ICC prosecutor seeks evidence of war crimes in Sudan’s Darfur
Karim Khan’s appeal comes after escalating violence in and around el-Fasher, the capital of North Darfur. The International Criminal Court’s (ICC) chief prosecutor has appealed to witnesses to send evidence to aid an urgent investigation opened by his office into allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity in Sudan’s Darfur region. Sudan has been mired in war since April last year when a rivalry between the leaders of the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) exploded into violence. Four weeks of fighting in and around el-Fasher, the capital of North Darfur, has killed more than 190 people and wounded 1,200, according to medical charity Doctors Without Borders, known by its French initials MSF. “I am extremely concerned about allegations of widespread international crimes being committed in el-Fasher and its surrounding areas,” ICC prosecutor Karim Khan said in a video statement on Tuesday, adding that the investigation “seems to disclose an organised, systematic and a profound attack on human dignity”. His investigators had seen credible allegations of what looked like ethnically motivated attacks against the civilian population, widespread use of rape and attacks against hospitals, Khan said, calling for anyone with possible evidence, video or audio material to submit it to his office. #ICC Prosecutor @KarimKhanQC announces campaign calling for information and cooperation in relation to allegations of international crimes being committed in #Darfur, Sudan, including in Al Fasher. Info can be sent to #OTPLink:https://t.co/IYVUCvyWCA Watch 👇 pic.twitter.com/H1sMPGB8jP — Int’l Criminal Court (@IntlCrimCourt) June 11, 2024 Khan’s statement came days after an RSF attack forced the closure of a main hospital in el-Fasher on Sunday. The group fired shots and looted the hospital, MSF reported. Home to more than 1.8 million residents and displaced people, el-Fasher is the only state capital in the vast Darfur region not under RSF control and a key humanitarian hub for a region on the brink of famine. People in the city have called el-Fasher “hell on Earth, where they could lose their lives any day”, Toby Harward, the UN deputy humanitarian coordinator for Sudan, told Al Jazeera last month. Previous atrocities The ICC has long been investigating atrocities in Sudan, dating back to a previous devastating conflict in Darfur. The Hague-based court can prosecute war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide and in some cases, the crime of aggression if committed on the territory of one of the court’s 124 member states or by nationals of ICC members. It can also have jurisdiction through a referral by the United Nations Security Council, as happened with Darfur in 2005. The court has issued arrest warrants for former Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir on charges including genocide allegedly committed in Darfur between 2003-2008. The RSF was born out of Arab militias, commonly known as Janjaweed, mobilised by al-Bashir against non-Arab tribes in Darfur. At the time, they were accused of mass killings, rapes and other atrocities. Khan referred back to the previous conflict in his message on Tuesday. “It is an outrage that we are allowing history to repeat itself once again in Darfur,” he said. “We cannot and we must not allow Darfur to become the world’s forgotten atrocity, once again.” Adblock test (Why?)
Taiwan arrests former Chinese navy captain over illegal speedboat arrival
The Chinese man reportedly claimed he wished to defect, but Taiwanese officials suspect he could be probing defences. Authorities in Taiwan have said a Chinese man who was arrested on Sunday after entering a Taipei harbour illegally in a speedboat is a former navy captain who could have been on a military probe. The man was arrested by Taiwan’s coastguard after crossing the 160km (100-mile-wide) Taiwan Strait that separates the island state from China, and entering the mouth of the Tamsui River in his small craft. He told authorities that he wanted to defect. But officials say he may have been testing Taiwan’s response to his approach. The 60-year-old, who Taiwan said was an officer in China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy surnamed Ruan, is now under investigation and being questioned. Kuan Bi-ling, head of Taiwan’s Ocean Affairs Council (OAC), which runs the coastguard, told reporters at parliament that the man was “quite refined and well presented” and had previously served as a Chinese navy captain. Taiwan Defense Minister Wellington Koo, also speaking to reporters at parliament, said the boat incident could be another example of China’s “grey zone” tactics against the island. The phrase is used to refer to irregular tactics to evaluate an area without engaging in open combat and has included China sending boats and surveillance balloons over the island. Taiwan declared independence from China during a civil war in 1949. However, Beijing insists that the island is part of its territory. “These grey zone tactics have always existed,” Koo said. “We must always maintain our vigilance and cannot rule out the possibility of taking countermeasures.” According to Kuan of the OAC, there have been 18 similar cases to the one on Sunday over the past year or so, mostly involving islands under the control of Taiwan that are close to the Chinese coast. “Looking at the accumulated cases in the past, we can’t rule out that this is a test,” she said, referring to Taiwan’s abilities to spot such vessels. She said Taiwan plans to step up its security measures and that personnel managing radar operations and monitoring stations who failed to detect and stop the boat sooner will be held responsible for the incident. In March, two Taiwanese fishermen strayed into Chinese waters near the Kinmen islands, one of the territories close to the Chinese coast. One, a Taiwanese military officer, remains in detention in China, while the other was released soon after. The latest incident comes amid rising tensions between China and Taiwan, and amid concerns China could resort to military action in staking its claim over the island. Adblock test (Why?)
