Archives: Articles

By Renée L. Quarterman

How a Tiny Island Defies U.S. Sanctions to Lead in Healthcare

In the heart of the Cuban capital, the Dr. Cosme Ordoñez Carceller Teaching Polyclinic stands as a testament to the nation’s unique approach to healthcare: universal, free of charge, accessible, regionalized, community-centered, and deeply rooted in preventive medicine. Unlike the profit-driven models that dominate much of the world, Cuba’s system prioritizes equitable access, public health education, and early intervention.

At the core of this approach is a commitment to health promotion through education, disease prevention through habit management, and the integration of medical care and rehabilitation. By emphasizing proactive healthcare rather than reactive treatment, the system ensures that communities receive continuous, comprehensive support to maintain overall well-being.

During a recent visit to the Dr. Cosme Ordoñez Carceller Teaching Polyclinic in Havana, the staff detailed how the system was developed and how it ensures that no Cuban, regardless of income, is left without medical care.

The Structure of Cuba’s Healthcare System

Cuba’s National Health System operates as a hierarchical, state-run model designed to ensure seamless coordination of care. At the top, the National Assembly oversees the Ministry of Public Health, which sets national policies and directs specialized health institutes that tackle broader public health concerns.

Below the Ministry, provincial governments, answering directly to the Assembly, oversee provincial health departments, which manage larger hospitals and specialized medical facilities. These provincial bodies, in turn, delegate responsibilities to municipal governments, which run the municipal health departments and smaller hospitals that serve local populations. At the community level, municipal health departments manage Cuba’s extensive polyclinic network, the cornerstone of the country’s healthcare system. These polyclinics not only provide specialized care, diagnostics, and emergency services, but they also coordinate closely with family doctor-and-nurse teams, who serve as the first point of contact for Cuban citizens.

These frontline providers play a crucial role beyond immediate treatment, emphasizing preventive care, home visits, and alternative therapies such as nutrition counseling, acupuncture, and plant-based medicine. Despite supply shortages exacerbated by U.S. sanctions, this integrated, top-down approach ensures that resources are distributed efficiently, maintaining consistent healthcare access nationwide.

Founded in 1974, the Dr. Ordoñez Carceller Polyclinic serves approximately 13,000 residents, offering care in medical specialties such as cardiology, orthopedics, fertility consultations, and genetic testing. The clinic is named after Dr. Cosme Ordoñez Carceller (1927–2019), an epidemiologist and pioneer of Community Medicine, who championed the polyclinic model that emerged in the 1960s and 1970s. He played a key role in training young physicians in comprehensive general medicine and launched innovative programs like the Grandparents’ Circles, a senior care initiative so effective that it was replicated nationwide.

Unlike the profit-driven models that dominate much of the world, Cuba’s system prioritizes equitable access, public health education, and early intervention. The country’s healthcare approach is rooted in promoting health through education, preventing disease by managing habits, and ensuring comprehensive medical care and rehabilitation. Unlike the fragmented, for-profit U.S. healthcare model, Cuba’s integrated, community-based approach ensures better health outcomes and higher patient satisfaction. At polyclinics like Ordoñez Carceller, primary care is not just about treating illness but about education, prevention, and holistic well-being. This commitment to accessible, people-centered medicine reflects Cuba’s broader philosophy: that healthcare is not a privilege, but a fundamental human right.

Cuba’s Healthcare Achievements: A Global Leader in Public Health

Despite enduring over six decades of economic embargo, Cuba has achieved remarkable public health milestones. The following list highlights key accomplishments of both the Ordoñez Carceller Polyclinic and the Cuban healthcare system as a whole:

• AIDS: Cuba identified HIV in 1983 and quickly set up a system to track and treat it. By 2014, it eliminated mother-to-child transmission of HIV and syphilis, a milestone the U.S. has yet to reach.

• COVID Cuba developed two COVID vaccines, kept infections low, and even sent vaccines abroad.

• Diabetes The nation has developed an effective medication that treats diabetic ulcers (skin wounds that result from poor blood sugar control)

• Alzheimer’s Research: Cuba developed a drug that may help reverse Alzheimer’s effects.

• Maternal-fetal medicine 99% of Cuban children are vaccinated, and the country has a lower infant mortality rate than the U.S.

• Nutrition While obesity is not an issue in Cuba, malnutrition is an increasing concern due to shortages caused by the U.S. embargo

• Home health Doctors make house calls to care for the elderly and new mothers.

Profit vs. Public Health: How Medical Education and Healthcare Delivery Differ in Cuba and the U.S.

The paths to becoming a doctor in Cuba and the United States could not be more different. In the U.S., medical students take on crippling debt, often exceeding $200,000, before ever treating a patient. The pressure to repay loans steers many toward high-paying specialties, leaving primary care and rural communities underserved. The system is structured around financial incentives rather than public need, reinforcing the idea that medicine is a business first, a service second.

Cuba takes the opposite approach. Medical education is fully state-funded, allowing students to focus on patient care instead of profit. Training begins immediately after secondary school, with students placed in community clinics early in their careers. By the time they specialize, they have already served in primary care settings, ensuring that the system produces physicians committed to public health, not private wealth.

A Focus on Prevention, Not Just Treatment

Cuba’s prevention-first model stands in stark contrast to the reactive nature of U.S. healthcare. While American medicine often prioritizes treatment over lifestyle interventions, Cuban doctors routinely incorporate nutrition, exercise, and disease prevention strategies into care plans. The country’s polyclinic system ensures patients receive consistent, community-based healthcare rather than navigating a fragmented, for-profit system that often leaves them behind.

The U.S. Blockade: An Unjust Barrier to Health

The U.S. embargo continues to hinder Cuba’s healthcare system by restricting access to essential medicines, medical equipment, and scientific research. Pharmaceutical and shipping companies, fearing U.S. penalties, avoid business with Cuba—leading to severe shortages of everything from aspirin to cancer treatments.

Even medical journals and online resources are blocked due to U.S. restrictions, forcing Cuban researchers to work under constraints that most Western physicians never encounter.

Yet, rather than succumbing to these barriers, Cuba has turned to self-sufficiency, investing in biotechnology, vaccine development, and herbal medicine research to compensate for limited imports. If freed from economic sanctions, Cuba’s contributions to global healthcare innovation could expand exponentially.

For decades, Cuba has exported medical expertise worldwide, sending doctors to disaster-stricken and underserved regions. These global medical brigades have provided care to millions, particularly in Latin America, Africa, and the Caribbean. Yet, rather than supporting these humanitarian efforts, Washington has sought to dismantle them. In February 2025, the U.S. expanded sanctions on Cuba’s international medical program, further restricting its ability to send doctors abroad. The move reflects a deeper failure to understand Cuba’s model of solidarity-driven healthcare, a stark contrast to the U.S. system, where medicine is often dictated by profit rather than public service.

It is within this profit-driven framework that Cuba’s medical missions are misunderstood, labeled as “forced labor” by those who cannot imagine doctors choosing service over salary. The very idea of healthcare as a human right, rather than a commodity, challenges the U.S. worldview, leading to efforts to discredit and sanction those who practice it differently.

What Could Be If the Embargo Were Lifted

Cuba’s healthcare system is a model of resilience and innovation, but its full potential remains hindered by decades of U.S. sanctions. If given access to global resources and technology, Cuban researchers could expand medical advancements in infectious diseases, chronic illness treatment, and disaster response. For now, Cuban doctors continue their work—undaunted by external pressures, committed to the principle that healthcare is a right, not a privilege.

Renée L. Quarterman, MD, FACS, is a surgical breast specialist. She is the director of Delaware Breast Care, a part of US Oncology.

