Israel

This week, the Israeli government approved a plan to designate large areas of the occupied West Bank as “state property”, shifting the burden of proof to Palestinians to establish ownership of their land.

The decision, which undermines the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination, has prompted regional condemnation, with many describing it as a de facto annexation which is illegal under international law.

In recent years, Israel has intensified its military incursions, expanded illegal settlements, and demolished Palestinian homes, all as part of a series of aggressive actions to steal more Palestinian land.

In total, at least 37,135 Palestinians were displaced across the occupied West Bank in 2025, a record high amid Israeli military incursions and settler attacks, according to figures compiled by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA).

According to UNRWA, Israeli military incursions have forcibly displaced at least 33,362 Palestinians from three northern refugee camps: Jenin (12,557), Tulkarem(11,862) and Nur Shams (8,943).

In addition to those displaced during Israeli operations, at least 3,773 have been forced from their homes due to Israeli home demolitions, settler violence, and access restrictions.

The West Bank governorates with the largest number of forced displacements include:

• Ramallah and el-Bireh: 870
• Jerusalem: 841
• Hebron: 446
• Nablus: 407
• Bethlehem: 397
• Tubas: 292
• Salfit: 150
• Jericho: 135
• Jenin: 110
• Tulkarem: 65
• Qalqilya: 60

Why most demolitions and attacks are in Area C

As part of the 1993 Oslo Accords, signed by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and Israel, the occupied West Bank was divided into three areas – A, B and C.

This led to the formation of the Palestinian Authority (PA) – an administrative body that would govern Palestinian internal security, administration and civilian affairs in areas of self-rule, for a five-year interim period.

Area A initially comprised 3 percent of the West Bank and grew to 18 percent by 1999. In Area A, the PA controls most affairs.

Area B represents about 22 percent of the West Bank. In both areas, while the PA is in charge of education, health and the economy, the Israelis have full control of external security, meaning they retain the right to enter at any time.

Area C represents 60 percent of the West Bank. Under the Oslo Accords, control of this area was supposed to be handed over to the PA. Instead, Israel retains total control over all matters, including security, planning and construction. The transfer of control to the PA never happened.

Although Area C is the least populated part of the West Bank, with about 300,000 Palestinians compared with about 3 million in Areas A and B, the vast majority of home demolitions and settler attacks occur there, due to it being under full Israeli military and administrative control.

The Israeli Civil Administration rarely grants building permits to Palestinians in this area, so nearly all construction is considered illegal and subject to demolition.

Record number of Israeli settler attacks

Since Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza began in October 2023, violence by Israeli settlers in the occupied West Bank has steadily risen.

According to data from OCHA, settlers have attacked Palestinians more than 3,700 times in the occupied West Bank over the past 28 months.

The number of settler attacks has risen sharply since 2016, with 852 recorded in 2022, 1,291 in 2023, 1,449 in 2024 and 1,828 in 2025 – an average of five attacks per day, according to data from OCHA.

Every West Bank governorate has faced settler attacks over the past year.

Data from OCHA shows that between January 1, 2025 and December 31, 2025, the Ramallah and el-Bireh governorate recorded the highest number of settler attacks with 523 incidents, followed by Nablus with 349 and Hebron with 309.

Who are Israeli settlers?

Settlers are Israeli citizens living in illegal, Jewish-only communities, known as Israeli settlements, built on Palestinian-owned land that Israel occupied in 1967.

Benjamin Netanyahu – Israel’s longest-serving prime minister – has bolstered settlement expansions since he first came to power in 1996, undermining the 1993 Oslo Accords, which called for the freezing of settlements and a mutually negotiated two-state solution.

Today, roughly 10 percent of Israel’s Jewish population, totalling between 600,000 and 750,000 people, live in about 250 settlements and outposts dispersed throughout the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem.

Many of these settlements are located near Palestinian population centres, often leading to increased tensions and restrictions on movement for Palestinians.

Nearly a year since the Palestinian-Israeli film No Other Land won an Academy Award, its co-director, Hamdan Ballal, says Israeli settler attacks on the cluster of occupied West Bank villages known as Masafer Yatta have only gotten worse, as those involved in the documentary bear the brunt of Israeli reprisals.

The latest bout of violence came on Sunday, when Israeli settlers stormed Ballal’s hometown of Susya, despite an Israeli court ruling designating the area around his home as closed to non-residents. Israeli army officers called by the family to enforce the ruling, issued two weeks prior, sided with the attackers.

“The ruling was supposed to make things better for us, but the opposite happened,” Ballal told Al Jazeera on Monday. “Israeli authorities did nothing to enforce the decision, but joined the settlers in the attack.”

One of his brothers was held in a chokehold by an army officer and later hospitalised with breathing difficulties. Four other relatives – two brothers, a nephew, and a cousin – were detained for several hours as they arrived at the scene. They have all since been released.

The Palestinian film director said his family was ambushed by the same Israeli settler who led an attack against him as he returned from the Oscar ceremony in Los Angeles last March. Then, he had been taken away in a blindfold by a group of Israeli settlers and army officers and released a day later with injuries to his head and stomach, leading to global condemnation.

Ballal said the retaliation for the documentary has since been directed against his family, rather than himself, to avoid media attention. His relatives have been routinely prevented from grazing sheep and ploughing the land. At times, they have been arrested, questioned about his work and whereabouts, or intimidated to vacate their homes.

“My family is paying because of me; because I shared the movie and I shared the truth,” he said.

The film, which won the Oscar for best documentary on March 2, follows Palestinian journalist Basel Adra and Israeli journalist Yuval Abraham as they try to protect Palestinian homes amid tensions with settlers in Masafer Yatta in the South Hebron Hills. Israeli filmmaker Rachel Szor also shares directing credits.

Israeli settlers in the area often graze their animals on Palestinian land to assert control, signal unrestricted access, and lay the groundwork for establishing illegal outposts, cutting Palestinians off from their farms and livestock.

The Israeli army argues that it has to demolish the Palestinian villages to convert the area into a military “firing” or training zone. It did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment on Sunday’s incident.

Across the occupied West Bank, Israel’s far-right coalition government, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, has been openly promoting new measures to expand Israeli control over the Palestinian territory.

Most recently, it announced the resumption of the land registration processes for the first time since 1967, which Israeli rights groups say will accelerate the dispossession and displacement of Palestinians in violation of international law.

‘Right to live’

Ballal’s family has not been the only one to pay the price for the acclaimed documentary.

Adra, the Palestinian protagonist in the film, had his home in at-Tawani raided by the Israeli army in September, after clashes broke out with a group of Israeli settlers that trespassed in his olive grove.

In July, Awdah Hathaleen, an activist, football player and a consultant for No Other Land, was shot dead, in the chest, in the village of Umm al-Khair. The father of three was a key figure in non-violent resistance against settler violence in Masafer Yatta. His assailant, Israeli settler Yinon Levi, later said, “I’m glad I did it,” according to witnesses.

Ballal said he does not hesitate to describe these attacks as being “terrorist”, as they leave the Palestinian community in Masafer Yatta constantly fearing for their safety.

“It’s a simple right for Palestinians to feel safe in their homes,” he told Al Jazeera. “We are scared; we are in danger, and it’s been like this for a long time.”

“International law doesn’t work for Palestinians,” he continued. “But we are human, and we have a right to live.”

ATHENS, Greece — Israeli producer Dana Eden, best known for co-creating the International Emmy-winning espionage thriller “Tehran,” has died suddenly in Greece, Israeli public broadcaster KAN said Monday.

Eden, 52, was found dead in a hotel in the Greek capital, Athens, a Greek police official said, adding that initial indications suggested she had taken her own life and there was no suspicion of foul play. The official spoke on condition of anonymity as Greek police do not comment publicly in such cases.

KAN said Eden was in Greece for the filming of the hit series’ fourth season.

“Dana was among the leading figures in Israel’s television industry and played a central role in the creation and leadership of some of the most prominent and influential productions within the corporation,” KAN said in a statement. It did not give a cause of death.

“Her professional work, uncompromising dedication, and love for creation left a deep mark on the Israeli Public Broadcasting Corporation. KAN shares in the deep sorrow of her family, friends and colleagues,” the broadcaster said.

In a statement posted on its Facebook page, Eden’s production company, Donna and Shula productions, sought to dispel rumors that the producer had been killed.

“The production company wishes to clarify that the rumors of a criminal or nationally motivated death are false and unfounded,” it said.

“This is a moment of great pain for the family, friends and colleagues. We ask that Dana’s dignity and the privacy of her loved ones be respected,” the production company said.

Israel Culture and Sports Minister Miki Zohar, in a social media post on X, said it was “with great sadness” that he had received the news of Eden’s death, describing her as “one of the most prominent and influential producers in the Israeli television industry.”

“Dana left a deep mark on Israeli creation and brought our story to international stages with pride, talent and courage,” Zohar said.

“Tehran,” which premiered in Israel and on Apple TV in 2020, tells the story of Tamar Rabinyan, a young Mossad operative tasked with hacking into and disabling the Iranian nuclear reactor so the Israeli military can carry out an airstrike. The show was named best drama series at the 49th International Emmy Awards in November 2021.

Eden started working in TV production in Israel in the 1990s, working on shows including comedy “Yom Haem” and crime drama “Magpie,” before finding international success with “Tehran.”

In 2018, her show “Saving the Wildlife” won best TV magazine for children and youth at the Awards of the Israeli Television Academy.

Kantouris and Becatoros write for the Associated Press. Kantouris contributed from Thessaloniki. Matt Kemp in London contributed.

More than 457,000 European citizens have signed a petition calling for the full suspension of the European Union’s partnership agreement with Israel within the initiative’s first month.

Launched on January 13 as a formally registered European citizens’ initiative, the petition must reach 1 million signatures from at least seven EU member states by January 13 next year to trigger formal consideration by the European Commission. It is not a symbolic appeal. It is a mechanism embedded within the EU’s democratic framework, designed to translate public will into institutional review.

The speed and geographic spread of this mobilisation matter. The demand to suspend the EU-Israel Association Agreement is no longer confined to street demonstrations or activist circles. It has entered the EU’s formal democratic architecture.

The petition calls for suspension on the grounds that Israel is in breach of Article 2 of the association agreement, which conditions the partnership on respect for human rights and international law. As the initiative states, “EU citizens cannot tolerate that the EU maintains an agreement that contributes to legitimize and finance a State that commits crimes against humanity and war crimes.” The text further cites large-scale civilian killings, displacement, destruction of hospitals and medical infrastructure in Gaza, the blockade of humanitarian aid and the failure to comply with orders of the International Court of Justice.

