Israeli forces kill 51 Palestinians waiting for flour at Gaza aid site, witnesses and rescuers say
Israeli forces have killed more than 51 Palestinians and wounded many more after opening fire near an aid distribution site in southern Gaza, witnesses and rescuers say.The Hamas-run civil defence agency said Israeli troops fired on crowds near the aid site in Khan Younis. More than 200 people were reportedly injured. The Israeli military has told the BBC it is looking into the reports.It is the latest, and potentially the deadliest, of the almost daily shootings that have been taking place recently near aid distribution sites in Gaza.
Witnesses say that Israeli forces opened fire and shelled an area near a junction to the east of Khan Younis, where thousands of Palestinians had been gathering in the hope of getting flour from a World Food Programme (WFP) site, which also includes a community kitchen nearby.A local journalist and eyewitnesses said Israeli drones fired two missiles, followed shortly after by a shell from an Israeli tank positioned between 400 and 500m away from the crowd. The explosions caused many casualties.The crowd had assembled near a key road leading to the town of Bani Suheila, an area that has seen weeks of ongoing Israeli military operations.Nasser Hospital, the main functioning medical facility in the area, has been overwhelmed by the number of casualties. It is so overcrowded that the many wounded are lying on the floor as medical staff treat their injuries. In a statement the IDF said "a gathering was identified adjacent to an aid distribution truck that got stuck in the area of Khan Younis, and in proximity to IDF troops operating in the area."It said it was "aware of reports regarding a number of injured individuals from IDF fire following the crowd's approach" and the incident was under review.On Monday, the UN human rights chief Volker Turk said Israel was weaponising food and called for an investigation into the shootings near aid sites.Addressing the UN Human Rights Council on Monday, he said: "Israel's means and methods of warfare are inflicting horrifying, unconscionable suffering on Palestinians in Gaza."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
19 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Trump swats US intelligence reports on Iran's nuclear threat to align with Israel
Tulsi Gabbard, the US director of national intelligence, delivered a concise verdict during congressional testimony this March: the intelligence community 'continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme leader Khomeini has not authorized the nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003'. As he rushed back to Washington on Tuesday morning, Donald Trump swatted aside the assessment from the official that he handpicked to deliver him information from 18 US intelligence agencies. 'I don't care what she said,' said Trump. 'I think they were very close to having one.' Trump's assessment aligned him with Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, who has warned that Iran's 'imminent' plans to produce nuclear weapons required a pre-emptive strike from Israel – and, he hopes, from the United States – in order to shut down the Iranian uranium enrichment program for good. It also isolates Trump's spy chief, whom he nominated specifically because of her skepticism for past US interventions in the Middle East and of the broader intelligence community, which he has described as a 'deep state'. Gabbard sought to tamp down on a schism with Trump, telling CNN that Trump 'was saying the same thing that I said in my annual threat assessment back in March. Unfortunately too many people in the media don't care to actually read what I said.' But as the Trump administration now appears closer than ever before to a strike on Iran, Gabbard has been left out of key decision-making discussions and her assessments that Iran is not close to a nuclear breakout has become decidedly inconvenient for an administration now mulling a pre-emptive strike. 'UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!' he wrote in a social media post on Tuesday. The US has dispatched an additional carrier group, KC-135 refueling tankers and additional fighter jets to the region. Those assets have been sent to give Trump 'more options' for a direct intervention in the conflict, US media have reported. Deliberations over the intelligence regarding Iran's breakout time to a nuclear weapon will be pored over if the US moves forward with a strike that initiates a new foreign conflict for the US that could potentially reshape the Middle East and redefine a Trump presidency that was supposed to end the US era of 'forever wars'. Israel launched airstrikes last week in the wake of an International Atomic Energy Agency report that formally declared Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations for the first time in 20 years and said the country had enriched enough uranium to near weapons grade to potentially make nine nuclear bombs. Gen Michael Erik Kurilla, the head of US Central Command who has forcefully campaigned for a tougher stance on Iran, told members of the armed services committee in the House of Representatives last week that Iran could have enough weapons-grade uranium for 'up to 10 nuclear weapons in three weeks'. Yet a CNN report on Tuesday challenged that claim. Four sources familiar with a US intelligence assessment said that Iran was 'not actively pursuing a nuclear weapon' and that the country was 'up to three years away from being able to produce and deliver one to a target of its choosing'. The skepticism over Iran's potential for a nuclear breakout has also been reflected in Gabbard's distancing from Trump's inner circle. People often represent policy in the Trump administration and those with unpopular views find themselves on the outside looking in. Trump last Sunday held a policy discussion with all the top member of his cabinet on national security. But Gabbard was not there. Her absence was taken as a sign that US policy was shifting in a direction against Iran. 'Why was Gabbard not invited to the Camp David meeting all day?' asked Steve Bannon, a member of Trump's Maga isolationist wing that has pushed against the US launching a direct strike against Iran. 'You know why,' responded Tucker Carlson, an influential pundit in Trump's America First coalition who had slammed 'warmongers' in the administration including popular Fox News hosts like Mark Levin. Days after the Camp David meeting, Gabbard released a bizarre video in which she warned about the threat of nuclear war, saying that this is the 'reality of what's at stake, what we are facing now'. 'Because as we stand here today, closer to the brink of nuclear annihilation than ever before, political elite and warmongers are carelessly fomenting fear and tensions between nuclear powers,' she said. The remarks could have referred to US involvement in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. But it is with Iran that US policy appears to be changing rapidly and avowed opponents of foreign interventions appear to be falling in line in order to avoid losing clout in the Trump administration. Trump 'may decide he needs to take further action to end Iranian enrichment', said vice-president JD Vance, who has publicly called on the US to avoid costly overseas interventions but has remained muted over Iran. 'That decision ultimately belongs to the president. 'But I believe the president has earned some trust on this issue,' he continued. 'And having seen this up close and personal, I can assure you that he is only interested in using the American military to accomplish the American people's goals. Whatever he does, that is his focus.'
