Pro-Palestinian activists respond to Israel’s Super Bowl ad
NewsFeed Pro-Palestinian activists have been sharing a video in response to an Israeli advert timed to the Super Bowl pledging to bring home captives held in Gaza. Published On 12 Feb 202412 Feb 2024 Adblock test (Why?)
Mosque demolition sparks deadly protests in India
NewsFeed Indian authorities bulldozed a mosque and a religious school in Haldwani sparking deadly protests by residents who say Muslims are being targeted. Published On 12 Feb 202412 Feb 2024 Adblock test (Why?)
‘Just Like We Drew It Up’: What’s behind Joe Biden’s Super Bowl post?
It is an image that could belong to a film that is part horror, part sci-fi: US President Joe Biden standing against a murky background, bright-red laser beams emanating from his eyes, his United States flag brooch shining prominently against his lapel. Yet, it was no meme page or troll account posting that image: It was posted on Biden’s own X page early on Monday. Coming against the backdrop of Israel’s brutal war on Gaza that has killed more than 28,000 people and that the US has backed, the image prompted particular criticism of Biden by some social media users. Here is all we know about Biden’s post so far: What was the post about? Biden’s post came after the Kansas City Chiefs defeated the San Francisco 49ers in the Super Bowl. Singer Taylor Swift – arguably the biggest name in the world of entertainment who has previously criticised former US President Donald Trump, Biden’s chief rival in the 2024 election – is dating Travis Kelce, who plays for the Chiefs. While Swift’s appearance at National Football League (NFL) games this season has helped the sport’s brand, it has also sparked conspiracy theories from sections of the far-right, which have suggested that the NFL was conspiring to set up a win for the Chiefs to create a backdrop for Swift to endorse Biden’s candidature. Though the Chiefs won, Swift is yet to declare support for any presidential candidate. That did not stop Biden from mocking the conspiracy theory with his tweet, suggesting that he had plotted the moment. Just like we drew it up. pic.twitter.com/9NBvc5nVZE — Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) February 12, 2024 Biden’s tweet set off a range of reactions on X, from digital eye-rolls to responses expressing disappointment and outrage. Several users questioned whether Biden’s account was hacked. Others joked about an intern posting the image while others remarked how they thought a parody account posted the picture at first glance. Many suggested that Biden’s post was distasteful and insensitive as it came amid Israel’s devastating war on Gaza. The Biden campaign makes a Dark Branden joke on the same night that Israel kills over a hundred Palestinians in a brutal bombing campaign over Rafah. What did they mean by this? pic.twitter.com/QXvenBlFi0 — The Barracks (@thebarrackslive) February 12, 2024 While calling for an end to civilian deaths in Gaza, the Biden administration continues to sell and supply weapons to Israel. this is what the president of the united states is tweeting while over 1 million men, women and children are being slaughtered with weapons he has provided and paid for. https://t.co/Y278Per7ZT — jay (@kendallhosseini) February 12, 2024 Given the war in Gaza, the post was not “appropriate”, said Ahmed Al-Rawi, an associate professor of news, social media and public communication at Simon Fraser University in Canada. “But I don’t think Biden is thinking of the global audience here,” he said. “He is mostly thinking about his US audience.” What is the Dark Brandon meme? The alt text, or image description on Biden’s post, simply says, “dark brandon”. This is a reference to a meme that dates back to October 2021. A crowd was chanting obscenities about Joe Biden during a race at the Talladega Superspeedway race track in Alabama. While interviewing race winner Brandon Brown, NBC’s sport reporter Kelli Stavast interpreted the chants to be, “Let’s Go Brandon”, and reported them as such on live television. Since then, the phrase “Let’s Go Brandon” became code for verbal abuse at Biden, lending Republican politicians new language to use against Biden online, circumventing censorship and avoiding criticism. The phrase also started showing up as song lyrics. Let’s Go Brandon!