Syria sends forces to end violence between Bedouin and Druze militias
Syria's president says forces have been sent to end fighting in southern Suwayda, where hundreds of people have been killed.
On Wednesday, Israel attacked targets in central Damascus and Suwayda, claiming the strikes were carried out to protect the Druze population.
Today, members of the Druze community in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights again, briefly crossed into Syrian territory.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Activists are right to target Edinburgh Festival sponsorship
There's a lot there I disagree with, but there's one point on which I find myself in accord with Ms McDermid. 'There is no such thing as a clean sponsor,' she says. 'If you dig deep, everybody who sponsors an arts event has got something in the cupboard that you would be uncomfortable with.' Read more Which surely cuts to the very heart of the matter and, I believe, undercuts Ms McDermid's argument. Because if there are no clean sponsors in the world of arts funding then surely you have a prima facie case proving that none of them – not 'unfairly pilloried' Baillie Gifford, not BP, not the Sackler family nor any of those other deep-pocketed corporate backers of the arts – was ever in it for reasons of genuine altruism but instead for reasons of cynicism and opportunism. To hedge against reputational damage. To indulge in what these days we call art-washing. Or, in the words of Chris Garrard, director of the campaign group Culture Unstained, to 'attempt to access high-level decision makers, to secure the public backing of leading cultural figures and to craft a positive public image.' Of course nobody wants to be in a position where all arts are state-funded (dream on, anyway: given the state of the nation's finances it's an entirely theoretical position). But just because there are no clean current sponsors of the arts does not mean there is no potential for them, no clean companies or wealthy individuals willing to front up cash in return for something as relatively benign as publicity or recognition. You just have to find them. Arts sponsorship is transactional, but nobody is asking you to sell your soul at the crossroads. All they do ask is for due diligence to be applied at the outset and, as societal attitudes shift and geo-politics intrude, for a little common sense to be brought to bear. As an author, Ms McDermid engages with and explores moral complexity because that's what good authors do. Things aren't black and white, she is saying, so underpinning her comments is an associated belief in nuance. Back in August 2023, the bone of contention centred mainly on Baillie Gifford's involvement in the fossil fuel industry and the wider impact on the ongoing climate emergency. People applied nuance to that and often concluded things weren't as simple as they looked to the protestors. A Palestinian woman mourns as she embraces the body of her daughter who was killed in an Israeli army strike on Gaza. at Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City in June. (AP Photo/Jehad Alshrafi) (Image: Jehad Alshrafi) But since then the issue of Gaza and Palestine, and of Israeli's response to the Hamas attacks of October 2023, has joined the climate emergency at the battlefront and become an area of great concern for many who work in the cultural sector. And just as nature abhors a vacuum, so do many in 2025 now naturally abjure nuance as a result. Why? Because nuance cannot be found in images of emaciated Palestinian children being starved of food. Because it's likewise hard to catch as you view satellite images of the post-apocalyptic wasteland Israeli bombers and American-made bombs have left behind in Gaza. Because today the climate emergency increasingly must be seen in terms of black and white. How else can activists and protestors critique the woolly 'adaptation' and 'resilience' mantras peddled by do-little (or do-nothing) governments? How else can they attack the actions of the rent-seeking corporates who still seek mid-term advantage in fossil fuels or, yes, the private equity firms which take short-term advantage from the same and return sizeable profits to their clients? Nuance be damned, I say, and I congratulate those artists, musicians, writers and other performers who say: enough is enough. Who say: sorry, not coming this year. Who blow the whistle and yell: everybody out. Ironically, this is also the week in which even the University of Edinburgh – let's have that again for emphasis: even the University of Edinburgh – has announced that among other acts of reparation it will investigate divesting from companies which may contribute to human rights violations in Gaza and the Occupied West Bank. The UN has found the university to be one of the UK's most 'financially entangled institutions' in that regard, with over £25 million invested in four companies central to Israel's 'surveillance apparatus and the ongoing Gaza destruction.' The 200 or so pro-Palestine protestors who disrupted 24 graduation ceremonies this summer will be applauding. Less so those who criticised and derided those same students for their actions. Read more Moving on, the Baillie Gifford case appears settled. But as the digital archaeologists, hacktivists and activists sift through social media posts, company accounts and financial documents, there are many sets of cross-hairs alighting on many more targets and the effects could be felt among the UK's arts organisations and arts bodies. Watch out for mention of Sequoia Capital in the months ahead. They recently invested $100 million in UK-based art-house movie streaming platform and film distributor MUBI, but they also have investments in Israeli defence-tech start-up Kela which is developing AI-enhanced battlefield systems. Last week, Chile's Valdivia Film Festival announced it was refusing to show films managed by MUBI as a consequence. Will there be more such actions? It doesn't seem unlikely. And while you may never have heard of US-based private equity firm Kohlberg Kravis Roberts (KKR) or even of Superstruct Entertainment, the company it bought in 2020, you will have heard of some of the 80 music festivals Superstruct Entertainment owns. Among them are UK festivals Field Day and The Mighty Hoopla, live streaming platform Boiler Room, and Barcelona's massive and massively prestigious electronic music festival, Sónar. Not so big this year, though: 70 acts pulled out of the June event in protest at KKR's Israeli military contracts and its links to manufacturers of weapons and surveillance technology. I look at all this and I don't see virtual signalling or hypocrisy or bandwagon jumping. I see artists doing what they should be doing and what our politicians are not: displaying moral courage, often in the face of criticism and (just as often) their own financial self-interest. Will it affect anything? Maybe not. But change starts with uncomfortable questions being asked, and for that you need 360 degree scrutiny. If action follows, so be it. Barry Didcock is a Herald arts writer
STV News
an hour ago
- STV News
What would UK recognition of Palestine mean for crisis in Gaza?
