The UK's silence on Gaza will haunt generations to come
You could be mistaken for thinking I am describing some Second World War scenario, but depressingly, this is the reality in Gaza today.
Despite repeated promises of a ceasefire, and a commitment to lift the siege of Gaza and allow aid to enter, Israel is still blocking food from reaching starving Palestinians.
A UN spokesperson recently announced that only five trucks of aid had reached more than two million people trapped in Gaza, and even then, aid workers were not given permission to distribute that tiny amount.
READ MORE: How much has your MP claimed in expenses? See the full Scottish list here
According to The New York Times, over the past year, Israel has been in talks with private US security contractors, namely former CIA veteran Philip Reilly, to create an Israeli-backed food distribution programme.
In February of this year, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) was established with the backing of the Trump administration. United Nations aid expert Tom Fletcher said that the GHF makes aid conditional on Israel's political and military aims, and 'makes starvation a bargaining chip'.
The former head of GHF resigned last week citing the foundation's inability to uphold the core humanitarian principles of 'neutrality, impartiality and independence'. According to The New York Times, the GHF emerged from 'private meetings of like-minded officials, military officers and businesspeople with close ties to the Israeli government'.
It is therefore very convenient that the GHF, supported by Israel, uses biometric screening, including facial recognition, to vet who receives aid. Critics also warn that the GHF's decision to concentrate aid in southern Gaza serves as a further attempt to depopulate northern Gaza, as planned by the Israeli military.
The GHF's lack of experience and capacity to deliver aid to more than two million Palestinians was laid bare on its very first day of operation. We saw images of thousands of starving Palestinians rushing to try to reach food, after three months of Israeli-imposed starvation. Those lucky enough to access food went on to discover there was only enough for a couple of days at most.
What began as a retaliatory campaign, after Hamas killed around 1200 Israelis and kidnapped 250 more, has since turned to genocide. As it stands, Israel has killed more than 61,000 Palestinians – of which nearly 20,000 were children.
Almost all of Gaza's homes have been damaged or destroyed, alongside 80% of facilities, 88% of school buildings and 70% of road networks and cropland. 222 journalists have been killed since the October 7 attack, of which 217 were Palestinian.
The disproportionate response from Israel and the continual breaking of international law means it is beyond doubt that Israeli actions are a deliberate military attempt to seize more Palestinian land. Israel places evacuation orders on areas it plans to bomb, only to issue further evacuation orders to the places people have been displaced to.
READ MORE: MSP demands answers from Police Scotland over Kneecap 'security concerns'
Most people in Gaza have moved repeatedly in attempts to escape Israeli airstrikes, though no part of Gaza has been spared attacks.
The Israeli military has issued more than 65 evacuation orders since October 7, 2023, leaving about 80% of the Gaza Strip under active evacuation orders.
Following this, Israel has authorised 22 new settlements in the occupied West Bank. This is despite the International Court of Justice ruling that Israel's settlement policy is a direct breach of international law.
Israel Katz, the country's defence minister, said the decision to expand these illegal settlements 'strengthens our hold on Judea and Samaria', using the biblical term for the West Bank, which is Palestinian territory.
Israel's far-right finance minister Bezalel Smotrich said: 'We have not taken foreign land, but rather the inheritance of our forefathers.'
Breaking international law in the name of religion is exactly the kind of behaviour we would describe as extremism. Bombing innocent civilians who are sheltering in hospitals and schools, to the point of obliteration, can only be described as terrorism.
READ MORE: 'Do something!': Question Time audience member in fiery row with Labour MP on Israel
This Labour Government has contorted itself into knots trying to be everything to everyone.
One week, the Foreign Secretary David Lammy suspended talks on further trade deals with Israel, only for the British trade envoy, Lord Ian Austin, to visit Israel the next week to 'promote trade'.
The UK Government's continual reticence to speak out against this genocide will haunt us for generations to come, especially when compared to how quick off the mark it has been to condemn the Irish band Kneecap.
The duplicity of this Labour Government's failure to act efficiently and proportionately in speaking out against this genocide cannot be forgotten.