#BidenInflation is an immoral tax on low and middle income families. pic.twitter.com/0tpQN89Kos — Greg Abbott (@GregAbbott_TX) October 17, 2021 The Brandon meme has since evolved and different renditions of Biden’s image with laser beams shooting out of his eyes – dubbed “Dark Brandon” – started making the rounds on the internet. Cutouts of the Dark Brandon meme even made an appearance at the venue for the third Republican presidential primary debate in November 2023. Cutouts of the ‘Dark Brandon’ internet meme are displayed across from the Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts, the venue for the third Republican presidential primary debate in Miami, Florida, on November 8, 2023 [Mandel Ngan/AFP] Has Biden made similar posts in the past? Regardless of origin, the meme that was intended to mock and criticise Biden has repeatedly been co-opted by Democrats and Biden himself. His tongue-in-cheek acknowledgement of the Brandon phrase began as early as 2021 and has continued. In April 2023, Biden put on dark sunshades after making a joke about becoming the “Dark Brandon” persona during the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner in Washington, DC. Biden made a joke about becoming the ‘Dark Brandon’ persona during the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner at the Washington Hilton in Washington, DC on April 29, 2023 [Carolyn Kaster/AP] Biden’s campaign made its first post on Truth Social, presidential race rival Donald Trump’s conservative social media network in October 2023. With the Dark Brandon profile picture, the verified @BidenHQ account posted, “Well. Let’s see how this goes. Converts welcome!” This appropriation of memes is part of an ongoing political war, said Al-Rawi, who has researched and written about the politics of memes. “The meme in itself is a political communication tool,” he told Al Jazeera. “It is being weaponised by different parties in order to attract attention and distract from other issues.” Al-Rawi believes the Brandon meme has worked in Biden’s favour from the perspective of his supporters, who like the fact that he is taking on a political attack. On the other hand, Al-Rawi said, it could come across as insensitive in parts of the Global South. Al-Rawi also attributed Biden’s efforts to “meme-ify” political messaging to attempts to connect with younger voters. Biden’s ability to govern has come under scrutiny due to his age and issues with his memory. Biden is not the only politician who
Fifty years on, a case to uphold Indigenous rights resonates in the US
First, she heard a ping, then the sound of something hitting her boat. It was 1975, and Norma Cagey, only 18 years old at the time, was alone with her husband on the calm waters of the Hood Canal, a tree-lined fjord in Washington state. A member of the Skokomish Indigenous nation, Cagey was using nets to catch Coho salmon when a series of strange noises interrupted the tranquil: whirs, pings and thuds. That’s when the couple realised they were being shot at. Cagey’s husband quickly turned on the boat motor, and the pair sped off. But the memory lingers with Cagey to this day. Indigenous fisher Norma Cagey said she faced gunfire for casting nets in her ancestral territory [Courtesy of Norma Cagey] “We were scared. It took a few days for us to get back out there. We needed the money,” Cagey told Al Jazeera. She believes she was targeted as part of the “fish wars” in the 1960s and ’70s: a string of clashes over Indigenous fishing rights in the Pacific Northwest region of the United States. But 50 years ago, on February 12, 1974, a federal court decision would change the course of the conflict, delivering a compromise that remains controversial to this day. The Boldt decision — named for its author, Judge George Boldt — upheld the Indigenous right to fish in Washington state, delivering a high-profile win to local tribes. What’s more, it designated that Indigenous peoples could claim a share of the catch equal to that of non-Indigenous fishermen. In other words, the state’s fish harvest would be split 50-50. Cagey was among the Indigenous residents present in court that day. She remembers a packed house, with tribe members decked out in regalia, hippies in tie-dye and Indigenous elders, comfortable in their everyday clothes. “It was a surprise to see how many people turned up to support the Natives,” said Cagey, now a member of the Skokomish Tribal Council. She considers the ruling a victory, albeit limited: “If you look at the history of Native Americans, we lost everything. We wanted a lot more, but we got some. And we can work with some.” But others believe the Boldt decision was a setback, setting the stage for hurdles that persist into the present. Coho salmon are among the species native to Washington state in the US [NOAA Fisheries handout/Reuters] Fishing as an act of protest The Boldt decision arrived in the twilight of the US civil rights movement, a time of racial awakening and cultural reckoning that started in the 1950s. It was an era of civil disobedience, when Black and brown protesters took to the streets to denounce racial segregation and other discriminatory practices. One of the most iconic forms of protest at the time was the sit-in. Demonstrators would occupy spaces where they ordinarily were not allowed, bellying up to segregated lunch counters or plopping down at segregated libraries where they would then refuse to move. In the Pacific Northwest, Indigenous protesters created their own version of the sit-in: a fish-in. The idea was to arrive at a waterway where they might otherwise be barred from fishing — and cast their