However things unfold over the next month, what we witnessed yesterday was a moment of history. Keir Starmer's announcement that the UK is prepared to recognise an independent state of Palestine at the UN General Assembly meeting in September has been awaited, at least by some in the region, for decades. That's how long the idea of a two-state solution to the conflict at the heart of the Middle East has been in circulation. Lately, though, the term has felt hollow and lopsided. There aren't two states at the negotiating table. When the Middle East peace process felt vibrant and hopeful, there were at least the makings of a Palestinian state. But peace is now a distant memory, and Gaza is in ruins, and starving. So the Prime Minister's statement may have been symbolic, but it was still significant. There are now two members of the UN Security Council prepared to recognise Palestine – with the UK joining France in stating its intentions. As the former colonial power in the region, and the closest ally of the United States to do so, the UK's statement carries the greatest weight. It's striking that Starmer chose to call his emergency cabinet meeting and make that statement, a day after meeting US President Donald Trump in Scotland. The US does not want its allies recognising Palestine – indeed, Trump pulled his negotiators out of ceasefire talks just days ago, saying Hamas doesn't want a deal. But there has been a diplomatic and political shift taking place, as distressing images of starving children have emerged from Gaza, and warnings from aid agencies have grown about a looming, deadly famine. The fact that Trump was willing to publicly disagree with America's ally, Israel, on the steps of his Turnberry golf resort, in front of the world's TV cameras, and say that children were going hungry in Gaza, showed just how far global opinion has shifted. The UK Government now sees an opening to use recognition of Palestinian statehood as leverage, with Israel, but primarily with the US. Even before the threat of recognition was confirmed, the Israeli Government had begun loosening its grip on the flow of aid into Gaza. Under American pressure, the hope is that more aid will be allowed through – but according to aid agencies, it will have to be much more, to avoid a humanitarian catastrophe. At the same time, it's also true that yesterday's announcement was about domestic politics. A third of MPs have signed a letter demanding recognition of Palestinian statehood, most of them Labour MPs. Privately, a number of cabinet ministers are reported to agree. The Prime Minister couldn't ignore that pressure forever. The SNP and Liberal Democrats argue that Palestinian statehood shouldn't be used as a bargaining chip; on the other side of the debate, the Conservatives and Reform agree with the Israeli Government that the announcement is a reward for Hamas and an incentive to hang on to the remaining Israeli hostages. For Starmer's announcement to not just be symbolic – for it to be a return to a peace process in the Middle East, and the start of a two-state solution – a great deal else will have to happen. The Prime Minister set conditions for both sides for British recognition of a Palestinian state to happen, that neither will be happy to agree to: abandoning claims on West Bank land for the Israelis; for Hamas, disarmament and its effective disbanding. From where things stand now, those demands don't seem realistic. Ultimately, the decision over how this conflict unfolds, and whether it ends, rests with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Increasingly, world powers are coming to the conclusion that recognition of Palestine is the only way to get his attention. Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country
South Wales Guardian
an hour ago
- South Wales Guardian
Freed hostage Emily Damari accuses Starmer of being on wrong side of history
Emily Damari accused the Prime Minister of 'moral failure' over the move. Sir Keir announced on Tuesday that the UK could take the step of recognising statehood in September, ahead of a major UN gathering. The UK will refrain from doing so only if Israel allows more aid into Gaza, stops annexing land in the West Bank, agrees to a ceasefire, and signs up to a long-term peace process over the next two months. The move has been criticised by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who claimed it 'rewards Hamas's monstrous terrorism'. Ms Damari, who was released from Hamas captivity in January, said in a post on Instagram on Wednesday: 'Prime Minister Starmer is not standing on the right side of history. Had he been in power during World War II, would he have advocated recognition for Nazi control of occupied countries like Holland, France or Poland? 'This is not diplomacy — it is a moral failure. Shame on you, Prime Minister. 'As a dual British-Israeli citizen who survived 471 days in Hamas captivity, I am deeply saddened by Prime Minister Starmer's decision to recognise Palestinian statehood. This move does not advance peace — it risks rewarding terror. It sends a dangerous message: that violence earns legitimacy. 'By legitimising a state entity while Hamas still controls Gaza and continues its campaign of terror, the Prime Minister is not promoting a solution; he is prolonging the conflict. Recognition under these conditions emboldens extremists and undermines any hope for genuine peace. Shame on you!!!' In a statement from Downing Street on Tuesday after an urgent Cabinet meeting on Gaza, Sir Keir said the UK's 'message to the terrorists of Hamas is unchanged but unequivocal: they must immediately release all of the hostages, sign up to a ceasefire, disarm, and accept that they will play no part in the government of Gaza'.