14 March 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Ranjan Solomon

Ukraine and the US recently proposed a ceasefire agreement, but Russia has rejected it and offered an alternative proposal. Russian President Vladimir Putin stated that while he agrees with the idea of a temporary ceasefire, it should lead to long-term peace and eliminate the initial causes of the war. Putin’s alternative proposal undermines the US and Ukraine’s goals, as it would grant Russia significant advantages. Russia would be allowed to continue military recruitment, production of military equipment, and receipt of military aid, while Ukraine would be restricted from doing so.

Russia’s rejection of the ceasefire proposal and its counteroffer suggest that Putin is holding the proposal hostage and attempting to extract concessions before formal negotiations begin. This move is consistent with Russia’s previous actions, as it has been accused of using negotiations as a delaying tactic to continue its military advances. The situation on the ground remains tense, with Russian forces continuing their offensive operations in eastern Ukraine. Despite some Ukrainian counterattacks, Russian forces have made marginal gains in the Kupyansk direction.

Russia’s demands in the Ukraine conflict are multifaceted and have evolved over time. At its core, Russia seeks to halt Ukraine’s integration with Western institutions, particularly NATO. Russia will not stop shot at demanding halting NATO expansion. Russia wants to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO and has called for a ban on NATO military exercises in Ukraine.

As far as territorial control goes, Russia demands recognition of its annexation of Crimea and control over the Donbas region. Russia seeks to limit Ukraine’s sovereignty by designating it as a “neutral, non-aligned, and non-nuclear” state. Russia demands protection for Russian-speaking citizens in Ukraine, which could be used as a pretext for future interference.

As yet another pre-condition, Russia wants to demilitarize Ukraine, which would significantly weaken its ability to defend itself. These demands are non-negotiable for Russia, and it has shown willingness to use military force to achieve its objectives.

Ukraine’s stance on negotiations with Russia has been shaped by the ongoing conflict and the country’s commitment to sovereignty. Ukraine’s non-negotiable dimensions are in sharp contrast in multiple ways. Ukraine insists on the complete withdrawal of Russian forces from its territory. Ukraine declines to recognize Russia’s annexation of Crimea or the independence of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions.

Ukraine is stubbornly committed to its goal of joining NATO and will not abandon its bid for membership. This factor alone makes the entire peace process a non-starter although even NATO countries and some European countries do not want Ukraine in NATO. Of these Hungary and Germany are votaries against Ukraine being in NATO. The USA has also asserted this position. These alone make a NATO membership complicated for Ukraine.

Hungary Hungary’s Concerns has expressed concerns about the treatment of the ethnic Hungarian minority in Ukraine, particularly in the Zakarpattia Oblast. Hungary wants to ensure that the rights of the Hungarian minority, including language and cultural rights are protected. There are also historical border disputes between Hungary and Ukraine, which have contributed to tensions between the two countries.

Germany has traditionally had close economic and energy ties with Russia, and has been cautious not to antagonize Russia further. Germany has emphasized the need for a diplomatic solution to the conflict in Ukraine, rather than a military one. Some in Germany have also expressed concerns about NATO’s expansion into Eastern Europe, and the potential for it to be seen as provocative by Russia. These concerns highlight the complexities of European politics and the need for careful diplomacy in addressing the Ukraine-Russia conflict.

Russia views NATO’s expansion into Eastern Europe, particularly in Ukraine, as a direct threat to its national security. Russia has historically sought to maintain a buffer zone between itself and NATO, and sees Ukraine as part of this buffer. On the flip side, Russia has also been accused of seeking to maintain its sphere of influence in Eastern Europe, and views Ukraine’s NATO membership as a challenge to this influence.

Ukraine and its Western allies argue that Ukraine’s NATO membership is a matter of sovereignty, and that Russia has no right to dictate Ukraine’s foreign policy choices.

Ukraine and its allies also argue that NATO membership is necessary for Ukraine’s defense against Russian aggression, particularly in the wake of the 2014 annexation of Crimea. NATO membership is seen as a way to bring stability and security to the region, and to counter Russian efforts to destabilize Ukraine.

Some argue that Ukraine’s NATO membership is part of a broader containment strategy aimed at reigning in Russian aggression and expansionism.  NATO membership is seen as a way to deter Russian aggression, by making it clear that any attack on Ukraine would be met with a collective response from the alliance. By promoting stability and security in Ukraine, NATO membership is seen as a way to promote stability in the broader region, and to reduce the risk of Russian aggression.

Russia has consistently demanded that Ukraine must not join NATO and has sought guarantees that the alliance will not expand further eastward. Ukraine, on the other hand, has been adamant about its right to join NATO and has received support from several Western countries.

The issue of NATO membership is closely tied to the broader conflict between Russia and Ukraine, and any resolution to the conflict will likely need to address this issue. However, it’s unclear what compromises might be possible, as both sides have taken firm stances on the matter.

Russia will not likely accept the very light and vague “readiness to accept” a ceasefire unless the promise to “immediately begin negotiations toward an enduring peace that provides for Ukraine’s long-term security” also addresses some of Russia’s key concerns about their long-term security. Russia is unlikely to accept a 30-day ceasefire that could just end with resumption of fighting with rested and resupplied Ukrainian armed forces. And they are unlikely to accept the possibility of endless extensions that the agreement offers that would freeze the situation in a manner that addresses none of the concerns that Russia went to war for.

Russia might be willing to accept a ceasefire agreement that includes promises of relief from some sanctions. They will likely insist on possession of all or some of the Donbas regions of Donetsk and Luhansk as well as constitutional guarantees of protection of the ethnic Russians in the regions that remain part of Ukraine and of permanent Ukrainian neutrality, including no membership in NATO.

In return, Russia might we willing to negotiate the return of some of the annexed territory, to use unfrozen Russian assets to help rebuild Ukraine, and to abandon their demand for the demilitarization of Ukraine on condition that weapons supplied by the West be restricted to defensive weapons with no long range capacity to strike inside Russian territory. Much of this is possible, since the U.S. and Russia have said that the “Istanbul protocol agreement” will be used as a “framework” and “guidepost” in the negotiations.

And there is some evidence that the ceasefire is coming with some preconditions. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has confirmed, for example, that the Saudi Arabia talks with Ukraine included discussions about “territorial concessions.” Zelensky said the same day that Ukraine “will not recognize any occupied territories as Russia’s.” But the refusal to formally and legally “recognize” the loss of the territory does not preclude the de facto recognition of the reality that those territories will remain under Russian control unless they can be won back through diplomacy at a later date. Zelensky has previously conceded that “De facto, these territories are now controlled by the Russians. We don’t have the strength to bring them back,” while still insisting that Ukraine “cannot legally acknowledge any occupied territory of Ukraine as Russian.” The conundrum is that negotiations without those conditions could be unbearable for Putin, while negotiations with those conditions could be politically and domestically unbearable for Zelensky.

Volodymyr Zelenskyy has baptized Putin as “manipulative” and said the Russian leader would either stall or try to kill the deal. US President Donald Trump once again signaled that Ukraine would have to make territorial concessions to Russia and that its desire to join the NATO alliance was a non-starter.

Trump described the negotiations as a “complicated” process of redrawing international boundaries: “You’re sort of creating the edge of a country.” A poll released from Reuters and Ipsos found that 56 percent of Americans felt Trump was “too closely aligned” with Russia. Peter Zalmayev, a political scientist in Kyiv and the executive director of the Eurasia Democracy Initiative, has told Al Jazeera he would be wary of any peace deal that would sacrifice Ukrainian territory. Russia currently occupies 20 percent of Ukraine’s territory, and Zalmayev said surrendering that area would have a “severe impact on international law”. But then? What exactly constitutes the 20 percent? And will that 20 percent all of a sudden balloon to, let’s say, 25 percent?”