nets en masse, defying orders to leave. The tactic was part of a shift in the Indigenous rights — or “Red Power” — movement. Certain older Indigenous-led organisations had previously resisted the idea of public protest with slogans like “Indians Don’t Demonstrate”. The fish-ins ultimately attracted major media attention and celebrity participants. Gary Peterson, 79, the former business manager of the Skokomish tribe, remembers that Academy Award winner Marlon Brando and comedian Dick Gregory took part. “People were seeing it on the news every night,” Peterson said. “There were prominent people like Marlon Brando getting arrested.” But unlike the fight to end racial segregation, the Indigenous protesters behind the fish-ins were not seeking assimilation. They were seeking sovereignty. Actor Marlon Brando, right, speaks to the press in 1986 alongside Indigenous leader Janet McCloud, centre [Courtesy of the Museum of History and Industry/Seattle Post-Intelligencer Photograph Collection] ‘This paper secures your fish’ The US government had recognised certain Indigenous tribes as sovereign nations — at least, on paper. In practice, however, the treaties it signed with these nations were often violated with little consequence. Such was the case in the Pacific Northwest. In the 1850s, Isaac Stevens, the first governor of the Washington Territory, drew up several treaties establishing the local tribes’ right to fish at “all usual and accustomed grounds”. But the treaties served primarily as vehicles to strip Indigenous peoples of their land. Historians underscore that Stevens took advantage of language barriers — and threatened military force — to ensure the documents were signed. Altogether, 64 million acres (25.9 million hectares) of Indigenous territory came under Stevens’s control. Still, he pledged to uphold tribal fishing rights. “This paper secures your fish. Does not a father give food to his children?” Stevens reportedly said during one treaty negotiation. Species like salmon were integral to the Indigenous communities in the region: They were a primary food source and an important part of spiritual life. “It may sound foreign to people, but [fishing] is tied into our culture and who we are,” said Amber Taylor, the assistant director of the Puyallup Tribe’s Historic Preservation Department. “So much so that when Stevens came to negotiate the treaty, our ancestors had the foresight to include those prefaces because we relied on them so heavily for our sustenance.” But as settlers moved into the Washington Territory, access to ancestral fishing spots became increasingly fraught. And then there was the population decline. The number of salmon had plummeted by the 20th century. Manmade changes to the environment — including the canal between Lake Washington and Puget Sound, the dredging of the Duwamish River and various hydroelectric dams — had disrupted fish migration patterns, impeding their ability to breed. Other factors like commercial fishing, urban development and pesticides also played havoc with the salmon populations. The shrinking
EU’s Borrell suggests US stop arming Israel amid fears over Rafah assault
European Union foreign policy chief Josep Borrell has urged allies of Israel, primarily the United States, to stop sending it weapons as “too many people” are being killed in Gaza. Pointing to US President Joe Biden’s comment last week that Israel’s military action was “over the top”, Borrell said on Monday: “Well, if you believe that too many people are being killed, maybe you should provide less arms in order to prevent so many people having been killed.” “Is [it] not logical?” he asked, in a Brussels news conference alongside Philippe Lazzarini, head of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), who is Israel is pressuring to resign. “How many times have you heard the most prominent leaders and foreign ministers around the world saying too many people are being killed?” Borrell asked. “If the international community believes that this is a slaughter, that too many people are being killed, maybe we have to think about the provision of arms,” Borrell added. The chief EU diplomat also slammed an order by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the more than one million Palestinians sheltering in the Gaza city of Rafah need to be “evacuated” ahead of a planned Israeli military operation there. “They are going to evacuate – where? To the moon? Where are they going to evacuate these people?” Borrell asked. This is not the first time Borrell expressed concerned over an invasion of the southern Gaza city of Rafah. On Sunday, he said an assault there “would lead to an unspeakable humanitarian catastrophe” and grave tensions with neighbouring Egypt. Rafah incursion ‘terrifying’ Former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis said European countries share responsibility for the atrocities being committed in Gaza. “We Europeans created the problem … we are playing a vicious