Latest news with #InternationalCommitteeoftheRedCross
NDTV
3 days ago
- Politics
- NDTV
US-Backed Ceasefire Plan For Gaza Still Under Discussion, But Optimism Fading
Jerusalem: Israeli and Hamas negotiators have been taking part in the latest round of ceasefire talks in Doha since July 6, discussing a U.S.-backed proposal for a 60-day ceasefire that envisages a phased release of hostages, Israeli troop withdrawals from parts of Gaza and discussions on ending the conflict. U.S., Qatari and Egyptian mediators have been working to secure an agreement. However, initial optimism that a deal might be at hand has waned in recent days. Here are the details of the ceasefire proposals, as outlined by an official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, and a look at some of the political calculations in play: Hostages And Palestinian Prisoners Ten hostages held in Gaza will be returned along with the bodies of 18 others, spread out over 60 days. The swaps will take place without ceremonies or parades. In exchange, Israel will release detained Palestinians. The exact number is not clear. Israel says that of 50 hostages held by Hamas and its allies, about 20 are believed to be alive. Aid To Palestinians In accordance with a January 19 agreement, aid will immediately enter Gaza in sufficient amounts with the involvement of the United Nations and the International Committee of the Red Cross. Israeli Withdrawals On Day One, after an initial eight hostages are released, the Israeli army will withdraw from parts of northern Gaza as per maps that will be agreed upon. On Day Seven, after receiving five bodies, Israel will withdraw from parts of the south as per the maps. A technical team will work on drawing boundaries for withdrawals during rapid negotiations that will take place after agreement on the framework of the proposal. Begotiations On A Permanent Ceasefire On Day One of the agreement, negotiations will start on a permanent ceasefire. If an agreement is reached, all remaining Palestinian prisoners detained from Gaza since October 7, 2023, will be released. Guarantees The proposal guarantees U.S. President Donald Trump's commitment to the agreement. The mediators will guarantee serious negotiations take place during the pause. If more time is needed, they can extend that period. Political Calculations In Israel Two far-right members of the Israeli cabinet -- Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir -- have criticised the ceasefire push, demanding instead the total destruction of Hamas. It is not clear if they would resign if a deal is signed. Looking to keep them on side, Netanyahu is pushing for the Israeli military to hold much more of Gaza than it did when the last ceasefire came into effect in January, allowing the army to control land between Khan Younis and Rafah in the south. The government has said it plans to build a "humanitarian city" for some 600,000 people in this area, saying it will be a safe space for Gazans. Opponents have likened it to a concentration camp. Critics say Netanyahu is looking to stretch out the negotiations until July 27, when the Knesset (parliament) breaks for the summer recess. It is much harder to collapse a government when the Knesset is closed. Political Calculations For Hamas Hamas is fundamentally opposed to leaving so much land under direct Israeli control or the creation of a closed-off "humanitarian city", which would further diminish its already battered grip on the coastal enclave. As such, it is demanding that Israeli forces withdraw to the lines established ahead of the January ceasefire. It has also pushed for stronger guarantees that any pause in hostilities would lead to a permanent end to the war, worried that the Israelis have no intention of extending the truce.
TimesLIVE
3 days ago
- Politics
- TimesLIVE
US-backed ceasefire plan for Gaza under discussion, but optimism fading
Israeli and Hamas negotiators have been taking part in the latest round of ceasefire talks in Doha since July 6, discussing a US-backed proposal for a 60-day ceasefire that envisages a phased release of hostages, Israeli troop withdrawals from parts of Gaza and discussions on ending the conflict. US, Qatari and Egyptian mediators have been working to secure an agreement. However, initial optimism that a deal might be at hand has waned in recent days. Here are the details of the ceasefire proposals, as outlined by an official who spoke on condition of anonymity, and a look at some political calculations in play: HOSTAGES AND PALESTINIAN PRISONERS A total of 10 hostages held in Gaza will be returned together with the bodies of 18 others, spread out over 60 days. The swaps will take place without ceremonies or parades. In exchange, Israel will release detained Palestinians. The exact number is not clear. Israel said of 50 hostages held by Hamas and its allies, about 20 are believed to be alive. AID TO PALESTINIANS In accordance with a January 19 agreement, aid will immediately enter Gaza in sufficient amounts with the involvement of the UN and the International Committee of the Red Cross. ISRAELI WITHDRAWALS On day one, after an initial eight hostages are released, the Israeli army will withdraw from parts of northern Gaza as per maps that will be agreed. On day seven, after receiving five bodies, Israel will withdraw from parts of the south as per the maps. A technical team will work on drawing boundaries for withdrawals during rapid negotiations that will take place after agreement on the framework of the proposal.
Middle East Eye
11-07-2025
- Middle East Eye
Red Cross staff member and volunteer shot and wounded in Gaza
An International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) staff member and Palestine Red Crescent Society (PRCS) volunteer were wounded after being shot at in Gaza late on Thursday, the ICRC said in a statement. It said: "The injured individuals were immediately evacuated and received treatment; both are in stable condition. The mission was launched to evacuate a wounded ICRC staff member and his family who had been unreachable since 4 July due to ongoing hostilities. The previously wounded ICRC colleague and his family members remain unreachable." The ICRC said that Israeli authorities were notified of the mission, and it took place with its coordination. "All staff were travelling in illuminated and clearly marked vehicles bearing the Red Cross and Red Crescent emblems," it said. "The ICRC condemns this attack. This is the second incident in which an ICRC staff member has been injured by bullets in less than a week. Both the PRCS and the ICRC have already faced numerous security incidents over the past few months. The ICRC is outraged by these incidents which are a stark reminder of the grave danger civilians in Gaza face every day." It added that under international humanitarian law, medical and humanitarian relief personnel must never be attacked.