As of Monday, the initiative had gathered 457,950 signatures, more than 45 percent of the required total in just one month. Signatories come from all 27 EU member states without exception. This is not a regional surge. It is continental.

The distribution of signatures reveals more than raw numbers. France alone accounts for 203,182 signatories, nearly 45 percent of the total. That figure reflects the country’s longstanding tradition of solidarity mobilisation, sustained mass demonstrations throughout the genocidal war on Gaza and the clear positioning of major political actors, such as La France Insoumise. France has emerged as the principal engine of this institutional push.

Spain follows with 60,087 signatures while Italy stands at 54,821, a particularly striking figure given the presence of a right-wing government that openly supports Israel. Belgium has registered 20,330 signatures from a population of roughly 12 million, reflecting high relative engagement. In the Nordic region, Finland with 12,649 signatures, Sweden with 15,267 and Denmark with 8,295 show sustained participation. Ireland has reached 11,281 signatures from a population of just over five million.

Several of these countries have already exceeded their required national thresholds under EU rules. France, Spain, Belgium, Finland, Ireland, Italy and Sweden have all surpassed the minimum number needed for their signatures to count towards the seven-member-state requirement. This is a critical development. It means the initiative is not merely accumulating volume but is also already satisfying the geographic legitimacy criteria built into the European citizens’ initiative mechanism.

The Netherlands, with 20,304 signatures, is approaching its national threshold. Poland, at 22,308 signatures, reflects engagement that extends beyond Western Europe. Even in smaller states such as Slovenia with 1,703 signatures, Luxembourg with 900 and Portugal with 4,945, participation is visible and measurable.

Germany presents a revealing contrast. Despite being the EU’s most populous member state and the site of some of the largest demonstrations against Israel’s genocidal campaign in Gaza, the petition has gathered 11,461 German signatures, only 17 percent of Germany’s national threshold of 69,120. This gap between visible street mobilisation and formal institutional participation highlights the particular political and legal environment in Germany, where pro-Palestinian expression has faced restrictions and where successive governments have maintained near-unconditional support for Israel as a matter of state policy. The relatively low percentage does not signal absence of dissent. Rather, it illustrates the structural constraints within which dissent operates. That more than 11,000 citizens have nevertheless formally registered their support indicates that institutional engagement is occurring even under conditions of political pressure.

Taken together, these patterns reveal something deeper than a petition’s momentum. Over more than two years of genocidal war, ethnic cleansing and the systematic destruction of civilian life in Gaza, solidarity across Europe has not dissipated. It has moved from protest slogans and street mobilisation into a formal democratic instrument that demands institutional response.

Petitions do not automatically change policy. The European Commission is not legally bound to suspend the association agreement even if the initiative ultimately reaches 1 million signatures. But the political implications are significant. A successful initiative would formally compel the commission to respond to a demand grounded in the EU’s own human rights clause. It would demonstrate that the call for suspension is rooted in broad and measurable public support across multiple member states.

The European Union has long presented itself as a normative power committed to international law and human rights. Article 2 of its partnership agreements is foundational. If hundreds of thousands, and potentially more than a million, European citizens insist that this principle be applied consistently, EU institutions will face a credibility test.

This petition is not merely a count of signatures. It is an index of political will. It shows that across France, Spain, Belgium, Italy, Ireland, the Nordic states and beyond, citizens are invoking the EU’s own democratic mechanisms to demand accountability.

Whether the initiative ultimately reaches 1 million, one reality is already established. The demand to suspend the EU-Israel partnership has entered Europe’s institutional bloodstream. It can no longer be dismissed as marginal rhetoric. It is embedded within the union’s formal democratic process, and that marks a significant development in Europe’s response to the genocide in Gaza.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

The Israeli government has approved a plan to begin land registration in the occupied West Bank, meaning it will be able to seize land from Palestinians who cannot prove ownership.

For the first time since Israel’s occupation of the West Bank in 1967, it will register such land as property of the state – also known as settlement of land title – in Area C of the occupied West Bank.

Area C is the part of the West Bank that remains under direct Israeli control. It covers about 60 percent of the West Bank.

According to Israeli media, Israeli Minister of Finance Bezalel Smotrich, who submitted the proposal to restart land registration with Minister of Justice Yariv Levin and Minister of Defence Israel Katz, said the move was a continuation of “the settlement revolution to control all our lands”.

The Palestinian Authority presidency said the decision amounts to “de facto annexation” of the West Bank. It is the formalisation of the ongoing process of building settlements in the West Bank in violation of international law over the past several decades.

Here’s what we know about how this could be implemented:

What does the land registration process mean?

During Jordanian control of the West Bank from 1949 to 1967, the administration primarily followed the British Mandate of land ownership, under which land was registered as state or private property.

But only about one-third of the land in the West Bank was formally registered under this process. Large numbers of Palestinians living in the region had no documentation or other means of proving they owned their own land. Many of them had also lost documents or they had been destroyed during the 1967 six-day Arab-Israeli war, which resulted in the Israeli occupation of the West Bank.

When Israel took control of the West Bank, it discontinued the process of land registration.

Now, the government has decided to restart the land registration, a move that many Israeli human rights groups and political analysts have condemned.

Xavier Abu Eid, a political analyst based in the West Bank, described the Israeli government’s move as a “de facto annexation of Palestinian territory”.

“What they are doing is the implementation of annexation, packaging it as a mere bureaucratic process,” he told Al Jazeera.

He added that it reaffirms the idea that “there is a colonial power that sets two different sets of legislation depending on ethnic and religious identity, defined also as apartheid.”

Where will land registration be implemented?

In 1993 and 1995, the Oslo Accords were signed between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization. They laid out administrative control of the West Bank and Gaza and divided the occupied West Bank into three areas – Area A, Area B and Area C.

The new Palestinian Authority (PA) was granted full administrative control of 18 percent of the land – Area A – and joint control with Israel over 22 percent – Area B. Area C remained under complete Israeli military control. These areas were meant to be in place for five years, after which full administrative control would be handed to the PA. However, this transfer never took place.

The land registration that will now be restarted will apply to Area C, which is home to more than 300,000 Palestinian people.

According to the Israeli anti-settlement group Peace Now, in Area C, about 58 percent of the land remains unregistered. In a statement on Sunday, the group warned that the Israeli government’s land settlement process will now facilitate full Israeli control of this unregistered land.

How will land registration work?

Israeli authorities have provided few details about how the process will unfold, but essentially, it will likely involve transferring legal ownership of land to the Israeli state and issuing evictions to Palestinian communities, as has been happening in East Jerusalem in recent years, experts told Al Jazeera.

Michal Braier, an architect and the head of research at Bimkom, an Israeli human rights organisation that focuses on land and housing rights, said it is likely Israeli authorities will take the same approach in the West Bank as they have taken in East Jerusalem since 2018. In East Jerusalem, only 1 percent of settled land has been registered to Palestinians from 2018 to 2024, according to Bimkom.

Braier said Israel will begin by selecting the areas of land it wants to register. The government has set a goal of registering about 15 percent of the unregistered land within the next four years, she added.

“Now we can pretty clearly guess that this 15 percent will be lands where they assume that they can prove the state ownership easily or they can easily reject Palestinian ownership claims because a lot of these unregistered lands don’t have clear records and the records go a very, very long time back. So it will be very hard to prove Palestinian ownership,” she told Al Jazeera.

In theory, she said, Palestinians will be able to file land claims as part of the new process, but in practice, it is likely that they will be prevented from successfully doing so.

“Even if they do file claims, the legal bars they need to meet are very difficult to obtain. On top of this, there is the problem of Absentee Property Law, which moves land into the state’s hands and is yet unclear how exactly it will be practised in the occupied West Bank. So Palestinians are highly likely to lose their individual property rights,” she said.

The Absentee Property Law is an Israeli law enacted in 1950 that states that Israel has the right to seize property of “absentees” – people who were expelled, fled or who left the country after November 29, 1947, the day the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution to end the British Mandate and recommend the creation of a Palestinian and a Jewish state. Israel was founded less than six months later.

Braier said land registration “will be used as another mechanism to grab land that they could not grab until now for different reasons and to build more settlements and push out Palestinians from Area C”.

According to a Times of Israel report, an Israeli government resolution linked to the land registration bill has allowed for an initial budget of $79m for the land registration process in Area C from 2026 to 2030. The report added that during this process, Israel, which already has civilian and military control of the area, will establish 35 ministerial positions and set up state agencies to begin the process of registering land.

What does this mean for Palestinian communities?

Peace Now described the Israeli government’s decision to restart land registration in the West Bank as “a mega land grab of Palestinian property”.

“Land registration will result in the transfer of ownership of the vast majority of Area C to the state, leaving Palestinians with no practical ability to realise their ownership rights,” the group said in a statement on Sunday.

Abu Eid said the land registration process the government intends to undertake amounts to a “full-fledged ethnic cleansing policy” and added that it is a moment that will be “remembered as a turning point in Israeli attempts at erasing the Palestinian cause”.

But he noted that the Israeli government’s decision has not arisen in a vacuum as Israel has “allowed for a wave of terror attacks by Israeli settlers and the expansion of colonial settlements all over the West Bank” for years.

“Palestinians in general are not just dispossessed of their land and natural resources but come under attacks that are dealt with utter impunity both by the Israeli regime and by the international community,” he said.

“In al-Auja, for example, near Jericho, from 100 Palestinian families that used to live in the place a few months ago, now there is not a single family left,” he added.

He said it is likely that Israel will expect thousands of displaced people from the West Bank to go to Jordan.

“You should not forget the incitement coming out from members of the Israeli government claiming that Jordan should be turned into Palestine while Palestine should be left for the Zionist project,” Abu Eid said.

How have Palestinian land rights been eroded before this?

The West Bank is home to about 3.3 million Palestinians. It is divided into 11 governorates with Hebron being the most populous at 842,000 residents. Jerusalem follows with 500,000, Nablus with 440,000, Ramallah and el-Bireh with 377,000 and Jenin with 360,000.

Since the Israeli occupation in 1967, the Palestinian people have been subject to  land seizures and illegal settlement expansion.

Today, about 700,000 Israelis live in the West Bank and East Jerusalem in settlements and outposts that are Jewish-only communities built on Palestinian land. These range in size from a single dwelling to a collection of high rises. Last year, the Israeli government approved the construction of new settlements in the region, seeking to advance “de facto sovereignty” in the region.