role, in its perpetuation,” Varoufakis told Al Jazeera. The former finance minister accused Borrell of hypocrisy for saying not enough pressure was being applied on Israel, asserting that the EU was “collectively arming” Israel. “As we speak, Germany, France, [and] Italy are sending the armaments that are being used in Rafah to kill people,” Varoufakis added. His latest comments came as dozens were killed in Israeli air strikes on Rafah, according to Palestinian health officials, as people there brace for a major offensive on the densely crowded urban area. Meanwhile, Volker Turk, the UN’s human rights chief, has also expressed alarm over an anticipated Israeli ground assault on Rafah. Turk said it is “wholly imaginable what would lie ahead” if the planned incursion is not stopped. “A potential full-fledged military incursion into Rafah, where some 1.5 million Palestinians are packed against the Egyptian border with nowhere further to flee, is terrifying, given the prospect that an extremely high number of civilians, again mostly children and women, will likely be killed and injured,” Turk said in a statement. Rights groups have also warned that a full-scale assault on Rafah, the last relatively safe area of the enclave, would result in significant civilian casualties. More than half the population of Gaza has crowded into Rafah to escape Israeli bombardment, which has reduced much of the rest of the Gaza Strip to ruins. Most of those in Rafah were displaced by Israeli offensives in northern, central, and eastern Gaza. Hamas, the Palestinian group that governs Gaza, has warned Israel that a ground offensive in Rafah would jeopardise negotiations on a truce and the exchange of captives and prisoners. More than 28,340 people, mostly women and children, have been killed in the Israeli assault on Gaza since October, according to Palestinian authorities. The relentless Israeli bombardment and ground offensive have displaced more than 80 percent of the population, according to aid agencies, and reduced much of the territory to rubble. Israel launched its war on Gaza after Hamas carried out a surprise attack on southern Israel on October 7, killing at least 1,139 people, mostly civilians, according to an Al Jazeera tally based on official Israeli figures. Adblock test (Why?)
US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin cancels NATO trip after hospitalisation
Austin has been hospitalised in the critical care unit for complications from prostate cancer. US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has cancelled his trip to Brussels to meet with NATO ministers and work on Ukraine military aid after being hospitalised with complications from prostate cancer, according to US officials. Austin, 70, was taken to Walter Reed Military Medical Center on Sunday with “symptoms suggesting an emergent bladder issue”, the Pentagon said. Austin was scheduled to travel to Brussels on Tuesday to attend a regular meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group, a group of about 50 countries, to coordinate military aid for Kyiv. That meeting will now be held virtually, two US defence officials told The Associated Press news agency on the condition of anonymity. After the Ukraine meeting, Austin was to attend a regular meeting of NATO defence ministers, also in Brussels. It is not immediately clear if Deputy Defense Secretary Kathleen Hicks, who Austin has transferred his duties to, will attend that meeting instead. Austin had failed to disclose a prostate cancer surgery in December and a subsequent hospitalisation in January to deal with its complications. This month, the cabinet secretary apologised for failing to tell Biden and senior staff about his cancer diagnosis, adding that the health scare was a “gut punch” that had shaken him. The most recent hospitalisation was publicly announced soon after he was taken to the military medical centre by his security detail. Austin is scheduled to testify before Congress on February 29 about the secrecy surrounding his initial hospitalisation. His trip to Brussels would have come at a critical time in Europe. A narrowly divided US Senate moved closer to passing a $95.3bn aid package for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan on Sunday, showing undiminished bipartisanship despite mounting opposition from Republican hardliners and former US President Donald Trump to continued help to Ukraine. The legislation includes $61bn for Ukraine, which is viewed as crucial by Kyiv as it grinds towards the second anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion as front lines in eastern and southern Ukraine largely static for many months. Trump, who is seeking a return to power in the November presidential election, raised a storm of criticism from the White House and top Western officials over the weekend for suggesting he would not defend NATO allies who failed to spend enough on defence and would even encourage Russia to attack them. Adblock test (Why?)
