Is America on the Brink of Civil War?

The British writer and historian Zoe Strimpel recently expressed her concerns about the state of America. She believes that the country has become divided, with some areas being so frightening that they could give you nightmares.

A Troubled Past

Strimpel recalls growing up in Massachusetts during the 1980s and 1990s, a state she considered to be relatively enlightened. However, even then, she witnessed disturbing instances of police brutality and racism. She saw how black individuals were harassed and mistreated by reckless and unprofessional police forces.

Escalating Horrors

Strimpel wonders why, despite progress in some areas, the horrors seem to have multiplied in America. She points to recent events, such as the execution of a man in Alabama using nitrogen gas, a method that hasn't been used in civilized countries for decades. She also mentions how some states have imposed severe penalties for crimes, including the complete ban and criminalization of aiding or inciting drug addiction.

A Deteriorating Situation

Strimpel argues that things have only gotten worse under President Joe Biden, who was expected to bring civility and experience to the country. Instead, she believes that internal problems have escalated, pushing the United States to the brink of collapse.

The Return of Trump

Strimpel predicts that Donald Trump will likely become the next president, whether Biden runs for re-election or not. In her opinion, this would lead to civil war and the end of the American republic as we know it.

An Immigration Nightmare

According to Strimpel, the immigration situation in America has turned into a nightmare. While she acknowledges that the United States is a nation of immigrants, she believes that there should be a balanced approach to immigration. She argues against simply allowing millions of dreamers to enter the country without proper regulations.

A Bleak Future

Strimpel concludes by stating that as long as Biden remains in office, the world will be under the shadow of Trump's rule for at least four more years. She sees this as a tragic and frightening future for a country that was once loved by many.

Source: Telegraph

------------

Human Rights

Last Friday, the International Court of Justice made a decision that has serious implications for Israel. The court asked Israel to take action to prevent genocide in Gaza. This decision should not be ignored, and it is important for the Israeli government, parliament, president, army, and citizens to understand the severity of the situation and comply with the court's directives.

What the Court Ordered

As a signatory to the 1948 UN Convention on Genocide, Israel was ordered by the International Court of Justice to take steps to prevent acts of genocide in Gaza. This includes easing the almost complete blockade of humanitarian aid to prevent irreparable harm to the population. However, the resolution did not call for a complete cessation of Israeli military operations in the Gaza Strip.

The Consequences of Inflammatory Statements

The court case, filed by South Africa on behalf of the residents of Gaza, put the Israeli government to the test. The laxity of the government's judicial advisor and the attorney general in dealing with inflammatory statements made by senior officials has cost Israel dearly. The court cited these statements in its ruling, highlighting the need for action against the instigators.

Punishing the Instigators

It is crucial for Israel to take action and punish those who make inflammatory statements. The court's decision emphasized the seriousness of statements made by President Isaac Herzog, Defense Minister Yoav Galant, and Foreign Minister Israel Katz. The court does not take these statements lightly, and Israel should not either. It is a disgrace to turn a blind eye to such statements, as they do not represent Israeli policy.

Changing the Way Israel Expresses Itself

The entire Israeli leadership needs to change the way they express themselves. If they fail to do so, the government's judicial advisor must take firm action. It is important to prioritize the well-being of civilians and provide them with conditions for a reasonable life in Gaza. This should not be done out of fear of the International Court of Justice, but rather to preserve our humanity.

The International Court of Justice's decision is a serious warning for Israel. It is crucial for Israel to comply with the court's directives and take action against those who make inflammatory statements. By doing so, we can work towards mitigating harm to civilians and preserving our humanity.

Source: Haaretz

Western Imperialism and Hypocrisy

Zweliflele Mandela, the grandson of the late South African leader Nelson Mandela, believes that the war on the Gaza Strip is a clear example of Western imperialism and the hypocrisy of its countries. He points out that Western countries did not impose sanctions on Israel, the apartheid state, nor did they issue an arrest warrant against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his ministers for their war crimes, as they did with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Legal Pursuit

Mandela's grandson reveals that South Africa's legal team will continue to pursue the case he filed before the International Court of Justice. However, he is awaiting the report that Israel will submit in order to explore the available options.

