UN reports 613 killings near aid distribution points and convoys in Gaza
But she said 'it is clear that the Israeli military has shelled and shot at Palestinians trying to reach the distribution points' operated by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF).
She said it was not immediately clear how many of those killings had taken place at GHF sites, and how many occurred near convoys.
Speaking to reporters at a regular briefing, Ms Shamdasani said the figures covered the period from May 27 to June 27, and 'there have been further incidents' since then.
She said she was basing the information on an internal situation report at the office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.
Ms Shamdasani said the figures, compiled through its standard vetting processes, were not likely to tell a complete picture, and 'we will perhaps never be able to grasp the full scale of what's happening here because of the lack of access' for UN teams to the areas.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
an hour ago
- The National
Motion would have aligned SNP foreign policy with Keri Starmer's
Normally, the policy formulation dimension represents tweaks to existing policy. On occasion, more pressing issues are debated. Last month's meeting was of the latter type. In the background, subsequently confirmed days later, was the prospect of the US weighing in on the Israeli side in its war with Iran. An act, as the secretary-general of the UN pointed out, that ran a coach and horses through the international rules-based order. In Perth, on the auditorium screen was a topical motion on the issue in the name of Stephen Gethins MP. Had it passed unamended, it would have upended SNP policy in several areas – not only on the party's position on international nuclear disarmament treaty architecture, but broader issues of national security and indeed adjacent economic policy. READ MORE: Protesters stage demonstration inside Reform UK's headquarters Unamended, it would have positioned the SNP group at Westminster behind Keir Starmer and David Lammy's position on the Israel-Iran crisis. It would have also represented a softening of the tone, possibly even the substance, of the critical statements made by other SNP parliamentarians at Westminster and in Holyrood. The unamended motion read: 'MIDDLE EAST SITUATION – National Council abhors the ongoing violence in the Middle East and recognises that destabilisation in the region is a threat to us all; calls for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and full access for humanitarian relief; further agrees that Iran should not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons but that the best means of stopping that and finding a sustainable solution is through diplomatic means.' The motion only mentioned Iran and not Israel and was presented in the name of a former professor of international relations. Stephen was not in attendance, so his motion was subsequently moved by another delegate. I proposed that three words – 'be allowed to' – be excised. In the end, my suggestion was acceded to and political embarrassment averted. Other amendments pertaining to the, frankly, barely condemnatory tone on what is going on in Gaza, would have been appropriate but timescales and procedures precluded that. (Image: Anadolu Agency via Getty Images) At first, I wanted to accept the cock-up theory but after a few days of reflection and being faced with some irrefutable facts, the record needs to be put straight. This must be reflected upon by SNP spokespersons, particularly on matters of war and peace. It's interesting how in the repertoire of those who used to promote a 'rules-based order that's not the United Nations', they and the mainstream media are very quick to gaslight anyone who says historical context is important. However, when the historical airbrush is applied to the signature diplomatic achievement of Barack Obama, I must speak out. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the deal that ensured Iran gave up any notion of developing nuclear weapons, was ditched by Donald Trump. My 'textual amendment' reaffirmed SNP adherence to the spirit of the Obama plan. During his first term as president, Trump of course trashed the JCPOA. Now, bizarrely, he appears to want to bomb Iran into a JCPOA-without-the-safeguards. The SNP seek to achieve the restitution of a sovereign Scottish state. It will be a small state and, as such, on the journey to independence, the recognition of the UN will be indispensable. However, I am no naive idealist. The world is a dangerous and uncertain place, particularly when you share a border with the Russian Federation or Israel. Only politicians with links to the arms trade would want to use fear as a key electoral driver. Arguing that man-made global dangers and instability are uniform throughout the world is an understandable though rather unethical marketing tool for arms companies. The truth is, in the bigger scheme of things, some places are a bit safer than others, and Scotland is one of those – a fortunate reality that the independence movement should unapologetically make more of. Bill Ramsay SNP CND
Channel 4
3 hours ago
- Channel 4
Gaza: Hamas studying proposals for a 60-day ceasefire
Gaza's Health Ministry says at least 138 Palestinians have been killed in the past day – 63 of them while seeking humanitarian aid. But many people are pinning their hopes on an imminent ceasefire. Hamas officials say they are studying proposals for a 60-day halt to the fighting, while President Trump said last night he expected the group to respond within 24 hours. And a warning: this report contains distressing images.
JAMnews
3 hours ago
- JAMnews
'What's stopping us from calling it treason?' — opinion on Georgian Dream's response to OSCE criticism
Georgian Dream did not recognize the Portuguese Declaration The OSCE Parliamentary Assembly adopted the Portuguese Declaration, which, among other issues, addresses Syria's recognition of the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia – regions that, for the vast majority of UN member states, remain Georgian territories occupied by Russia. However, the chairman of Georgia's one-party parliament, Shalva Papuashvili, stated that the parliament and the ruling Georgian Dream party did not support the resolution. This comes as no surprise, considering that in addition to reaffirming support for Georgia's territorial integrity, the declaration also criticizes Georgian Dream for its anti-democratic policies and its departure from the path of European integration. So far, only five UN member states have recognized the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, including Syria, which did so in 2018 after the then Syrian government made a complete turn toward Russia. The policy of non-recognition of the independence of these territories has remained one of Georgia's main diplomatic priorities for many years. Some Georgian experts believe that now, with the change of government in Syria, Tbilisi has a unique opportunity to demand the withdrawal of recognition. But is it ready to seize this opportunity? Lawyer Saba Brachveli reflects on this. Saba Brachveli: 'Georgia has no diplomatic relations with Syria because Syria recognizes the independence of the occupied territories. At the moment, after the overthrow of the previous government, Syria is undergoing a global reset of its international relations, which gives us the best chance to secure the withdrawal of recognition. Opposition parties have jointly appealed to the new Syrian authorities with such a request. What 'Georgian Dream' is doing in this regard (if anything at all) remains unknown. On July 3, the OSCE adopted a declaration that, on one hand, calls on Syria to recognize Georgia's territorial integrity, and on the other hand, urges 'Georgian Dream' to release political prisoners, hold repeat parliamentary elections, and stop hostile rhetoric toward the European Union. [Parliament Speaker] Shalva Papuashvili stated that the Georgian delegation, consisting of members of Georgian Dream, does not support this declaration. In other words, they did not back the most prominent and influential demand for Syria to recognize our territorial integrity. This raises questions: What do we call those who put their personal and party interests above the interests of the homeland? What do we call those for whom the arrest of innocent people is more important than the return of occupied territories? What prevents us from calling this treason?' News in Georgia
