The Guardian view on Israel's aid blockade of Gaza: hunger as a weapon of war
S hameful. That was the word that Gideon Sa'ar, Israel's foreign minister, used to describe proceedings at the international court of justice (ICJ) last Monday. The United Nations asked the court to determine whether Israel must allow aid to enter Gaza, two months after it cut it off again just before the ceasefire deal collapsed. Supplies are running out. Unicef says that thousands of children have already experienced acute malnutrition.
Mr Sa'ar's complaint is that Israel is unfairly targeted. The separate international criminal court case against Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister, and Yoav Gallant, the former defence minister, also focuses on the alleged starvation of civilians. It is true that withholding food is a common weapon in war, yet has rarely been the focus of international legal cases, in part because intent is hard to prove. It is the rhetoric of Israeli officials, suggests Dr Boyd van Dijk, an expert on the Geneva conventions, which has changed that.
Last summer, Bezalel Smotrich, the far-right finance minister, remarked that it might be 'justified and moral' to starve people if it brought home Israeli hostages seized in the Hamas atrocities of 7 October 2023, but that 'no one in the world will allow us'. Israel's defence minister, Israel Katz, said last month that its 'policy is clear: no humanitarian aid will enter Gaza'. The far-right national security minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir, insisted that 'there is no reason for a single gram of food or any aid to enter' until hostages were freed. An aid ship destined for Gaza was attacked by drones and disabled on Friday. More than 52,000 people, mostly civilians, have been killed in Gaza since the war began, according to its health authorities. Unicef says they include 15,000 children, with hundreds of deaths since the new Israeli offensive began in March. But withholding food kills just as bombs do. Farmland is devastated. Flour is said to cost 30 times more than before the war. Aid warehouses are empty. UN World Food Programme bakeries closed a month ago when supplies ran out; essential community kitchens are now following.
Israeli officials have said they need to stop Hamas getting their hands on aid. It's obvious that men with guns will secure food long after others have starved. Donald Trump says that he has told Mr Netanyahu to allow aid in. Yet the US told the ICJ that Israel's security needs override its obligation to do so. The strong legal consensus is that occupying powers have an absolute duty under the Geneva conventions to permit food to be given to a population in need.
Israel is reportedly planning to resume aid delivery 'in the coming weeks', but via a radically new mechanism. It claims the UN agency for Palestinian refugees, essential to humanitarian efforts, has been mass-infiltrated by Hamas – an allegation strongly disputed by the UN and others. The proposed alternative, of international organisations and private security contractors handing out food to individual families, looks both unworkable and dangerous for civilians.
As Israel and the US attack international courts, other nations – including the UK – must do all they can to defend and bolster them. They must also press harder for the immediate resumption of aid. What is shameful about this ICJ case is the need to bring it. What is shameful is that almost half the children in Gaza questioned in a study said that they wished to die. What is shameful is that so many civilians have been killed, and so many more pushed to the brink of starvation. What is shameful is that this has, indeed, been allowed to happen.
Read More Credit hire boom powers firm's 62% profit surge
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
33 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Providence's new flag policy isn't just about flags. It's about who gets to be seen, and who is silenced.
Get Rhode Map A weekday briefing from veteran Rhode Island reporters, focused on the things that matter most in the Ocean State. Enter Email Sign Up One major problem with the new flag policy is inconsistency. There was no need for special approvals before. Why now? Advertisement Second, the policy gives too much power to a few. It lets either the mayor or the Providence City Council decide who gets to be represented. This is dangerous because it makes public visibility subject to the comfort of a few officials rather than any clear or fair process. Third, this move discredits the real message behind raising the Palestinian flag: solidarity with people experiencing deep suffering. feels bad to those of us who are part of the Muslim and Arab community. It feels like we are being told our pain is too controversial to acknowledge. Advertisement This incident isn't isolated. It reflects a broader pattern known as the 'Palestine Exception' to free speech, where advocacy for Palestinian rights is often met with disproportionate censorship and suppression. A report by So what should happen now? Either the city allows all communities to be represented through flag-raising, or it stops the practice altogether. There's no middle ground that's fair. The policy must apply equally and without favoritism or fear. If Providence wants to stand for diversity, it must stand for all of us, not just the ones who make people comfortable. If the city is serious about equity, it needs to show it — not just say it. Khaled Soulaiman is a first-generation Syrian Lebanese Muslim and a student at College Unbound in Providence.