History will certainly never let us forget.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BreakingNews.ie
15 minutes ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Farage has brought ‘racism and hatred' to Hamilton by-election, says Swinney
Nigel Farage has been accused of 'racism and hatred' by John Swinney in the last weekend of campaigning before polls open in the Hamilton by-election. The Scottish first minster hit out at the Reform UK leader, claiming he was a 'real threat' ahead of voting in the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election on Thursday. Advertisement Criticism has been levelled at Mr Farage's party after a Facebook ad claimed Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar was prioritising Pakistani people over Scots and included a section of a speech in which he encouraged more people from south Asian backgrounds to enter politics. Nigel Farage (Ben Whitley/PA) Addressing activists – including a number of MSPs, former MPs and candidates for the 2026 Holyrood election – in Hamilton on Saturday, Mr Swinney contrasted Reform UK with former minister Christina McKelvie, whose death prompted the by-election. 'This is a by-election that none of us wanted to be fighting, because it meant that we'd lost somebody we loved, Christina McKelvie, who was an individual that represented generosity, tolerance and inclusion,' he said. 'That was how she went about her work in this constituency and in Parliament, and that's the antithesis of what's been brought into this by-election campaign by the politics of Nigel Farage, who's brought racism and hatred right into the heart of this community, and it is repugnant. Advertisement 'We are going to stand up to it in every way we can.' In response to journalists, the first minister said he was not concerned about defamation claims stemming from his allegations of racism against Mr Farage. When the by-election was called, it was widely seen as a two-horse race between the SNP's Katy Loudon and Labour's Davy Russell, but recent weeks have seen a surge in fortune for Mr Farage's party. Speaking to the PA news agency after his speech, the first minister said it is 'very clear' that Labour is 'out of this contest' and it is now 'between the SNP and Farage'. Advertisement 'I want to make sure that Farage's politics don't get any hold in Scotland, they are damaging,' he said. In his speech, the first minister repeatedly referenced Mr Farage, but when asked if he was increasing the chance of Reform gaining a foothold by paying the party's leader so much attention, Mr Swinney said: 'I've just got to make sure that people in this constituency are aware of the threat that Farage poses in this election. 'If Farage gets in here, then you know the agenda of NHS privatisation is what will follow, the agenda of undermining the Scottish Parliament will follow, because that's what he believes in.' Elsewhere in Hamilton on Saturday, Reform UK's candidate Ross Lambie gathered activists ahead of a canvassing session, including some bussed into the constituency from the north of England. Advertisement Speaking to journalists, Mr Lambie was asked why the parties believed to be the frontrunners at the beginning of the campaign were spending so much time on Reform. 'They're doing their canvassing and they're getting the same results as we are, that's why,' he said. He added: 'We are super proud that we're not being pigeon-holed with any particular voter and we're not being boxed into certain aspects of the community. 'We're getting votes from across the area. Advertisement 'If you were to chat to these volunteers, you'll find some of them were SNP voters in the past, many of them were Labour voters, Conservative voters. 'So that's the thing we're most proud of, that we're breaking down those old barriers in Scottish politics.' Anas Sarwar (Andrew Milligan/PA) Mr Sarwar said Labour is still in the race for the seat in Thursday's vote. 'It's between ourselves and the SNP, every single vote is going to count,' he told PA on Saturday. 'That's why, if you want to beat the SNP, if you want a local champion, if you want to start that pathway to a new direction, the best way of doing that is to vote for one of your own – vote for Davy Russell.' The Labour leader also accused the first minister of 'talking up Reform for a very, very long time', an assertion Mr Swinney rejects, while saying he would 'call out Nigel Farage's poison'.
NBC News
17 minutes ago
- NBC News
Trump administration continues to target international students. What to know and what could be next.
Lawsuits, next-day countersuits, backtracking and mass confusion. International students find themselves at the center of a dizzying legal landscape as the Trump administration continues to crack down on immigration. Here's what to know as the Trump administration keeps attempting to put up legal barriers to international students' ability to study in the U.S. What's the latest? Just Wednesday, a judge granted Harvard an extension on an injunction that blocked the administration's attempt last week to stop the Ivy League school from enrolling foreign-born students. An estimated 4,700 or more foreign-born students have been impacted since the Trump administration began revoking visas and terminating legal statuses in March. A few have also been detained in high-profile cases. In just the past two weeks, students across the country were granted a nationwide injunction against the administration. Some scholars have been released from Immigration and Customs Enforcement as well. Meanwhile the State Department announced that it is 'aggressively' targeting an additional group of Chinese scholars out of national security concerns. But in spite of its legal losses, the federal government has doubled down on its efforts to target international students. On Tuesday, the Trump administration stopped scheduling new student visa interviews for those looking to study in the U.S., according to an internal cable seen by NBC News. Meanwhile, the State Department is preparing to expand its social media screening of applicants, the cable said. The next day, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that the government would be looking to revoke the visas of Chinese students 'with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields.' It's still unclear what 'critical fields' the administration will be looking into and what types of connections to the CCP are under scrutiny. The State Department referred NBC News to comments by spokesperson Tammy Bruce during a news briefing Thursday in which Bruce said the department does not discuss the details of its visa process due to privacy concerns. 