The Independent
24 minutes ago
- The Independent
Instead of ending wars, ‘America First' is being dragged into more of them
It is difficult to discern exactly what the 'big stuff' is that prompted President Trump to leave the G7 summit and return to Washington a day early. Mr Trump wouldn't say what, precisely, but he did advise the 9 million residents of Tehran to 'immediately evacuate' their homes, causing mass panic. Any lingering hopes that the president was going back to the White House to work full time on a ceasefire were extinguished when Mr Trump declared that suggestions to that effect made by the president of France were mistaken: 'I'm not looking for a ceasefire, we're looking at better than a ceasefire.' What the president does want, in his words, is 'an end, a real end, not a ceasefire,' and a 'complete give-up' by Iran. At the same time, though, the president told the world that he had not contacted the Iranians to engage in peace talks in any 'way, shape, or form' because they 'should have taken the deal that was on the table'. Given that many American diplomats have left the region – and the USS Nimitz and its carrier strike group are transferring from the Pacific – it seems plain that the US government is at least contemplating how force (or the threat of it) might have to become necessary to pursue American strategic objectives. President Trump has long been perfectly clear about what one of those prime objectives is: Iran 'just can't have a nuclear weapon'. On that point, at least, he has the backing of his allies, endorsed in the G7 communique, which added that Iran is a 'source of terror'. As is his style, weeks ago he tried a bold – if unlikely – diplomatic initiative to strike a deal, with direct talks in Rome between American and Iranian officials. These were stalling even before Israel started its bombardment of Iran's labs, uranium enrichment facilities and other targets – and the US-Iran talks have since broken down. Yet even now, there is speculation that – pressured by Israel's actions and backed with a major US naval taskforce heading towards the Persian Gulf – Mr Trump may try to use this opportunity to achieve a breakthrough deal. Asked by reporters if he might dispatch his vice-president, JD Vance, and roaming negotiator Steve Witkoff to Iran for this purpose, Mr Trump did not rule it out. 'Peace through strength' is a slogan that the president frequently uses, but thus far in his presidency, it has seldom worked out in practice. This time, the world must hope, will be different. If diplomacy fails? Mr Trump could simply allow Israel to continue its efforts to eliminate Iran's nuclear capabilities, such as they are, and to so destabilise the theocratic regime that it is overthrown by the Iranian people. Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, has made no secret of his wish for 'regime change', addressing the 'Persian' people directly and having his photograph taken with the exiled son of the last shah of Iran, who was toppled by the ayatollahs in the revolution of 1979. Subcontracting the task of disarming Iran and persuading the people of Iran to replace their government with a more palatable, peace-loving alternative, all without any direct US involvement, must have some attractions for American foreign policy (though Mr Trump reportedly vetoed an assassination attempt on the supreme leader of Iran). That carries significant risks, however, which will be apparent to the defence, security and state department officials briefing Mr Trump. For some weeks, Israel has used the George W Bush playbook as applied in the last Gulf war to justify its attacks in Iran – a pre-emptive military strike to remove the threat of weapons of mass destruction, and, as the Americans did with Saddam Hussein, offering regime change as an alternative to destruction and defeat. A similar ultimatum is now being issued by Mr Trump, with Israeli backing – give up your nukes and you can stay in power. If not... But the world knows how that Iraqi story ended – a fractured country that fell into civil war and the rule of Isis, an even more murderous and dangerous entity than the Baathists. The collapse of Iran into chaos and civil war would be a far greater disaster for the world than anything that has happened in Iraq, Libya, Syria or Afghanistan in terms of the consequences for turning a stable (if malign) state into a failed one. Iran is in another league of military and political importance. If there was fighting for control of Iran – and the ayatollahs cannot be expected to meekly slink away to their holy places – then that would soon spread to Yemen, and restart the horrific proxy war there with Saudi Arabia. Russia remains Iran's friend and ally, and relies on its Shahed drones that proved so effective in Ukraine. What would Vladimir Putin do to protect his interests? If America intervenes, or acquiesces in Israel's escalating campaign, the regional conflagration so long feared between Israel and Iran would not remain a private dispute between the two regional superpowers of Israel and Iran, not least because Tehran's client terrorists in Hezbollah, the Houthi rebels and, above all, Hamas will continue to be involved. The more nations and groups become involved, the more unpredictable events will become, and the harder it will be for America to control them. Instead of ending far-away wars, this 'America First' is being dragged into more of them. That's very much 'big stuff' – and big risks.