CNN
33 minutes ago
- CNN
Trade war: China isn't getting rid of its controls over rare earths, despite 90-day truce with US
Despite a 90-day truce in its trade war with the United States, China appears to be maintaining tight control over its rare earth exports – preserving a key source of leverage in future negotiations amid intensifying strategic rivalry with Washington. As part of last week's trade agreement in Geneva to temporarily roll back tariffs, China pledged to suspend or remove the 'non-tariff' countermeasures it imposed on the US since April 2. That has left businesses scrambling to find out whether that promise applies to China's export controls on seven rare earth minerals and associated products, which were imposed on April 4 as part of its retaliation against US President Donald Trump's 'reciprocal' tariffs on Chinese goods. Magnets made of these heavy rare earth elements are an essential part of everything from iPhones and electric vehicles to big-ticket weapons like F-35 fighter jets and missile systems. Yet their supply is completely dominated by China. Fresh off the plane from the trade talks in Geneva last week, US trade representative Jamieson Greer sought to ease concerns surrounding this potential vulnerability. In a Fox News interview, he answered affirmatively when asked whether China had agreed to lift its export restrictions on rare earths as part of the truce. 'Yep, the Chinese have agreed to remove those countermeasures,' Greer said. 'If they don't do those things, we're going to be back in a different situation. But I expect they'll remove them.' However, there's little sign to suggest China is removing its newly imposed rare earth export control regime. If anything, according to experts and industry insiders, Chinese authorities appear to be strengthening implementation and ramping up oversight. The system, introduced in April, does not ban exports outright, but requires government approval for each shipment. That had caused weeks long holdups as companies navigated the new regime, fueling fears among a wide range of American industries from automobile to defense. 'I would not be shocked to find that Mr Greer is expressing what he hopes will happen versus what has actually been negotiated to happen,' said Jon Hykawy, president of the Toronto-based industry advisory firm Stormcrow Capital. 'These controls are intended … to ensure that China does not run short of some materials that are needed for domestic Chinese priorities,' said Hykawy. Gracelin Baskaran, director of the Critical Minerals Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), said China's export licensing regime is 'here to stay' and 'may stay for a long time,' allowing Beijing to retain its leverage in future trade talks with the US. If the US were to turn around and renege on their tariff policy, China can easily withhold the required licenses, she said, adding that the licensing policy is dynamic by design, giving Beijing the power to decide which companies or countries can access its rare earth minerals and magnets at any given time. Following the Geneva talks, China's Commerce Ministry removed 28 US firms from its dual-use export control list and pulled 17 American companies from another trade and investment backlist. But the ministry made no mention of any changes to the exports control on rare earth minerals and magnets. A spokesperson for the ministry said she had 'no information to share' on whether China is lifting the export controls at a regular news conference last Friday. Instead, Chinese authorities launched a crackdown on the smuggling of critical minerals – a broader category of resources that include rare earth elements. On May 12, the day US and China announced the tariff cuts, Chinese export regulators convened a meeting with authorities from multiple mineral-rich provinces with the aim to 'prevent the illegal outflow of strategic minerals' and 'strengthen oversight across every link of the production and supply chain.' On the same day, Yuyuan Tantian, a social media account affiliated with state broadcaster CCTV, said in a post that 'China's rare earth export controls are continuing.' Meanwhile, after weeks of delay, China has started to issue export permits for rare earth magnets – a development that experts say shows the new licensing system is up and running, rather than restrictions being eased. Two Chinese rare earth magnet producers told CNN they had recently received licenses for exporting products containing dysprosium and terbium – elements that are often added to create more heat resistance in high-performance magnets commonly used in the automobile, aerospace and military industries. The approvals are granted under a 'one batch, one license' rule, meaning a new permit is required for each shipment and cannot be reused, according to the companies. One of the companies received its first export license for a shipment heading to Southeast Asia. It has since been granted several other licenses for exports to Europe, including the carmaker Volkswagen in Germany. 