UK announces sanctions on four ‘extremist’ Israeli settlers
The settlers are accused of committing human rights abuses against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank. The United Kingdom has announced sanctions on four Israeli settlers accused of committing human rights abuses against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank after a similar move by the United States this month. The sanctions announced on Monday follow what the UK called “unprecedented levels of violence by extremist settlers in the West Bank” over the past year by some residents of illegal Israeli settlements and outposts there. The sanctions represent a rare move by London and Washington against Israelis as war rages in the besieged Gaza Strip. The transatlantic allies’ steadfast support for Israel’s military operations in the territory has drawn heavy criticism both internationally and among sections of their domestic populations. Announcing the asset freezes and travel and visa bans against the settlers, British Foreign Secretary David Cameron said: “Israel must also take stronger action and put a stop to settler violence.” “Too often, we see commitments made and undertakings given but not followed through,” he added. Cameron said “extremist Israeli settlers” are threatening Palestinians, often at gunpoint, and “forcing them off land that is rightfully theirs,” branding the behaviour “illegal and unacceptable”. “Extremist settlers, by targeting and attacking Palestinian civilians, are undermining security and stability for both Israelis and Palestinians,” he said. Two of the individuals sanctioned – Moshe Sharvit and Yinon Levy – have in recent months used physical aggression, threatened families at gunpoint and destroyed property, Cameron’s foreign ministry said. Their actions are “part of a targeted and calculated effort to displace Palestinian communities”, the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office added. London also targeted Zvi Bar Yosef, who it said had set up an illegal outpost in the West Bank in 2018, which has been described by local Palestinian residents as a “source of systematic intimidation and violence”. A fourth person London sanctioned, Ely Federman, has been involved in multiple incidents against Palestinian shepherds in the South Hebron Hills, according to the Foreign Office. Levi was the only one of the quartet to also be targeted by the US when it imposed sanctions on four Israeli settlers for attacking Palestinian communities in the West Bank, accusing them of undermining stability and security in Israel and the Palestinian territories. The US sanctions target Levy, David Chai Chasdai and Einan Tanjil, who are accused of assaulting and intimidating Palestinians. They also target Shalom Zickerman, who is accused of assaulting Israeli activists. The White House also announced a new decree to penalise perpetrators of “extremist settler violence” in the West Bank. Adblock test (Why?)
Putin is ready for talks on Ukraine, but on his own terms
On February 8, US TV anchor Tucker Carlson released a two-hour interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin. This was the Russian leader’s first encounter with a Western journalist since the start of the Russian full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. The interview was met with a lot of mockery in the West, largely focused on the first part, in which Putin suggested that he would talk about Russo-Ukrainian history for 30 seconds and then went on bragging about medieval princes and long-extinct empires for a good half-hour. Some of his claims were outright shocking, such as his suggestion that Poland precipitated World War II by failing to accommodate Hitler’s demands. Others reflected a view of history associated with Russian nationalist mythology, which is hardly worse than Ukraine’s nationalist mythology – the one which Western supporters of Ukraine tend to pass as the country’s legitimate history. While the interview provided a lot of fodder for Western ridicule, it also contained some important messaging that Western observers ignored amid their persistent rejection of the very likely prospect that Putin will end the war in Ukraine on his own terms. Throughout his conversation with Carlson, the Russian leader appeared to channel the sentiment of being constantly duped by the West and demonstrate a firm resolve not to be duped ever again. The Russian president spoke of Ukraine’s invitation to join NATO, issued at the Bucharest summit in 2008. Germany and France were known to be against it at the time and only a small minority of Ukrainians supported the idea. According to Putin, US President George W Bush pushed through the decision which triggered a chain of events ultimately leading to the conflict in