Zalmayev observes: “Ukraine might actually be at peace with the idea of exchanging that loss for a promise of solid guarantees of security, investment, economic development. Russia may push to retain control of those areas as well, if territorial concessions are on the table. Ukraine would have to cede those cities like Kherson, which fought back and was recaptured from the Russians at the cost of thousands of lives of soldiers… “It could create significant discontent on the part of the returning soldiers, veterans, et cetera. And that in itself, I think, Vladimir Putin is very cognizant of and actually would not mind chaos in Ukraine.”

Occupied territory is a ‘bargaining chip’ for Putinaccording to experts.Territorial concessions are not the main goal of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.“For Vladimir Putin, territory is not the main issue. The war is not for territory. The war is for the future security architecture in Russia, and I think Putin quite genuinely sees this war as existential for Russia.” The longer the war stretches on, the more Russia will gain the upper hand. TheRussians have been continuing their slow advance in Ukraine for many months – for over a year. This seems to be what is probably going to continue if no peace deal is achieved at the moment.

Putin figures that with every month of fighting continuing, Ukraine is losing, and the deal that is feasibly attainable by Ukraine is getting worse with each month Ukraine continues to remain in the battle. Putin is just waiting for Kyiv to admit that there is no way out from this war except negotiations.”

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is emerging as a significant asset in the ongoing Russian-Ukrainian conflict. Specifically, it has become a key data analysis tool that helps operators and war fighters make sense of the growing volume and amount of information generated by numerous systems, weapons and soldiers in the field. As AI use continues to evolve, its application on the current Ukrainian and future battlefields will translate into more precise and capable responses to adversary forces, movements and actions. Ukraine’s application of this technology in combat is made possible by both government and private sector efforts. On balance, Ukraine seems to be gaining more from using this technology, although it’s too early to predict whether such a technological edge will translate into significant gains against entrenched Russian positions. So far, Ukraine has managed to maintain a human-centric approach toward AI use, with operators making the final decisions. In my view, Ukraine’s Western partners are embracing that approach, but their militaries still need to agree on how to use AI after its debut in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict.

An absolutely crucial aspect of this war is the rapid evolution of combat technologies and the adaptation of key tactics and concepts by both sides. In this war, Ukraine has benefited from allies and partners offering their artificial intelligence technologies and concepts, which are used in several key roles. A key role of AI in Ukraine’s service is the integration of target and object recognition with satellite imagery, prompting Western commentators to note that Ukraine has an edge in geospatial intelligence. According to public sources, neural networks are used to combine ground-level photos, video footage from numerous drones and UAVs, and satellite imagery to provide faster intelligence analysis and assessment to produce strategic and tactical intelligence advantages.

Putin gave a ‘sensible’ reply to ceasefire deal

An eminent political science academic Nicolai Petro, has praised Putin’s guarded response to the 30-day ceasefire proposal as a smart one in Al Jazeera. He warned that the devil is always in the details, and that’s what Moscow is waiting to see,” Petro told Al Jazeera. Putin is nobody’s fool.  Putin asserted he agreed in general to the prospect of peace, but not without factoring “the root causes of the crisis”. These include the the oppression of the Russian-speaking minority within Ukraine and the unbridled expansion of NATO eastward. The latter was in violation of the Minsk agreements. It was the notorious Clinton who cheekily and stealthily led the expansion into Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. Then came more countries: Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, and Poland. Finally, in came Finland with citizens lying to themselves that they were at risk of nuclear war. Finland imagines that because its borders stretch nearly 1340 kilometers. It has its significance because of a complex history and diplomatic relations.

Western policymakers should study the lessons of the Minsk agreements – and drop any illusions about the ways in which Russia supposedly acts. As Marie Dumoulin, director of the Wider Europe programme at the European Council on Foreign Relations notes, “Russia has acted in and around past negotiations about Ukraine – the most prominent results of which were the Minsk agreements. These have long since become a byword for the West’s failure to deal with the post-2014 conflict in eastern Ukraine. In the debate relating to the Minsk agreements, they tend to either be branded a de facto capitulation to Russia or made out to be the main reason for Russia’s full-scale invasion of 2022, because of a supposed failure by Ukraine to implement these agreements (a view which echoes the Russian narrative, whether knowingly or not).

Gorbachev undid the Cold War under the condition that WARSAW would be wound up, and, in return, East and West Germany could be integrated. But, NATO held on claiming it was a mere defense alliance. It is now interventionist. It bombed Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, and now Ukraine. It had no UN mandate for these wars and could be termed as a terrorist organization with a huge Military-Industrial Complex from which its host nations also gain. This is the hypocritical West. It has supported authoritarian regimes and enabled repression against Russia has its options. Alliances with China, Iran, Syria, will stave off threats from the post-colonial/still-colonial western bloc. It should work with allies in the Eastern bloc including Ukraine, Belarus, and Caucasus. At the economic level it must diversify so it becomes an economic power and overpower a compromised Europe devoid, as it is , of sterner stuff than some hand outs and no principles.

A robust BRICS can enable Russia to stave off western sanctions- in which area they are already cheating. Its exports must be prioritized to BRICS members like China and India. The New Development Bank (NDB) and the contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA) are ways in BRICS can alter the dynamics of the way in which neo-colonial Europe plays its sullied political playoffs.

NATO can claim no credibility when it comes to democracy. Russia is right to reject any NATO presence in its borders. NATO leaders have lacked honesty and principle and are a violent militaristic bunch of allies.

Ranjan Solomon is a political commentator

14 March 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Dr. Ramzy Baroud

“The higher the monkey climbs, the more he shows his tail,” warns a timeless Chinese proverb. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, however, seems to neither heed the lessons of history nor the wisdom of such folk sayings.

By leading a vilification campaign against Egypt, the Israeli leader is further exposing his country’s vulnerabilities. This is yet another example of Israel’s inability to alter the political reality in Gaza, 17 months after it launched its devastating war on the Strip.

By targeting Egypt, Israel aims to project an image of prowess, and that it is unafraid to confront the most populous Arab nation. Yet, in doing so, it inadvertently exposes its own weaknesses. This behavior is wholly consistent with Netanyahu’s legacy of running away forward.

Long before the October 7, 2023, war, Netanyahu was riding a wave of political euphoria. At the time, his relentless climb to greater heights seemed justified. His Global South diplomacy was reversing decades of Israeli isolation, and his success in gaining international recognition without paying a significant political price earned him immense popularity at home.

In Israel, Netanyahu kept winning one election after another. His latest right-wing extremist coalition secured a comfortable majority in the Knesset facing little pushback. The extremists were poised to transform Israel from within, reconfigure the region, and, with the usual unconditional support from the United States, position Israel as a global power commanding respect and authority.

However, October 7 and Israel’s catastrophic failure on all fronts exposed Netanyahu’s tail as a failed leader. The crisis quickly manifested in global outrage as Israel carried out a genocidal war on the Palestinians, killing and wounding over 160,000 people in the course of 15 months. The Israeli tail was further exposed as the once-confident leader, who tirelessly promised to reshape the Middle East to fit Israel’s agenda, became a wanted criminal by the International Criminal Court on November 21, while his country faced investigations for the crime of genocide by the International Court of Justice.

Yet Netanyahu climbed even higher, doubling down on his approach. He insisted on continuing the war in Gaza, maintaining a military presence in Lebanon, and carrying out frequent and massive bombing campaigns in Syria.