'We haven't received any indications about the (export control) system easing up,' a person close to the company told CNN. Volkswagen said in a statement that its suppliers have received indications that 'a limited number of export licenses have been granted.' Baskaran, from CSIS, said that instead of lifting the export controls on rare earths, China removed 28 American firms from its export control list. That means those companies, mostly aerospace and defense firms, are no longer banned from accessing dual-use materials from China, and their Chinese suppliers can now apply for export licenses for rare earth magnets. But it remains to be seen whether Beijing will ultimately give out licenses to American defense firms. China's rare earth export controls were 'specifically designed to hit the US defense industry, and I cannot envision China stepping back from that,' said Thomas Kruemmer, director of the Singapore-based mineral and metal supply chain firm Ginger International Trade and Investment. Under the new rules, exporters must include information about end-users in their applications, which take up to 45 working days to be approved. 'I am sure that in case of defense contractors, the Chinese Commerce Ministry will raise pesky questions, which the Americans may be unwilling to answer or may need Pentagon permission to answer,' Kruemmer said. 'This way they can conveniently delay the issuance of dual-use product export licenses beyond the self-set 45-day deadline, perhaps even beyond this 90-day (truce) window. And it still has the option to reject the license applications anyway.' The licensing rules can also offer China visibility into where the rare earth magnets end up. 'You can still get the material, but you have to fill out paperwork, describe to China who the end user is. You're going to give all this information and then (China) can see inside your downstream customer base and use and look for further vulnerability,' said James Kennedy, president of Three Consulting, a rare earths consultancy based in St Louis, Missouri. 'So it's very smart. They get a looking glass into what you're doing.' For decades, the US and other countries have been dependent on China's supply of rare earth minerals, which are difficult, costly and environmentally polluting to extract and process. China accounts for 61% of global mined rare earth production, but its control over the processing stage is much higher at 92% of the global output, according to the International Energy Agency. The April export controls are far from the first time Beijing has leveraged its dominance in the industry. In 2010, China halted shipments of rare earths to Japan for nearly two months over a territorial dispute. In late 2023, it imposed a ban on rare earth extraction and separation technologies. Beijing has also curbed exports of other critical minerals that are vital to the economy and global supply chains – including outright bans on the shipments of gallium, germanium, antimony and so-called superhard materials to the US. 'China's control over rare earths, cobalt, gallium and all these critical materials is a geopolitical weapon of never-before measured and seen effect,' Kennedy said. 'And at the end of the day, what this does is, it creates a lot of uncertainty. And that in itself is a powerful weapon.' Baskaran said that by granting some of its first export licenses of rare earth magnets to Volkswagen, China is sending a pointed geopolitical message. 'Germany is at the height of geopolitical crossfire. The US is unhappy that Germany has been overtly quite friendly with China. So, by giving it one of the first licenses, China is sending a very positive signal in the Chinese-German relationship,' she said. 'In this era of rising tension between the world's two geopolitical superpowers, the licensing system may stay as a larger form of power.' CNN's Joyce Jiang contributed reporting.
Los Angeles Times
41 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Being Jewish on campus amid Trump's campaign against antisemitism: ‘tremendous heartache'
Protesters were chanting slogans Alyssa Wallack had never heard at USC, shouting so loudly that she thought demonstrators were inside the lecture hall where she was attending class. 'Globalize the intifada!' she recalled hearing. 'From the river to the sea...,' they yelled. It was Oct. 17, 2023 — 10 days after Hamas launched a terrorist attack against Israel that killed about 1,200 people and took hundreds as hostages. Wallack, who is Jewish, said she had to 'escape.' 'I freaked out, and I ran out of class and started sobbing,' said Wallack, 23, who served as student board president of USC Chabad. 'It felt like everyone was against me, which I know is not so accurate. But I just remember sitting in my class, not able to learn. ...Were some of the people who I thought were my friends part of these protests, chanting things that were not only offensive but also antisemitic?' In the months ahead, Wallack said, she didn't feel safe on campus. She wasn't alone. Other Jewish students at the University of Southern California said that after the Hamas attack — and the war it triggered — they, too, felt unsafe amid pro-Palestinian protests. At UCLA, where a large encampment sparked a violent confrontation that led to dozens of arrests, Jewish students expressed similar sentiments. As the academic year draws to a close — USC's commencement was last month, UCLA's is in mid-June — The Times interviewed 12 Jewish students and professors at the universities who reflected on their campus experiences since Oct. 7. They wrestled with two questions: Did you feel safer this school year? And did Donald Trump's campaign against antisemitism have anything to do with it? The complexity of their answers was, for some, rooted in Trump's aggressive move in a Jan. 29 executive order 'to combat the explosion of antisemitism on our campuses' and 'investigate and punish anti-Jewish racism in leftist, anti-American colleges and universities.' His