Ukraine. He told Carlson that at the time he was being repeatedly assured by his German and French counterparts that Ukraine wasn’t really going to join NATO, but he had no reason to believe these assurances. If the US was able to press them into agreeing to the invitation for Ukraine, there was no guarantee it wouldn’t do it again to get the country into NATO, he said. Later in the interview, Putin brought up the February 2014 agreement between the Ukrainian government and the opposition. Mediated by France, Germany and Poland, it was supposed to end the violence at the most dramatic point of the Maidan revolution in Kyiv. Putin said that instead of complying with it, the opposition proceeded with overthrowing Viktor Yanukovych’s government, whereupon – he maintained – the Western guarantors threw the agreement “into the furnace”. Towards the end of his history lecture, he brought up the Istanbul talks in March 2022, which could have ended the current war in Ukraine. He claimed that he removed the troops from the surroundings of Kyiv at the insistence of Western leaders in order to facilitate the talks, whereupon the Ukrainians ditched the agreements at the behest of the West – namely British Prime Minister Boris Johnson. The claim that the withdrawal was intentional is hardly plausible since the Russian forces in northern Ukraine were extremely stretched and suffering heavy losses from the Ukrainian army’s guerrilla tactics. They likely would have had to be pulled back anyway. But the sentiment of being duped was once again very much there and it should inform us about his further actions. Putin appears to see the history of his relationship with Western and Ukrainian leaders as a succession of insults and betrayals, to which he has responded in his trademark heavy-handed manner: Not an eye for eye, but a punishment that grows exponentially each time the opponent shows perceived intransigence. Yet his policy, at least from his own point of view, has always been reactive, not proactive. Whether it was in good or bad faith, the message he was trying to convey in the interview is that at each crucial point in history, Ukraine had a choice of sparing itself all the further trouble and that it still has this choice now. He is ready for talks. A few times in the interview, he ridiculed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy for banning himself from talking to Putin by a presidential decree. He urged his Ukrainian counterpart to cancel that decision. Putin’s endgame appears to be getting an agreement along the lines of what has been tentatively achieved in Istanbul, but this time with all the territories which Russia occupied and formally annexed after these talks fell through. The implied threat is that Ukraine will lose even more territory – not to mention lives and infrastructure – should it keep being stubborn. What Putin is trying to achieve is making the West face its moral dilemma which boils down to the cost and benefit of resisting his aggression. The continued support for Ukraine’s military effort will cost thousands of lives and devastate Ukraine even further, while success is hardly guaranteed. The stakes do not seem to be in Kyiv’s favour as things stand now: Russian troops are advancing all along the front line and the US military aid to Ukraine is in jeopardy due to the resistance from the Republicans. But getting back to the Istanbul framework means a clear defeat for both Ukraine and the West, no matter how hard all the spin doctors and troll farms will try to frame it as a victory. More than anyone else, it will be the Ukrainians who will be asking what was all this enormous sacrifice for when it was possible to sign a deal in Istanbul back in March 2022 or to implement the Minsk agreements, which Zelenskyy publicly dismissed as “vapid” days before Putin ordered his troops to march on Ukraine. If the situation does not miraculously change, at the moment Ukraine looks very far from getting any semblance of what was envisaged in Minsk or Istanbul and it is drifting further towards misery. The mockery of Putin’s interview will, of course, continue in a hermetic echo chamber that has long parted ways with reality. The views expressed in this article
Two orphaned teens got their seven siblings to Rafah; now they live in fear