In all, the number of settlements and outposts in the West Bank and East Jerusalem has risen by nearly 50 percent since 2022 – from 141 to 210 now.

Besides eroding Palestinian people’s land rights, Israel has also carried out frequent raids in the West Bank, where Palestinians are also subject to checkpoints, arbitrary arrests, home demolitions and settler attacks.

The Israeli human rights organisation B’Tselem estimated that settler attacks against Palestinians have forcibly displaced 44 communities across the West Bank in recent years. These attacks have also resulted in the deaths of Palestinian people. Since Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza began on October 7, 2023, settler attacks have also intensified.

At least 1,054 Palestinians were killed in the West Bank by Israeli soldiers and settlers from October 7, 2023, to February 5 of this year, according to the latest United Nations figures.

Braier said Sunday’s approval of Israel’s land registration in the West Bank will result in a rise in violence in the region.

“Area C is being cleared out by what is usually regarded as settler violence, but this violence is actually state violence, backed by state mechanisms, so this is all working together to expand Israeli control over Area C and expand settlement in Area C,” she said.

Is Israel’s land registration process legal?

In 2024, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that Israel’s “expropriation of land and properties, transfer of populations, and legislation aimed at the incorporation of the occupied section are totally invalid and cannot change that status”.

The ICJ has also ruled that Israel’s long-term occupation of Palestinian territory is illegal and must be terminated “as rapidly as possible”.

Braier said the Israeli government’s latest decision on land registration also contravenes international law.

“International law is clear: As an occupying power, Israel cannot exercise sovereign powers, including final determination of land ownership, in an occupied territory,” she told Al Jazeera.

“This position was reinforced by the International Court of Justice’s 2024 advisory opinion, which found that similar settlement of land title proceedings in East Jerusalem violate the laws of occupation,” she said.

“Furthermore, the decision to authorise Israeli civilian authorities to manage the land registration procedures likewise constitutes a clear indication of the annexation of the area,” she added.

What does this mean for Israel’s peace treaty with Jordan?

On October 26, 1994, Israel and Jordan signed the Wadi Araba Treaty, which formally ended the state of war between the two nations that had existed since the creation of Israel in 1948.

Under the agreement, Israel and Jordan established diplomatic ties, agreed to exchange territory and opened the way for cooperation in trade, tourism, transport links, water resources and environmental protection. Jordan also signed the agreement seeking to ensure a two-state solution between Israel and Palestine would be established.

But the public in Jordan, opposition groups and human rights groups have repeatedly called on the government to sever relations with Israel due to its continuing aggression in Palestine.

In 2014, many Jordanians took to the streets, calling on the government to scrap its peace treaty with Israel after clashes between Israeli police and Palestinians at Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem.

In 2024, a similar call was issued by Jordanian activists as Israel conducted its genocidal war in Gaza, which has killed more than 70,000 Palestinians.

On Sunday, Jordan, which shares a 482km (300-mile) border with Israel and the West Bank, condemned Israel’s decision to reinstate land registration in the West Bank. Jordan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs described Israel’s move as a “flagrant violation of international law”.

While Jordan’s peace treaty with Israel still holds, Abu Eid said Sunday’s decision by the Israeli cabinet is a serious and sensitive matter for Jordan, particularly if thousands of people are forcibly displaced from the West Bank.

Furthermore, he said, Israel has been acting against the principles of the Jordan-Israel peace agreement for years.

“If peace agreements are aimed at creating the conditions to enhance cooperation and establish a two-state solution, Israel goes against all of such principles, seeking the expansionist ‘Greater Israel’ agenda,” he said.

“Jordan takes such matters seriously and will certainly seek to have collective action with other regional and international allies,” he added.

The world’s largest shipping company MSC has been moving goods to and from illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank and Syria’s occupied Golan Heights, with the help of European port operators.

A 15-day-old baby lost her father in Israel’s latest violation of the Gaza ‘ceasefire’ during attacks that killed at least 11 Palestinians in 48 hours.

New US court documents reveal ties between a key figure behind the Oslo Accords and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, including financial links and visa favours. The revelations have sparked political fallout in Norway and renewed scrutiny of the Palestinian peace process’s legacy. Al Jazeera’s Nour Hegazy explains.

Iran’s top diplomat says he hopes to ‘achieve a fair and equitable deal’ before high-stakes talks are held on Tuesday.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has arrived in Geneva for high-stakes second round of nuclear talks with the United States aimed at reducing tensions and avert a new military confrontation that Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has warned could turn into a regional conflict.

“I am in Geneva with real ideas to achieve a fair and equitable deal,” Araghchi wrote on X on Monday. “What is not on the table: submission before threats.”

Iran and the US renewed negotiations earlier this month to tackle their ⁠decades-long dispute over Tehran’s nuclear programme as US deploys warships, including a second aircraft carrier, to the region as mediators work to prevent a war.

Araghchi met with Rafael Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), on Monday, after saying his team nuclear experts for a “deep technical discussion”.

The United Nations nuclear watchdog has been calling for access to Iran’s main nuclear facilities that were bombed by the US and Israel during the 12-day war in June. Tehran has said there might be a risk of radiation, so an official protocol is required to carry out the unprecedented task of inspecting highly enriched uranium ostensibly buried under the rubble.

Speaking to state-run IRNA news agency on Monday, foreign ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei said the IAEA will play “an important role” in upcoming mediated talks between Iran and the US. But he also renewed Tehran’s criticism of Grossi for the director’s refusal to condemn military strikes on Iranian nuclear sites that are protected under agency safeguards as part of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

Araghchi also said he would meet his Omani counterpart, Badr bin Hamad al-Busaidi, who mediated the first round of talks between Iran and the US since the war earlier this month.

Iran has repeatedly emphasised that it will not agree to Washington’s demand for zero nuclear enrichment, and considers its missile programme a “red line” that cannot be negotiated.

Meanwhile, the US continues to build up its military presence in the region, with President Donald Trump saying a change of power in Iran “would be the best thing that could happen” and sending in a second aircraft carrier.

Trump is again likely to send his special envoy Steve Witkoff and his son-in-law Jared Kushner to represent the White House in the Geneva talks. Brad Cooper, the most senior US military commander in the region, had unexpectedly joined the US delegation during the Muscat talks on February 6.

The talks also come over a month after Iran’s deadly crackdown against nationwide protests, with Iranian officials claiming “terrorists” and “rioters” armed and funded by the US and Israel were behind the unrest.

The UN and international human rights organisations have blamed Iranian authorities for the widespread use of lethal force against peaceful protesters, which killed thousands, mainly on the nights of January 8 and 9.

But the hardliners in Tehran are more concerned about any potential concessions that could be given during upcoming talks with the US.

Addressing an open session on Monday, one of the most hardline lawmakers in Iran’s parliament cautioned security chief Ali Larijani against giving inspection access to the IAEA befire ensuring Iran’s territorial integrity, the security of nuclear sites and scientists, and use of peaceful nuclear energy for civilian purposes under the NPT.

“When US warships have opened their arms to embrace Iranian missiles, US bases have opened arms to take our missiles, and the homes of Zionist military personnel are anticipating the sound of the air raid sirens, it is obvious that such conditions cannot be met at the moment,” said Hamid Rasaei, a cleric close to the hardline Paydari (Steadfastness) faction.

In the other diplomatic track pursued in Switzerland on Tuesday, officials will be discussing ways of ending the Ukraine war, which is approaching the end of its fourth year after Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022.

But no immediate breakthrough appears in sight, with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy telling the annual Munich Security Conference on Saturday that Kyiv has “too often” been asked to make concessions.

President Prabowo Subianto’s government said on February 10 that Indonesia is preparing to deploy up to 8,000 troops to a proposed multinational Gaza stabilisation force under Donald Trump’s so-called Board of Peace (BoP). The troop proposal forms part of Jakarta’s broader decision to participate in the BoP framework, an initiative conceived and driven by Trump. Together, these steps signal a significant shift in Indonesia’s longstanding foreign policy posture. At a time of intensifying geopolitical volatility, Jakarta appears to be committing itself to a project shaped around a single, deeply polarising political figure. The decision raises a fundamental question: is Indonesia advancing its national interests and diplomatic credibility, or allowing its foreign policy direction to be shaped by an external agenda?

Geopolitics is not a theatre for symbolic proximity to power but a disciplined calculation of national interest and sovereign credibility. Indonesia’s decision to engage with the BoP appears less like a carefully calibrated strategic choice and more like a reactive impulse that risks weakening the philosophical foundations of its diplomacy, built over decades. Indonesia’s international influence has historically rested on strategic equidistance rather than personal alignment with controversial leaders.

There is a growing sense that Jakarta risks acting out of geopolitical urgency. Yet the initiative Indonesia has chosen to support is led by a figure known for transactional diplomacy and disregard for international consensus. The implications extend well beyond Middle East peace initiatives. What is at stake is Indonesia’s reputation as an independent stabilising actor in global diplomacy.

If Indonesia proceeds with troop deployment under the BoP framework, the risks become even more acute. Gaza is not a conventional peacekeeping theatre. It is one of the most volatile and politically contested conflict environments in the world, where humanitarian imperatives and hard security objectives frequently collide. Deploying thousands of troops into such an arena without an inclusive multilateral mandate risks drawing Indonesia into a conflict environment where neutrality would be difficult to sustain.

The erosion of the ‘Free and Active’ doctrine

The most serious concern is the gradual erosion of Indonesia’s “Free and Active” foreign policy doctrine, the intellectual backbone of its diplomacy since the Djuanda Declaration and the Bandung Conference. Indonesia has historically positioned itself as a mediator rather than a follower of personalised diplomatic agendas.

By participating in an institution closely identified with Donald Trump, Jakarta risks legitimising unilateral approaches that often conflict with established international norms. “Free” diplomacy implies independence, and “active” diplomacy implies engagement driven by national priorities rather than external pressure.

Indonesia also risks being reduced to a symbolic endorsement of a United States-centred foreign policy outlook. If Jakarta drifts too far into this orbit, its leverage with other major actors, including China, Russia and ASEAN partners, could weaken. Indonesia’s leadership in Southeast Asia has depended on its credibility as a neutral stabilising force. That credibility may erode if it is seen as participating in great-power security agendas.

