Amid heated debate, no real plan for Israel's 'humanitarian city' in Gaza
Even without a clear blueprint, opposition critics have denounced the proposal, with some likening the suggested site to a "concentration camp," which could lead to ethnic cleansing in the coastal enclave devastated by 21 months of conflict.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's administration has defended the project, saying it would offer civilians a safe haven while further weakening Hamas militants' grip on Gaza, but it remains unclear whether it is a concrete government policy.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Diplomat
12 hours ago
- The Diplomat
How Barack Obama Planned to Destroy North Korea's Weapons of Mass Destruction
U.S. President Donald Trump's attack on Iran's nuclear facilities has once again raised the prospect of Washington destroying North Korea's stockpile of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). That's only natural given Trump's first term in office, when he appeared on the brink of launching such an attack on North Korea. But as analysts have pointed out, Pyongyang's WMD programs have grown to alarming proportions over the past decade. As a result, such a strike has virtually no chance of succeeding. What analysts haven't pointed out is that serious planning for a first strike against North Korea's arsenal was initiated by then-President Barack Obama almost five years before Trump's 'fire and fury' threats, and those plans came up short. Obama and Trump met for the first – and only – time days after the Republican candidate had won the presidential election. Obama had decided to personally take on the task of making sure an uninformed Trump, who didn't even know there were two Koreas, understood that Pyongyang's nuclear weapons would soon be able to devastate American cities. Obama warned Trump that Kim Jong Un was about to cross a technological Rubicon. Obama often told his advisors that a future president might have to attack North Korea before it launched its weapons. While Obama informed Trump that he had ordered the Pentagon to figure out how to do that, their plan still fell short of achieving the objective. Obama's warning may have been too successful. It certainly left an impression on the president-to-be. An astounded Trump repeatedly asked his advisers how past presidents could have left him with this mess. He would also ask everyone, including the musician Kid Rock, what to do. Trump would later claim in public that Obama was about to start a war with North Korea, but all Obama was trying to do was to arm future presidents with a plan to prevent the destruction of American cities. Trump also claimed that Obama has been 'begging for a meeting' with Kim Jong Un. Susan Rice, Obama's national security adviser, called Trump's accusation 'horseshit,' but like many of Donald Trump's pronouncements, there was a grain of truth in what he said. The North Korean arsenal grew to alarming proportions during Obama's two terms in office. In 2009, intelligence estimates predicted the threat of a North Korean intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) was still a decade off. But in January 2011, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates made headlines when he announced that North Korea could attack U.S. cities in five to ten years. It turned out Pyongyang's long-range missile program had been hiding in plain sight. Suspicious purchases of 'large off-road vehicles,' perfect for transporting a new mobile ICBM, were announced on a Chinese company's website starting in October 2010. Deliveries started 8 months later. In April 2012, those transporters appeared carrying a new missile dubbed the KN-08 in a massive Pyongyang parade celebrating Kim Il Sung's birth. The missile was a potential game-changer for the Pentagon, since a stationary missile could be destroyed before launch. Mobile missiles were likely to survive an attack. Some experts argued the paraded missiles were only mockups and a hoax. The Pentagon, however, believed they were intended to help build a new weapon. The KN-08 confirmed the worst fears of a handful of Defense Department officials. James 'Jim' Miller, the third ranking civilian official at the Pentagon, had initially supported the majority view that the real North Korea threat was short-range missiles aimed at U.S. troops and allies – South Korea and Japan – in Northeast Asia. However, the more Miller and an aide, Tom Ehrhard, a former Air Force officer who didn't engage in wishful thinking, talked to intelligence analysts, the more they realized the ICBM danger was real. The two were joined by four-star Admiral James 'Sandy' Winnefeld, Jr., then the newly appointed vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Tasked to protect the continental United States from attack in his last job, Winnefeld's wife had complained that Pyongyang ruined their holidays by launching rockets. He assured her he would take care of the problem. The admiral feared that North Korea would eventually be able to obliterate cities on the United States' West Coast. The April 2012 parade also set off alarm bells in the White House. Obama had been concerned about the North Korean threat. His daily brief, featuring the KN-08's appearance, concluded that the missile wouldn't be operational until it was successfully tested. But Obama sent an unequivocal message to the Pentagon. 