Bravado aside, Netanyahu has still failed to achieve any of Israel’s stated objectives through the devastating war on Gaza—a war that has also cost Israel unprecedented losses and casualties. Meanwhile, the divisions among the political and military elites are deepening. The latest manifestation of this is the firing of many top military brass and the reordering of the army to align with Netanyahu’s political ambitions.

The more Israel’s vulnerabilities are exposed, the more Netanyahu and his allies intensify their threats—not only against Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria but also against Egypt. In fact, Egypt, which is not a party to the war and has been one of three mediators in ceasefire talks, has become the primary target of Israel’s new strategy aimed at ethnically cleansing Gaza’s population into the Sinai desert.

But how did this come about?

Egypt was hardly a factor in the Israeli war on Gaza. Yet, as the war on Gaza dragged on, with no possibility of a “total victory,” top Israeli officials began pointing fingers at Egypt.

The idea of taking over the Philadelphi Corridor, separating the city of Rafah in southern Gaza from the Egyptian border was first floated by extremist Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich. Others, including Netanyahu himself, soon began parroting the same words.

In the media, the language took an even more foreboding turn, with some accusing Egypt of arming Hamas, or of not doing enough to stop the flow of weapons to the Palestinian resistance.

When Egypt rejected Israeli accusations and refused to accommodate Israel’s wish to ethnically cleanse Gaza, Israeli leaders began talking of an Egyptian military threat, alleging that Egypt was amassing troops at its border with Israel.

The original aim of roping Egypt into Israel’s failed war was meant to create a distraction from the battlefield. Eventually, however, the distraction turned into deflection: blaming Egypt for Israel’s inability to win the war or to displace the Gaza population.

To some extent, Netanyahu has succeeded in making Egypt part of the conversation on Gaza. With US President Donald Trump repeatedly proposing the displacement of Palestinians and the takeover of Gaza, the Israeli leader felt that, finally, he had a clear American commitment to export Israel’s problems elsewhere.

Even the leader of the Israeli opposition, Yair Lapid, used Egypt to distract from his own failure to mount a serious challenge to Netanyahu’s rule. On February 25, he proposed that Cairo oversee the Strip for a number of years at a conference in Washington.

While Palestinians, Arabs, and others reacted angrily to the Israel-US ethnic cleansing schemes, few paid attention to the fact that, historically, Israel has never sought permission to ethnically cleanse Palestinians. This was as true during the 1948 Nakba as it is today. Putting pressure on Arab countries to concede to Israel’s ethnic cleansing plans is the strongest sign yet of Israel’s weakness.

Tough talk and threats aside, Israel finds itself in a more vulnerable position than at any point in its history. It is clear that Israel is now using the Arabs to mask its own vulnerabilities. And though the monkey continues to climb, his tail has never been as exposed as it is today.

Dr. Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle.

14 March 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor

Geneva – Israel’s systematic sexual and gender-based violence against Palestinians is widespread and amounts to war crimes and crimes against humanity, according to United Nations experts. Anew report released by the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel, also concludes that Israel has been responsible for acts of genocide in the Gaza Strip since October 2023.

The long-standing impunity enjoyed by Israel, which has enabled it to continue its systematiccrimes against Palestinians, must end immediately due to the seriousness of the report’s contents.

In its report “‘More than a human can bear’: Israel’s systematic use of sexual, reproductive and other forms of gender-based violence since October 2023” released today (13 March 2025), the International Commission of Inquiry concludesthat the frequency, severity, and prevalence of sexual and gender-based crimes against Palestinian men and women in the Occupied Palestinian Territory show that Israel is increasingly and systematically employing sexual and gender-based violence as a deliberate strategy to destabilize Palestinian society, assert control, persecute its people, and contribute to their destruction.

According to the report, thousands of women have died in Gaza since 7 October 2023 as a result of Israeli military operations that have disproportionately affected civilians, especially Palestinian women and girls, many of whom were directly targeted.

The Commission of Inquiry asserts that Israel’s systematic violations of Palestinian women and girls have also resulted in severe gender-related harm, including death from pregnancy and childbirth complications, as well as serious physical and psychological harm. This is because of deliberate Israeli policies that have destroyed the Gaza Strip’s health system and preventedwomen and girls of reproductive age from accessing reproductive healthcare.

Israel specifically targeted facilities related to sexual and reproductive health, which had both immediate and long-term effects on women’s physical and mental well-being as well as their capacity to procreate. These effects will have a lasting impact on the fertility of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip as a whole. All phases of reproduction—from pregnancy and childbirth to postpartum recuperation and breastfeeding—have been negatively impacted by Israel’s use of starvation as a weapon of war, blocking of humanitarian aid, and forced displacement of Palestinians in the Strip.

The Commission of Inquiry documented systematic patterns of gender-based and sexual violence against Palestinians, including crimessuch as rape, forced nudity, sexual humiliation, sexual torture, genital-targeted violence, and degrading treatment. As part of Israeli tactics meant to degrade and terrorize Palestinians, these infractions were photographed or recordedand shared online on social media platforms.

The report also noted that Palestinian men, women, and children have been subjected to sexual and gender-based violence across the occupied Palestinian territory, whether during arrest, in interrogation centers and prisons, or amid forced displacement in Gaza. These violations were systematically committed by Israeli security forces, as well as by Israeli settlers in the West Bank.

The Commission determined that the sexual and reproductive crimes committed by Israel in the Palestinian territories since October 7, 2023, constitute war crimes and/or crimes against humanity. It further concluded that some of these acts amount to genocide under the Rome Statute and the Genocide Convention and The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

The Commission confirmed that Israel has systematically targeted the reproductive capacity of Palestinians in Gaza through the deliberate destruction of sexual and reproductive healthcare facilities, including maternity hospitals and in-vitro fertilization centers, significantly undermining childbirth within the Palestinian community. Additionally, Israel imposed a comprehensive siege, preventing access to essential humanitarian aid, including food, water, and critical medications and equipment necessary for safe pregnancies, deliveries, and neonatal care. These actions have resulted in irreversible long-term effects on the mental health, physical well-being, and reproductive and fertility prospects of Palestinians in Gaza as a group.

Furthermore, Israel used starvation as a method of warfare and systematically denied exit permits for patients, particularly women suffering from serious illnesses such as gynecological cancer, exacerbating their suffering and putting their lives at grave risk. The Commission concluded that these combined policies amount to the deliberate imposition of living conditions intended to bring about the physical destruction of Palestinians, in whole or in part—an act explicitly classified as genocide under Article 6 of the Rome Statute and the Genocide Convention.

The report of the UN committee is entirely in line with the documentation of human rights organisations, including Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor, during the last 17 months in the Gaza Strip. Despite the fact that Israeli crimes against civilians in the Strip have unquestionably included elements of genocide, most members of the international community have shamefully done nothing to stop the crime or hold Israel and its allies responsible for it.

Euro-Med Monitor has previously documented Israel’s systematic use of sexual violence, including rape and other forms of sexual crimes. These violations are a clear part of a larger Israeli campaign of genocidal violence against the Palestinian people, and Israel should therefore be added to the list of organisations that engage in sexual violence during times of conflict.

In October 2024, Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor published a report documenting the various elements of the crime of genocide, including the imposition of measures aimed at preventing childbirth within the Palestinian community. The report found that Israeli occupation forces have acted with prior and specific intent through deliberate measures to prevent births in Gaza as part of the crime of genocide. These measures include expanding the killing of individuals of reproductive age, forcibly displacing and separating Palestinian families, destroying embryo preservation laboratories, dismantling the healthcare system, and imposing harsh living conditions through starvation and the deliberate obstruction of humanitarian aid.

The International Commission’s report ought to be a wake-up call for all pertinent states and organisations to take immediate action to fulfil their responsibilities under the Genocide Convention, rather than just sitting on paper. The continued inaction of these states and entities regarding Israeli crimes has directly or indirectly contributed to the ongoing crime of genocide in the Gaza Strip, and is thus legally and morally indefensible.

