A Flawed Attempt at Delivering Gaza Aid Led to a Wave of Deaths
Israeli army officers and American military contractors looked on from their joint operations center late last month with concern. A new attempt to hand out food and other aid to thousands of hungry people in Gaza had just launched, and it was about to be overwhelmed.
A crowd surged through the newly constructed gates at the site in Rafah. Chaos and looting quickly followed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Israel set to deport eight activists, including French MEP, over Gaza boat
JERUSALEM (Reuters) -Eight pro-Palestinian activists including a French member of the European Parliament will soon be forcibly deported from Israel, three days after the Israeli navy prevented them from sailing into Gaza, their legal advisers said on Thursday. Four other members of the 12-strong crew aboard the charity vessel, including Swedish campaigner Greta Thunberg, agreed to leave Israel voluntarily on Tuesday, hours after the navy had brought them ashore. The other eight crew refused to leave, accusing Israel of acting illegally, and have been held in a detention centre while an Israeli court reviewed their legal status. However, Israeli rights group Adalah, which has provided the activists with legal assistance, said the group had lost their battle against repatriation. French MEP Rima Hassan and five other activists have been taken to Tel Aviv airport and will be flown out of the country in the next 24 hours, Adalah said in a statement. The remaining two crew members will be expelled on Friday afternoon. "Their continued detention and forced deportation are unlawful and a part of Israel's ongoing violations of international law," Adalah said in a statement. There was no immediate confirmation from Israel which earlier this week dismissed the Gaza-bound sea mission as a pro-Hamas publicity stunt. "Greta and her friends brought in a tiny amount of aid on their celebrity yacht. It did not help the people of Gaza. This was nothing but a ridiculous gimmick," Foreign Minister Gideon Saar told reporters on Tuesday. Israel has imposed a naval blockade on Gaza since Hamas took control of the coastal enclave in 2007. It tightened its grip significantly after Hamas-led militants rampaged through southern Israel on October 7, 2023, killing more than 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages, by Israeli tallies. Israel's retaliatory offensive against Hamas has since killed nearly 55,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza health officials, and reduced much of the territory to a wasteland.
Atlantic
an hour ago
- Atlantic
Israel's Least Bad Option Is a Trump Deal With Iran
Having once described Donald Trump as Israel's 'greatest friend ever,' Benjamin Netanyahu must be watching with some consternation as the American president enthusiastically pursues a nuclear deal with Iran. After all, the Israeli prime minister made every effort to stop the Obama administration's Iran deal in 2015. Trump exited that deal in 2018, perhaps partially at Netanyahu's urging. And now Trump is pursuing a deal of his own—his administration has even dropped a number of Iran hawks from its ranks, in what one pro-Israel D.C. outlet described as a 'purge.' But Israel's leaders shouldn't fear the coming Iran deal. They may even find reasons to welcome it: Among a host of bad options for curbing Iran's nuclear program and pacifying a volatile region, a nuclear agreement between Trump and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei could be the least bad option for Israel too. No such deal has happened yet—and none will until the two sides can reach an accord about whether Iran should maintain a capacity to enrich uranium on its own soil. The U.S., together with Israel, has strongly objected to any such prospect. 'WE WILL NOT ALLOW ANY ENRICHMENT OF URANIUM!' Trump wrote on Truth Social on June 2. The Iranians insist on it—and, for their part, are playing a game of reverse psychology: 'This Guy Has No Will for a Deal,' read a headline in the semiofficial Tehran Times on June 7, referencing Trump. But both sides have compelling reasons to want these talks to come to something. The Trump administration, stymied in Ukraine and Gaza, could use a foreign-policy win, and the Iranian regime, having lost its regional proxy power, would prefer to avoid military strikes on its nuclear facilities and to see some sanctions lifted. Steven Witkoff, the Trump administration's top negotiator, has proffered a plan that reportedly suggests outsourcing Iran's uranium enrichment to a regional consortium. The enrichment would be for civilian purposes, and the consortium would include Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and possibly Qatar and Turkey. The idea is to remove the technical capacity from Iranian hands and internationalize the process. Whether this consortium would do its work on Iranian soil or elsewhere, however, is not clear. And as Richard Nephew, an American diplomat who helped negotiate the 2015 nuclear deal, told me, this is the nub of the issue—'centrifuges in Iran'—in relation to which 'a consortium is window-dressing.' Mostafa Najafi, a Tehran-based expert close to Iran's security establishment, told me that Iran has 'seriously studied' Washington's consortium proposal and could accept it only if at least some enrichment were to be done on Iranian soil. One option might be to use Iran's islands in the Persian Gulf for this purpose, he added. These are part of Iran but geographically close to Saudi Arabia and the UAE, and therefore easier to monitor than the mainland. For Israel, the matter of where the enrichment happens is nonnegotiable. 