Aid or illusion? Starving Gazans decry 'looted' relief shipments
However, despite claims of a humanitarian truce and increased aid flow, voices in Gaza paint a picture of chaos, deception and deepening hunger. Khalil Sardah, a 28-year-old displaced resident from Khan Younis in the south, said he and thousands of others gathered after hearing lorries would be arriving, but were surprised by others looting them.
'By noon, tens of thousands were there. We waited until night. The trucks came, but there was no security,' he told The National. 'I personally saw around 30 trucks looted in front of my eyes.'
He described the scenes as desperate and chaotic. With no official distribution system, 'the strongest and most aggressive' groups managed to take control of the aid. Mr Sardah said he received no aid himself. His brother managed to bring back a few items, but most supplies, he said, were stolen or hoarded by armed groups.
On Monday, Israel claimed that more than 120 lorryloads of food aid were distributed by the UN and aid agencies in Gaza on the first day of a partial pause in fighting. UN agencies did not confirm the amount of aid.
According to World Food Programme (WFP) calculations, Gaza needs around 500 to 600 aid lorries a day − or 1,000 to 1,500 daily at peak need − to prevent famine. The WFP said a third of the population of Gaza had not eaten for days, and 470,000 were 'enduring famine-like conditions'.
Gaza's hospitals have reported 14 new deaths from starvation and malnutrition in the enclave in the past 24 hours, local health authorities announced. This takes the death toll from starvation and malnutrition to 147, including 88 children, according to the same source.
Unsecured areas
Mahmoud Al-Sharif, a community activist in Gaza, criticised what he called a 'performance' orchestrated for international media. While Israel declared a temporary humanitarian pause, he noted that the violence on the ground never stopped.
'The Israeli army allowed the trucks in through dangerous routes, knowing they'd be looted. Their aircraft even targeted youth trying to secure the aid,' he added. The National was unable to verify this claim with independent sources.
Rami Abdu, director of the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor, said the recent events were part of a calculated propaganda effort. 'Israel launched a massive media campaign, showing aid trucks entering through Kerem Shalom, to suggest the crisis is easing. But this is deception,' Mr Abdu said.
'Only a small number of trucks entered, and they were left in unsecured areas, deliberately enabling their looting.' According to the Government Media Office in Gaza, 73 aid lorries entered the territory on Sunday.
The World Health Organisation warned on Sunday that malnutrition was reaching 'alarming levels' in Gaza. It said that of the 74 recorded malnutrition-related deaths in 2025, 63 had occurred in July − including 24 children aged under five, one child older than five and 38 adults.
Despite that, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu denied that starvation is happening in the Palestinian territory, which has been under Israeli bombardment for more than 21 months. 'There is no policy of starvation in Gaza and there is no starvation in Gaza,' he claimed in a speech.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Middle East Eye
an hour ago
- Middle East Eye
Trump administration removes clause that cuts funding to states boycotting Israel
A clause in the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (Fema) guidelines threatening US states and territories that boycott Israel with the denial of federal funds for natural disaster preparation was discreetly removed from its terms and conditions directives on Monday after backlash. The change in status came after media reports on Monday explained how funding was conditional on states following Department of Homeland Security (DHS) conditions laid out in April. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema) announced on Friday it was making nearly $1bn available to states to protect themselves from natural disasters, such as floods, tornadoes, hurricanes, and fires, as well as terrorist attacks and cyber disruptions. However, before being removed, the clause said: 'Discriminatory prohibited boycott means refusing to deal, cutting commercial relations, or otherwise limiting commercial relations specifically with Israeli companies or with companies doing business in or with Israel or authorized by, licensed by, or organized under the laws of Israel to do business,' according to 11 agency grant notices reviewed by Reuters. DHS, which oversees Fema, reportedly removed this clause from section 17 on anti-discrimination under its terms and conditions. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Fema had announced on Friday it was making nearly $1bn available to states to protect themselves from natural disasters, such as floods, tornadoes, hurricanes, and fires, as well as terrorist attacks and cyber disruptions. This $1bn allocation, which will apply to 15 different grant programmes, is part of the "Notices of Funding Opportunity amounting to more than $2.2 billion available to state, local, tribal and territorial governments to help them protect American citizens", Fema states on its website. DHS sent Middle East Eye a statement on Monday, saying: 'There is no FEMA requirement tied to Israel in any current NOFO. No states have lost funding, and no new conditions have been imposed. 