What is the Gaza ceasefire plan backed by UN Security Council?
NewsFeed Here’s what happened as the United Nations Security Council voted in favour of a ceasefire in Gaza, endorsing a US-backed plan to end Israel’s eight-month war. Published On 11 Jun 202411 Jun 2024 Adblock test (Why?)
UN Security Council endorses US-sponsored Gaza ceasefire resolution
The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has adopted a resolution endorsing a US-backed ceasefire proposal that aims to end Israel’s eight-month assault on Gaza. The vote on the United States-sponsored resolution on Monday was 14-0, with Russia abstaining. The resolution welcomes a three-phase ceasefire proposal announced by US President Joe Biden last month, which calls for an initial six-week ceasefire and the exchange of some Israeli captives held in Gaza for Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails. The second phase would include a permanent ceasefire and the release of the remaining captives. The third phase would involve a reconstruction effort for the devastated Gaza Strip. The US says Israel has accepted the proposal, although some Israeli officials have since promised to continue the war until the elimination of Hamas, the Palestinian group that governs Gaza. The resolution calls on Hamas, which initially said it viewed the proposal “positively”, to accept the three-phase plan. It urges Israel and Hamas “to fully implement its terms without delay and without condition”. Hamas was quick to welcome the resolution on Monday. In a statement after the vote, Hamas said it was ready to cooperate with mediators and enter indirect negotiations over the implementation of the principles of the agreement. Al Jazeera’s Gabriel Elizondo, reporting from the UN headquarters in New York, said the UNSC passed the resolution “overwhelmingly and it is binding in international law”. The “big question moving forward”, Elizondo said, is whether it be enforced and implemented. “The US has said very clearly that Israel has agreed to this. So that puts quite a lot of pressure on Israel to abide by this.” US deputy Ambassador Robert Wood told reporters earlier that the US wanted to make sure all 15 UNSC members were on board to support what he described as “the best, most realistic opportunity to bring at least a temporary halt to this war”. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu previously said that Biden presented only parts of the proposal and insisted that any talk of a permanent ceasefire before dismantling Hamas’s military and governing capabilities was a non-starter. Hamas has frequently said that any deal must lead to a permanent ceasefire, a full Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, an end to the Israeli siege of Gaza, reconstruction and “a serious exchange deal” between captives in Gaza and Palestinians held in Israeli jails. The UNSC adopted a resolution on March 25 demanding a humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, which ended April 9, with the US abstaining. But there was no halt to the offensive. Three-phase plan Biden’s May 31 announcement of the new ceasefire proposal said it would begin with a six-week ceasefire and the release of captives held in Gaza in exchange for Palestinian prisoners, the withdrawal of Israeli forces from populated areas in Gaza and the return of Palestinian civilians to all areas in the territory. The resolution goes into detail about the proposal and spells out that “if the negotiations take longer than six weeks for phase one, the ceasefire will still continue as long as negotiations continue”. Phase one also requires the safe distribution of humanitarian assistance “at scale throughout the Gaza Strip”, which Biden said would lead to 600 trucks with aid entering Gaza every day. In phase two, the resolution says that with the agreement of Israel and Hamas, “a permanent end to hostilities, in exchange for the release of all other hostages still in Gaza, and a full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza” will take place. Phase three would launch “a major multi-year reconstruction plan for Gaza and the return of the remains of any deceased hostages still in Gaza to their families”. The resolution reiterates the UNSC’s “unwavering commitment to achieving the vision of a negotiated two-state solution where two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders”. It also stresses “the importance of unifying the Gaza Strip with the West Bank under the Palestinian Authority”, something Netanyahu’s right-wing government has not agreed to. Alon Liel, the former director of Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said the Israeli government “was taken by surprise” by the resolution. “The resolution is giving new content to the Blinken visit here. I think there will be a very hectic morning discussing it tomorrow,” Liel told Al Jazeera. “Israel is not standing behind its own proposal and definitely not the draft proposal submitted by the Americans,” he said. “Our ambassador tried in the last 48 hours to change the text and was unable to do it. So Israel definitely doesn’t like this resolution… If Israel will openly reject it, the pressure will grow internationally,” Liel added. Adblock test (Why?)