Many people of conscience have lost faith in the international system and the principles of justice and equality. This loss is justified, given the international community’s persistent disdain for the reports and recommendations of competent independent entities, as well as its preference for political interests and considerations over moral and legal obligations. This also creates the necessary conditions for tensions and conflicts to continue and escalate.

In line with their international commitments, states must enact economic, diplomatic, and military sanctions to force Israel to stop its crimes, in light of the overwhelming evidence that it has committed genocide in the Gaza Strip. The financial assets of officials implicated in crimes against Palestinians must be frozen, trade privileges and bilateral agreements suspended, arms exports and purchases from Israel prohibited, and military cooperation with Israel suspended. States must also refrain from interfering with the International Criminal Court’s work in any manner and assist it in its continuing investigations into the situation in Palestine.

To be in compliance with international law, the international community must take immediate action to ensure the Palestinian people’s right to live in freedom and dignity, support their right to self-determination, and eradicate the underlying causes of their suffering and continuous oppression over the past 76 years, i.e. occupation and ethnic cleansing. They must also seek to lift Israel’s illegal blockade of the Gaza Strip, ensure accountability for Israeli perpetrators, guarantee the right of Palestinian victims to redress and compensation, end the illegal Israeli occupation and violent settler colonialism imposed on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, and demolish the system of isolation and apartheid imposed by Israel and its allies against Palestinians.

Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor is a Geneva-based independent organization with regional offices across the MENA region and Europe

14 March 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Phil Pasquini

Emboldened by Donald Trump’s war on words and “woke” phrases, Congressman Andrew Clyde (R-GA) a member of the House – Transportation and Infrastructure Committee on March 3 introduced bill H.R. 1744 to eliminate Black Lives Matter Plaza (BLM).

The racist overtones in erasing this important symbolic part of DC and American history are not lost on anyone.

The purported purpose of the congressman’s bill is “To amend title 23, United States Code, to withhold certain apportionment funds from the District of Columbia unless the Mayor of the District of Columbia removes the phrase Black Lives Matter from the street, symbolically designated as Black Lives Matter Plaza, redesignates such street as Liberty Plaza, and removes such phrase from each website, document, and other material under the jurisdiction of the District of Columbia.” It is a wonder, too, why the good congressman did not demand that his bill be numbered 1776 to maintain his patriotic theme.

Rep. Clyde, a gun store owner, fired the first shot to erase the five-year-old two-block plaza that was designated BLM Plaza in 2020. The plaza was created in reaction to the killing of George Floyd by police in whose wake civil unrest and protests broke out across the country calling for racial justice.

Feeling the pressure if the proposed bill were to be passed, rather than remain intransient, DC Mayor Muriel Bowser has ordered the removal of all BLM Plaza vestiges in paving the way for the creation of the new proposed “Liberty Plaza.” That demolition work began on March 10 and is proceeding at a rapid pace.

Bowser downplayed her decision earlier this week in recognizing the change as an “evolution” and said that “We can’t afford to be distracted by meaningless congressional interference. The devastating impacts of the federal job cuts must be our number one concern. Our focus should be on economic, public safety and supporting our residents affected by these cuts.” Case closed.

Since its inception from an early simply painted tribute, it has gone through at least three iterations as traffic slowly wore down the original painted letters and the street was reopened to traffic. Its final design in 2021 that was promoted as a “permanent installation,” the plaza underwent an extensive and professionally designed remodel with the installation of an expensive cobblestone and cement paved street bed, new yellow heat applied lettering and the delineation of two traffic lanes separated by a pedestrian zone contained within modern illuminated bollards.

In its first iteration, citizen volunteers painted BLACK LIVES MATTER in bold yellow lettering across the black asphalt pavement from curb to curb on the street closed to traffic. During it existence it has gone from a symbol of racial justice, activism and resistance in America to an outliner offensive to Trump and the MAGA crowd in need of immediate removal.

Soon after it was created, the plaza became a part of a growing tourist attraction and downtown community space that saw the former busy street facing the White House used for numerous community activities and events.

The transformation now to a new and unknown design for a “Liberty Plaza” with the associated costs of demolishing BLM, and reconstruction, should be the stuff of DOGE nightmares. For a “cost conscious” entity flippant in firing hard working civil servants at a frantic pace tasked by Trump and Musk with removing government waste and excess, one has to wonder how they justify the millions of dollars spent on flying Trump to Florida every weekend to play golf.

Added to this is the extensive list of forbidden words and phrases just published in the New York Times that must be purged from all government documents, and how DOGE justifies the diversion of resources and salaries to pay for highly trained cartographic staff to change the names Gulf of Mexico and Denali on maps and all government documents and publications.

It makes no sense, but as of January 20th, America has made little sense to anyone paying attention…

Report and photos by Phil Pasquini

13 March 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Marwan Asmar

One couldn’t help but feel a tinge of pleasure in Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian lashing out at Donald Trump. Without mincing his words, and certainly not sticking to diplomatic niceties, no doubt taking his cue from the new boss at the White House, Pezeshkian told the US president a few home truths.

Depending on the translation into English from Persian, he basically told the US president to “go to hell”. This is a phrase that is making great headlines all over the world for its intensity and meaning.

On its part, the social media is having a field day at Pezeshkian, to say the least “forthright” speech at the Iran Entrepreneurs Forum in which he lambasted Trump for the way he is called on Tehran to heed and either go back to the nuclear deal or face the mighty military of the United States.

He didn’t at all like how Trump framed his appeal for Iran to get back to the negotiations table  when he spoke nonchalantly that “there are two ways Iran can be handled: militarily or make a deal.”

In turn,  Pezeshkian and the Iranian leadership starting from Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei to Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi became particularly angry at this approach as Trump is now seeking to revive the 2015 Iran Nuclear Deal which he muzzled out of in 2018 during his first administration as one of the latest pieces of the US global, foreign and security policies.

Though denied by Iran, Trump said he sent a letter to Ayatollah Khamenei in which he told them to agree to a deal or face the military wrath of the United States with extended crippling sanctions on Iran’s oil sector, its exports and the shutting off of its global financing.

The subsequent utterings on the international media about Trump and his latest obsession in “controlling” the nuclear file of Iran has created a knee-jerk reaction among the country’s leadership which saw what Trump was doing was “coersive diktates” and imposition of maximalists pressure which today, they are in no mood to pay heed to because of so many factors including its ballistic missile attacks on Israel last October where up to 250 missiles landed on different sites of the country.

Pezeshkian, dubbed as a reformist president and one who is willing to listen, was startlingly critical at the way Trump invited, more like dictating, to get back to the nuclear deal under vastly different and stringent negotiating terms, and ones that would strip Iran of its nuclear aspirations and impose an additional and an even tougher monitoring and observation regime than the previously deal allowed for which Pezeshkian and other leaders rejected.

In plain, straight talking, again no doubt like Trump’s abrasive approach Pezeshkian leading a country on the threshold of becoming a nuclear power as many analysts suggest with more than 60 percent uranium enrichment capacity, said Iran would not negotiate with Washington while while being threatened. He essentially delivered the ultimate stab that the US president can “do whatever the hell you want”, as reported by the Iranian state media, Tuesday.

”It is unacceptable for us that they [the U.S.] give orders and make threats. I won’t even negotiate with you. Do whatever the hell you want”, Pezeshkian repeated at the behest of a country long standing up to the United States and to maintain cold and freezing relations with the United States.