'FEMA grants remain governed by existing law and policy and not political litmus tests. DHS will enforce all anti-discrimination laws and policies, including as it relates to the BDS movement, which is expressly grounded in antisemitism. Those who engage in racial discrimination should not receive a single dollar of federal funding.' BDS refers to the Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, which aims to "pressure Israel to comply with international law". Existing law Although the clause has been removed, more than 30 US states already have laws that require 'public entities to certify they do not and will not boycott Israel'. However, public outcry over the worsening humanitarian conditions in Gaza has led to institutions and companies coming under increasing pressure to divest from Israeli and international companies investing in Israel. The momentum for the BD movement in the US was spearheaded by students on college campuses across the country last year due to outrage over the war on Gaza, which to date has killed over 60,000 Palestinians, wounded over 100,000 and decimated the strips infrastructure. While many institutions have refused pressure to divest from Israel, a handful of institutions like Union Theological Seminary have applied new investment screenings to divest from companies profiting from Israel's war on Gaza. San Francisco State University also agreed to disclose its investments quarterly and added new screening policies for investment decisions last year. Following this agreement, San Francisco State University agreed to pull investments from three companies it claimed do not meet its human rights standards, including aerospace and defence company Lockheed Martin, stock positions in Italian defence company Leonardo, and US-based data analysis enterprise, Palantir Technologies.
The National
an hour ago
- The National
Egypt calls Israel's war in Gaza 'systematic genocide'
Egypt has ratcheted up its criticism of Israel, branding its 22-month war in Gaza 'systematic genocide' and calling out the international community for not doing more to stop the conflict. The comments by President Abdel Fattah El Sisi and Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty, made separately, constituted Egypt's most scathing reprimand of Israel over the Gaza war. They are likely to accelerate the steady deterioration of relations between the two neighbours bound by a 1979 peace treaty. 'The war that's going on in Gaza is no longer waged to realise political objectives or free hostages, but rather a war for starvation, genocide and the liquidation of the Palestinian cause,' Mr El Sisi said on Tuesday after talks in Cairo with his Vietnamese counterpart. He accused Israel of attempting to hollow out the Palestinian cause and added: 'History will reflect for a long time before it holds to account and bring to justice many nations for their position on this war. 'The world's conscience will not be silent for much longer,' said Mr El Sisi, who spoke again on Gaza on Wednesday. On a visit to Greece on Wednesday, Mr Abdelatty said the world's response to the escalating humanitarian crisis in Gaza was shameful and he urged western powers to increase pressure on Israel. 'The international community should be ashamed of the tragic situation unfolding in Gaza and the devastating actions carried out by Israel,' he told reporters in Athens. 'What is unfolding is a human tragedy, and the suffering witnessed is a stain on the conscience of the international community.' Widespread reports of hunger in Gaza have heightened international concern over the devastating consequences of Israeli military operations launched on October 7, 2023, following a deadly attack by Hamas-led militants on southern Israeli communities. At least 61,000 Palestinians have been killed in the war, according to authorities in Gaza. Most of the enclave's 2.2 million residents have been displaced, many more than once, and large swathes of its built-up areas razed. Echoing President El Sisi's comments, Mr Abdelatty described Israel's military action in Gaza as 'systematic genocide'. Egypt has been trying, along with the United States and Qatar, to broker a pause in the Gaza war and secure the release of the estimated 50 Israeli hostages held by Hamas, in return for the freedom of hundreds of Palestinians jailed in Israel. Egypt, which neighbours both Gaza and Israel, has criticised Israel's actions while repeatedly warning that it will not stand idly by if difficult living conditions created by Israel in the enclave force Palestinians to move into its Sinai Peninsula. Such action, Mr El Sisi has said, would undermine Egypt's national security and hollow out the Palestinian cause. While a traditional champion of Palestinian rights, Egypt has in recent weeks come under criticism from activists at home and abroad for not doing more to allow humanitarian supplies in through its border with Gaza. Mr El Sisi has sought to discredit these charges on at least three recent occasions, in a televised address to the nation, his comments on Tuesday and again on Wednesday when he spoke to cadets at the military academy. Israel, he argued, has occupied the Palestinian side of the border with Gaza, including the Rafah crossing, the only point of entry and exit for Gaza that is not controlled by the Israelis. Sending aid through the crossing requires advance co-ordination with Israel, he said. Egypt has, alongside other nations, taken part in air drops of supplies into Gaza, but the method has been described by UN experts as insufficient. Pro-government pundits suspect the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist group banned in Egypt since 2013, is behind the campaign over Egypt's perceived inaction to alleviate Gazans' suffering. Scores of Palestinians have died from famine or malnutrition-related ailments. 'Egypt is continuing to work towards pausing the war, the entry of humanitarian aid [into Gaza] and the release of the hostages … despite the campaigns of defamation and misinformation that target its vital role,' Mr El Sisi told the military cadets on Wednesday.