Indonesia’s respected record in United Nations peacekeeping has historically rested on internationally recognised neutrality under UN command structures. Participation in a BoP framework, which sits outside established multilateral systems, risks shifting Indonesia from neutral arbiter to participant in a political security architecture shaped beyond globally recognised peacekeeping norms.

More troubling is the precedent this sets. If foreign policy principles become negotiable in exchange for economic or strategic promises, Indonesia risks undermining the coherence of its diplomatic identity. Its constitutional commitment to promoting global peace and social justice depends on preserving policy independence.

The Palestine paradox

Indonesia’s participation in the BoP also creates a visible moral and constitutional tension. The Indonesian constitution explicitly rejects all forms of colonialism and emphasises international justice. Participation in an initiative led by the architect of policies historically skewed in Israel’s favour creates a contradiction that is difficult to reconcile.

Trump’s record in the region remains controversial. His decision to relocate the US embassy to Jerusalem altered decades of diplomatic consensus and drew widespread criticism across the Muslim world. For Indonesia, the world’s largest Muslim-majority nation and a consistent supporter of Palestinian statehood, association with this framework carries significant political sensitivity.

If the Board of Peace advances regional normalisation without firm guarantees of Palestinian sovereignty, Indonesia risks being linked to a process widely perceived as externally imposed. This would conflict with domestic public sentiment and weaken Indonesia’s moral leadership in forums such as the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation and the United Nations.

The troop deployment dimension deepens these concerns. The Gaza conflict landscape extends beyond Israeli and Palestinian actors to include broader regional power networks, including the so-called “Axis of Resistance”. Indonesian forces could be perceived by militant groups as extensions of Western-backed security arrangements, increasing the risk that peacekeeping troops become operational targets.

Strategic and economic trade-offs

Deploying 8,000 personnel overseas is not a marginal decision. For Indonesia, it represents a full brigade likely composed of some of its most capable units. At a time of rising tensions in the North Natuna Sea and intensifying Indo-Pacific competition, diverting elite forces to the Middle East risks diluting focus on core national defence priorities and stretching military readiness across distant theatres.

The financial dimension is equally significant. Sustaining thousands of troops in a devastated and heavily militarised enclave would require extensive logistical infrastructure. Even when operations receive international support, hidden costs often revert to national budgets. At a moment when Indonesia’s domestic economy requires stimulus and its defence sector seeks modernisation, allocating substantial resources to an expeditionary mission with uncertain strategic returns warrants serious parliamentary scrutiny.

Diplomatic engagement must deliver tangible dividends to the public, not impose new burdens on an already stretched state budget. Without clearly defined security or economic benefits, troop deployment risks appear as an expensive geopolitical gamble. Indonesia could find itself dependent on security arrangements shaped by shifting US domestic political priorities, creating commitments that may prove unreliable over time.

The absence of robust public debate surrounding this decision is equally concerning. Large-scale overseas military commitments require democratic oversight. Without transparency, foreign policy risks becoming an elite-driven exercise detached from national consensus.

Reputational risk and strategic myopia

Indonesia’s close association with an initiative so strongly linked to Donald Trump introduces long-term reputational risk. US politics remains deeply polarised. If future administrations distance themselves from Trump-era initiatives, Indonesia could face diplomatic exposure through no necessity of its own.

Foreign policy frameworks built around highly personalised leadership often prove unstable. Indonesia’s diplomatic partnerships have traditionally been grounded in multilateral institutions such as the United Nations and ASEAN, which provide durability precisely because they are not tied to individual leaders.

If the Board of Peace becomes politically contested or evolves into a coercive security instrument, Indonesia may struggle to disengage without reputational damage. Participation, therefore, concentrates diplomatic risk rather than diversifying it.

In a rapidly multipolar world, Indonesia does not require shortcuts to global influence. Its credibility has historically been built on independence, balance and principled diplomacy. The central question is whether Indonesia will preserve that tradition or compromise it in pursuit of geopolitical visibility and proximity to power. Indonesia deserves a far more independent role than that.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

One afternoon late August in a quiet Irish seaside town, a supermarket worker decided he could no longer separate his job from what he was seeing on his phone.

Images from Gaza, with neighbourhoods flattened and families buried, had followed him to the checkout counter.

At the time, Israel’s genocidal onslaught had killed more than 60,000 Palestinians.

His first act of protest was to quietly warn customers that some of the fruit and vegetables were sourced from Israel. Later, as people in Gaza starved, he refused to scan or sell Israeli-grown produce.

He could not, he said, “have that on my conscience”.

Within weeks, Tesco supermarket suspended him.

He requested anonymity following advice from his trade union.

In Newcastle, County Down, a town better known for its summer tourists than political protest, customers protested outside the store.

The local dispute became a test case: Can individual employees turn their moral outrage into workplace action?

Facing mounting backlash, Tesco reinstated him in January, moving him to a role where he no longer has to handle Israeli goods.

“I would encourage them to do it,” he said about other workers. “They have the backing of the unions and there’s a precedent set. They didn’t sack me; they shouldn’t be able to sack anyone else.

“And then, if we get enough people to do it, they can’t sell Israeli goods.”

“A genocide is still going on, they are slowly killing and starving people – we still need to be out, doing what we can.”

From shop floors to state policy

Across Europe, there is labour-led pressure to cease trade with Israel.

Unions in Ireland, the UK and Norway have passed motions stating that workers should not be compelled to handle Israeli goods.

Retail cooperatives, including Co-op UK and Italy’s Coop Alleanza 3.0, have removed some Israeli products in protest against the war in Gaza.

The campaigns raise questions about whether worker-led refusals can lead to state-level boycotts.

Activists say the strategy is rooted in history.

In 1984, workers at the Dunnes Stores retail chain in Ireland refused to handle goods from apartheid South Africa. The action lasted nearly three years and contributed to Ireland becoming the first country in Western Europe to ban trade with South Africa.

“The same can be done against the apartheid, genocidal state of Israel today,” said Damian Quinn, 33, of BDS Belfast.

The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement is a Palestinian-led campaign launched in 2005 that calls for economic and cultural boycotts of Israel until it complies with international law, including ending its occupation of Palestine.

“Where the state has failed in its obligation to prevent and punish the crime of genocide, citizens and workers across the world must refuse Israel and apply pressure on their governments to introduce legislation,” said Quinn.

That pressure, he said, takes the form of boycotting “complicit Israeli sporting, academic and cultural institutions”, as well as Israeli and international companies “engaged in violations of Palestinian human rights”.

The movement also seeks to “apply pressure on banks, local councils, universities, churches, pension funds and governments to do the same through divestment and sanctions”, he added.

Supporters argue that such pressure is beginning to shape state policy across Europe.

Spain and Slovenia have moved to restrict trade with Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank following sustained public protests and mounting political pressure. In August 2025, Slovenia’s government banned imports of goods produced in Israeli-occupied territories, becoming one of the first European states to adopt such a measure.

Spain followed suit later that year, with a decree banning the import of products from illegal Israeli settlements. The measure was formally enforced at the start of 2026.

Both countries’ centre-left governments have been outspoken critics of Israel’s conduct during the war, helping create the political conditions for legislative action.

In the Netherlands, a wave of pro-Palestinian campus protests and public demonstrations in 2025 shifted political discourse. Student demands for academic and trade disengagement became part of broader calls for national policy change.

Later that year, members of the Dutch parliament urged the government to ban imports from illegal Israeli settlements.

Meanwhile, Ireland is attempting to advance its Occupied Territories Bill, first introduced in 2018, which would prohibit trade in goods and services from illegal settlements in occupied Palestinian territory, including the West Bank.

Progress, however, has stalled despite unanimous backing in the lower house of Ireland’s parliament, the Dail.

Paul Murphy, an Irish pro-Palestine member of parliament who, in June, attempted to cross into Gaza, told Al Jazeera the delay amounts to “indirect pressure from Israel routed through the US”. He accused the government of “kicking the can down the road” as it seeks further legal advice.

Pro-Israel organisations are working to oppose initiatives that aim to pressure Israel economically.

B’nai B’rith International, a US-based group that says it strengthens “global Jewish life”, combats anti-Semitism and stands “unequivocally with the State of Israel”, decries the BDS movement. In July 2025, it submitted an 18-page memorandum to Irish lawmakers, warning the bill could pose risks for US companies operating in Ireland.

The memorandum argued that, if enacted, the bill could create conflicts with US federal anti-boycott laws, which prohibit US companies from participating in certain foreign-led boycotts – particularly those targeting Israel.

B’nai B’rith International also “vehemently condemns” the United Kingdom’s recognition of Palestinian statehood and has donated 200 softshell jackets to Israeli military personnel.

Critics say interventions of this kind go beyond advocacy and reflect coordinated efforts to influence European policymaking on Israel and Palestine from abroad.

While lobby groups publicly press their case, leaked documents, based on material from whistleblower site Distributed Denial of Secrets, suggest the Israeli state has also been directly involved in countering BDS campaigns across Europe.

A covert programme, jointly funded by the Israeli Ministries of Justice and of Strategic Affairs, reportedly hired law firms for 130,000 euros ($154,200) on assignments aimed at monitoring boycott-related movements.

Former Sinn Fein MEP Martina Anderson, who supports the BDS movement, previously accused Israeli advocacy organisations of attempting to silence critics of Israel through legal and political pressure.

According to the leaked documents cited by The Ditch, an Irish outlet, Israel hired a law firm to “investigate the steps open to Israel against Martina Anderson”.

She told Al Jazeera she stood by her criticism.

“As the chair of the Palestinian delegation in the European Parliament, I did my work diligently, as people who know me would expect me to do.

“I am proud to have been a thorn in the side of the Israeli state and its extensive lobbying machine, which works relentlessly to undermine Palestinian voices and to justify a brutal and oppressive rogue state.”

Pushback across Europe

In 2019, Germany’s parliament, the Bundestag, adopted a non-binding resolution condemning the BDS movement as anti-Semitic, calling for the withdrawal of public funding from groups that support it.

Observers say the vote has since been used to conflate criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism.

The European Leadership Network (ELNET), a prominent pro-Israel advocacy organisation active across the continent, welcomed the move and said its German branch had urged further legislative steps.

Meanwhile, in the UK, ELNET has funded trips to Israel for Labour politicians and their staff.

Bridget Phillipson, now secretary of state for education, declared a 3,000-pound ($4,087) visit funded by ELNET for a member of her team.

A coworker of Wes Streeting named Anna Wilson also accepted a trip funded by ELNET. Streeting himself has visited Israel on a mission organised by the Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) group.