The Guardian
32 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Middle East conflict reaches crucial moment as Trump demands ‘real end' to Iran nuclear programme
Israel's war on Iran appeared to be approaching a pivotal moment on Tuesday night after five days of bombing and retaliatory Iranian missile strikes, as Donald Trump demanded 'unconditional surrender' from Tehran and weighed his military options. Trump convened a meeting of his national security team in the White House situation room after a day of febrile rhetoric in which the president gave sharply conflicting signals over whether US forces would participate directly in Israel's bombing campaign over Iran. He told journalists in the morning that he expected the Iranian nuclear programme to be 'wiped out' long before US intervention would be necessary. Later he took to his own social media platform, Truth Social, to suggest that the US had Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in its bomb-sights, and could make an imminent decision to take offensive action. 'We know exactly where the so-called 'Supreme Leader' is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there – We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now,' Trump said. 'But we don't want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin.' In a post a few minutes later, Trump bluntly demanded 'UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER'. It was not just Trump's all-caps threats that triggered speculation that the US might join offensive operations. They were accompanied by the sudden forward deployment of US military aircraft to Europe and the Middle East, amid a general consensus that Iran's deeply buried uranium enrichment facilities could prove impregnable without huge bunker-busting bombs that only the US air force possesses. 'If Iran does not back down, complete destruction of Iranian nuclear programme is on the agenda, which Israel cannot achieve alone,' German chancellor Friedrich Merz told ZDF television a day after meeting Trump at the G7 summit in Canada. But France's president, Emmanuel Macron, urged restraint, saying: 'We recognize Israel's right to self-defense, but we do not support actions that threaten stability in the region. The biggest mistake that can be made today is to try to change the regime in Iran by military means – because that would lead to chaos.' Despite the US military deployments and Trump's menacing comments, the UK prime minister, Keir Starmer, who was also at the G7 meeting, insisted the US was not about to join the Israeli bombing campaign. 'There's nothing the president said that suggests that he's about to get involved in this conflict,' Starmer said. 'On the contrary, the G7 statement was about de-escalation ... I was sitting right next to President Trump [at the dinner], so I've no doubt, in my mind, the level of agreement.' Trump left the Canadian summit a day early and flew back to Washington around midnight on Monday. On the way, he told journalists he was not seeking a ceasefire in Israel's war on Iran but instead wanted to see a 'complete give-up' by Iran, as well as 'a real end' to Iran's nuclear programme, with Tehran abandoning its uranium enrichment 'entirely'. The vice president, JD Vance, also took to social media to discuss Trump's options. 'He may decide he needs to take further action to end Iranian enrichment. That decision ultimately belongs to the president,' Vance wrote, before adding that 'people are right to be worried about foreign entanglement after the last 25 years of idiotic foreign policy'. The US president predicted Israel would not let up in its bombing campaign and suggested a decisive moment in that campaign was imminent, though he made clear he expected Israel to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities without US help. 'You're going to find out over the next two days … Nobody's slowed up so far,' he told CBS News on the flight back to Washington, saying he was returning to the White House to focus on the conflict. Israel's justification for its shock attack on Iran was called into question on Tuesday when CNN cited US intelligence assessments as saying that when Iran was attacked, it had been 'up to three years away from being able to produce and deliver [a nuclear bomb] to a target of its choosing'. The report echoed a public assessment in March by Trump's own director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, who told Congress 'Iran is not building a nuclear weapon' and the supreme leader 'has not authorised the nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003'. On Tuesday, Trump shrugged off that assessment, siding instead with Israel's claims that Tehran was on the brink of making a warhead. 'I don't care what she said,' Trump said. 'I think they were very close to having it.' In freewheeling remarks to reporters on Air Force One, Trump also stressed that any Iranian attack on Americans or US bases, which Iran has threatened, would be met with overwhelming force, saying: 'We'll come down so hard, it'd be gloves off.' Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, said Iran was open to resuming talks with the US. 'If President Trump is genuine about diplomacy and interested in stopping this war, next steps are consequential,' he said. Benjamin Netanyahu was also dismissive of the idea of diplomacy. 