Middle East Eye
3 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
Eighty years after Hiroshima, calls to 'nuke Gaza' show how little has been learned
On 22 May 2025, the register of all victims of the US atomic bombing of Hiroshima was brought out from its stone-chamber cenotaph at Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park, following a silent prayer at 8.15am - the exact time the bomb fell 80 years ago. The register lists 344,306 names, with one volume dedicated to those whose identities are unknown. Marking the 80th anniversary, the city allowed media to view the inside of the chamber for the first time. That very same day, as Hiroshima quietly marked its dead, Republican Congressman Randy Fine went on Fox News to suggest that a nuclear weapon be dropped on Gaza. Despite his history of incendiary and extremist remarks, he was not the first US politician to make such a statement. A year earlier, on 21 March 2024, Republican Congressman Tim Walberg also suggested dropping a nuclear weapon on Gaza, "like Nagasaki and Hiroshima". The previous November, less than a month after Israel began its assault on 7 October 2023, heritage minister Amichay Eliyahu, of the Jewish Power Party, told a Hebrew radio station that a nuclear bomb should be dropped on Gaza. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Some Israeli commentators warned that calls to "nuke Gaza" risked drawing international outrage and undermining Israel's long-standing policy of nuclear ambiguity - its refusal to confirm or deny possessing such weapons. After Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu suspended him from cabinet meetings and publicly disavowed the remarks, Eliyahu claimed his words were "metaphorical". Since Israel launched its genocidal war on Gaza, comparisons to the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which took place three days later on 9 August 1945, have been invoked by a range of figures. The frequency and flippancy with which politicians and pundits have entertained - and at times encouraged - the nuclear destruction of Gaza has struck a nerve in Japan, where anti-war and pro-Palestine sentiment has surged. The frequency and flippancy with which politicians and pundits have entertained - and at times encouraged - the nuclear destruction of Gaza has struck a nerve in Japan Last year, Nihon Hidankyo, the group representing living atomic bomb survivors (hibakusha), won the Nobel Peace Prize. One of its leaders, Toshiyuki Mimaki, said aid workers in Gaza deserved the honour instead. Earlier that year, the mayor of Nagasaki refused to invite the Israeli ambassador to the city's memorial, despite public criticism from Israel's embassy and its supporters. Japan's pro-Palestine mobilisation has not been confined to civil society. In July 2025, Reiwa Shinsengumi, a five-year-old left-wing populist party led by former actor Taro Yamamoto, overtook the century-old Japanese Communist Party in the lower house and gained an additional seat in the upper house. Reiwa's platform includes an explicit opposition to Zionism and support for Palestinian rights. After nearly two years of a live-streamed genocide, the Japanese response carries a particular historical resonance. In a country where the devastation of nuclear war is a living memory, casual calls to obliterate Gaza reflect the same logic of annihilation. That this recognition comes from survivors of mass destruction - who have stood publicly with Palestinians in Gaza - underscores not only the cruelty of such rhetoric, but the ease and impunity with which it is voiced. Eighty years after Hiroshima, politicians' open calls for the extermination of an entire civilian population - even as Palestinians are starved, bombed and incinerated - reveal how little has been learned, and how thoroughly such apocalyptic violence has been normalised. Reanimated memory The harrowing images emerging from Gaza - skeletal infants, children burned, dismembered and sniped at by US-supplied weaponry, and a region reduced to rubble - have reverberated globally. In Japan, these scenes have cut even deeper, reanimating historical memory and evoking haunting parallels with the wide-scale destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki - entire cities levelled, where virtually no buildings were left standing. Photographs of mutilated and burned bodies, taken by the US military in 1945, were shown to the Japanese public as a chilling display of nuclear horror, and later appeared in the 1959 French film Hiroshima Mon Amour. This assertion of colonial dominance echoes in Gaza today, where Israeli soldiers have live-streamed their sadistic acts in what human rights groups describe as war crimes broadcast in real time. In both cases, the