'We use every tool that we have to vet and to make sure we know who's coming in,' Bruce said. 'In this particular case, the United States is putting America first by beginning to revoke visas of Chinese students as warranted.' How did the Trump administration revoke the visas and statuses of international students? For months, there was mass confusion among schools and international students about the criteria the government used to abruptly terminate visas and statuses, with little to no notice to students. But in late April, the Department of Homeland Security revealed at a hearing that it used the National Crime Information Center, an FBI-run computerized index that includes criminal history information. The agency said fewer than two dozen employees ran the names of 1.3 million foreign-born students through the index, populating 6,400 'hits.' And from there, many students experienced terminations of their records in the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS), which maintains information about nonimmigrant students and exchange visitors. The method was sharply criticized by legal and policy experts, who pointed out that the database relies on cities, counties, states and other sources to voluntarily report their data. This means that it may not have the final dispositions of cases, potentially leading to errors in identifying students. At another hearing in April, Elizabeth D. Kurlan, an attorney for the Justice Department, said that going forward, Immigration and Customs Enforcement will not be terminating statuses based solely on findings in the crime information center. She also told the court that ICE would be restoring the legal status of international students who had their records terminated until the agency developed a new framework for revocations. Shortly afterward, an internal memo to all Student and Exchange Visitor Program personnel, which is under ICE jurisdiction, showed an expanded list of criteria for the agency to terminate foreign-born students' legal status in the U.S., including a 'U.S. Department of State Visa Revocation (Effective Immediately).' Though students would typically have the right to due process and defend themselves before their status is terminated, visa revocation itself is now grounds for the termination of status, according to the memo. The administration has also taken aim at students who have been active in pro-Palestine protests, including Columbia student Mahmoud Khalil and Tufts University student Rümeysa Öztürk, who were both detained in March. Öztürk has since been released from ICE custody. 'Every time I find one of these lunatics, I take away their visas,' Rubio said at a news conference in March. Has anyone been successful in challenging the Trump administration? Students across the U.S. from Georgia to South Dakota have been winning their lawsuits against the Trump administration, with judges siding with plaintiffs and allowing them to stay in the U.S. Last week, a judge issued an injunction blocking the Trump administration from terminating the legal statuses of international students at universities across the U.S. It's the first to provide relief to students nationwide. The day after the Trump administration terminated Harvard's Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification — a move that would force the university's foreign students, roughly a fourth of its student body, to either transfer or lose their legal status — the Ivy League school sued the administration. And hours later, a judge issued an injunction. In addition to Öztürk, others who were detained are no longer in ICE custody, including Georgetown scholar Badar Khan Suri and Mohsen Mahdawi, a U.S. permanent resident who was born and raised in a refugee camp in the occupied West Bank. The judge in Khan Suri's case ruled that his detention was in violation of the First Amendment, which protects the right to free speech, and the Fifth Amendment, which protects the right to due process. What might be next for international students? Though the recent nationwide injunction provides some relief, students can still be vulnerable to visa revocation. Legal experts say the temporary restraining order blocks the government from arresting or detaining students, or terminating their legal statuses. But it's possible that visas can still be revoked. And many expect the Trump administration to hit back. 'This is a federal district court decision. It is not a final decision, and it seems likely that the executive branch will appeal this decision,' Elora Mukherjee, director of the Immigrants' Rights Clinic at Columbia Law School. Mukherjee also added that the Chinese international students referred to in Rubio's new statement are likely not protected by the injunction either. 'What they're likely to claim in court in defense of this policy is that the secretary of state and the executive branch deserves deference with regard to quote, unquote, foreign affairs,' Mukherjee said. However, with backlash already brewing, Mukherjee said she expects that the policy will be challenged legally, with immigration attorneys and activists arguing that it is unconstitutional. Legal experts said that with many decisions surrounding international students' fate far from decided, foreign-born scholars should first and foremost remain in the country. She also said it's important to seek legal counsel in the event that students are also eligible for other forms of relief, including asylum or other humanitarian visas. Razeen Zaman, director of immigrant rights at the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, said it's particularly important for American citizens to speak out against the immigration policies on behalf of foreign-born students, as many of these students may not be able to push back themselves. 'You have to have a certain amount of resources to be able to do that. You have to have a certain amount of connections. There's even some people who are too afraid to seek counsel,' Zaman said. 'U.S. citizens have the most protections. … And the reality is, even if you're stopped at the border, they do have to still let you in as a U.S. citizen.' And given how the Supreme Court on Friday allowed the Trump administration to revoke the temporary legal status of more than 500,000 immigrants from four Latin American countries, Zaman said, it's likely that even more groups will be targeted without fierce advocacy and protest. 'This is about the First Amendment today. It's Chinese people, the CCP, whoever they decide is tied to the Chinese government,' Zaman said.