ELNET’s UK branch is directed by Joan Ryan, an ex-Labour MP and former LFI chair.

During the passage of a bill designed to prevent public bodies from pursuing their own boycotts, divestment or sanctions policies – the Labour Party imposed a three-line whip instructing MPs to vote against it. Phillipson and Streeting abstained.

The Economic Activity of Public Bodies (Overseas Matters) Bill was widely seen as an attempt to block local councils and public institutions from adopting BDS-style measures.

A vocal supporter of the legislation was Luke Akehurst, then director of the pro-Israel advocacy group, We Believe in Israel. In a statement carried by ELNET, he said it was “absurd” that local councils could “undermine the excellent relationship between the UK and Israel” through boycotts or divestment.

“We need the law changed to close this loophole,” he said, arguing that BDS initiatives by local authorities risked “importing the conflict into communities in the UK”.

The legislation was ultimately shelved when a general election was called in 2024. It formed part of broader legislative efforts in parts of Europe to limit BDS-linked boycotts.

Akehurst has since been elected as Labour MP for North Durham, having previously served on the party’s National Executive Committee.

Lebanese authorities say Israeli forces bombed a vehicle near the border, killing at least four people.

Israeli forces have bombed a vehicle near Lebanon’s border with Syria, killing at least four people, according to the Lebanese Ministry of Public Health.

The Israeli air strike took place early on Monday morning, it said in a statement.

Lebanon’s National News Agency said one of the victims was a Syrian national named Khaled Mohammad al-Ahmad.

The Israeli military confirmed the air strike, claiming in a post on X that it targeted members of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) in Lebanon. It did not provide evidence for its claim.

The Israeli military said the raid took place in the Majdal Anjar area of Lebanon.

There was no immediate comment from the PIJ.

The PIJ is an armed group in the occupied Palestinian territory, fighting alongside Hamas in Gaza for the establishment of a Palestinian state. It is also an ally of the Lebanese armed group, Hezbollah, which launched attacks on northern Israel in solidarity with Palestinians after the start of Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza in 2023.

Israel and Hezbollah agreed to a ceasefire in November 2024, but the Israeli military has continued to carry out near-daily attacks on Lebanon, in violation of the United States-brokered truce.

According to the United Nations, the Israeli military launched more than 10,000 air and ground attacks in the year since it agreed to halt hostilities.

The UN’s rights office said in November last year that it verified at least 108 civilian casualties from Israeli attacks since the ceasefire, including at least 21 women and 16 children.

At least 11 Lebanese civilians were also abducted by Israeli forces during that time period, the office said.

Lebanon filed a complaint with the UN last month about the repeated Israeli violations, urging the UN Security Council to push Israel to end its attacks and fully withdraw from the country.

The complaint said Israel violated Lebanon’s sovereignty at least 2,036 times in the last three months of 2025 alone.

Israel also continues to occupy five areas in Lebanese territory, blocking the reconstruction of destroyed border villages and preventing tens of thousands of displaced people from returning to their homes.

Israel’s decision to resume the land registration processes in the occupied West Bank for the first time since 1967 will facilitate the dispossession and displacement of Palestinians in violation of international law, Israeli rights groups say.

The land registration process – also known as settlement of land title – has been reinstated after nearly six decades, following the government’s approval on Sunday of a proposal submitted by far-right Minister of Finance Bezalel Smotrich, Minister of Justice Yariv Levin, and Minister of Defence Israel Katz.

While Israel has increased the confiscation of Palestinian land through military orders, with the activity reaching record levels in 2025, the new move gives Israel a legal avenue that “systemati[ses] the dispossession of Palestinian land to further Israeli settlement expansion and cement the apartheid regime”, Bimkom, an Israeli human rights organisation that focuses on land and housing rights, said in a statement.

Michal Braier, head of research at Bimkom, told Al Jazeera that land registration will be inaccessible to large segments of the Palestinian population who never had their land formally registered, or who may fail to prove ownership.

In the occupied West Bank, land registration under the Jordanian Administration – which followed British Mandate rule and lasted from 1949 to 1967 – covered about 30 percent of the total area. As a consequence, about 70 percent of the West Bank is “completely unregistered”, Braier said, making it “very hard to determine who actually owns the land”.

Even for those whose land was registered, “the legal bar for proving land ownership is very, very high, in a way that most Palestinians won’t have the proper documents to prove it”, said Braier.

‘Full annexation’

In 1968, Israeli occupation authorities froze most land settlement procedures in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, making transfer of ownership down the family line hard to prove for Palestinians.

Additionally, legal documents could have been lost or stored in homes that are now out of reach to Palestinian refugees displaced by the Arab–Israeli war (1948-49) – when the newly-founded Israel seized control of 77 percent of Palestine – and in the Six Day War of 1967, which ended with Israel capturing the Sinai Peninsula from Egypt and the Golan Heights from Syria, while occupying the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza.

The Israeli anti-settlement group Peace Now said the newly reinstated process of land registration amounts to a “full annexation” of Palestinian land.

“This is a way for Israel to take control over the West Bank,” Hagit Ofran, a Peace Now member, told Al Jazeera. “The government is asking for papers that are dating back to the British mandate or to the Jordanian time 100 years ago.”

“This is something that, very rarely, Palestinians will be able to prove, and therefore, by default, the land will be registered under [Israel’s] name,” she added.

Israel’s Supreme Court last month rejected a petition opposing the resumption of the land registration process, filed by local human rights groups Bimkom, Yesh Din, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel and HaMoked. The court deemed it “premature” to rule on the implementation of the government’s decision.

‘Totally invalid’

Israeli authorities have provided few details on how the process will unfold. Yet, a similar scenario has already played out in occupied East Jerusalem, where the settlement of land title that began in 2018 resulted in the expropriation of Palestinian land.

Research conducted by Bimkom found that only 1 percent of the East Jerusalem land registered for ownership between 2018 and 2024 was registered to Palestinians, while the rest came under the control of the Israeli state or private Israeli owners.

The move expanded Israel’s de facto annexation over East Jerusalem in breach of international law, including, most recently, an advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 2024.

In its landmark ruling, the World Court found that Israel’s “expropriation of land and properties, transfer of populations, and legislation aimed at the incorporation of the occupied section are totally invalid and cannot change that status”.

More broadly, the ICJ ruled that Israel’s long-term occupation of Palestinian territory – comprised of East Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip – was unlawful, and must be terminated “as rapidly as possible”.

Braier said the Israeli government’s decision was its latest move expand control over Palestinian territory in breach of international law.

“The government is not hiding its intentions. They want to expand settlements and push Palestinians into as small an area as possible.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has outlined the conditions he considers necessary for any prospective deal between the United States and Iran, including the dismantling of all of Tehran’s nuclear infrastructure.

His comments on Sunday came as Iranian Minister of Foreign Affairs Abbas Araghchi headed to Switzerland for a second round of nuclear talks with the US.

Speaking at the annual Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, Netanyahu said he was sceptical of a deal, but had told US President Donald Trump last week that any agreement must include several elements.

“The first is that all enriched material has to leave Iran,” he said.

“The second is that there should be no enrichment capability – not stopping the enrichment process, but dismantling the equipment and the infrastructure that allows you to enrich in the first place”.

The third, he said, was resolving the issue of ballistic missiles.

Netanyahu also called for sustained inspections of Tehran’s nuclear programme.

“There has to be real inspection, substantive inspections, no lead-time inspections, but effective inspections for all of the above,” he said.

Iran and the US resumed nuclear negotiations in Oman on February 6, months after previous talks collapsed when Israel launched an unprecedented bombing campaign against Iran last June, which started a 12-day war.

The US joined in the attacks, bombing three Iranian nuclear sites.

Netanyahu’s comments mark the first time he has spoken publicly on the discussions with Trump in Washington, DC, last Wednesday. The meeting was their seventh since Trump returned to office last year.

Trump told reporters afterwards that they had reached no “definitive” agreement on how to move forward with Iran, but that he had “insisted that negotiations with Iran continue to see whether or not a deal can be consummated”.

According to a report by Axios, the two leaders agreed to intensify economic strangleholds on Iran, mostly on its oil sales to China. More than 80 percent of Iranian oil exports current go to China.

The report, which cited US officials, said Netanyahu and Trump agreed in their meeting on the necessary end state: an Iran without the capability to obtain nuclear weapons. But they disagreed about how to get there.

Netanyahu told Trump it would be impossible to make a good deal, while Trump said he thought it was possible. “Let’s give it a shot”, Trump said, according to Axios.

Iran has long denied any intent to produce nuclear weapons, but has said it is prepared to discuss curbs on its atomic programme in exchange for the lifting of sanctions. It has ruled out linking the issue to missiles, however.

The CBS broadcaster, meanwhile, reported on Sunday that Trump had told Netanyahu during a meeting in Florida in December that he would support Israeli strikes on Iran’s ballistic missile programme if the US and Iran could not reach a deal.

The network cited two sources familiar with the matter.

There was no immediate comment from the US or Israel on the CBS report.

The renewed push for diplomacy comes after Trump threatened new attacks on Iran and sent a US aircraft carrier to the region, citing a deadly crackdown on antigovernment protesters in January.

Tensions in the region remain high, meanwhile.

On Friday, Trump said he was sending a second aircraft carrier to the Middle East, and openly discussed changing Iran’s government.

Asked if he wanted a government change in Iran, Trump responded that it “seems like that would be the best thing that could happen”.

Asked why a second aircraft carrier was headed to the Middle East, Trump said: “In case we don’t make a deal, we’ll need it … if we need it, we’ll have it ready.”

For its part, Iran has promised to retaliate to any attack, saying it will strike US bases in the Middle East.

The continued tensions have sparked fears of a wider regional war.

Thousands of Western nationals joined the Israeli military amid its genocidal war in Gaza, raising questions over international legal accountability for foreign nationals implicated in alleged war crimes against Palestinians.

More than 50,000 soldiers in the Israeli military hold at least one other citizenship, with a majority of them holding US or European passports, information obtained by the Israeli NGO Hatzlacha through Israel’s Freedom of Information Law has revealed.

Since October 7, 2023, Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza has killed at least 72,061 people in military actions that have been dubbed war crimes and crimes against humanity by rights groups.

Rights organisations around the world have been trying to identify and prosecute foreign nationals, many of whom have posted videos of their abuse on social media, for their involvement in war crimes, particularly in Gaza.