'I have to defend this country. I want you to take this seriously,' a senior military officer recalled the president as saying. A successful North Korean satellite launch in December using a large rocket was a 'big wake up call,' according to a Pentagon official. Then, Pyongyang's nuclear detonation in February 2013, which it claimed helped develop nuclear warheads small enough to place on top of a rocket, proved to be the last straw. Miller and Winnefeld won their fight. In March, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel announced a $1 billion initiative to buy 14 more Ground Based Interceptors, or GBIs, to add to the existing stockpile. They would protect the United States from Pyongyang's 'irresponsible and reckless provocations.' However, complacency soon set in again. The Pentagon's attitude was, 'We've got it,' according to one Defense Department official, even though it became clear that a modest upgrade in U.S. missile defenses wouldn't be able to cope with more than a handful of KN-08s. Officials reasoned, 'If they launch a nuclear weapon at San Francisco, we will nuke them.' That view wasn't shared by everyone. A policy review ordered by Obama confirmed that Hagel's GBI upgrade could easily be overwhelmed by a growing missile arsenal. The president ordered the Pentagon to consider the new North Korean ICBM operational even if it hadn't been tested and to develop a plan to take 'those missiles out' before they could be launched, according to a senior U.S. military officer. Obama didn't want the military to 'bring him another rock.' The fight to find a solution to the growing North Korean threat was joined by a new important ally. Robert 'Bob' Work, a Marine veteran who was appointed deputy secretary of defense, quickly focused on the danger, with the aid of Ehrhard, who had remained behind when Miller left the Pentagon. History had proved that destroying mobile missiles is hard. The Allies only managed to stop one German V-1 rocket during World War II. None was destroyed during the 1991 'Great SCUD hunt' for Saddam Hussein's mobile rockets. However, technology had advanced. Missiles could be tracked more precisely, data could be transmitted more quickly, and more accurate weapons could destroy the missiles before they moved. Moreover, exotic 'left of launch' technologies, such as cyberstrikes against computers that controlled the weapons, might destroy or disable missiles before they left the ground. Both Work and Winnefeld had their own expert groups examining this new toolkit. While much of the Pentagon was fixated on the exotic to the exclusion of the pragmatic, those technologies were only '1 percent of the answer,' according to a senior Pentagon official. There was no substitute for old-fashioned detective work, tracking and blowing up North Korea's missiles. Ehrhard had experienced that drudgery as a young Air Force captain assigned the job of figuring out how to destroy mobile Russian missiles. The U.S. intelligence community had been monitoring Pyongyang's weapons. but there was still much more work that remained to be done, tracking their daily movements and operations. The Pentagon missed White House deadlines twice to come up with an ICBM-busting plan. When it did deliver, the proposals were bounced back. 'It's not good enough, I want another version,' Rice commented after seeing the first report. 'Is that enough? What else can you do?' White House officials asked during briefings. In May 2015, the Joint Chiefs of Staff organized a half-day long secret war game to review how much progress had been made. The answers fell far short of what Obama wanted. According to one White House aide, the Pentagon's bottom line – 'We are just not sure we can catch everything' – was disappointing. Moreover, North Korea's response to a strike could devastate South Korea and Japan. Past presidents going back to Richard Nixon, who considered attacking the North after it shot down an American spy plane in 1969, had faced the same dilemma. Seoul, a city with millions of inhabitants, is only 22 kilometers from the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ). Still, Obama reminded his advisers that the United States had found Osama Bin Laden. Why couldn't it find North Korea's mobile missiles? 'You've got to be working harder,' an aide heard him argue. After Pyongyang's hydrogen bomb test in September 2016, Obama asked again if it was possible to launch a preemptive strike supported by cyber operations. It's unlikely that the Obama administration ever succeeded in formulating a plan for an attack on North Korea. One administration official recalled that on a scale of one to ten, it rated a five on the priority list. By the end of Obama's administration, North Korea was well on the way to building a nuclear arsenal that could withstand a U.S. first strike. Eight years later, Trump's options for such a strike would be even more constrained.