actions — coming amid a surge in violence targeting American Jews, from Colorado to Washington D.C. — have included attempts to deport college students who've espoused pro-Palestinian views. Trump's offensive — aimed at mainly elite universities, which he claims have enabled antisemitism — has roiled academia, with billions of dollars of federal funds threatened or withheld. USC and UCLA are among the schools under investigation by a Department of Justice 'task force to combat antisemitism.' Yet, some students and professors said Trump is using antisemitism as a cudgel to achieve his political objectives and exert his influence over higher education. A few doubted the president's sincerity and questioned whether his tactics would, in the long run, leave American Jews better off. David N. Myers, a professor of Jewish history at UCLA, said that slashing federal funding for universities because of their response to campus antisemitism points to the 'very cynical and completely misguided nature of this campaign.' 'It's not about antisemitism,' he said. 'It's about enfeebling and dismantling the university, in which Jews actually have a very huge stake. ...I think many, many, many people or groups will suffer, including Jews.' Following the start of pro-Palestinian demonstrations last year, both USC and the University of California implemented new, stricter protest rules or began enforcing existing ones, such as their bans on encampments. At UCLA, protesters cannot wear masks or block paths, and demonstration areas are restricted. USC, a private university, has closed campus gates and requires identification to enter. A relatively calm academic year at UCLA and USC followed. Yet jarring recollections endure. UCLA junior Gal Cohavy, 20, recalled two encounters last spring: One friend was physically threatened, and another struck in the head with a water bottle. Other actions were, he said, alarming: 'Walking around campus with a kippah on, I saw a swastika.' Cohavy began carrying pepper spray. Many Jews have taken issue with Israel's war in Gaza and the country's treatment of Palestinians, and protested the Jewish state's actions alongside like-minded activists. Some have also spoken out against Islamophobia, and pointed out that Trump has taken no action in response to reported increases in anti-Muslim harassment or discrimination. Myers said he didn't feel unsafe last year — what he felt was uncomfortable. That's because he believed it was necessary to condemn both the Oct. 7 attack and 'the excess of Israel's response in Gaza.' 'There is a distinct feeling for me of not fitting into either of the two most prominent camps,' he said. 'I felt some sense of aloneness.' Asked if he still felt that way, Myers paused. 'Yeah, to some extent.' Nearly all of the Jewish people interviewed for this story expressed pro-Israel views, to varying degrees. Although most said they felt safer this year, nearly every discussion was laced with caveats — a reflection, perhaps, of how personal the issue has become. And traumatic. 'It wasn't just unsafe — it was traumatizing,' said USC professor Hagit Arieli-Chai, who teaches modern Hebrew. Encountering protesters and their anti-Israel signs and slogans last spring, she said, forced her to confront 'hatred ... in unequivocal ways.' Arieli-Chai, who said one of her cousins was killed in the Oct. 7 attack, tried to avoid campus, going there only to teach. Some said they attributed an improved sense of campus safety to tightened university protest polices, or other factors — and not Trump. Others praised the president. And yet another group said it's hard to pinpoint reasons. 'It strikes me as a false claim to knowledge for anyone other than a trained sociologist who's done a serious survey ... to say it's because of' one factor or another, said David Nimmer, a professor from practice at UCLA School of Law. Some who credited Trump for an improved campus climate expressed a sense of discomfort, worrying about billions of dollars in potential funding cuts across higher education and an illiberal stifling of speech, among other issues. 'I am not the slightest supporter of the Trump administration,' said Nimmer. But, 'to the extent that anyone comes in and diminishes ... antisemitism, that is a step in the right direction.' A few questioned the sincerity of Trump's support of the Jewish people. 'Now we're being used to justify, I would say, frankly, illegal actions [in] the case of the administration,' said Dylan Julia Cooper, 22, who graduated from USC in May. 'We are being used for his own goal of ... taking out anybody who disagrees with him.' Yoav Gillath, 22, who also just graduated from USC, said he 'wanted to believe' that the president's goal was fighting antisemitism — but wasn't sure how to interpret the administration's actions. 'I wish they were more transparent with exactly why they're making the decisions that they are about various universities,' said Gillath, 22. UCLA senior Bella Brannon said she is troubled by Trump administration funding cuts to 'life-saving research.' But she said, overall, 'Jewish students are happy to see some sort of action taken.' 'For far too long, nobody was even upholding the rules and policies that were in place — not to mention the law,' she said of universities' response to antisemitism. 'It's absolutely no surprise that the government is taking action.' One word came up in several interviews: 'angst.' 'I have a tremendous amount of angst every day,' Nimmer said. 