So, what does the first such data reveal about the Israeli military? And what could be the legal implications for dual-national soldiers?

Which foreign nationals enlist most in the Israeli military?

At least 12,135 soldiers enlisted in the Israeli military hold United States passports, topping the list by a huge margin. That is in addition to 1,207 soldiers who possess another passport in addition to their US and Israeli ones.

The data – shared with Al Jazeera by Israeli lawyer Elad Man, who serves as the legal counsel for Hatzlacha – shows that 6,127 French nationals serve in the Israeli military.

The Israeli military, which shared such data for the first time, noted that soldiers holding multiple citizenships are counted more than once in the breakdown.

The numbers show service members enlisted in the military as of March 2025, 17 months into Israel’s devastating war in Gaza.

Russia stands at third, with 5,067 nationals serving in the Israeli military, followed by 3,901 Ukrainians and 1,668 Germans.

The data revealed that 1,686 soldiers in the military held dual British-Israeli citizenship, in addition to 383 other soldiers who held another passport in addition to their British and Israeli ones.

South Africa, which brought a case of genocide against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), also had 589 of its citizens serving in the Israeli military ranks.

Furthermore, 1,686 soldiers hold Brazilian citizenship, 609  Argentine, 505 Canadian, 112 Colombian, and 181 Mexican, in addition to their Israeli nationality.

Israel’s military comprises an estimated 169,000 active personnel and 465,000 reservists – of whom nearly eight percent hold dual or multiple citizenships.

Can dual nationals be tried for war crimes in Gaza?

Ilias Bantekas, a professor of transnational law at Hamad Bin Khalifa University in Qatar, told Al Jazeera that “war crimes incur criminal liability under international law, irrespective of what the law of nationality says”.

Otherwise, Nazi Germans, whose law allowed and obliged them to commit atrocities, would incur no liability, Bantekas added. “Dual nationality is immaterial to criminal liability,” he said.

However, the major issue in prosecuting the accused “is getting [them] on your territory and putting them before a court”, he noted.

Bantekas also added that there is no difference in the question of liability between native soldiers and those of dual nationalities.

Dual nationals, in fact, “may in addition be liable under laws that prevent military service in foreign conflicts or joining armies of other nations”, the professor said.

Prosecuting foreign nationals has been “pretty much the norm”, he noted.

“Think of Nazi Germans tried by Allied war crimes tribunals after World War II, Japanese officers tried by US military courts, and crimes committed during the Bosnian conflict where alleged offenders were tried by various courts in Europe,” Bantekas told Al Jazeera.

Last May, the United Kingdom’s Foreign Office said that allegations of war crimes should be submitted to the Metropolitan Police.

“The UK recognises the right of British dual nationals to serve in the legitimately recognised armed forces of the country of their other nationality,” it said. “Allegations of war crimes should be submitted to the Met Police for investigation.”

Have foreign nationals been tried for Gaza war crimes?

Nationals with dual or multiple citizenships have not yet been arrested for committing war crimes in Gaza. But rights groups, including lawyers, are trying to get them prosecuted.

In the UK last April, the Gaza-based Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) and the UK-based Public Interest Law Centre (PILC) filed a 240-page report to the Metropolitan Police.

Accusations against the 10 British individuals, whose names have not been publicly disclosed, include murder, forcible transfer of people, and attacks on humanitarian personnel, between October 2023 and May 2024.

In September last year, a case was filed in Germany against a 25-year-old soldier, born and raised in Munich, for participating in the killing of Palestinian civilians in Gaza, by PCHR, the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR), Al-Haq, and the Al Mezan Center for Human Rights.

The sniper, with shootings documented near Gaza’s al-Quds and Nasser hospitals between November 2023 and March 2024, was a member of a unit known as “Refaim”, “ghost” in Hebrew.

Legal proceedings against members of the same unit are also under way in France, Italy, South Africa, and Belgium.

The Belgian public prosecutor’s office also opened a judicial investigation last October into a 21-year-old Belgian-Israeli citizen, a member of Refaim.

The mandatory military service law in Israel exempts dual nationals residing abroad, making the enlistment a voluntary act, an important distinction when such crimes are tried in foreign courts. Lawyers have reportedly noted that the voluntary nature of the soldiers’ service makes them more liable for alleged crimes.

What does international law say about soldiers in foreign wars?

South Africa brought its case to the ICJ in December 2023, arguing that Israel’s war in Gaza violates the 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

While a final ruling could take years, the ICJ issued provisional measures in January 2024 ordering Israel to take steps to prevent acts of genocide in Gaza and to allow unimpeded access for humanitarian aid. But Israel has continued curb the supply of aid into Gaza in violation of the ICJ interim order.

Under the 1948 Genocide Convention, countries that are party to the treaty have a binding obligation to prevent and punish genocide. Countries can investigate and prosecute individuals who may have committed or been complicit in this crime.

In March last year, the International Centre of Justice for Palestinians (ICJP) announced the “Global 195” campaign to hold Israeli and dual-national individuals accountable for war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza.

The coalition aims to work simultaneously within multiple jurisdictions to apply for private arrest warrants and initiate legal proceedings against those implicated, including the Israeli military members and the entire Israeli military and political command in its scope.

For countries that are parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), there is an additional layer, where the ICC can assert its jurisdiction. Palestine has been a state party since 2015.

The State of Palestine is recognised as a sovereign nation by 157 of the 193 UN member states, representing 81 percent of the international community. Most recently, it has been recognised by France, Belgium, Canada, Australia, and the UK.

A foreign national, whose country considers Palestine a “friendly state”, would also be vulnerable to prosecution for participating in the Israeli military’s war crimes in Gaza.

How is the Hind Rajab Foundation tracking alleged war criminals?

The Hind Rajab Foundation – named to honour a five-year-old Palestinian girl whose killing by Israeli soldiers on January 29, 2024 became emblematic of Israel’s genocide in Gaza – has been amassing troves of data with identifiable information about Israeli soldiers.

The Belgium-based foundation is the force behind an international effort for accountability over war crimes in Gaza – and has since filed several cases, including a landmark challenge targeting 1,000 Israeli soldiers.

The foundation identified numerous individuals with dual citizenship, including 12 from France, 12 from the US, four from Canada, three from the UK, and two from the Netherlands, in the complaint.

The foundation has scoured TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube, where the Israeli soldiers boast about atrocities in Gaza, to collect information on the soldiers. It has been using those pieces of evidence to pursue the trail of the accused for war crimes.

“We are in possession of many more profiles of dual nationals beyond the 1,000 soldiers named in our complaint to the ICC. We will be pursuing legal action against all of them in the national courts of their respective countries,” the foundation had said in October 2024. “Impunity must end, everywhere.”

The Hind Rajab Foundation says it pursues criminal accountability for Israeli war criminals, from those who planned and ordered operations to those who executed them, including foreign nationals who have participated in or financed these crimes.

Its founder, Dyab Abou Jahjah, was also threatened by Israeli Minister of Diaspora Affairs Amichai Chikli, who told him to “watch your pager” in a post on X, an allusion to deadly attacks on Hezbollah members’ communication systems in September 2024. At least 12 people were killed and more than 3,000 people were wounded when thousands of pagers were detonated by Israeli operatives during those attacks.

In January last year, a complaint filed by the Hind Rajab Foundation led to a Brazilian judge ordering an investigation into an Israeli soldier vacationing in the country. The soldier had to flee, prompting the Israeli military to order all troops who participated in combat to conceal their identities.

“Criminal liability under international law cannot be dissolved by time bars. It extends forever, and no statute of limitations is applicable,” said Bantekas of Hamad Bin Khalifa University.

However, prosecuting Israeli military members “is practically difficult for two reasons”, he said, noting the difficulty of obtaining firsthand evidence and the wariness of national prosecutors who may fear political or other repercussions.

“If public opinion and political opinion in Europe shifts far more in favour of Palestine than it is now, then national prosecutions will feel more at ease to initiate prosecutions,” he told Al Jazeera.

As a child, I spent nearly every weekend with my best friend shooting hoops and jumping fences throughout Hollywood.

It was always amusing seeing tourists — especially foreigners — line up around buildings and outside nightclubs and lounges that held no meaning to me, at the time.

These monuments I ignored as a youngster became the must-see places of my teenage years and early 20s.

It was at the Viper Room where a 20-year-old me was tossed out of line trying to crash the same venue where Pearl Jam had played.

I was first scandalized by the price of a drink for a date’s $10 cocktail at the Troubadour in West Hollywood (I think I was making $6.50 an hour at the time). But I had to visit one of Jim Morrison’s favorite haunts.

So I was delighted when The Times entertainment team compiled its list of 26 legendary music sites in L.A.

It was fun to see favorites, but more importantly, to read about new places and legends.

Hopefully, there’s a spot that intrigues you. Let’s take a look at a few selections.

Capitol Records (Hollywood)

The most famous tower in all of music was never overtly intended to look like a stack of LPs and a stylus needle.

“The building was not designed as a cartoon or a giggle. To have it trivialized with the stack-of-records myth is annoying and dismaying,” architect Louis Naidorf has said of his Capitol Records Building. “There’s not a thing on the building that doesn’t have a solid purpose to it.”

That was no obstacle for it becoming emblematic of both Los Angeles and the record business. It’s still home to one of the most renowned recording studios on Earth, and its silhouette remains a Hollywood icon and a symbol of Los Angeles on par with the Hollywood sign nearby.

(Ken Hively/Los Angeles Times)

Elliott Smith Wall (Silver Lake)

The beloved singer-songwriter Elliott Smith posed at the swooping mural outside Solutions speaker repair in Silver Lake for the cover of his LP “Figure 8” in 2000.

After he died by suicide in 2003, the wall became an unofficial memorial for Smith, where fans left touching notes, song lyrics and nips of liquors mentioned in his songs.

While the wall has been cut out in spots to make room for various restaurants — and it’s often covered in more flagrant tagging — it’s still a living connection to one of the city’s most cherished voices.

(Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times)

Chaplin Studio (Hollywood)

John Mayer calls it “adult day care”: the historic recording studio behind the arched gates on La Brea Avenue where famous musicians have been keeping themselves — and one another — creatively occupied since the mid-1960s.

Known for decades as Henson Studios — and as A&M Studios before that — the 3-acre complex in the heart of Hollywood has played host to the creation of some of music’s most celebrated records, among them Carole King’s “Tapestry,” Joni Mitchell’s “Blue,” Guns N’ Roses’ “Use Your Illusion” and D’Angelo’s “Black Messiah.”