Japan Times
14 hours ago
- Japan Times
Pentagon No. 3 praises Japan defense report, but vows to make alliance more 'equitable'
The U.S. Department of Defense's No. 3 official has lauded Japan's latest defense white paper — though his praise was couched in language suggesting that the Pentagon will continue to push Tokyo to hike defense spending even further. The annual report, released Tuesday, says the international community has entered 'a new era of crisis,' with China representing Japan's 'greatest strategic challenge' and U.S. President Donald Trump's policies expected to 'significantly impact' the Indo-Pacific region. U.S. Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Elbridge Colby on Tuesday labeled the report 'an important, clear-eyed strategic assessment from our close ally Japan.' Colby's endorsement, however, came with the stipulation that the U.S. would aim to focus on the shifting tide in the Indo-Pacific by seeking a more 'equitable' balance in its alliance with Japan. 'We at DOD stand ready to work closely with Tokyo to adjust to this new era and to follow President Trump's guidance to make our alliances stronger, more equitable, and thus sustainable,' Colby wrote on X. Trump has a long history of railing against the U.S.-Japan alliance, saying in recent months that the partnership is unfair and 'one-sided' — remarks that echoed views from his first term, when he demanded Tokyo cough up more cash or risk the removal of American troops. Colby has carried out these demands, initially saying during a March confirmation hearing that Japan 'should be spending at least 3%' of its gross domestic product on defense 'as soon as possible.' Last month, however, the Pentagon said it had set a 'global standard' for Japan and other U.S. allies to spend 5% of GDP on defense. Ostensibly pacifist Japan has in recent years undertaken a dramatic transformation of its security policy, including a five-year plan to ramp up defense spending to 2% of GDP by 2027. Japan's defense white paper alluded to concerns over potential policy shifts under Trump, saying that 'U.S. actions will significantly impact' the regional security environment 'and will require continued attention.' The Shandong, China's first domestically built aircraft carrier, sits anchored after arriving in Hong Kong on July 3. | AFP-JIJI China, meanwhile, lashed out at the attention it received in the report. 'The new version of the defense white paper holds a wrong perception of China, unreasonably interferes in China's internal affairs and hypes up the so-called China threat,' Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lin Jian told a news conference Tuesday. 'China expresses strong dissatisfaction and resolute opposition to this, and has lodged solemn representations with Japan.' The white paper singles out China as 'the greatest strategic challenge' Tokyo has ever faced, pointing to the Chinese military's stepped-up 'throughout areas surrounding Japan.' It cites several recent incidents, including the China Coast Guard's deployment of a helicopter in Japan's territorial airspace around the Japanese-controlled, Chinese-claimed Senkakus in May. The white paper also notes a Chinese military aircraft's incursion into Japanese airspace last August and a Chinese aircraft carrier sailing close to Japan's territorial waters the following month — both firsts. Beijing has continued to chip away at precedent in recent months, dispatching both of its active aircraft carriers deep into the western Pacific last month and sending its warplanes near Japanese aircraft multiple times in recent weeks, moves that Tokyo said risked collisions. Following the latest close encounter — during which Chinese JH-7 fighter-bombers came within 30 meters of the Japanese YS-11EB electronic intelligence aircraft — Beijing blamed Tokyo, calling 'close-in reconnaissance and harassment' by the Japanese side 'the root cause' of the incidents. Defense Minister Gen Nakatani speaks during a news conference at the Defense Ministry in Tokyo on Tuesday. | JIJI Japanese Defense Minister Gen Nakatani said Tuesday that the Air Self-Defense Force had acted appropriately in conducting 'regular surveillance activities,' calling the Chinese allegations that the ASDF aircraft's flights were to blame 'completely unfounded.' Lin disputed that China's larger military moves were problematic, repeating Beijing's line that it adheres to 'the path of peaceful development and pursues a defensive national defense policy.' 'Its national defense construction and military activities are legitimate and reasonable, and its military cooperation with other countries is in line with international law and international practice,' he said. Lin accused Tokyo of using the white paper — which also offers a detailed description of progress Japan has made in strengthening its own defenses — to justify its decision to loosen many of the postwar shackles on its military in recent years. Noting that this year marks the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II, Lin urged Japan to 'deeply reflect' on its role in the war 'and stop looking for pretexts for its military expansion by exaggerating 'tensions in the surrounding areas.''