Further, and to say the least, this was the ultimate snub delivered by the Iranian president who was in no mood to listen to the antics of the new US president wishing to wield his rhetorical stick around the world and was not afraid of telling him so.

Pezeshkian was especially irked him by the way Trump met the Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky in the White House recently calling it disgraceful and shameful and Iran would not listen to such talk as a way of moving the negotiations forward.

It was Trump, who initially pulled out of the Iran deal officially called Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) signed by the then Barack Obama administration with international backing of five major UN powers including Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany in 2015.

Then Trump said the deal was a bad one and wanted to re-negotiate. But since taking the USA out of the deal, Tehran no longer found it necessary to continue to observe the strict regime imposed by JCPOA on Iranian nuclear facilities which slowly started to top up its uranium enrichment levels to where it is today.

As well, Pezeshkian was echoing the words of Ayatollah Khamenei who earlier rejected the prospects of direct talks, calling them neither “smart, wise nor honorable” while saying that Iran will not be bullied into negotiations.

This was seconded by Iran’s Foreign Minister Araghchi who made it perfectly clear on his X account that “we will NOT negotiate under pressure and negotiation, We will NOT even consider it, no matter what the subject might be, whilst emphasizing that dialogue must be rooted in mutual respect, not threats.”

For all the outward talk however, Iranian officials have stressed as they did so in the past that the country’s nuclear program has been always for peaceful purposes and is open about the country’s nuclear reactors and plants as proved in its current consultation with the different world powers of the United Nations Security Council.

Marwan Asmar is an Amman-based writer and chief editor of the crossfirearabia.com website.

13 March 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Heather Stroud

The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), an organisation funded by the public, yet controlled by the government and influential lobby groups, finds itself at the centre of a storm. This time it is not about presenting biased news, or half lies that feed the narrative of their most favoured influential lobby groups, it is about airing a documentary that simply presents a view of life through the eyes of children in Gaza.

The documentary, at the centre of the storm is, ‘How to survive a War Zone’. The Campaign Against Antisemitism ‘CAA’, took out full page advertisements in The Sunday Times, Sunday Telegraph and the Mail on Sunday’, calling for the suspension of licence fees for BBC. The claims made against BBC centre around Abdullah, a thirteen year old Gazan boy, fluent in English, who was hired by BBC as a narrator to introduce children who were finding ways to survive the Israeli war on Gaza. Abdullah, who worked for nine months during the making of the documentary, was allocated $1000 for personal expenses. The money was paid into his sister’s account. The claim made is that in paying out these expenses, BBC were funding Hamas. Like most of these claims there is no evidence to suggest that any of the money paid out in expenses was used in an actual war crime against any Israelis. For a British group that has been set up to challenge incidents of antisemitism ( racism) their disregard for the life threatening danger they have placed this child in, is alarming to say the least.

Courageous and industrious as these Palestinian children are, Israel does not regard their lives as worthy of concern. This has been well documented by evidence presented to the International Court of Justice and the numerous posts on social media of settlers referring to children as potential terrorists and the babies of Palestinians as little snakes. Israeli politicians have also called for the annihilation of all Palestinians, including children. Foreign doctors, working in Gaza, have spoken out about children being targeted, by Israeli snipers, as they struggle to flee the aftermath of a bombing raid. CAA may just as well have painted a huge red target sign on Abdullah’s back.

Israel accused Palestinian workers of UNWRA, the internationally funded organisation that runs food and social programmes for Palestinians, both inside and outside of Gaza, of working for Hamas. As a consequence several of Israel’s close allies instantly withheld funding to UNWRA, exacerbating the existing crisis and leaving many Gazans to starve — babies and children being the most vulnerable. Doctors, journalists and aid workers have all been targeted along with deadly attacks on Gaza’s hospitals, schools and residential buildings. These attacks are all based on the claim that they were legitimate military targets because they harboured Hamas fighters or were in some way connected with them.

Hamas are the elected government in Gaza. They won the Palestinian legislative elections overwhelmingly in 2006, hence anyone working for them in a civil capacity, works for Hamas. However, Israel makes no distinction between someone working for Hamas in a civil capacity and someone who is actively engaged in armed resistance against them. In the U.K. British journalists have been arrested under the terrorist act for presenting factual evidence of Israel’s war crimes. British activists have likewise been arrested under the terrorist act for trying to prevent Israeli companies (based in the UK, such as Elbit Systems), from shipping parts for arms to Israel during Israel’s genocide on the Gazan people. Under International Law any kind of resistance is considered, not only legitimate, but obligatory for those who are aware and who are in a position to prevent further genocide. For Israel Labelling those who oppose their occupation and military objectives as ‘terrorist’, is strategically advantageous. Getting your closest allies, to label those who speak of or challenge their military objectives, as terrorist, is doubly advantageous.

BBC is trapped. When serious journalists, working within the BBC, attempt to present facts favourable to the Palestinian cause, they are likely to have their work banned or severely edited to conform with  government and powerful lobbyist editorial policy. Nine years ago BBC presented  a serious documentary which explored Israel’s attack on the USS Liberty, ‘Dead in the Water’. Until the current documentary, ‘How to Survive a War Zone’, (now withdrawn from viewership), I’m not aware that BBC has attempted to present anything that close to documenting Israel’s war crimes. BBC has long been criticised for its bias towards Israel so to see this campaign organised by CAA, creates an ironic twist as might be read in one of Kafka’s novels. The very people who rely on the BBC to push the Israeli narrative could end up being the ones responsible for bringing it down.

The link to the BBC documentary; ‘How to Survive in a War Zone’.

https://rumble.com/v6nm6n9-bbc-gaza-how-to-survive-a-warzone.html

The BBC documentary on the USS Liberty, ‘Dead in the Water’ is available on YouTube

Heather Stroud is an activist

13 March 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Euro-Med Human Rights Monitoris

Palestinian Territory – Israel has killed 150 Palestinians—an average of three people every 24 hours—since the ceasefire on 19 January 2025. The Euro-Med Monitor field team has documented Israeli sniper and drone attacks since the ceasefire went into effect, as well as the continued use of the blockade as a weapon of slow death by starvation in the ongoing genocide in the Gaza Strip.

The ongoing killings by the Israeli army are carried out by snipers and drones, including quadcopter aircraft, which target Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip. The deadly attacks frequently occur when residents attempt to return and inspect their damaged homes near the so-called “buffer zone” imposed by Israel along the Strip’s northern and eastern borders.

An Israeli drone strike on Monday 10 March killed Abdullah Ali al-Shaer and injured another person in the east of Rafah, despite the victims being in a designated “safe zone”. Just hours earlier, a separate drone attack killed three siblings—Mahmoud, Mohammed, and Ahmed Abdullah Ahmed—northeast of al-Bureij refugee camp in the central Gaza Strip.

Rafah Governorate has faced the most Israeli targeting since the ceasefire. Fifty-three-year-old Abdel Moneim Ali Qishta was killed inside his home by Israeli forces stationed along the Egyptian border opposite the al-Salam neighbourhood in the southern part of the city, on the morning of Saturday 8 March. That same day, an Israeli drone strike killed two young men, Mahmoud Hussein Farhan al-Hissi, 37, and Mahdi Abdullah Nadi Jarghoun, 39, in the town of al-Shawka, east of Rafah City.

Euro-Med Monitor has also documented the Israeli army’s ongoing killings of Palestinians in repeated attacks on the Shuja’iyya neighbourhood, east of Gaza City, and the town of Beit Hanoun, in the northern Gaza Strip, since the beginning of March. Since the ceasefire, Israel has killed 150 Palestinians—an average of six people every two days—and injured 605 others, at a rate of 11.8 individuals per day. This pattern underscores Israel’s systematic and ongoing targeting of Palestinians in the Strip, carried out with no military justification and in blatant disregard of the ceasefire and international law.