Deir el-Balah/Rafah, Gaza – In a little tent in Rafah, 15-year-old Nagham al-Yaziji and her brother Mohammad, 14, are holding down the fort as best they can, keeping house and caring for their seven younger siblings, the youngest of whom is six-month-old sister Toleen. The children have lost both their parents over the past four months and had to bring their younger siblings south on their own, set up a tent, and struggle through every day as best they can. Holding Toleen in his arms and bouncing her gently, Mohammad tells Al Jazeera about the day they lost their mother, Shouq al-Yazji, 37, in the first week of Israel’s war on Gaza. Mohammad plays with Toleen in their tent [Abdelhakim Abu Riash/Al Jazeera] “That day, my mother asked us to look after my little sister, Toleen, who was three months old at the time, because she was going to visit my grandfather nearby,” Mohammad recalls. While Shouq was visiting her elderly parents, the house next door was bombed, killing everyone in it and in the surrounding houses. Her husband and children found out late that evening. “Hearing that was devastating,” Nagham says, describing the feelings of sadness and utter loss they all felt when they realised they would never see their mother again. Left alone After Shouq was killed, the family struggled without her as their fears built up with the worsening safety situation in their neighbourhood. Five of the al-Yazji children stand outside their tent [Abdelhakim Abu Riash/Al Jazeera] Seeking safety in numbers, their father took everyone to al-Shifa Hospital for shelter. But conditions there were terrible, with overcrowding and a severe lack of everything, even access to hygiene. So the decision was taken that they would flee further south, and the children’s father started to prepare for the trip. “My father left us that day to go to our house and get a few things we would need. But he never came back,” Nagham says. “We lost contact with him, and we don’t know his fate.” In the midst of the confusion and worry over their disappeared father, the older children were painfully aware that the situation was only getting worse and that something would have to be done to protect the younger ones. Mohammad and two of his younger brothers walk through their encampment to get water [Abdelhakim Abu Riash/Al Jazeera] “So, we fled to the south with my uncle,” Nagham says. Their uncle does not live with them. All he could do was help them set their tent up and look in on them from time to time. For the day-to-day, the older children take care of the younger ones and somehow the nine make do. “I queue for water and aid and bread every morning. I start a wood fire and heat up the water to prepare formula for my baby sister,” Mohammad says proudly. Nagham, as the eldest, frets about her siblings daily. “Life without a father and mother would be excruciating in normal circumstances, let alone such dire circumstances,” Nagham adds. Mohammad, in spite of his young age, tries as hard as he can to do the things that his father would have been doing for the family, and it seems to pain him that the little makeshift tent where they all shelter lacks even the simplest and most basic of necessities. Mohammad gathers clothes that had been hung out to dry. With no washing facilities, they are never really clean [Abdelhakim Abu Riash/Al Jazeera] “Sometimes I’ll go out looking for a day’s work when we have nothing to eat and I need to earn to support my siblings. “But some of those times I come back without any money and they go to bed hungry,” Mohammad says. Nagham, for her part, takes on the mothering, trying to take care of the entire family, especially 18-month-old Youssef and baby Toleen. “I make them their bottles with Mohammad’s help. I change their diapers and figure out what our meals will be every day. “Yesterday I managed to make falafel for them, with the help of my aunt,” Nagham says. Nagham stands holding Toleen as her younger siblings eat falafel she managed to prepare with the help of an aunt [Abdelhakim Abu Riash/Al Jazeera] While she does her best with her circumstances, Nagham is still a child herself and struggles with fear, doubt and sadness. “I don’t understand everything children want. Sometimes, my baby sister will wake up in the middle of the night crying but I won’t understand what she wants. “I don’t know: Is she hungry? Is she in pain? I often end up crying along with her,” Nagham says tearfully. While both Mohammad and Nagham hope day in and day out that the war ends soon and that they can find out what happened to their father, they also live in constant terror of the Israeli raids and the land assault Israel is threatening to launch. “This situation is so terrifying. We’re afraid when they bomb at night. I try to reassure my siblings and calm their fears, but the whole time I’m trembling myself,” Mohammad says. “We don’t know where we would go anymore,” Nagham interjects. “It’s not like there’s anywhere safe that we can take the little ones and go, so we just stay here with our fears.” “I miss my parents terribly. Life without them is so unbearably hard and sad,” Mohammad concludes. Mohammad holding Toleen outside their makeshift tent in Rafah [Abdelhakim Abu Riash/Al Jazeera] Adblock test (Why?)
