, the US will be the only UN Security Council permanent member to block Palestine's UN membership. From RTÉ Radio 1's Morning Ireland, Eithne Dodd speaks to Palestinians in Ireland about the Government's formal recognition of a Palestinian state Recognition by France, the UK and other countries can be a game changer. It will lead to further isolation of Israel and make it harder for the US to continue supporting Israel's destructive policies unconditionally. It also indicates that European powers are capable of exercising their strategic autonomy from the US and are not merely vassals to the US grand strategy despite close transatlantic ties. The current wave of recognition may also have regional implications, where the EU might gradually distance itself from Israel in terms of trade, research, and security. Furthermore, the growing support for Palestine sparked by the Gaza genocide, coupled with the increasing diplomatic recognition of the State of Palestine, may create opportunities previously thought unattainable. There will be heightened global focus on Israel's occupation and violence against Palestinians, alongside increased backing for the realisation of a viable Palestinian state. But, it is unlikely to secure full UN membership unless the US changes its position. The increasing cost of independent statehood While states might have an inalienable right to self-determination, their recognition by other states is unfortunately not a given. While some states or entities might be lucky and receive diplomatic recognition without much struggle, it is a very painful, unpredictable and costly endeavour for many groups. From Bangladesh and Eritrea to Timor-Leste, Kosovo and South Sudan, newly formed and recognised states have achieved their statehood only after enduring genocide-like repression by the base state. The more states recognise Palestine, the more they become invested in supporting the realisation of Palestinian statehood Palestine is perhaps an extreme case of securing gradual diplomatic recognition as compensation for decades-long suffering and injustices. The more states recognise Palestine, the more they become invested in supporting the realisation of Palestinian statehood. The power of recognition is not merely symbolic, but it can preserve the hope for statehood for cases such as Palestine. It can reverse the occupation of Palestinian territories and serve as moral compensation for the collective failure to protect civilians. But as long as issues related to statehood and recognition remain unregulated and governed by arbitrary state practices, we are likely to witness more prolonged statehood conflicts and higher costs for diplomatic recognition.
The Journal
4 hours ago
- The Journal
World watches in horror and the IDF is sceptical, so will Netanyahu order full occupation?
ACCORDING TO MULTIPLE Israeli news sources, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is considering ordering a full military occupation of the Gaza Strip in Palestine. Israel has been waging war on the besieged territory since October 2023 and killed more than 60,000 people in the process, most of them women and children. Despite mounting global pressure on the Israeli government to reach a ceasefire agreement with Hamas, and the outrage provoked by images of starving children featured on the front pages of newspapers around the world, Netanyahu appears undeterred and is reportedly planning to escalate the assault on Gaza even further. So, what would the military occupation of Gaza look like? What has been decided? So far, Netanyahu has not officially ordered the military to fully occupy Gaza, but Israeli news outlets have reported his intention to do so, something that would appease the extremist members of his coalition government. It would also prolong the military operation in Gaza, and therefore the survival of his coalition and his premiership. However, he is being met with opposition from senior military officers, most notably the army's chief of staff Eyal Zamir, who yesterday presented alternatives to full military occupation. What would full military occupation look like? Gaza had already been under a complete blockade by Israel long before the Hamas-led attack of October 2023. After Hamas won an election there in 2006, Israel blockaded Gaza, restricting the movement of people and goods in and out of the territory. This amounted to a de facto occupation, but without Israeli troops being present inside the Gaza Strip. A full military occupation of Gaza would see Israeli soldiers posted throughout the territory, as they are in much of the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem, a part of Palestine that has been occupied since 1967. The International Court of Justice ruled last year that Israel's occupation is illegal under international law. It could also pave the way for the establishment of Israeli settlements (colonies) inside Gaza, which is the aim of far-right government members like Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and Interior Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir. The Israeli newspaper Haaretz has said that total occupation would take one or two years to achieve. For the people of Gaza, the specific results of a full military occupation are unclear, but Netanyahu has endorsed US President Donald Trump's proposal to 'clear out' the Palestinian population and turn the Strip into a 'Riviera of the Middle East'. Advertisement Aside from that extreme scenario, the evidence from Israel's decades-long occupation of the rest of Palestine shows that illegal settlements would likely be established and that the local population would face restrictions on movement, as well as the demolition of what's left of their homes. A side from the question of total occupation, widening of the war 'would risk catastrophic consequences for millions of Palestinians and could further endanger the lives of the remaining hostages in Gaza,' Miroslav Jenca, UN assistant secretary-general for Europe, Central Asia and the Americas, told a Security Council meeting. 'There is no military solution to the conflict in Gaza or the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict,' Jenca said. Are Israelis on board? While the far-right elements of the coalition government have consistently voiced their wish to completely occupy Gaza, senior Israeli military officials are reportedly opposed to it. They fear it would further endager the remaining Israeli hostages and that it would strain military resources, which are already under severe pressure. Netanyahu held a three-hour meeting with security chiefs yesterday to discuss options for the continuation of the war, his office said in a statement. At the meeting, chief of staff Zamir warned that a full occupation would be like 'walking into a trap,' according to public broadcaster KAN. The army chief suggested alternatives to a full occupation, such as an encirclement of specific areas where Hamas is believed to be hunkering down, according to the Channel 12 broadcaster. But Defence Minister Israel Katz hit back with a clear message that served as evidence of the divided opinion in yesterday's meeting. 'It is the right and duty of the Chief of Staff to express his position in the appropriate forums,' he wrote on X. 'But once decisions are made by the political echelon, the IDF will execute them with determination and professionalism… until the objectives of the war are achieved,' he added, using an acronym for the Israeli military. Haaretz reported today that many of the Israeli soldiers who have fought in Gaza are burnt out, and that a full occupation would require the call-up of more reservists. 'At a time when the number of reservists showing up for duty has fallen steeply, as has conscript soldiers' motivation, the army could struggle finding the troops needed for a full occupation,' the newspaper reported. With reporting from AFP Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone... Our Explainer articles bring context and explanations in plain language to help make sense of complex issues. We're asking readers like you to support us so we can continue to provide helpful context to everyone, regardless of their ability to pay. Learn More Support The Journal