'Of course they want to stop. They want to stop, and to keep producing the tools of death. We gave that a chance,' the Israeli prime minister said, laying out a new, expanded set of war aims. 'We want three central results: eliminating the nuclear programme, eliminating the ability to produce ballistic missiles and eliminating the axis of terror.' He left vague what the third war aim would entail. Later on Tuesday, his foreign minister, Gideon Sa'ar, described it differently as a mission to 'severely damage [the Iranians'] plan to eliminate the state of Israel'. Asked how that would be achieved, Sa'ar told the Guardian: 'We are doing that gradually. First we cut the [tentacles] of the octopus, when we dealt with Hamas and Hezbollah. Now we are dealing with the head of the octopus.' 'Regime change is not an objective of this war,' the minister insisted however, during a visit to a missile strike site in Rishon LeZion, east of Tel Aviv. He added that regime change 'may be a result, but its not an objective' of the war. Israel's choice of targets has broadened over the course of the campaign, in line with its rhetoric. In recent days it has bombed the Iranian capital, ordering the residents of a part of northern Tehran, a third of a million people, to leave their homes. On Tuesday night, loud blasts were reported across the city. The Israeli evacuation order was modelled on those routinely issued to Palestinians in Gaza, where bombing by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has flattened entire residential neighbourhoods over the course of a 20-month conflict. The Israeli ultimatum on Monday said the bombing of Tehran would be aimed at 'military infrastructure', but one of the targets hit was a state television station, killing three staff and ending live broadcasts. Israel has also been bombing Iran's oil and gas installations, and Iran has retaliated with strikes on Haifa, damaging a power station and a refinery in the Mediterranean port. Israeli airstrikes killed at least 24 Iranians across the country on Tuesday morning, bringing the toll since Friday's surprise attack to at least 224 people dead and more than 1,400 injured, Iran's health ministry said. The scale of destruction and the threats from the IDF and Trump triggered an exodus of Tehranis, jamming the roads out of the capital overnight. In Israel, the death toll after four days was 24, with about 600 injured. Iran fired a total of 20 to 30 missiles on Tuesday morning, according to the IDF, lightly wounding five people, marking a significant drop in the tempo of its attack compared with the previous few days. The IDF said Iran had used 370 missiles in eight salvoes out of a US-estimated arsenal of 3,000 ballistic missiles. The IDF further claims to have destroyed 200 of Iran's missile launchers, half the total. Israel has also struck a severe blow to Iran's chain of command, killing at least 11 top generals and, in some cases, their replacements. On Tuesday the IDF said it had killed the acting armed forces commander, Maj Gen Ali Shadmani, who had been in the post for only four days, after his predecessor was targeted in the first wave of strikes on Friday morning. 'Iran is completely naked and we have full freedom of action. This is an unprecedented achievement,' an IDF general staff officer told the newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth. Iran continued to threaten Israeli cities however, with its senior army commander echoing Israeli methods by calling for the residents of Haifa and Tel Aviv to evacuate immediately. If those threats prove empty and IDF claims of its dominance are borne out, it will leave Iran with few cards to play. The Iranian parliament has prepared a bill that would withdraw Iran from the 1968 nuclear non-proliferation treaty, so that it would no longer be legally bound to forgo nuclear weapons, but the government insists it remains opposed to all weapons of mass destruction. State TV has also aired calls from hardline politicians suggesting that Iran block the strategically important strait of Hormuz, potentially stopping the passage of more than 17m barrels of oil a day and producing a dramatic spike in world oil prices and global inflation. On Tuesday, the International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed that Israeli bombing sorties on the enrichment plant in Natanz had penetrated to its underground levels. But, as the war enters its sixth day, the focus of key decisions in Israel and the US is likely to be the underground facility at Fordow, near the religious centre of Qom, which houses Iran's stockpile of highly enriched uranium as well as an enrichment plant. However, Kelsey Davenport, the director for nonproliferation policy at the Arms Control Association, said its presence was not likely to be relevant to military calculations 'Blowing up the stockpiles at Fordow would release a limited amount of radiation and chemical toxicity from the UF6, but it would be confined to the site,' Davenport said. 'There may be a very slight risk that if Iran has enough 60 percent enriched uranium stored at the site, an explosion could trigger a chain reaction. But I would be very surprised if that is the reason Fordow is not being bombed. Israel knows it cannot destroy the site.'