violence is not only inflicted, but also staged and justified through self-serving myths that confer moral legitimacy. Although the Empire of Japan was a brutal colonial force that committed war crimes across East and Southeast Asia and the Pacific, the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not deployed to end the war. Rather, they served to establish US postwar supremacy in the Asia-Pacific region after the Soviet Union declared in 1943 its intention to enter the Pacific Theatre once the war in Europe had concluded. By early 1945, diplomatic discussions between Japan and the Soviet Union regarding the terms of surrender were already under way, including before and after the Potsdam Conference, which brought together the US, UK and USSR from 17 July to 2 August. Even the choice of Hiroshima as the first target was not predetermined. The original plan was to strike Kokura (now Kitakyushu) on the island of Kyushu, but heavy cloud cover threatened to obstruct aerial surveys of the bomb's impact and aftermath. Hiroshima, on the island of Honshu, was selected instead due to its clearer skies. Myths of war Of the many myths invented to rationalise imperialist mass murder, few are as enduring as the US claim that the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were somehow necessary to save lives. In his 1955 memoirs, former US President Harry Truman claimed that the use of nuclear weapons on Japan "saved 500,000 American lives". Follow Middle East Eye's live coverage of Israel's war on Gaza However, records from the Joint War Plans Committee, dated 15 June 1945, estimated American military casualties (not including Japanese military or civilians) of 40,000 killed, 150,000 wounded and 3,500 missing - totalling 193,500 - if the US were to invade Kyushu and then Honshu from the south. On 18 June, in a memo from General Douglas MacArthur to General George C Marshall, MacArthur agreed with this estimate and wrote that he regarded "the operation as the most economical one in effort and lives that is possible". Unlike the deadly Battle of Okinawa, which took place from 1 April to 22 June 1945 and claimed 150,000 Indigenous Ryukyuan lives, and around 50,000 US and 100,000 Japanese soldiers, the Joint War Plans Committee expected a mainland invasion to be far less lethal, given the multiple points of entry into Kyushu, unlike the heavily militarised island of Okinawa. From Okinawa to Palestine: How the US military machine connects occupied territories Read More » Instead, the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed an estimated 246,000 people, most of them civilians. Between 10 and 20 percent were Zainichi Koreans - themselves victims of Japanese colonialism who were brought to Japan as labourers after the empire's colonisation of the Korean peninsula in 1910. The myth that dropping the bombs "saved lives", therefore, only holds if Japanese and Korean lives are excluded from the calculation - if, in the logic of war, only American lives matter. Yet this distorted claim remains fervently defended by right-wing American and Zionist nationalists. On a recent episode of Piers Morgan Uncensored, hardline pro-Israel commentator Rabbi Shmuley Boteach cited Hiroshima and Nagasaki to ask whether Truman "was a war criminal" for authorising the killing of hundreds of thousands of civilians, including children. Morgan, unsurprisingly, responded "no", insisting that neither Truman - the only US president to authorise nuclear attacks on civilian populations - nor Winston Churchill - who presided over the 1943 Bengal Famine that killed up to 3.8 million Bengalis - could be considered war criminals. Weaponised history The invocation of Hiroshima is no longer limited to historical debate. It is now a rhetorical device used by Israel apologists to justify the destruction of Gaza. On another recent Piers Morgan episode, Clay Travis, a far-right US radio host and successor to Rush Limbaugh, linked the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor to the atomic bombing of Japan in a discussion about "proportionality". The invocation of Hiroshima is no longer limited to historical debate. It is now a rhetorical device used by Israel apologists to justify the destruction of Gaza He drew a parallel between those events and Hamas's 7 October attack, which he referenced to excuse Israel's starvation, bombing and collective punishment of Gaza. The historical absurdity of such comparisons reveals just how deeply entrenched the myth of the atomic bombing's necessity remains in the American psyche - and how central it is to the political and media machinery now condoning another genocide. When the Japanese Empire attacked Pearl Harbor (its Hawaiian name, Puʻuloa, was renamed by the US