Accountability for War Crimes

Zweliflele, wearing a Palestinian keffiyeh, commends South Africa's legal team for their efforts to hold Israel accountable for its genocide, ethnic cleansing, and war crimes against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and throughout occupied Palestine.

Inspired by Mandela

The grandson recalls his grandfather's words, stating that Nelson Mandela was inspired by his experience in the struggle against occupation and apartheid when supporting the Palestinian cause. Mandela believed that the freedom of the Palestinian people is essential for the complete freedom of all.

Commitment to the Palestinian Cause

Zweliville, a representative of the African National Congress in the South African Parliament, emphasizes that this generation is committed to defending the Palestinian cause and fulfilling Mandela's commitment. However, he highlights the need for international pressure to hold those responsible for genocide, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity accountable.

South Africa's Lawsuit

South Africa filed a lawsuit before the International Court of Justice, accusing Israel of committing genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. The devastating war, lasting over three months, has resulted in numerous casualties and a humanitarian catastrophe.

Yesterday, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take measures to prevent genocide in the Gaza Strip and rejected Israel's request to dismiss South Africa's lawsuit.

Source: Al Jazeera

What is UNRWA?

UNRWA stands for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees. It was created after a big event called the Nakba, and its main job is to help Palestinian refugees who had to leave their homes before 1967. There are more than 5.5 million Palestinian refugees that rely on UNRWA for support.

What Does UNRWA Do?

UNRWA focuses on five important things: education, health, support, relief, and infrastructure. They use their budget to provide schools, healthcare, and other essential services to Palestinian refugees in different parts of the world, like Palestine, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and more.

The Campaign Against UNRWA

 Israel has been accusing UNRWA of some serious things. They claim that some people working for UNRWA have joined groups that are against Israel, and they say that these groups are even using UNRWA's buildings and schools for their activities.

Because of these accusations, Israel started a campaign to stop funding UNRWA. Some other countries that used to fund UNRWA also decided to stop funding them. This means that UNRWA lost about 56% of its total budget, which is a lot of money!

Why Did Countries Stop Funding UNRWA?

It's important to note that these countries stopped funding UNRWA even before any official investigation took place. They made this decision right after the International Court of Justice told Israel to let relief materials enter the Gaza Strip. So, it seems like these countries were not happy with what was happening and decided to take action.

What Does This Mean for Palestinian Refugees?

With the loss of funding, UNRWA is facing some big challenges. They might not have enough money to provide the same level of support to Palestinian refugees as before. This could affect things like education, healthcare, and other important services that these refugees rely on.

What Are People Saying?

Some people are speaking up about this situation. The United Nations rapporteur on the right to housing said that stopping funding for UNRWA is like punishing all the people living in the Gaza Strip. He believes that it's not fair to punish everyone because of the actions of a few individuals in the agency.

On the other side, the Hamas movement, which is a Palestinian group, denounced the threats made by Israel against UNRWA and other international organizations. They are calling on the United Nations and other international institutions to not give in to Israel's threats and blackmail.

So, the campaign against UNRWA is causing some big changes and challenges for Palestinian refugees. 

Source: Al Jazeera

 A serious issue happening in Israel! The Israeli government is keeping the bodies of dead children who have passed away recently. Let's dive in and learn more!

The Story of Ruqaya Abu Dohuk

  Ruqaya Abu Dohuk, a 4-year-old girl who tragically lost her life. She was shot by Israeli soldiers at a checkpoint near Jerusalem. Instead of returning her body to her family, the soldiers kept it and performed an autopsy without permission. They didn't even explain why they did it. After 10 days of waiting, Ruqaya's family finally received her body and laid her to rest.

Israel's Policy of Detaining Bodies

Unfortunately, Ruqaya is not the only child whose body has been held by Israel. In fact, there are 25 children in total who have been kept in refrigerators and cemeteries for many years. This policy of detaining bodies has been going on since Israel occupied the West Bank in 1967.

The Story of Khaled Hamidat

Another heartbreaking story is that of Khaled Hamidat, a 16-year-old boy who was killed by Israeli bullets. His body was also detained, leaving his family in a difficult situation. The soldiers even prevented medical teams from helping Khaled when he was still alive. It's a truly tragic situation for his family.

Reasons for Detaining Bodies

You might be wondering why Israel is doing this. Well, there are a few reasons. One is to punish Palestinians and create fear among them. Israel also wants to hide any evidence that might raise questions about how these children were killed. Additionally, by detaining the bodies, Israel makes it harder for Palestinians to seek justice and demand investigations into these deaths.