US Gaza aid pier not used in Israel’s captives rescue mission: Pentagon
US says it is ‘incidental’ that deadly Israeli operation took place near floating dock built to deliver aid to Gaza. The United States has stressed that its temporary aid pier in Gaza was not used in the Israeli captive rescue operation in the Nuseirat refugee camp in central Gaza that killed more than 270 people. The Pentagon said on Monday that reports linking the pier to Saturday’s Israeli assault that resulted in the freeing of four captives held by Hamas are “inaccurate”. “It was near, but I think it’s incidental. Again, the pier, the equipment, the personnel all supporting that humanitarian effort had nothing to do with the [Israeli military] rescue operation,” Pentagon spokesperson Patrick Ryder told reporters. He added that the Israeli operation – despite its proximity to the US floating dock – does not put American personnel at a “greater risk”. “To underscore, the temporary pier on the coast of Gaza was put in place for one purpose only: to help move additional urgently-needed lifesaving assistance to Gaza,” Ryder said. The Washington Post reported on Sunday that the Israeli military used a helicopter on a beach “not far from” the US pier to evacuate three of the captives and the soldiers who freed them. The Israeli military intensively bombed the Nuseirat area during the operation, killing at least 274 people, including dozens of women and children, according to Palestinian authorities in Gaza. The administration of President Joe Biden lauded the rescue of the captives. “We welcome the rescue of four hostages who after eight months of captivity have finally been reunited with their families in Israel. The United States will not rest until every hostage is returned home,” the Department of State said in a statement on Saturday. While the US military has denied involvement in the attack, several international media outlets, including The New York Times, have reported that American officials provided intelligence that helped with the operation. Hamas decried Washington’s purported involvement in the mission, saying it “proves once again the complicity of the US administration and its full participation in the war crimes committed in the Gaza Strip”. The Palestinian group said the attack also raises questions over the professed US concern over the humanitarian situation in Gaza. Biden announced the decision to build the humanitarian pier in March amid the Israeli blockade on Gaza, which has sparked fears of famine. The floating US dock was completed in May, but within weeks, it sustained damage from bad weather, requiring repairs. The pier was reassembled on Friday. Aid groups have argued for weeks that the US dock is not an adequate substitute to delivering humanitarian assistance via land routes. Late in May, 20 aid organisations, including Doctors Without Borders, called the US-installed dock part of “cosmetic changes” that fail to address the crisis adequately. “As Israeli attacks intensify on Rafah, the unpredictable trickle of aid into Gaza has created a mirage of improved access while the humanitarian response is in reality on the verge of collapse,” the groups said in a statement. The Nuseirat attack could further deepen the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. The United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) paused its aid deliveries in Gaza after the operation. “Two of our warehouses were rocketed yesterday, so we’ve stepped back just for the moment to make sure that we’re on safe terms and on safe ground before we’ll restart,” WFP Executive Director Cindy McCain told CBS News on Sunday. Adblock test (Why?)
UN Security Council passes resolution urging Hamas to accept ceasefire
NewsFeed he UN Security Council approved a US-sponsored resolution calling on Hamas to accept a ceasefire proposal, with 14 votes in favour and one abstention from Russia. The US says Israel has already agreed to the deal. Published On 10 Jun 202410 Jun 2024 Adblock test (Why?)