Navy), it also targeted other American military installations on the island of Oʻahu, including the marine base at Mokapu Peninsula, now home to the Kāneʻohe Marine Corps Base Head (MCBH). But what is often omitted from such narratives is that Japan's military action in the Hawaiian Islands occurred within the context of US imperial aggression - namely, the illegal overthrow of the sovereign Kingdom of Hawaiʻi in 1893, with which Japan had maintained a peace treaty since 1871. Glorified annihilation The atomic bombings of Japan continue to hold a powerful grip on the American and western imaginary, framed as life-saving, morally righteous acts and triumphant displays of technological might and imperial dominance. Their use in 1945 was not, as many still claim, a response to the attack on Pearl Harbor. Rather, it marked a strategic assertion of US supremacy across the Pacific in the postwar era - a campaign extended through decades of nuclear weapons testing. On 1 March 1954, the US detonated "Castle Bravo", its first high-yield thermonuclear bomb, on Bikini Atoll in the Marshall Islands. The blast irradiated the 23-man crew of a Japanese tuna boat and inspired the original Godzilla film later that year, with the monster serving as a metaphor for nuclear destruction. Fallout from the test forced the displacement of Indigenous Bikini Islanders, who remain exiled from their ancestral land. Yet while Japanese popular culture reckoned with the trauma of nuclear war, the West transformed it into spectacle. The designer of the modern bikini swimsuit named it in commemoration of the 1946 "Baker" atomic bomb test on Bikini Atoll. Today, SpongeBob lives in "Bikini Bottom". The nuclear arms race became, in the West, a source of humour, fashion, and even children's entertainment. Christopher Nolan's 2023 film Oppenheimer extends this tradition, centring the guilt of a white American physicist while omitting the civilian death toll in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the ecological devastation of nuclear testing, and the displacement of Indigenous Pueblo farmers to make way for the Manhattan Project at Los Alamos. This aestheticisation of mass death follows centuries of American mythmaking, propaganda and nationalist storytelling - a mythology that glorifies technological violence and depends on the erasure of its victims. This moral and cultural detachment has consequences. In a shocking moment during a 2014 showing of Godzilla in a Philadelphia cinema, the American audience hissed when a Japanese character delivered an impassioned speech against the use of nuclear weapons. A film born of nuclear trauma was consumed as pure entertainment in a culture that scorns its victims. It is this same genocidal worldview that now allows American and Israeli politicians to openly call for "nuking" Gaza and other declared enemies of US hegemony. For decades, Israel has positioned itself as a global innovator of military technology, boasting of weapons that are "battle-tested" on Palestinians. During its 2014 assault on Gaza, surveillance footage of targeted buildings was displayed at international arms expos to advertise Israeli drones. Similar showcases have accompanied the current war, with Israeli officials reportedly promoting new weapons systems based on their performance in Gaza. Whether in Japan, the islands of the Pacific or in Gaza, the ideology that enables the mass killing of civilians remains intact. It endures through the systematic dehumanisation of its victims - Indigenous peoples, colonised populations, and now Palestinians - whose suffering is reduced to data points, sales metrics or propaganda fodder. And as this system of annihilation reaches its most violent and unrestrained expression in Gaza today, the world continues to look away - or worse, to hiss. False equivalence If some in the West scorn or dismiss victims altogether, others do acknowledge the horror in Gaza, only to dilute it with misleading historical comparisons. The growing trend of comparing the scale of destruction in Gaza to the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki risks obscuring, rather than illuminating, the nature of Israel's assault. Consider political commentator Peter Daou's viral post on X from 26 July 2025, which superimposed Gaza onto a map of New York and read: By the way, this is the size of Gaza. Basically a train ride from Brooklyn to Yonkers. Now imagine this slice of NYC being subjected to the equivalent of 6 Hiroshima bombs, mass starvation, drones sniping children, hospitals demolished, and aid workers massacred. The intention behind such posts is understandable, as many wish to convey the sheer scale of devastation in a small, densely populated area. But these analogies are