Telegraph
24 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Trump is breaking up with the tech bros, here's why
As Elon Musk steps down from his role at the White House, there are signs Donald Trump's love affair with Silicon Valley could be on the rocks. The president sailed to election victory in November buoyed up by a wave of support from tech billionaires. But as his America First measures on immigration, university funding, tariffs and energy begin to bite, a tech bro break-up looms. 'There's definitely some buyer's remorse on the right,' said Nu Wexler, a former policy communications executive at Google. Having previously blocked the president from all Meta platforms, Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg sought to make amends first by dining with Mr Trump at his Mar-a-Lago resort in November, and then by donating $1 million to his inauguration fund. Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon, caused outrage in February when he shook up The Washington Post's opinion section, ordering the paper to support 'personal liberties and free markets', in a move widely interpreted as a courtesy to Mr Trump. He also made overtures to the first lady, paying $40 million for a Melania Trump documentary – nearly three times the next highest bid. Meanwhile, Tim Cook, the Apple CEO, was hailed as tech's Trump whisperer after he donated $1 million and is said to have sweetened the deal with promises to start manufacturing products in the US. Their support for Mr Trump was not without reason. During the election campaign, the president promised to unleash innovation by stripping back regulations he said hindered the development of artificial intelligence (AI) under the Biden administration. Mr Trump is currently also making good on promises to make permanent the cuts to corporate tax rates, which he slashed from 35 per cent to 21 per cent in his first term. And he has set about implementing a bold programme of financial services deregulation, particularly around cryptocurrency. But the flattery of Mr Trump has not had the anticipated effect. It was widely expected that antitrust lawsuits against Facebook, Google and Amazon would soon disappear. Yet Mr Trump has so far declined to intervene. Meanwhile, his relationship with Mr Cook appears to have soured after Mr Trump criticised the Apple billionaire for building factories in India. At the same time, the knock-on effects of Mr Trump's broader policy agenda have sent Silicon Valley reeling. Mr Musk said this week he was 'disappointed' with the president's 'big, beautiful' spending bill, warning that it 'undermines' the work of the Department for Government Efficiency (Doge) to bring down the deficit. Despite Mr Musk's comment, the pair apparently remain great friends, with the president presenting the billionaire with a golden key to the White House during a farewell press conference on Friday. However, Mr Musk's concerns were echoed by Chamath Palihapita, a former Facebook senior executive and host of the All In podcast, who warned that the financial markets would 'punish' the Trump administration for driving up national debt. Immigration, too, has proved a dividing line between Mr Trump's Maga base and his Silicon Valley allies, with Mr Musk pledging to 'go to war' over visas for skilled immigrants. Around 70 per cent of H-1B visa holders in the US are employed in the tech industry, and the SpaceX founder has likened the need to attract engineering talent from overseas to a professional sports team bringing in foreign players. The president's repeated attacks on universities have also set pulses racing in Silicon Valley, with the scientific research programmes that transformed America into a technology superpower facing billions of dollars in cuts. For decades, the US has stood unrivalled as the world's leader in scientific discovery and technological innovation thanks to government-backed projects that have created everything from the internet to mRNA vaccines. However, the amount of money disbursed in grants by the National Science Foundation, which funds much of the scientific research at American universities, has plummeted by 51 per cent this year so far, compared to the average over the past 10 years. 'Killing the golden goose' 'There are a lot of people in Silicon Valley who worry this is going to kill the golden goose,' said Darrell West, a senior fellow in the Center for Technology Innovation at Brookings Institution. 'A lot of America's competitive advantage has been in digital technologies, and we're now making it difficult to finance the next generation.' Mr Trump's tariffs agenda has triggered widespread alarm in the tech sector as well. Having successfully won an exemption from a 145 per cent tariff on iPhones assembled in China, Apple was caught off guard last week by Mr Trump threatening 25 per cent tariffs on all iPhones made outside the US. 'I don't want you building in India,' the president warned Mr Cook during his recent Middle East tour. Moreover, Mr Trump's moratorium on new clean energy projects risks driving up energy prices in California, where renewables account for 54 per cent of the state's total electricity generation. Data centres – sprawling warehouses full of computer servers that power AI – are reliant on cheap electricity to keep them running, with experts warning that even small increases in energy prices could have 'catastrophic' consequences. His plan to repeal the Inflation Reduction Act also spells bad news for California's world-leading energy storage industry by removing tax cuts that spurred investment in the technology. From the moment Mr Musk pranced on stage at a Trump rally in October wearing an 'Occupy Mars' T-shirt, some critics said the president and Silicon Valley made strange bedfellows. A far cry from the casual-dressing tech bros of San Francisco, whom Mr Trump recently called 'these internet people', the president is rarely seen without a suit and tie (when he's not on the golf course). 'Tech investors are not a logical fit for the grassroots Maga movement. It is more a relationship of convenience right now,' said Mr Wexler. A loveless marriage it may be. But a messy divorce could have devastating consequences for the future of Mr Trump's coalition. 'He's tacked his administration to tech billionaires. They're a very powerful group and very well connected,' said Mr West. 'If they start to turn on him, that's a political nightmare.'