Israel has engaged in widespread killing and destruction in the besieged enclave for over 15 months and has intensified its genocidal policies by imposing deadly living conditions on Palestinians that result in their slow, systematic killing. Through a complete, illegal siege, Israel is preventing the entry of humanitarian aid and essential supplies while blocking the repair of critical infrastructure and services necessary for survival—all amid an absence of effective international intervention.

Euro-Med Monitor warns of a worsening humanitarian crisis if the blockade persists, with markets now being rapidly depleted of goods. Additionally, numerous relief and food distribution centres have halted operations due to the ongoing closure of the Gaza Strip’s border crossings and Israel’s refusal to allow supplies to enter since 2 March. This has significantly worsened the suffering of civilians, pushing them closer towards famine without the swift intervention of the international community.

Famine is not the only threat that should prompt the international community to act, and waiting for it to occur before responding is unacceptable. Depriving the enclave’s vulnerable population, particularly children, of proper nutrition will lead to severe malnutrition, resulting in long-term health damage and potentially irreversible physical and psychological disabilities depending on the individual’s age. Euro-Med Monitor asserts that severe malnutrition during critical growth stages weakens the immune system, heightens the risk of fatal diseases, and causes significant delays in cognitive and motor development, leaving a person with permanent health consequences that cannot be remedied, even if conditions improve in the future.

This is not merely a temporary humanitarian crisis, but a deliberate, systematic policy aimed at eradicating entire Palestinian generations. It constitutes a direct act of genocide, as outlined in the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which explicitly prohibits the creation of conditions that lead to the destruction of a group, in whole or in part. The continued implementation of this policy, without decisive international intervention, not only reflects a failure in humanitarian response but also amounts to complicity in the documented crime of genocide.

Euro-Med Monitor reiterates that Israel’s renewed starvation of Palestinians will exacerbate the existing humanitarian crisis and thus serves as a clear indicator of genocidal intent, and that this crime aligns with the broader, US-proposed ethnic cleansing policy. Humanitarian aid is a fundamental right of civilians under international humanitarian law, with no exceptions, and there is no legal justification for Israel to deny Palestinians access to essential aid. Israel is not only using humanitarian aid as a bargaining chip for political and military gain but is also deliberately enforcing a policy of systematic starvation, creating life-threatening conditions designed to make survival in the Gaza Strip impossible.

Israel’s repeated statements announcing its full coordination with the United States administration, which has explicitly stated its intention to displace the Strip’s entire population, confirm that the crimes of starvation and blocking of humanitarian aid are not isolated incidents or negotiating tools. Instead, they are part of a deliberate plan aligned with the US strategy to forcefully displace and depopulate the Gaza Strip.

Israel’s policy continues to perpetuate genocide, even after the ceasefire. By depriving the Palestinian population of their most basic needs as part of a long-term plan that threatens their physical survival as a national group, Israel has maintained deadly conditions designed to gradually eliminate them. The international community can no longer afford to dismiss the illegal blockade imposed on the Gaza Strip, which stands as one of the most prominent tools of Israel’s genocide.

All relevant countries and entities must fulfil their legal responsibilities and take immediate action to halt the genocide in the Gaza Strip. This includes pressuring Israel to lift the blockade entirely, allowing the unrestricted movement of individuals and goods into and out of the enclave, unconditionally opening all border crossings, and implementing effective measures to protect Palestinians from the ongoing policies of slow killing and forced displacement. Furthermore, an urgent response committee should be activated to address the population’s immediate needs, including temporary and adequate housing.

The international community must impose economic, diplomatic, and military sanctions on Israel in response to its systematic and severe violations of international law, including a ban on arms trade and military cooperation, as well as freezing the financial assets of officials involved in crimes against the Palestinian people.

To pressure Israel to halt its crimes against the Palestinians, Euro-Med Monitor also calls for the suspension of any trade privileges and bilateral agreements that provide Israel with economic benefits.

Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor urges the international community to uphold its legal and humanitarian responsibilities by implementing the International Court of Justice’s order from 28 March 2024. This includes the precautionary measures requiring Israel to take necessary and effective actions, in cooperation with the United Nations, to ensure the unhindered and timely entry of aid into the Gaza Strip, in compliance with its obligations under the Genocide Convention.

The International Criminal Court must expedite its investigations and issue arrest warrants against Israeli officials implicated in international crimes in the Gaza Strip. Euro-Med Monitor reminds the member states of the Rome Statute of their legal obligations to fully cooperate with the Court, ensure the enforcement of arrest warrants, and prevent impunity for those responsible.

Euro-Med Human Rights Monitoris a Geneva-based independent organization with regional offices across the MENA region and Europe

13 March 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Quds News Network

New York (Quds News Network)- A judge in the United States has extended his order blocking authorities from deporting Columbia University graduate Mahmoud Khalil from the US after he was arrested by ICE agents over his pro-Palestinian activism on campus.

On Saturday, Khalil, who is a permanent resident of the US, was detained by the ICE agents when he arrived at his home at a student resident facility with his pregnant wife over his activism as he played a key role in pro-Palestine and anti-genocide demonstrations on campus. He acted as a negotiator with university officials during protests for Palestine in the spring of 2024. The agents said they planned to revoke his green card at the behest of the US Department of State.

On Monday, US District Judge Jesse Furman temporarily blocked Khalil’s deportation. On Wednesday, the judge extended that prohibition in a written order – following a hearing in New York’s Manhattan federal court – to allow himself more time to consider whether the student’s arrest was unconstitutional.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said Khalil is subject to deportation under a legal provision that orders the removal of migrants whose presence in the country is deemed by the US Secretary of State to be incompatible with US foreign policy, according to a document seen by Reuters.

Khalil’s lawyers said his arrest outside his university residence in Manhattan was in retaliation for his outspoken advocacy against Israel’s assault on Gaza, and thus violated Khalil’s right to free speech under the US Constitution’s First Amendment.

“Mr Khalil was identified, targeted, detained and is being processed for deportation on account of his advocacy for Palestinian rights,” Khalil’s lawyer Ramzi Kassem said in court on Wednesday.

Outside the courthouse, Kassem told reporters that the legal provision DHS referred to was rarely used and was not meant to silence dissent.

The latest legal move means that Khalil, who was initially detained in nearby New Jersey, will likely remain detained at an immigration detention centre in the southern US state of Louisiana until at least next week. His lawyers want him returned to New York and released from detention under supervision.

Khalil, who is of Palestinian origin and married to an American citizen, came to the US on a student visa in 2022 and became a permanent resident last year.

Hundreds of people rallied outside the New York City courtroom during the hearing to demand Khalil’s release. “Release Mahmoud Khalil now!” they chanted.

[https://twitter.com/QudsNen/status/1900080076877664763]

During the brief hearing, Kassem said his client had been allowed just one call with his legal team from the detention centre in Louisiana. But Kassem said that the call was cut off prematurely and was on a line recorded and monitored by the government.

[https://twitter.com/QudsNen/status/1899932551713554852]

Judge Furman ruled that Khalil and his lawyers should have one phone call on Wednesday and another on Thursday, covered by attorney-client privilege, meaning the government would not have access to their conversation.

Khalil’s arrest comes shortly after the State Department announced its plans to use AI to revoke the visas of pro-Palestine foreign students, labeling them “pro-Hamas”.

It also comes days after the New York Police Department was seen dragging students out of a sit-in at Columbia’s Barnard College, where students were protesting against the expulsion of three students for protests and disruptions in 2024.

Following his arrest, Secretary of State Marco Rubio wrote on X that the US would “be revoking the visas and/or green cards of Hamas supporters in America so they can be deported”.