'I am ... someone who is devoted to democracy. And yet I feel that the duly elected leader in the United States and the duly elected leader in Israel are both tearing down the very structures on which the countries are founded. And it's causing me tremendous heartache every day.' The mix of dread and relief reflected in some comments also appeared in the nonpartisan American Jewish Committee's recent open letter that praised a federal task force on antisemitism but warned about the effect of deep cuts at universities. 'We are concerned that ... lifesaving scientific research and other critical fields that have little connection to the areas where antisemitism has manifested may be harmed by arbitrary, across the board cuts to grants and research contracts,' the letter said. Last spring, Westwood was suffused with rage. The encampment erected by pro-Palestinian activists became a global news story in May after a melee instigated by pro-Israel counterdemonstrators erupted. UCLA's inability to stop it sparked intense criticism. The violence, among the university's darkest chapters, brought change. Those interviewed noted a turning point: Julio Frenk — whose German Jewish father fled Nazi Germany in the 1930s — becoming chancellor on Jan. 1. The university has also overhauled security and hired LAPD veteran Steve Lurie to lead the new Office of Campus Safety. Noting the 'pain and fear' that antisemitism had brought on campus, Frenk said, 'UCLA is unwavering in its commitment to building a campus community in which Jewish students — and all members of our community — feel safe, respected and welcome.' Senior Mia Toubian, 20, who is news editor of Ha'Am, UCLA's student-run Jewish newsmagazine, praised Frenk for banning Students for Justice in Palestine as a campus organization in March following a protest the group held in front of a UC regent's house that was vandalized. 'It's gotten a little bit better,' said Toubian, 20, who added that she feels 'relatively' safer now, but 'objectively still not completely safe.' Brannon, the magazine's editor in chief, recalled how she was followed home after covering a protest last spring. 'I got really, really scared,' she said. Once, she was spat at while walking to class. But Brannon, 22, feels less safe now. That's partly because, she said, the 'fringe of the fringe' have continued to demonstrate with few repercussions. She noted a recent incident that illustrated how — even with UCLA's tighter rules — ruptures still occur. In March, pro-Palestinian demonstrators blocked access to a campus building, draping it with a banner that equated UCLA police and the Israeli military with the Ku Klux Klan. They evaded law enforcement. 'I'm worried that without sanction, it is getting more unsafe for Jewish students,' Brannon said. Lurie said that when police approached the building to arrest those blocking the entrance, they 'ran and kind of scattered.' The protesters' faces were covered, he said, making it impossible to identify them via recordings. But some at UCLA said the changes have been dramatic — for the better. Sharon Nazarian, founder of the Younes & Soraya Nazarian Center for Israel Studies at UCLA, noted a peaceful UCLA Hillel vigil and walk through campus to mark the first anniversary of the Hamas attack would have been 'unfathomable the previous academic year.' 'That,' she said, 'is a sea change for me.' A few USC students praised university leadership for protecting Jewish students. Ben Sheyman, 22, grew up in San Francisco, but his life as a Jew was partly shaped by his immigrant parents' experience in their home countries: Ukraine and Belarus — places where Jews were persecuted. When his family came to the U.S., it was supposed to be different. 'Here, you are as American as anybody else,' said Sheyman, who graduated this spring. But walking to class in the 2023-24 school year, Sheyman would see signs with slogans like 'End Zionism.' It was, he said, 'really unsettling.' Still, Sheyman felt unsafe just once, when a crowd of masked protesters held items emblazoned with 'Nazi symbols,' he said. The tighter security changed things for the better, he said. Cooper also felt safer in recent months, but related an upsetting run-in. She wears a Star of David necklace, and once, in the months after the Oct. 7 attack, a passerby hurled an extremely offensive Jewish slur at her as she walked near campus. She praised administrators' decision to close the campus gates, even if she has some reservations. 'Whether it's politically correct or not, I do feel safer,' she said. USC said in a statement that it 'continues to publicly and unequivocally denounce antisemitism in all its forms and has taken strong actions to protect all of our students ... from illegal discrimination of any kind.' It also touted the 'enhanced security protocols' and the launch of new mandatory seminars 'devoted specifically to free expression and civic discourse.' For some at USC, though, the fractures in their lives — the loss of friendships, the alienation from peers or professors — linger. People like Wallack. Her time at USC after the Oct. 7 attack was discombobulating. She left her sorority because she felt it did not voice sufficient support for Israel, and moved home. 'I don't really feel like I found my people at USC as a result of Oct. 7,' she said. Sitting in the shade at the USC Village in early May, Wallack touched her Star of David necklace and explained that she would not attend graduation ceremonies. Instead, Wallack departed for Israel. A business fellowship awaited.
