Israel kills Al Jazeera journalist Anas Al Sharif in Gaza – DW – 08/11/2025
Qatari broadcaster Al Jazeera's reporter Anas Al Sharif and four of his colleagues were killed on Sunday in an Israeli strike near Shifa Hospital in eastern Gaza City, according to Gaza officials and the network.
The network said the 28-year-old journalist had been previously threatened by Israel.
The Israeli military has claimed that Al Sharif headed a Hamas cell, an allegation Al Jazeera has rejected.
Gaza health officials and Al Jazeera said the journalists were killed when an Israeli missile hit a tent near the hospital. An official at Shifa said two other people were also killed.
"Al Jazeera journalist Anas al-Sharif has been killed alongside four colleagues in a targeted Israeli attack on a tent housing journalists in Gaza City," the Qatar-based broadcaster said.
It said he "was killed on Sunday after a tent for journalists outside the main gate of the hospital was hit."
The other Al Jazeera journalists killed were Mohammed Qreiqeh, Ibrahim Zaher and Mohammed Noufal.
To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
Minutes before his death, Al Sharif, whose X account had more than 500,000 followers, posted on the platform that Israel had been intensely bombarding Gaza City for more than two hours.
Al Sharif had worked as a prominent correspondent for Al Jazeera and was previously part of a photography team for the Reuters news agency that won the 2024 Pulitzer Prize for Breaking News Photography for coverage of the Israel-Hamas war.
He was described by the network as "one of Gaza's bravest journalists" and a vital voice in reporting on the war. His coverage often included interviews with residents directly affected by the fighting, as well as footage from sites immediately after Israeli strikes.
A press freedom group and a United Nations expert had previously warned that Al Sharif's life was at risk due to his reporting from Gaza. UN Special Rapporteur Irene Khan said last month that Israel's claims against him were unsubstantiated.
Al Jazeera said Al Sharif had left a social media message to be posted in the event of his death, saying he had "never hesitated to convey the truth as it is, without distortion or misrepresentation, hoping that God would witness those who remained silent."
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said Al Sharif was "responsible for advancing rocket attacks against Israeli civilians and IDF troops," alleging he led a Hamas cell.
It cited intelligence and documents found in Gaza as evidence, though Al Jazeera and Al Sharif himself denied any links to Hamas.
Both Al Jazeera and al-Sharif had previously dismissed the accusations as baseless.
The Palestinian Journalists' Syndicate described Al Sharif's death as a "bloody crime" of assassination.
The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) said it was "appalled" by the killing, denying the Israeli military's claims that Al Sharif had ties to Hamas.
"Israel has a longstanding, documented pattern of accusing journalists of being terrorists without providing any credible proof," the CPJ said Monday.
In July, the CPJ had urged the international community to protect Al Sharif, saying in a statement that Israel had failed to provide any evidence to back up its allegations against him.
In the statement, the CPJ accused Israel of targeting him in a smear campaign.
"Israel's pattern of labeling journalists as militants without providing credible evidence raises serious questions about its intent and respect for press freedom," Sara Qudah, CPJ's director for the Middle East and North Africa, said on Monday.
Reporters Without Borders (RSF) says the targeting of journalists in Gaza has created an "information blackout" in some areas.
Al Jazeera called the attack "a desperate attempt to silence voices in anticipation of the occupation of Gaza" and urged international accountability.