LeMonde
09-07-2025
- Politics
- LeMonde
ICRC head: 'Are we accepting life in a world where war is becoming the first resort?'
Pierre Krähenbühl, the second-in-command at the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) calls on states, including Western nations, to pull themselves together, warning that the fundamental principles of international humanitarian law established after World War II are in danger of becoming meaningless. You have mentioned a collapse of international humanitarian law. Is that what you are seeing on the ground? We are witnessing a dual phenomenon, unprecedented in its scope: the proliferation of conflict zones and the lengthening of wars. Wars no longer end. There is a kind of crisis management paradigm that has taken hold, rather than one focused on prevention and resolution. So the question we are forced to ask is: Are we, in reality, accepting life in a world where war is once again becoming the first resort, where it can be waged without limits? Most of the conflicts in which the ICRC is involved have lasted for decades, yet that was never the original idea behind humanitarian action. At the same time, we are seeing a growing laxity toward international humanitarian law [of which the ICRC is the guardian under the 1949 Geneva Conventions]. If what we see in Gaza, Sudan, eastern Congo and Ukraine is the future of war, then there is reason to be deeply concerned about the abandonment of the most basic rules. International humanitarian law is not an abstraction, it's not a recitation of articles to soothe one's conscience. We are talking about the difference between life and death for civilians, between torture and humane treatment of prisoners of war.
Boston Globe
08-07-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Land mines, a Cold War horror, could return to fortify Europe's borders
Recent moves by Poland, the three Baltic states and Finland — and a vow by President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine — to quit a mine ban treaty that came into force in 1999 won't result in any immediate surge in the use of antipersonnel mines. Formally leaving the treaty is a six-month process. But the recent rush of countries rejecting a pillar of the post-Cold War order has outraged antimine campaigners. Advertisement 'We are furious with these countries,' said Tamar Gabelnick, director of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines, which in 1997 won a Nobel Peace Prize for its work clearing antipersonnel weapons and its role as the driving force behind the Mine Ban Treaty, known as the Ottawa Convention. 'They know full well that this will do nothing to help them against Russia,' Gabelnick said, dismissing a retreat from the global accord as 'just political games' by officials trying to present themselves as defenders of national security. Advertisement Senior military officials in at least three of the five countries whose parliaments recently voted to withdraw from the treaty have said in the past they saw little military utility in reviving antipersonnel mines. The weapons mostly kill civilians and offer limited defense against modern mechanized armies. The war in Ukraine 'changed everything,' said Veronika Honkasalo, a left-wing member of the Finnish parliament who is opposed to leaving the treaty, a move supported by an overwhelming majority of her fellow legislators in a recent vote. Because of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, she added, 'people got really scared because we have a 1,300-kilometer border with Russia and long history of war with our neighbor.' Of the European countries that share a land border with Russia, only Norway has stayed steadfast in its commitment to the Mine Ban Treaty. The treaty, according to the United Nations, led to the destruction of more than 55 million antipersonnel mines. The weapons were widely used in the Cold War era, in conflicts in Afghanistan, Angola, Cambodia, Myanmar, and many other countries, but continued to kill people long after fighting ended. Eighty percent of the casualties from antipersonnel mines are civilians, many of them children, according to the International Committee of the Red Cross, which estimates that the number of people killed or maimed each year has fallen to around 3,500 from more than 20,000 over the last two decades. 'It is a horrible weapon,' Honkasalo said. Russia, the United States, China, and a few other countries never signed up to the Ottawa Convention, but more than 160 others did. Advertisement Mary Wareham, a campaigner against antipersonnel mines who was involved in treaty negotiations in the 1990s, said the announced departures were a setback after decades of work to limit civilian casualties. They also 'set a terrible precedent,' she added, for the stability of a vast edifice of international law governing chemical, biological and nuclear weapons and the conduct of war itself. 'Once an idea gets going it picks up steam,' said Wareham, who is the deputy director of the crisis, conflict and arms division at Human Rights Watch. 'Where does it stop?' The push by countries near Russia to leave the treaty started last year after a visit to Ukraine by Laurynas Kasciunas, then the defense minister of Lithuania. Told by Ukrainian military officers that the ban on antipersonnel mines made it difficult to hold back Russian troops, he called for a review of their use by Baltic states. 'I understand the concerns about antipersonnel mines — they've caused immense suffering in many places,' he said in an interview. But, Kasciunas added, claims that they are of little military use are untrue. 'They do not directly stop a mechanized division, but they force the enemy to either take significant risks or commit time and resources to clearing operations,' he said. Russia's widespread use of antipersonnel mines played a significant in role in blunting a major Ukrainian offensive in 2023. In March, the defense ministers of the three Baltic states and Poland, all members of NATO, said their countries needed to pull out of the mine ban accord because 'military threats to NATO member states bordering Russia and Belarus have significantly increased.' Finland said in April that it, too, wanted out. Advertisement Ukraine, which formally joined the treaty in 2006, initially saw little reason to revive the use of antipersonnel mines. But, after its failed 2023 offensive and Russia's increasing reliance on foot soldiers to lead assaults, it decided they were needed. In an early blow to the treaty, the Biden administration last year approved supplying Ukraine with American antipersonnel mines. Zelensky this month announced he had signed a decree to withdraw Ukraine from the Ottawa Convention because Russia, never a party to the treaty, was 'using antipersonnel mines with utmost cynicism.' This article originally appeared in .