'Israel would be willing to accept the consortium solution only if it is located outside of Iran, a condition that Iran, of course, will not accept,' Raz Zimmt, the head of the Iran program at Israel's Institute for National Security Studies, told me. 'This is Israel's official stance, and it enjoys near-unanimous support across the Israeli political spectrum.' The reasons for this are understandable: Iran's leaders, unlike many of their counterparts in the region, have never embraced a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and instead continue to clamor for the destruction of Israel. Just last month, Khamenei called Israel 'a cancerous, dangerous, and deadly tumor that must be removed from the region and it will be.' Israeli leaders are worried that a deal with Iran will not go far enough in disabling it from acting on its animus against Israel. In fact, hard-line Israelis cannot envision a solution to the Iranian nuclear problem that doesn't involve the total dismantlement of its centrifuges and expatriation of its uranium. That's because the means to weaponize are already there. Even those, including Nephew, who advocate for a new deal caution that Iran's enrichment capacity has increased in the seven years since Trump left the 2015 agreement. Iran now has enough enriched uranium that if it sought to weaponize, it could build as many as 10 atomic weapons. Even if it shipped that stockpile elsewhere, the country would still have its advanced centrifuges. With these, experts say, Iran could hold on to just 5 percent of its current stockpile and still be able to enrich enough weapons-grade uranium for a bomb inside of a month, and four bombs' worth in two months. Given this reality, according to Zimmt, the Israeli government believes that it is running out of time to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. And to this end, he told me, 'Israel clearly prefers no deal over a bad deal,' because without a deal, military strikes become thinkable. Many in Israel see such a confrontation as the best option—even though Iran's nuclear facilities are spread across its territory, and some are buried deep underground, making any military campaign likely to be drawn-out, complicated, and hazardous. The analysts I spoke with did not see much lasting good coming of such an assault. Nephew noted that the setback to Iran's nuclear program would likely be temporary and said that Israel would be 'infinitely better off with a good deal.' Gregory Brew, an analyst with the Eurasia Group, pointed out that Iran's regional proxies have been so weakened that Israel is in a particularly strong position at the moment. A negotiated settlement to the nuclear question could allow Israel to build on its advantage by pursuing closer ties to Arab states. This 'would be a win for Israeli security and the region as a whole,' Brew said. Back in 2015, the Arab states of the Gulf region were leery of a U.S.-Iran nuclear deal. They had poor relations with Iran and worried that an agreement might exclude their interests. Now those relations have softened, and most of the Gulf states are eager for an arrangement that could cool the region's tempers. Their support for diplomacy should be good news for Israel, which already has diplomatic, trade, and military ties with two Gulf countries (the UAE and Bahrain). The Saudis have conditioned normalization on Israel's allowing for a Palestinian state, but their language is pragmatic—Riyadh's overwhelming interest appears to be in economic development, which regional conflict only undermines. A nuclear deal that draws in the Gulf states would undoubtedly serve to better integrate Iran into the region's economy. Some in Israel may balk at this idea, preferring to see Iran isolated. But there is a case to be made that giving Iran a stake in regional peace and stability would do more to de-radicalize its foreign policy than caging it has done. Some in Israel remain skeptical. 'I don't believe that Saudi or Emirati participation in the deal carries any real significance,' Zimmt said. 