How has Benny Gantz’s resignation affected the Israeli government?
EXPLAINER Benny Gantz, the Israeli prime minister’s principal rival, has quit the government. What now? Not as much as you might think. Former general and leader of Israel’s National Unity party Benny Gantz has resigned from the war cabinet, citing the failure of the wider cabinet to agree a plan for Gaza beyond the current war. In mid-May, Gantz submitted a six-point plan for the administration of Gaza beyond the fighting. At the time, he said that if this was not agreed to, he would quit the cabinet. Gantz is regarded as a relative centrist and the principal rival to Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu. Here are the details of what happened and what this may mean for Israel and Palestine: What was Gantz’s plan? Gantz said his proposed six-point plan would include bringing a temporary US-European-Arab-Palestinian system of civil administration for the enclave, with Israel retaining overall control of security. It also proposed spreading the burden of national service across Israelis by including ultra-Orthodox Jews, whose exemption from the draft is protected by two parties in Netanyahu’s coalition cabinet. Gantz addresses the press in Kiryat Shmona on November 14, 2023 [Evelyn Hockstein/Reuters] Why didn’t Netanyahu like Gantz’s plan? There is growing consensus from Israel and abroad that Netanyahu rejected it for personal gain. In his resignation, Gantz said: “Netanyahu is preventing us from advancing toward true victory.” Israel’s principal ally, US President Joe Biden, told Time Magazine on Tuesday that “there is every reason for people” to think Netanyahu is prolonging the war on Gaza for his own political survival. That may be the belief that the war will protect Netanyahu from legal repercussions of the bribery, fraud, and breach of trust charges that have hung over him since his 2019 indictment. It may also be that any future plan for Gaza may split his coalition cabinet – some of whom want to build illegal settlements there and others who, like Gantz, want it administered by an international task force. Netanyahu – who campaigned as “Mr Security” – may also be trying to avoid dealing with the failings of October 7 when Palestinian group Hamas led an attack on Israel that saw 1,139 people killed and dozens taken captive. How does this benefit the far right? Gives them more room to grow. Gantz leaving the war cabinet, which was him, Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, leaves a slot open for one of the far-right politicians Netanyahu relies on to sustain his rule. National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir has already expressed interest in Gantz’s war cabinet seat. The extreme right-wing partnership of Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich is strong. Both are in Netanyahu’s coalition cabinet and their combined parliament seats outweigh Gantz’s centre. While Gantz was an ineffective political counterweight, his departure from government will remove a strong voice critical of the far right from Israeli politics. What does this mean for Gaza? Little that’s good. Ben-Gvir and Smotrich are clear that their plan for Gaza involves its people “voluntarily migrating” and Israelis settling it. Netanyahu may oppose this but has yet to confront the far right on anything significant since war was launched on Gaza in October. Will this change how Israelis feel? Israelis still seem to support the war, if starkly divided along political lines, but fewer are confident that Netanyahu will achieve his aims of “destroying Hamas” and freeing the captives through military means. Every week, tens of thousands of people crowd into the so-called Democracy Square in Tel Aviv and other locations around the country to demand an exchange deal to release the captives and the dismissal of Prime Minister Netanyahu. Polling shows Gantz consistently in the lead over Netanyahu in polls, with Netanyahu only edging ahead when Gantz threatened to quit the cabinet, which was deemed unpatriotic. But elections may still be some way off, according to Eyal Lurie-Pardes of the Middle East Institute. He feels that if Netanyahu can hold his coalition together until the summer recess, electoral laws would mean an election could not happen until March. Will it change how Israel’s allies feel? There is little to suggest that Gantz’s resignation, despite being the preferred interlocutor for the United States, will change anything. The US and Western states have continued to supply Israel with arms and diplomatic support since it started bombing Gaza in October – ignoring international accusations of “genocide” and applications for international arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant. Even the apparent rejection of a ceasefire plan presented by Biden has done little to undermine support for Israel from the US. Adblock test (Why?)