Charlie Chaplin, who was born in London, began building the lot in 1917 in a white-and-brown English Tudor style; he went on to direct some of his best-known films, including “Modern Times” and “The Great Dictator,” on the property.

The Lighthouse Cafe (Hermosa Beach)

The Lighthouse Cafe might seem familiar from its cameo in the Oscar-winning movie “La La Land,” but this jazz cafe was once instrumental in shaping the West Coast jazz scene.

The beachside spot first opened as a restaurant in 1934 and was changed into a bar by the 1940s. It first started to play jazz in 1949 when the owner let bassist Howard Rumsey host a recurring jam session. The jams quickly began to draw both a vivacious crowd of listeners and a core group of budding jazz musicians.

Over the years, musicians like Chet Baker, Gerry Mulligan, Miles Davis and Max Roach all made regular appearances at the Lighthouse. Today, the venue still hosts jazz brunches every Sunday and other musical gigs throughout the week.

For more, here is the entire list.

The week’s biggest stories

(Allen J. Schaben/Los Angeles Times)

Los Angeles news

Trump administration policies and reactions

Milan-Cortina Olympic Games

Crime, courts and policing

What else is going on

Must reads

Other meaty reads

For your downtime

(Illustrations by Lindsey Made This; photograph by Rony Armas)

Going out

Staying in

L.A. Affairs

Get wrapped up in tantalizing stories about dating, relationships and marriage.

Have a great day, from the Essential California team

Jim Rainey, staff reporter
Hugo Martín, assistant editor, fast break desk
Kevinisha Walker, multiplatform editor
Andrew J. Campa, weekend writer
Karim Doumar, head of newsletters

How can we make this newsletter more useful? Send comments to essentialcalifornia@latimes.com. Check our top stories, topics and the latest articles on latimes.com.

The Israeli government has approved a proposal to register large areas of the occupied West Bank as “state property,” for the first time since the Israeli occupation of the territory in 1967.

Israeli public broadcaster KAN on Sunday said the proposal was submitted by far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, Justice Minister Yariv Levin, and Defence Minister Israel Katz.

“We are continuing the settlement revolution to control all our lands,” said Smotrich.

Most Palestinian land is not formally registered because it is a long, complicated process that Israel stopped in 1967. Registration of land establishes permanent ownership. International law states an occupying power cannot confiscate land in occupied territories.

The Palestinian Presidency slammed the Israeli government’s decision, calling it a “serious escalation” and saying the Israeli move effectively nullifies signed agreements and clearly contradicts resolutions of the United Nations Security Council, Wafa news agency reported.

Meanwhile, Israeli Defence Minister Katz described the move as an “essential security and governance measure designed to ensure control, enforcement, and full freedom of action for the State of Israel in the area”, the Jerusalem Post newspaper reported.

Last week, the Israeli Security Cabinet approved measures promoted by Smotrich and Katz that further facilitate the unlawful seizure of Palestinian land in the occupied West Bank.

Analysts describe it as a de facto annexation of the Palestinian territory, warning that it will profoundly reshape its civil and legal landscape by eliminating what the Israeli ministers called longstanding “legal obstacles” to the expansion of illegal settlements there.

Speaking from Ramallah, political analyst Xavier Abu Eid told Al Jazeera Israel is “packing annexation into some sort of a bureaucratic move”. He said the International Court of Justice in 2024 said the Israeli actions amount to annexation of the occupied West Bank.

“People should understand this is not just a step towards annexation, we are experiencing annexation as we speak today. What the Israeli government is doing is implanting their political programme – a policy that has already been presented,” he said.

Palestinian landowners are going to face more threats and intimidation from Israeli settlers supported by the Israeli government, he warned.

Medical sources say Israeli forces killed five Palestinians in southern Khan Younis and four in northern al-Faluja.

Israeli forces have killed at least nine Palestinians in new attacks across Gaza, in yet another violation of the United States-brokered “ceasefire” in October, according to medical sources.

The attacks on Sunday came as the Israeli military launched several attacks on southern Lebanon, targeting what it called warehouses used by the Hezbollah armed group.

In Gaza, a source at the Nasser Hospital told Al Jazeera Israeli forces killed at least five Palestinians in the southern city of Khan Younis.

The attack took place beyond the so-called “yellow line”, where Israeli troops are stationed in Gaza, the source added.

The other four Palestinians were killed when Israeli forces attacked a tent for displaced people in the al-Faluja area of northern Gaza, a source at al-Shifa Hospital said.

There was no immediate comment from Israel.

The Israeli military, however, said in a statement early on Sunday that it struck a building in an unspecified part of northern Gaza shortly after several armed fighters entered the structure.

At least two of the fighters were killed, it said.

The Israeli military also said it killed another person in Gaza on Sunday who allegedly crossed the yellow line and posed “an immediate threat” to its forces there.

It did not provide evidence for its claims.

In Lebanon, the Israeli military said it struck warehouses used by Hezbollah for storing weapons and launchers in the southern parts of the country.

The Israeli military and Hezbollah, which began attacks on northern Israel in solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza in 2023, agreed to a ceasefire in November 2024.

There was no immediate comment from Lebanon on Sunday’s attacks.

According to authorities in Gaza and Lebanon, the Israeli military continues to launch near-daily attacks despite agreeing to halt the fighting.

In Gaza, Israel has violated the US-brokered “ceasefire” more than 1,500 times since it came into effect on October 10. At least 591 people have been killed and 1,590 wounded since then.

In addition to the near-daily killing of Palestinians, Israel also severely restricts quantities of food, medicine, medical supplies, shelter materials and prefabricated houses from entering Gaza, where some 2 million Palestinians – including 1.5 million displaced – live in catastrophic conditions.

Israel launched its genocidal war on Gaza on October 8, 2023, with support from the US, killing 72,032 people, wounding some 171,661, and destroying 90 percent of the territory’s infrastructure.

The United Nations estimates it could cost more than $70bn to rebuild Gaza.

In Lebanon, the Israeli military launched more than 10,000 air and ground attacks in the year since it agreed to halt hostilities, according to the UN.

The organisation’s rights office said in November last year that it verified at least 108 civilian casualties from Israeli attacks since the ceasefire, including at least 21 women and 16 children.

At least 11 Lebanese civilians were also abducted by Israeli forces during that time period, the office said.

France and Germany call for UN special rapporteur for occupied Palestinian territory, Francesca Albanese, to step down over her critical comments.

More than 100 prominent artists – including musicians, actors and writers – have signed an open letter in support of the United Nations special rapporteur for occupied Palestinian territory who faces international calls to step down.

In a letter from the group Artists for Palestine on Saturday, the signatories offered “full support to Francesca Albanese, a defender of human rights and, therefore, also of the Palestinian people’s right to exist”.

“There are infinitely more of us in every corner of the Earth who want force no longer to be the law. Who know what the word ‘law’ truly means,” the letter said.

Among the supporters were actors Mark Ruffalo and Javier Bardem, Nobel Prize-winning author Annie Ernaux and British musician Annie Lennox.

At last week’s Al Jazeera Forum, Albanese, an outspoken critic of Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, said “we as humanity have a common enemy”, but a fake video that was later debunked had her accusing Israel of being the “common enemy”.

She later explained in a social media post she was referencing “the system that has enabled the genocide in Palestine” as the “common enemy”.

‘Crush any criticism of Israel’

Still, European countries, including France and Germany, continue to call for her removal.

On Tuesday, a group of French lawmakers sent a letter to Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot condemning Albanese’s remarks as “anti-Semitic”. A day later, Barrot called on her to step down, saying France “unreservedly condemns the outrageous and reprehensible remarks”.

On Thursday, German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul called her position “untenable”.

Frank Barat, an author and film producer, said French President Emmanuel Macron and Barrot have repeatedly said they support international law “while the facts show the complete opposite”.

Albanese has highlighted for the past two years that under international law, “states have a duty to act to prevent genocide, and they’ve been failing completely” in Gaza, Barat told Al Jazeera.

“Because Francesca has been highlighting this hypocrisy, she’s been targeted by most Western governments. The political agenda of these governments is to crush any criticism of Israel. We’ve seen it in the streets of Europe. We’ve seen it in the streets of the US,” he added.

People who have spoken out against Israel’s war on Palestine are “criminalised while the perpetrators of genocide continue to be let go“, Barat said.

Marta Hurtado, a spokesperson for the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, said at a news briefing on Friday that her colleagues are “very worried” about the backlash against Albanese.

“We are concerned that UN officials, independent experts and judicial officials are increasingly subjected to personal attacks, threats and misinformation that distracts from the serious human rights issues,” Hurtado said.

Nearly 600 Palestinians have been killed by Israel in Gaza since an October 10 “ceasefire” alone. At least 72,000 Palestinians have been killed and 171,000 wounded in Israel’s war since October 2023

Tehran, Iran – Iran and the United States are presenting clashing views before expected talks as diaspora Iranians rally across the world to demand action after thousands were killed during last month’s nationwide protests.

Amid reports that a second round of mediated talks may take place over the coming days, Washington has maintained it wants to limit Iran’s missile programme and end all its nuclear enrichment. Iran has consistently rejected both demands, saying it could dilute highly enriched uranium – all said to be buried under rubble after being bombed by the US in June – in exchange for the lifting of sanctions.

US President Donald Trump said at the White House on Friday that he is sending a second aircraft carrier to the Middle East, adding that “regime change” in Iran would be the “best thing that could happen”.

Speaking at a conference in Tehran on Saturday aimed at attracting regional investment for railroad projects, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian thanked the leaders of Azerbaijan, Turkiye, Qatar, Oman, Saudi Arabia and others for mediating to prevent a US military attack.

“All of these countries are working so that we can resolve our own problems with peace and calm, and we are able to do this. We do not need a custodian,” Pezeshkian said, warning that a war would impact the entire Middle East.

Major rallies in US, Europe

A large number of Iranians abroad who are opposed to the theocratic establishment governing Iran since a 1979 revolution participated in rallies across the world on Saturday to demand an end to religious rule.

Reza Pahlavi, son of Iran’s US-backed shah who was deposed in the revolution, called on Iranians living abroad to be part of a “global day of action” aimed at “taking Iran back” from the Islamic Republic. He also addressed the Munich Security Conference in Germany and met with leaders such as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and senior US Senator Lindsey Graham.