Al Jazeera remains blocked in Israel, where soldiers raided and shut its West Bank offices last year.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
DW
4 hours ago
- DW
Trump's DC intervention may be less likely in other cities – DW – 08/14/2025
US President Donald Trump has sent the National Guard into Washington, may well have other major cities in his sights. But could he replicate his capital intervention elsewhere? The arrival of 800 US National Guard troops in Washington, D.C. at the direction of President Donald Trump has been framed as an "authoritarian push" by the mayor of the nation's capital. Trump cast his decision to involve the National Guard in Washington and put the city's police force under the supervision of Attorney General Pam Bondi and Drug Enforcement Administration chief Terry Cole as a crime crackdown. He's calling the move a "Liberation Day" and claiming the city needed rescuing from "crime, bloodshed, bedlam and squalor." He's also named other cities, including New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago and Baltimore, as possible future targets if they don't address their own local crime issues. But federal data contradicts that claim, with statistics showing that violent crime is at a 30-year low. Critics say that based on this, there is no emergency that requires a military presence in the capital. "The numbers simply do not justify this measure," said Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser. So if crime has been going down in Washington, why the intervention? "It does look, if you look at the data, [like] crime is going down," said Laura Dickinson, a law professor at George Washington University, US. "City officials have not asked for help [from the president] so it really does seem at best questionable." "This is really problematic and contrary to our tradition in the United States, where we've been very cautious about using the military to do law enforcement functions," Dickinson added. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video In part, because he can. Washington, D.C. (which stands for District of Columbia) is not part of any US state and largely falls under the jurisdiction of the federal government. Under the 1973 Home Rule Act, presidents can take control of the DC police during emergencies for 30 days without congressional approval. And because it's a federal enclave, the president also commands the city's National Guard. Some US commentators have observed the move could be a political attempt to distract from ongoing controversy related to the Epstein Files and the release of jobs figures that showed a rise in unemployment. Trump's popularity in his flagship policy areas — in particular immigration — has also recently declined. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video While Trump and his allies have pointed to city crime as justification for the move, his opponents inside and outside of congress say the action is designed to exact control over cities that do not support Congressional Black Caucus, which currently has no Republican members, also said the cities named by Trump as potential targets all have the common thread of being led by Black mayors, labelling the move a "blatantly racist and despicable power grab." The presidency has fewer powers outside of the nation's capital. The governors of the 50 US states preside over the National Guard within their own borders. It's a key distinction that William Banks, a law professor at Syracuse University, US, said would make it far more difficult for Trump to follow through on threats to extend interventions beyond the federal enclave of Washington, D.C. "It would be unwise, I think to generalize this example and apply it to other places in the United States," Banks told DW. "He can't go to Chicago or Philadelphia or New York City or Los Angeles and do the same thing. He simply doesn't have the authority." But what about in June, when he deployed the National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles? Banks said there are provisions for limited interventions to protect federal property and personnel, but Trump "was walking on very thin ice." "His argument was that they were needed to ensure that the protesters didn't destroy federal property or harm ICE and other immigration personnel who are on the ground there doing their job." While they can protect federal assets, military personnel are banned from being actively used in domestic policing by the Posse Comitatus Act. In California, a three-day trial investigating whether the deployment of the National Guard was in breach of this law, and potentially unconstitutional, has recently wrapped up, with a decision pending. Dickinson said the use of military forces by the federal government in American cities could also impact how these institutions are perceived by the public. "It could damage the credibility and respect that Americans have for the military and the National Guard," Dickinson told DW. "These are some of the few institutions in the United States that enjoy very broad bipartisan support." To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Federal command of the DC police ends after 30 days, unless the Republican-controlled Congress approves an extension. The National Guard can remain active indefinitely. Despite alarms being raised by Trump's opponents, who are calling the move an authoritarian flex, Banks expects a return to the status quo is more likely, particularly when it comes to threats to other states. He said the United States' foundational history overthrowing the British military, and the norm that law enforcement should be maintained by civilian police, are crucial in understanding what Americans will accept in their communities. "Our situation is somewhat unique in the United States in not having any expectation of military involvement in law enforcement," Banks told DW. "We don't like military uniforms on our streets, we don't like men and women with guns patrolling our streets, it just rubs against the grain. "Posse Comitatus codifies that principle, but I think the norm is even more important and more fundamental."