dangerously imprecise. The total tonnage of conventional explosives dropped on Gaza cannot be meaningfully compared to even the earliest nuclear weapons, let alone those in today's arsenals. The atomic bombs dropped on Japan in 1945 were fission-based weapons with yields of 15 and 21 kilotons, respectively. By contrast, modern thermonuclear weapons use both fission and fusion, resulting in vastly larger blast radii and destructive power, sometimes up to 3,000 times more powerful than the bombs dropped on Japan. For example, the overall yield of the two bombs - "Little Boy" on Hiroshima and "Fat Man" on Nagasaki - was 15,000 and 21,000 tons of TNT equivalent. Modern thermonuclear weapons can have yields up can yield up to 10 megatons - or 10 million tons of TNT equivalent - such as the weapon tested over Eniwetok Atoll in the Marshall Islands on 1 November 1952, more than 700 times the power of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima. Even so-called "tactical" nuclear weapons today can carry payloads of 100 kilotons or more - five times the destructive force of the bomb dropped on Nagasaki. A Palestinian man amid the damage caused by an Israeli strike on the UN-run Sheikh Radwan Health Centre in northern Gaza City on 6 August 2025 (Omar Al-Qattaa/AFP) President Barack Obama's nuclear modernisation programme upgraded over 1,550 US warheads with precision-guided missile delivery systems, at a cost of $1.25 trillion under the 2011 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) with Russia. All of these weapons have horrifying short-term and long-term destructive effects. While Israel has a nuclear arsenal, perhaps one reason it does not use such weapons on Gaza is the simple proximity of its own population centres. Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and surrounding Israeli settlements lie just 44-48 miles (71-78km) from Gaza - well within reach of radioactive fallout. Though the intensity of bombing in Gaza is extraordinary in the context of 21st-century conventional warfare - with reports of US-supplied GBU-31, GBU-32 and GBU-39 bunker buster bombs levelling entire neighbourhoods - even these powerful bombs do not approach the destructive scale of nuclear weapons. So simply comparing the tonnage of explosives to "six Hiroshima bombs" is misleading - and, frankly, does not compute in the American mind, which has long glorified nuclear weaponry as a "life-saving" and "technological miracle". The destructive force of even six "Little Boys" would quite literally kill everyone, not only in Gaza, but across the surrounding Israeli settlements, possibly reaching the rest of occupied Palestine and poisoning the Mediterranean Sea and nearby freshwater sources. The entire region would become a kind of Chernobyl. Remembrance and resistance In the run-up to President Donald Trump's June attack on Iran, there was speculation that he might order a tactical nuclear strike on Iran's Fordow nuclear plant. Instead, he reportedly authorised the use of GBU-57 bunker buster bombs, which weigh 30,000lbs (13,607kg) and can only be deployed by a B-2 stealth bomber - unlike strategic nuclear warheads, which can be launched via ballistic missile. The tactical nuclear weapon under consideration was the B61 thermonuclear bomb, which remains in the US stockpile in versions with yields ranging from 0.3 to 300 kilotons - the upper limit being six times the power of the bomb dropped on Nagasaki. Israel-Palestine war: How racist discourse fuels Israel's settler colonial genocide Adam Miyashiro Read More » That we now live in an age where serious talk of using nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear state - a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty - can be entertained in defence of an undeclared nuclear power that has signed no such treaties, should give us pause. It should also force us to interrogate the language we use when we speak of nuclear threats - whether literal or metaphorical - and to ask who is permitted to wield them without consequence. On this day, 6 August 2025, the 80th anniversary of the first use of an atomic weapon on a civilian population, we must honour their memory by uplifting the courage of the hibakusha who have stood in solidarity with the Palestinian people - especially those in Gaza - and resisted US imperialism and its agents in Japan. Their defiance reminds us that remembrance without resistance is hollow. To truly honour the victims of Hiroshima is to confront the political systems that treat some lives as disposable. It is to reject the dehumanisation and racial hierarchies that sustain violent military occupations - from the islands of the Pacific to Palestine. The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