Yomiuri Shimbun
15 hours ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
UN Rapporteur Calls for Global Action to Stop ‘Genocide' in Gaza
BOGOTA, Colombia (AP) — The United Nations' special rapporteur for Gaza and the West Bank said Tuesday that it's time for nations around the world to take concrete actions to stop what she called the 'genocide' in Gaza. Francesca Albanese spoke to delegates from 30 countries meeting in Colombia's capital to discuss the Israel-Hamas war and ways that nations can try to stop Israel's military offensive in the territory. Many of the participating nations have described the violence as genocide against the Palestinians. 'Each state must immediately review and suspend all ties with the State of Israel … and ensure its private sector does the same,' said Albanese, w ho was sanctioned by the U.S. earlier this month. 'The Israeli economy is structured to sustain the occupation that has now turned genocidal.' The two-day conference organized by the governments of Colombia and South Africa is being attended mostly by developing nations, although the governments of Spain, Ireland and China have also sent delegates. Israel, which was founded in the aftermath of the Holocaust, has adamantly rejected genocide allegations against it as an antisemitic 'blood libel.' Analysts say it's not clear whether the conference's participating countries have enough leverage over Israel to force it to change its policies in Gaza, where more than 58,000 people have been killed in Israeli military operations following a deadly Hamas attack on Israel in 2023. The death toll comes from the health ministry, which is under Gaza's Hamas government and does not differentiate between civilians and combatants. The U.N. and other international organizations see its figures as the most reliable statistics on war casualties. 'The United States has so far failed to influence Israel's behavior … so it is naive to think that this group of countries can have any influence over (Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin) Netanyahu's behavior or on the government of Israel,' said Sandra Borda, a professor of international relations at Bogota's Los Andes University. She said, however, that the conference will enable some nations of the Global South to clarify their position toward the conflict and have their voices heard. The conference is co-chaired by the governments of South Africa and Colombia, which last year suspended coal exports to Israeli power plants, and includes the participation of members of The Hague Group, a coalition of eight nations that earlier this year pledged to cut military ties with Israel and to comply with an International Criminal Court arrest warrant against Netanyahu. Participating nations have said they are trying to comply with an I nternational Court of Justice opinion issued last year that said Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories is illegal. There is also a U.N. General Assembly resolution from September, which demands that Israel withdraw its military from Palestinian territories and calls on member nations to stop selling weapons to Israel. 'It's important that we stand up for the rule of law in a meaningful way,' said Chrispin Phiri, a spokesman for South Africa's Department of International Relations who is attending the conference in Bogota. 'This idea that international law … can only be enforced on counties of the global south is something that has become unsustainable.' For decades, South Africa's ruling African National Congress party has compared Israel's policies in Gaza and the West Bank with its own history of oppression under the harsh apartheid regime of white minority rule, which restricted most Blacks to 'homelands' or Bantustans, before ending in 1994. Albanese also brought up the comparison as she spoke to delegates in the conference, and urged them to impose sanctions on Israel until it withdraws from Gaza and the West Bank. 'I ask you to consider this moment as if we were sitting here in the 1990s, discussing the case of apartheid South Africa. Would you have proposed selective sanctions on South Africa for its conduct in individual Bantustans? Or would you have recognized the state's criminal system as a whole?' Albanese said. The gathering comes as the European Union weighs various measures against Israel including a ban on imports from Israeli settlements, an arms embargo and individual sanctions against Israeli officials found to be blocking a peaceful solution to the conflict. Colombia's Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs Mauricio Jaramillo said Monday that the nations participating in the Bogota meeting, which also include Qatar and Turkey, will be discussing diplomatic and judicial measures that can be taken to put more pressure on Israel to cease its attacks. The Colombian official described Israel's conduct in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank as an affront to the international order. 'This is not just about Palestine,' Jaramillo said in a press conference. 'It is about defending international law … and the right to self determination.'