DW
4 hours ago
- DW
Pakistan detains Afghans waiting for Germany relocations – DW – 08/14/2025
Pakistani police have been arresting Afghans, some of whom were awaiting relocation to Germany under special admission programs. Some detainees have reported surprise raids and separations from family members. Pakistani authorities detained Afghans in Islamabad in its latest crackdown on refugees from the country, including some who were set for relocation to Germany, police confirmed on Thursday. The arrests have drawn reactions from Berlin, with some of those sent to deportation centers already approved for relocation under Germany's admissions program as they flee the Taliban. Police in Islamabad said the group includes people registered in German programs, such as former local staff and others deemed at risk after the Taliban takeover in 2021. It was not clear how many such people were among those arrested. After the withdrawal of German troops, Germany had promised refuge from the Taliban to local staff who had supported Germany, as well as other Afghans facing persecution who fled to Pakistan. Some 2,400 of these people are now in Pakistan and hoping to leave for Germany. Among them, according to the German Interior Ministry, are about 350 former local staff of German institutions and their families. People in the region told the Reuters news agency that some have already been taken to the border region and even to Afghanistan. Witnesses described night raids on multiple guesthouses, saying entire families were taken away. "Seven families were arrested from my guesthouse alone," one owner told the DPA news agency. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video The advocacy group Kabul Luftbrücke ("Kabul air bridge") said families have been split up, with minors removed from parents. For example, two sisters aged 17 and 18 were reportedly arrested without their family and taken to Afghanistan. "The German Embassy in Islamabad is apparently unable to effectively protect those affected," the group said in a statement. Those affected include a family for whom the Berlin Administrative Court had already issued a positive emergency ruling. Reporters Without Borders urged Berlin to secure the release of an Afghan journalist with a German admission promise, saying "Germany must act now." Pakistan began mass deportations of undocumented Afghans in late 2023 and extended the policy to registered individuals in April 2024. Officials in Islamabad say the plan is to remove up to 3 million Afghans, arguing that the policy is needed to put pressure on the Taliban government. Human rights advocates warn of serious danger for returnees, including possible retaliation for perceived acts against the Taliban as it was fighting its insurgency. When asked whether people who had already been deported to Afghanistan were now being brought back, German Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt said there was contact with these individuals through the German Agency for International Cooperation (GIZ) and that they were receiving support. He added that each case would be examined for whether there was a legally binding obligation to admit them. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video The Interior Ministry has confirmed awareness of the detentions and said it has told Pakistan about detainees who are part of German programs. "We have a very close eye on the fact that in Pakistan," Dobrindt said. "The return of Afghans to Afghanistan is being accelerated." He said "in the vast majority of cases" there is still currently no entry permit for Germany, and whether one will be granted "cannot be said today." The Greens' Schahina Gambir called Pakistan's deportations "a scandal" and said "for months the federal government has been ignoring their legally confirmed need for protection." Clara Bünger of the socialist Left party described the situation as "immense inhumanity" and said "now action must be taken immediately: issue visas, stop deportations." Kabul Luftbrücke said it has 15 court rulings confirming individuals' right to admission, but that "appeals by the federal government often delay visa issuance." Rights groups and opposition parties continue to press for immediate visas and the safe return of those already deported. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
Int'l Business Times
4 hours ago
- Int'l Business Times
UN Warns Russia, Israel Of Conflict Sex Crimes Listing Risk
The United Nations warned Israel and Russia on Thursday that their militaries faced being listed as parties suspected of committing sexual violence in conflict in light of credible evidence of violations. UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres's report said the two countries risked being added to a list of parties thought to use sexual violence including rape in conflict that includes Myanmar's military, Sudan's army and the Palestinian militant group Hamas. "Due to significant concerns regarding patterns of certain forms of sexual violence perpetrated by Israeli armed and security forces and Russian armed and security forces and affiliated armed groups, these parties have been put on notice for potential listing in the next reporting period," said the annual report. "These concerns relate primarily to violations recorded in detention settings." In the case of Israel, the report alleges "credible information" military and security forces perpetrated patterns of sexual violence including "genital violence, prolonged forced nudity and repeated strip searches conducted in an abusive and degrading manner." In February, the Israeli army said it had charged five soldiers for abusing a Palestinian detainee at a site used to hold Palestinians following the start of the war in Gaza in the wake of the October 7, 2023 attacks by Hamas. Among the charges was an allegation that the accused had stabbed a man with a sharp object "which had penetrated near the detainee's rectum." The report said there was "credible" evidence of violations "against Ukrainian prisoners of war, in 50 official and 22 unofficial detention facilities in Ukraine" and Russia. "These cases comprised a significant number of documented incidents of genital violence, including electrocution, beatings and burns to the genitals, and forced stripping and prolonged nudity, used to humiliate and elicit confessions or information," it said. In 2024, the human rights monitoring mission in Ukraine documented 209 cases of conflict-related sexual violence, including rape, the report added. Israel has cooperated with a special representative on the issue of sexual violence in conflict, whereas Russia has not, the report said. The report said however that Israel's refusal to grant access to inspectors had frustrated her ability to determine patterns and trends. Israel rejected the report's findings and called a letter that accompanied it from Guterres "unusual." "The UN must focus on the shocking war crimes and sexual violence of Hamas and the release of all hostages," Israel's ambassador to the UN Danny Danon said. "Israel will not shy away from protecting its citizens and will continue to act in accordance with international law." Russia's embassy to the United Nations did not respond to a request for comment.