'It's not something that would reassure Israel, certainly not before normalization with Saudi Arabia, and not even necessarily afterward.' Other Israeli critics of Trump and Witkoff chastise them for mistaking the ideologically driven actors of the Middle East for transactional pragmatists like themselves. Daniel Byman: Trump is making Netanyahu nervous But leaders and peoples—in Riyadh, Abu Dhabi, Damascus, Beirut—have grown tired of wars around religion and ideology, and many are ready to pursue development instead. This explains why Syria's new leaders have embraced Trump and promised not to fight Israel. Iran is not immune to this new regional mood. Iranian elites have reason to fear that the failure of talks will bring about devastating military strikes. But they also have reason to hope that the lifting of sanctions, and even a partial opening for the country's beleaguered economy, will be a boon to some of the moneyed interests close to the regime. Najafi told me that Iran already has a shared interest with Arabs in trying to avoid a confrontation between Israel and Iran: 'Arabs know that any military action by Israel against Iran could destroy their grand developmental projects in the region,' he said. I've talked with Iranian elites for years. Most of them have no interest in Islamism or any other ideology. They send their sons and daughters to study in American and Swiss universities, not to Shiite seminaries in Iraq or Lebanon. Khamenei's zealotry is very unlikely to outlive him in Iran's highest echelons of power. A diplomatic deal, however flawed, will not only curtail Iran's nuclear program but also put the country on a path defined by its economic and pragmatic interests. A more regionally integrated Iran is likely to be much less belligerent, as it will have relations with the Saudis and Emiratis to maintain. The regime will likely be forced to drop many of its revolutionary pretensions, as it already has toward Saudi Arabia: Iran once considered the kingdom illegitimate, but it now goes out of its way to maintain good ties with Riyadh. Although this might sound unthinkable today, ultimately the regime will have to drop its obsession with Israel as well, for the same pragmatic reason that Arab countries have done in the past. The alternative to a deal is an extensive military campaign—most likely, a direct war between Iran and Israel—with unpredictable consequences. The notion that such a confrontation would lead to positive political change in Iran is a fantasy. Just as likely, the regime will hunker down under duress, prolonging its hold on power. This is why even the most pro-Israel figures in the Iranian opposition, such as former Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, oppose military strikes on Iran. Iran's population harbors very little hostility to Israel. A group of student activists recently tried to organize an anti-Israel rally at the University of Tehran, but only a couple of dozen people joined them, a small fraction of those who have turned out for rallies in Cairo, Amman, or New York City. But a direct war that costs Iranian civilian lives would easily change this. The future of Iran and Israel does not need to lie in hostility. That's why a deal that keeps Iran from going nuclear and avoids military strikes is the least bad option for everyone.
Associated Press
an hour ago
- Associated Press
Israel is deporting 6 more activists detained on Gaza aid boat, rights group says
JERUSALEM (AP) — Israel is deporting six more activists who were detained when it seized an aid boat bound for the war-ravaged Gaza Strip, according to the rights group representing them. The six include Rima Hassan, a French member of the European parliament who Israel had previously barred from entering Israel and the Palestinian territories, citing her support for boycotts of the country. They were among 12 passengers, including climate campaigner Greta Thunberg, aboard the Madleen, a boat that sought to break Israel's blockade of Gaza and deliver a symbolic amount of aid. Israel seized the vessel early Monday and deported Thunberg and three others the following day. The last two activists are expected to be deported on Friday, according to Adalah, a local human rights group representing them. It said the activists were subjected to 'mistreatment, punitive measures, and aggressive treatment, and two volunteers were held for some period of time in solitary confinement.' Israeli authorities declined to comment on their treatment. Israel says it treats detainees in a lawful manner and investigates any allegations of abuse. Israel portrayed the voyage as a media spectacle, dubbing it the 'selfie yacht.' It says the blockade, which it has imposed in various forms along with Egypt since Hamas seized power in 2007, is needed to prevent the militant group from importing arms. Critics view it as collective punishment of Gaza's roughly 2 million Palestinians. The Israeli Foreign Ministry said those activists who signed deportation documents would be deported immediately while those who refused would be brought before a judicial authority to authorize their deportation in keeping with Israeli law. The activists have protested that they had no intention of entering Israel and were brought there against their will. The Freedom Flotilla Coalition, which organized the journey, said it was aimed at protesting Israel's blockade of Gaza and ongoing military campaign there, which experts say has pushed the territory to the brink of famine more than 20 months into the Israel-Hamas war. ___ Follow AP's war coverage at