These Palestinians are sheltering in their destroyed homes in Gaza
NewsFeed Palestinians from Khan Younis in Gaza have returned to live amongst the rubble of their destroyed houses, as Israel’s war continues to leave people with nowhere safe to go. Published On 10 Jun 202410 Jun 2024 Adblock test (Why?)
Far-right parties surge in EU elections
NewsFeed Far-right parties have made significant gains in the European Union’s elections, prompting President Macron to call a snap parliamentary election in France and dealing heavy defeats to leaders such as Germany’s Scholz and Austria’s Nehammer. Published On 10 Jun 202410 Jun 2024 Adblock test (Why?)
Germany and France’s far right make gains in EU elections
Far-right parties have made major gains at the European Union parliamentary elections, dealing stunning defeats to two of the bloc’s most important leaders: German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and French President Emmanuel Macron. In Germany, the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) was on track to take second place in Sunday’s EU election, according to projections from public broadcaster ARD, underscoring the party’s resilience ahead of next year’s federal election. The Eurosceptic party was set to secure a record 16.5 percent of the vote on Sunday, according to an exit poll published by ARD. That was 5.5 percentage points more than in the last European Union election in 2019, and more than all three parties in Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s coalition. The conservatives, who are in opposition at the federal level, have been forecast to come first, rising slightly to 29.5 percent. Germany’s Greens were the biggest losers on Sunday, falling 8.5 percentage points to 12 percent, punished by voters for the cost of policies to reduce CO2 emissions – in line with expectations for environmental parties across Europe. Scholz’s Social Democratic Party (SPD) and the third coalition partner, the pro-business Free Democratic Party (FDP), also fared poorly, expected to win 14 percent and 5 percent of the vote respectively, down from 15.8 percent and 5.4 percent in the previous election. The results are in line with an expected broader shift rightwards for the European Parliament across the bloc of 450 million citizens. The strong showing comes as Germany’s party landscape undergoes its biggest upheaval in decades, with new populist parties vying to take space vacated by the shrinking mainstream parties that have dominated since reunification in 1990. This looks set to make it much harder for established parties to form workable coalitions, and is coarsening the political climate, say analysts. The campaign was overshadowed by a surge in violence against politicians and activists. The AfD was plagued by scandals in recent months, with its lead candidate having to step back from campaigning in May after declaring that the SS, the Nazis’ main paramilitary force, were “not all criminals”. “We’ve done well because people have become more anti-European,” the AfD’s co-leader Alice Weidel said on Sunday. “People are annoyed by so much bureaucracy from Brussels,” she added, giving a plan ultimately to ban CO2-emitting cars as an example. [embedded content] In France, the National Rally party of Marine Le Pen dominated the polls to such an extent that Macron immediately dissolved the national parliament and called for new elections, a massive political risk since his party could suffer more losses, hobbling the rest of his presidential term that ends in 2027. Projected results from France put Marine Le Pen’s far-right National Rally around 33 percent, with 31 seats in the incoming European Parliament – more than double the score of President Emmanuel Macron’s liberals, at 15 percent. Macron acknowledged the thud of defeat. “I’ve heard your message, your concerns, and I won’t leave them unanswered,” he said, adding that calling a snap election only underscored his democratic credentials. Overall across the EU, two mainstream and pro-European groups, the Christian Democrats and the Socialists, remained the dominant forces. The gains of the far right came at the expense of the Greens, who were expected to lose about 20 seats and fall back to sixth position in the legislature. Reporting from Berlin, Al Jazeera’s Step Vaessen said that the Eurosceptic parties appeared set to form a large bloc in the next European Parliament. “With this very large bloc of far-right parties, there can be an influence on climate policies, for example … Also, [the EU’s] agriculture policies … and migration policies, which is a very important issue here in Germany and in the Netherlands,” she said. However, Vaessen noted that the far-right parties are not united. “They have a lot of divisions among themselves, and they have been trying to reach out to each other. We’ve seen [France’s] Marine Le Pen, for example, reaching out to [Prime Minister] Giorgia Meloni in Italy,” she said. “But after tonight, we will have to see how these groups will be formed and what kind of influence they will have.” Adblock test (Why?)