The three main cities designated for the protests were Munich, Los Angeles and Toronto. Iranians also marched in cities in Australia, including Sydney and Melbourne.

A similar rally last month in Toronto saw more than150,000 people in attendance and no adverse incidents, according to city police. About 100,000 people registered early to attend the Munich rally on Saturday.

The rallies are some of the largest ever held by the Iranian diaspora and the biggest since demonstrations in solidarity with the deadly 2022-2023 nationwide protests in Iran, triggered by the death in police custody of Mahsa Amini, 22, for allegedly wearing the mandatory hijab for women improperly.

The latest protests were held days after the Iranian establishment organised demonstrations and burned the flags of Israel and the US to mark the 47th anniversary of the 1979 revolution.

“They killed my innocent girl for a few strands of hair and nobody was held accountable, but now they record women with bare heads and so-called unconventional attire in their official ceremonies and nobody yells that Islam is in danger,” Amini’s father wrote in an Instagram story after state television interviewed a pro-establishment woman without a hijab.

Since the killing of thousands of protesters last month, mostly carried out on the nights of January 8-9, similar rallies have been held to raise awareness in dozens of cities across the globe, including The Hague, Zurich, Rome, Budapest and Tokyo.

The United Nations and international human rights organisations said they documented widespread use of lethal force by state forces against peaceful protesters. But the Iranian government rejected all their allegations, claiming “terrorists” and “rioters” armed and funded by the US and Israel were behind the killings across Iran.

Families united in grief, strength

From Kuhchenar county in southern Iran’s Fars province to central Arak and Mashhad in the northeast, families continue to release footage online to commemorate their loved ones killed during the demonstrations.

Behesht-e Zahra, a cemetery in Tehran, was crowded on Friday as people gathered in solidarity with multiple families holding mourning ceremonies to mark “chehelom”, or 40 days since the killing of their loved ones.

Bereaved relatives somberly clapped, played music and showed the “victory” sign in an attempt to express pride, strength and defiance despite their losses.

Among those remembered were Ayda Heydari, 21, a medical student, and Zahra “Raha” Behloulipour, who attended Tehran University. Both were shot and killed with multiple live rounds in separate incidents.

The state-run Mehr news agency reported Heydari was “a victim of Mossad agents in recent riots” and released a short clip of an interview with her family. Heydari’s mother said her daughter was not a “munafiq”, a term the Islamic Republic uses to describe dissidents.

Mohammad-Hossein Omid, head of Tehran University, last week told the semiofficial ISNA news agency that “most” of the people taking part in the nationwide demonstrations were “protesters not terrorists”.

Concerns for prisoners

The Iranian judiciary confirmed on Saturday that a number of senior reformist politicians arrested last week for criticising the establishment were released on bail while others remained behind bars to face previous charges.

Vahid Shalchi, a deputy science minister, cited judiciary officials as saying “a considerable” number of arrested students will be released soon but did not say how many are being held.

Tens of thousands of people have been arrested during and after the protests, and human rights organisations said some are in immediate danger of being executed – allegations the Iranian judiciary has rejected.

Amnesty International said 18-year-old wrestling champion Saleh Mohammadi has been sentenced to public execution in Qom after being forced to make confessions about being involved in the death of a security agent.

Mai Sato – UN special rapporteur on Iran, who previously said more than 20,000 civilians may have been killed during the demonstrations – said three other people face execution and “What is happening now is not new.”

“The same patterns documented in those individual cases are being replicated on a mass scale after the nationwide protests,” she said.

A specific casualty toll from the demonstrations is unknown as information remains extremely limited because of ongoing heavy internet filtering.

Jury chair Wim Wenders said filmmakers ‘have to stay out of politics’ when asked about German support for Israel’s genocidal war in Gaza.

Indian author Arundhati Roy has announced that she is withdrawing from the Berlin International Film Festival after what she described as “unconscionable statements” by its jury members about Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza.

Writing in India’s The Wire newspaper, Roy said she found recent remarks from members of the Berlinale jury, including its chair, acclaimed director Wim Wenders, that “art should not be political” to be “jaw-dropping”.

“It is a way of shutting down a conversation about a crime against humanity even as it unfolds before us in real time,” wrote Roy, the author of novels and nonfiction, including The God of Small Things.

“I am shocked and disgusted,” Roy wrote, adding that she believed “artists, writers and filmmakers should be doing everything in their power to stop” the war in Gaza.

“Let me say this clearly: what has happened in Gaza, what continues to happen, is a genocide of the Palestinian people by the State of Israel,” she wrote.

The war is “supported and funded by the governments of the United States and Germany, as well as several other countries in Europe, which makes them complicit in the crime,” she added.

During a panel to launch the festival on Thursday, a journalist asked the jury members for their views on the German government’s “support of the genocide in Gaza” and the “selective treatment of human rights” issues.

German filmmaker Wim Wenders, who is the chair of the festival’s seven-member jury, responded, saying that filmmakers “have to stay out of politics”.

“If we made movies that are dedicatedly political, we enter the field of politics. But we are the counterweight to politics. We are the opposite of politics. We have to do the work of people and not the work of politicians,” Wenders said.

Polish film producer Ewa Puszczynska, another jury member, said she thought it was “a bit unfair” to pose this question, saying that filmmakers “cannot be responsible” for whether governments support Israel or Palestine.

“There are many other wars where genocide is committed and we do not talk about that,” Puszczynska added.

Roy had been due to participate in the festival, which runs from February 12 to 22, after her 1989 film, In Which Annie Gives It Those Ones, was selected to be screened in the Classics section.

Germany, which is one of the biggest exporters of weapons to Israel, after the US, has introduced harsh measures to prevent people from speaking out in solidarity with Palestinians.

In 2024, more than 500 international artists, filmmakers, writers and culture workers called on creatives to stop working with German-funded cultural institutions over what they described as “McCarthyist policies that suppress freedom of expression, specifically expressions of solidarity with Palestine”.

“Cultural institutions are surveilling social media, petitions, open letters and public statements for expressions of solidarity with Palestine in order to weed out cultural workers who do not echo Germany’s unequivocal support of Israel,” organisers of the initiative said.

The Federal Constitutional Court, the highest Court in Germany, has spoken. That sentence is the centre of gravity. It signals judicial restraint. It confirms that the Federal Government retains broad discretion in determining how it complies with its constitutional duty to protect fundamental human rights, including in the sensitive area of arms exports contributing to a warfare that is deemed genocidal by the United Nations.

This assessment is embedded in the legal framework governing German arms exports, including the relevant provisions of the War Weapons Control Act and the Foreign Trade and Payments Act, which define the procedural and substantive prerequisites for export authorizations and directly inform the court’s evaluation of the complainant’s standing. Beneath the formalism in its decision lies an act with profound political weight. The Court states: “However, how the state authorities fulfil their general duty of protection and any specific duties of protection is, in principle, their own responsibility to decide.”

The case concerns German-made transmission components for Israeli Merkava and Namer tanks, widely deployed by Israeli forces in Gaza and reportedly used repeatedly in violations of international law. Germany is one of the largest arms suppliers to Israel.

The Court notes that “[t]he specialist courts have determined – in a manner that is not objectionable under constitutional law – that the legislature and the executive have not remained inactive, but have created a general protection regime to effectively counter the risks of arms exports with regard to the protection of human rights and compliance with international humanitarian law, and that they have also taken concrete measures with regard to the Israeli military offensive and the catastrophic humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip.”

In concrete terms, this means the judiciary will not substitute its own assessment for that of the executive. It does not examine battlefield realities in Gaza – on the contrary, it states that it is unclear whether, when, and how the exported goods would be used in a way that directly affects the complainant, and therefore the complainant lacks a sufficiently concrete legal interest to claim constitutional protection. It will not determine whether particular weapons systems might contribute to violations of international humanitarian law. As long as the government can demonstrate that it has established a system to “effectively counter the risks” and has taken “concrete measures”, the constitutional threshold for intervention is not met. It remains unclear how the government counters risks. Just yesterday, Julia Klöckner, President of the German Bundestag, emphasised the friendship between Israel and Germany.

This evidently shows that the protection system referred to by the Federal Constitutional Court is ineffective in legal practice. When arms exports continue despite numerous indications of serious violations of international law, and affected parties are unable to challenge these decisions in court, the protection regime fails to provide meaningful legal safeguards.

“The Court acknowledges the duty to protect but only in the abstract and refuses to ensure its practical enforcement. For people whose lives are endangered by the consequences of German arms exports, access to justice remains effectively closed,” says Dr. Alexander Schwarz, Co-Director of the International Crimes and Accountability Program at the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights.“Especially when life and death are at stake, the rule of law must allow for judicial oversight. Instead, this decision largely removes state action in this sensitive area from review. This is not persuasive.”

If courts do not intervene unless the state has entirely abdicated its duty of protection, then the decisive arena becomes merely political. This represents a discourse in Germany that constantly places Palestinian matters and rights in a political frame, even when they concern fundamental human rights.

The ECCHR is supporting the complainant together with Palestinian human rights organizations Al-Haq, Al Mezan, and the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR). Shawan Jabarin, General Director of Al-Haq, commented:

“Germany remains bound by international law, including the Genocide Convention, and must not export weapons where there is a clear risk that they will be used to commit serious violations of international humanitarian law or contribute to genocide. Israel’s conduct throughout Palestine clearly violates international humanitarian law and the Genocide Convention. Germany’s continued adherence to a policy of ‘reason of state’ that defends Israeli crimes regardless of their scale and impact and trivializes the cost in Palestinian lives must be challenged. We will continue to pursue justice for the Palestinian people.”

Neither the legal landscape nor politics are abstract or neutral. The International Criminal Court has issued an arrest warrant against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on charges of crimes against humanity. The International Court of Justice, in proceedings concerning Gaza, has indicated that states have obligations to prevent genocide where there is a plausible risk and to ensure that their conduct does not contribute to such acts. In addition, proceedings have been brought before the International Court of Justice against Germany itself, alleging violations of the Genocide Convention in connection with its support and arms exports — directly linking Germany’s conduct to the duty to prevent genocide under international law.

The Constitutional Court’s ruling does not negate these developments. Nor does it declare German exports compliant with international law. It simply affirms that the assessment of risk lies “in principle” with the political branches.

If the government alone decides whether its general protection regime is sufficient in light of allegations of war crimes, crimes against humanity, or genocide, then accountability becomes a matter of parliamentary oversight and public scrutiny rather than constitutional adjudication.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.