In Gaza, hope is a fantasy
I wanted to be wrong, but it turns out that I was right. Since early October, I have been sure that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has had one aim all along: to erase Gaza. Spurred on by a rabid cabinet that believes that Palestinians are worthless “vermin”, Netanyahu has done what I suspect he has always wanted to do: dispense with the incremental destruction of a people and a strip of land and, instead, engineer a genocide in Gaza with ruthless and oh so satisfying efficiency. By now, this fact should be clear. That is the “victory” Netanyahu has and will continue to pursue until he has achieved it – to turn Gaza into dust and memory permanently. There will be no “pause in fighting”, no “lasting” ceasefire, no truce, no end to the genocide because Netanyahu has no reason or incentive to stop. And Netanyahu knows that no one inside or outside Israel is prepared, willing or able to stop him. Hope has been extinguished. Every day, Palestinians hope, in vain, that the horrors and outrages will end. Every day, we hope, in vain, for a faint sign that the murderous madness will end, that reason and diplomacy will prevail, that the captives – on both sides – will be reunited with their aching families. Hope is a fantasy, snuffed out by men and forces who thrive on causing chaos and despair in their “killing rage”. Netanyahu may be unpopular. Still, what he is doing and how he is going about doing it in defiance of proportionate scale, decency, and international law has the overwhelming support of Israelis who, apparently, would also be content to see Gaza reduced to dust and memory – permanently. Polls show that most Israelis want Netanyahu to use more force, more “firepower” in Gaza and beyond. Damn decency, international law, and the mushrooming number of casualties day after dreadful day. The pain and suffering of Palestinians is irrelevant. The right and duty of Israel to defend itself is the only thing that counts. It’s hardly surprising then that polls show, as well, that despite the rampant hunger, disease, and desperate need, most Israelis want fellow Israelis to continue blocking trucks carrying food, water, and medicine from reaching Gaza until the Hamas-held captives are released. Palestinians are expendable. Israelis are not. As for the “future” of Gaza, 93 percent of Israelis reportedly agree with Netanyahu: the two-state “solution” is dead on arrival since all of the land between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River belongs to them. The intent is to have Israeli settlers take the place of Palestinians in Gaza. Another Nakba is already afoot – literally. I am convinced most of Israel’s confederates abroad – whether they admit it publicly or not – also embrace these egregious beliefs and subscribe, wholeheartedly, to Netanyahu’s modus operandi and definition of “victory”. So, far from being “damaged” or “weakened”, Netanyahu has been emboldened as a “wartime” prime minister and by an “international community” that has encouraged him to do what he has done in Gaza and the occupied West Bank without remorse or restraint. Netanyahu will survive as prime minister for as long as Israel goes about doing what it is doing in Gaza and perhaps longer. Ever the calculating Machiavellian, he has rebuffed predictions of his imminent political demise or forced exit by wishful-thinking columnists, “experts”, and former presidential candidates. Again and again, the “international community” has said it is “concerned” by what their man in Tel Aviv is doing in Gaza and the occupied West Bank. Again and again, these expressions of “concern” have proven to be hollow bits of performative nonsense. On reliable cue, US President Joe Biden described what Israel is doing in Gaza as being “over the top”. “I’ve been pushing really hard, really hard, to get humanitarian assistance into Gaza. There are a lot of innocent people who are starving, a lot of innocent people who are in trouble and dying, and it’s gotta stop. Number one,” Biden told reporters earlier this week. It won’t stop. How can it stop when Biden and his complicit allies in London, Paris, Berlin, and Ottawa keep arming Israel to the brim and refusing – even in the blatant face of Israel’s “over the top” onslaught and the deepening humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza – to demand an immediate ceasefire? The calamitous course was set when Biden and the other presidents, chancellors, and prime ministers rushed to Tel Aviv in “solidarity” pilgrimages to “stand firmly” by Netanyahu’s side. It’s too late to apply the stock, talking-point-ephemeral brake since Netanyahu isn’t listening. He isn’t abiding by the International Court of Justice’s damning ruling which called on the Israeli government to stop what it is doing in Gaza after South African lawyers and diplomats made a persuasive and “plausible” case that Palestinians are victims of genocide and Israel is the perpetrator. Rafah is in Netanyahu’s crosshairs. The so-called “safe haven” and the more than a million Palestinians who have taken refuge there in tents and makeshift “homes” will endure the inevitable lethal consequences of the major Western powers’ unconditional backing of Israel. Exhausted and petrified Palestinians, including mothers, wives, and their sons and daughters, will not be spared Israel’s wrath. Their already precarious lives hang on the precipice of Netanyahu’s – for the moment and only for the moment – delayed designs. Biden et al may claim, at least publicly, to ask Israel to stop the looming carnage. Netanyahu will not be deterred by their empty, delivered-behind-a-lectern “warnings”. He is calling the geopolitical shots, not Biden et al. While America was preoccupied with a football game on Sunday night, Netanyahu gave Palestinians in Rafah a taste of the terror to come – firing a shower of shells that killed and dismembered dozens of sleeping children, women and men. Finally, a cocksure Netanyahu understands the value of patience. Biden looks and sounds like an old man who is poised to become yesterday’s man – gone,