Neither Rubio nor the DHS provided any details as to how Khalil’s activism at Columbia University, where he had openly played the role of a student negotiator with administrators, amounted to supporting Hamas.

On Monday, in a post on Truth Social, US President Donald Trump described the arrest of Khalil as “the first arrest of many to come”.

“We know there are more students at Columbia and other Universities across the Country who have engaged in pro-terrorist, anti-Semitic, anti-American activity, and the Trump Administration will not tolerate it,” Trump said.

Trump also revoked $400 million in federal grants to Columbia University, citing its failure to address ‘antisemitism’.

As he campaigned for a second term in the White House, Trump pledged to stop the pro-Palestinian demonstrations that erupted after Israel launched its deadly war on Gaza and deport any foreign students involved.

Upon taking office, he began to issue executive actions signalling he would carry out his threats.

“To all the resident aliens who joined in the pro-jihadist protests, we put you on notice: come 2025, we will find you, and we will deport you,” Trump said in a White House fact sheet.

“I will also quickly cancel the student visas of all Hamas sympathizers on college campuses, which have been infested with radicalism like never before.”

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Tuesday that Secretary of State Marco Rubio could revoke Khalil’s green card if Rubio determined his presence in the US runs contrary to the country’s national security and foreign policy interests.

Citing a government document detailing the civil charges Khalil faces, The Washington Post also reported on Wednesday that Rubio’s determination “is so far the Trump administration’s sole justification” for trying to deport him.

Separately, Rubio told reporters that Khalil’s case “is not about free speech”.

“This is about people that don’t have a right to be in the United States to begin with,” the top US diplomat told reporters at Ireland’s Shannon airport during a refuelling stop after a trip to Saudi Arabia.

“No one has a right to a student visa. No one has a right to a green card, by the way,” Rubio said.

But speaking outside the Manhattan court, Khalil’s lawyer Kassem told reporters that the rarely used legal provision that the Trump administration seems to be invoking was not meant to silence dissent.

“It is not intended to be used to silence pro-Palestinian speech or any other speech that the government doesn’t like,” Kassem said.

Emails leaked by Zeteo show Khalil sought protection from Columbia University before his arrest. He warned school officials about a doxxing campaign against him. He reported threats and feared for his safety. His messages also raised concerns about discrimination, after his university ID was suddenly deactivated.

Wife of Mahmoud Khalil: ‘He is Fighting for His People’

Noor Abdalla, the wife of Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia University graduate who was arrested by ICE agents due to his pro-Palestinian activism on campus, stated that her husband is “Palestinian, and he’s standing up for his people.” The government has announced that it has begun proceedings to deport him over his activism.

On Saturday, Khalil, who is a permanent resident of the US, was detained by the ICE agents when he arrived at his home at a student resident facility with his pregnant wife over his activism as he played a key role in pro-Palestine and anti-genocide demonstrations on campus. He acted as a negotiator with university officials during protests for Palestine in the spring of 2024. The agents said they planned to revoke his green card at the behest of the US Department of State.

In her first media interview, Abdalla, a U.S. citizen who is eight months pregnant, told Reuters that Khalil asked her if she knew what to do if immigration agents came to their door. She said she was confused. As a legal permanent resident of the U.S., surely Khalil did not have to worry about that, she recalls telling him.

“I didn’t take him seriously. Clearly I was naive,” she said.

Abdalla, a 28-year-old dentist in New York, met Khalil while volunteering in Lebanon in 2016. The two are expecting their first child in late April and she said she hoped Khalil would be free by then.

She showed Reuters a picture of a recent sonogram: a boy whose name they have yet to choose.

“I think it would be very devastating for me and for him to meet his first child behind a glass screen,” Abdalla said.

On Monday, US District Judge Jesse Furman temporarily blocked Khalil’s deportation. On Wednesday, the judge extended that prohibition in a written order – following a hearing in New York’s Manhattan federal court – to allow himself more time to consider whether the student’s arrest was unconstitutional.

Khalil grew up in a Palestinian refugee camp in Syria and came to the U.S. on a student visa in 2022, getting his U.S. permanent residency green card last year.

“Mahmoud is Palestinian and he’s always been interested in Palestinian politics,” she said. “He’s standing up for his people, he’s fighting for his people.”

13 March 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Bertrand Russell

This statement on the Middle East was dated 31 Jan 1970 and read on 3 Feb, the day after Bertrand Russell’s death, to an International Conference of Parliamentarians meeting in Cairo.

Video:

Bertrand Russell’s “Last Message” Israel and Palestine (He died the next day)

TRANSCRIPT:

The latest phase of the undeclared war in the Middle East is based upon a profound
miscalculation. The bombing raids deep into Egyptian territory will not persuade the civilian
population to surrender, but will stiffen their resolve to resist. This is the lesson of all aerial
bombardment.

The Vietnamese who have endured years of American heavy bombing have responded not by
capitulation but by shooting down more enemy aircraft. In 1940 my own fellow countrymen
resisted Hitler’s bombing raids with unprecedented unity and determination. For this reason, the present Israeli attacks will fail in their essential purpose, but at the same time they must be condemned vigorously throughout the world.

The development of the crisis in the Middle East is both dangerous and instructive. For over 20
years Israel has expanded by force of arms. After every stage in this expansion Israel has
appealed to “reason” and has suggested “negotiations”.

This is the traditional role of the imperial power, because it wishes to consolidate with the least
difficulty what it has already taken by violence. Every new conquest becomes the new basis of
the proposed negotiation from strength, which ignores the injustice of the previous aggression.

The aggression committed by Israel must be condemned, not only because no state has the right
to annex foreign territory, but because every expansion is an experiment to discover how much
more aggression the world will tolerate.

The refugees who surround Palestine in their hundreds of thousands were described recently by
the Washington journalist I.F. Stone as “the moral millstone around the neck of world Jewry.”

Many of the refugees are now well into the third decade of their precarious existence in
temporary settlements. The tragedy of the people of Palestine is that their country was “given”
by a foreign Power to another people for the creation of a new State. The result was that many
hundreds of thousands of innocent people were made permanently homeless.

With every new conflict their number have increased. How much longer is the world willing to
endure this spectacle of wanton cruelty? It is abundantly clear that the refugees have every right
to the homeland from which they were driven, and the denial of this right is at the heart of the
continuing conflict.

No people anywhere in the world would accept being expelled en masse from their own country;
how can anyone require the people of Palestine to accept a punishment which nobody else would
tolerate? A permanent just settlement of the refugees in their homeland is an essential ingredient
of any genuine settlement in the Middle East.

We are frequently told that we must sympathize with Israel because of the suffering of the Jews
in Europe at the hands of the Nazis. I see in this suggestion no reason to perpetuate any suffering.
What Israel is doing today cannot be condoned, and to invoke the horrors of the past to justify
those of the present is gross hypocrisy. Not only does Israel condemn a vast number. of refugees
to misery; not only are many Arabs under occupation condemned to military rule; but also Israel
condemns the Arab nations only recently emerging from colonial status, to continued
impoverishment as military demands take precedence over national development.

All who want to see an end to bloodshed in the Middle East must ensure that any settlement does
not contain the seeds of future conflict. Justice requires that the first step towards a settlement
must be an Israeli withdrawal from all the territories occupied in June, 1967. A new world
campaign is needed to help bring justice to the long-suffering people of the Middle East.

____________________________________________

Bertrand Arthur William Russell, (18 May 1872 – 2 Feb 1970), 3rd Earl Russell, was a British Nobel Literature laureate, philosopher, logician, mathematician, historian, writer, social critic, and political activist .

17 March 2025

Source: transcend.org