The Year of Child Extermination

According to Defense for Children International, 2023 was a devastating year for Palestinian children. They called it the "year of genocide" because Israel killed thousands of children in Gaza and the West Bank. They also mentioned that many children were arrested and detained by Israel during that year.

It's truly heartbreaking to hear about these children who lost their lives and the pain their families have to endure. We hope that one day, all children will be treated with respect and dignity, regardless of where they come from. 

Source: Al Jazeera

Texas Unilateral Fortification

The Texas border, which stretches over 1,200 miles, has become a point of contention between the state and the federal government. Governor Greg Abbott of Texas has made border security a top priority, expressing concerns about illegal immigration and drug trafficking. He has taken swift and uncompromising actions, such as empowering the Texas National Guard to apprehend migrants and allocating funds for border wall construction. While these actions have gained support from conservatives, they have also faced criticism for potentially violating the constitution and human rights.

Federal Pushback and Legal Battles

The federal government has challenged Texas's unilateral actions on multiple fronts. The Department of Justice has filed a lawsuit against Governor Abbott's executive order, arguing that it infringes on federal authority. The Biden administration has emphasized de-escalation and humanitarian concerns, creating a divide between the two camps. These legal battles, currently in progress, have the potential to escalate tensions and hinder cooperative efforts.

Flashpoints of Friction

Specific points along the border have the potential for direct clashes between state and federal authorities. One flashpoint is the apprehension and detainment of migrants. Texas aims to return them to Mexico, while the federal government seeks to process them through the asylum system. This conflicting approach could lead to standoffs between state troopers and federal agents. Another point of friction is the construction of the border wall. Texas's efforts contradict the Biden administration's plan to dismantle previous wall projects, potentially resulting in physical confrontations between construction crews and federal officials.

The Escalation Ladder

Several factors could contribute to a wider escalation of the conflict. An influx of migrants, caused by natural disasters or political instability in Central America, could strain resources and lead to blame-shifting. Heated political rhetoric could further inflame tensions, making compromise more challenging. Unforeseen incidents, like altercations between state troopers and migrants, could escalate into larger confrontations, testing the commitment to non-violent resolutions.

Assessing the Odds of a Clash

While a direct clash between Texas and Washington is possible, several factors reduce the immediate risk. The legal system, although slow, could provide a cooling-off period and a framework for de-escalation. Public opinion, despite being divided, leans towards a moderate approach, potentially pressuring both sides to seek compromise. Additionally, the economic interdependence between Texas and the federal government gives both parties an incentive to avoid a complete breakdown in cooperation.

  A Precarious Balancing Act

The standoff between Texas and Washington over border protection is a delicate situation. While the possibility of a direct clash exists, the legal system, public opinion, and economic realities act as buffers against immediate escalation. However, the underlying ideological differences and the volatile nature of the border itself pose a constant risk of flare-ups. Moving forward requires both sides to prioritize reason, compromise, and a genuine commitment to finding practical and humane solutions for border security.

Sources: American Press

Algeria recently expressed concern over the termination of the peace and reconciliation agreement between the Malian government and the Azawad movements. The Algerian Foreign Ministry warned that this decision could lead to a civil war in Mali and pose a threat to regional security.

Reasons Behind the Decision

The Malian government justified their emergency action by citing changes in the positions of some signatory groups and what they perceived as hostile actions from Algeria. However, the Algerian Foreign Ministry dismissed these reasons as untrue and unrealistic.

Excess Power

Experts believe that the Malian military leadership's decision stems from their belief that they have enough power to control the north without sharing it with other groups, as outlined in the agreement. This surplus of power has led them to disregard the principle of power-sharing.

Delaying Implementation

Furthermore, the Malian government has been postponing coordination sessions to implement the provisions of the National Peace and Reconciliation Agreement. This indicates their lack of commitment to the agreement and their intention to assert their authority without adhering to its terms.

Possible Scenarios

Experts predict that the termination of the agreement could lead to fighting between the central government and the Azawad groups. This would create a security burden along Algeria's southern border, affecting not only military aspects but also social, economic, and immigration issues. Additionally, terrorist groups in the Sahel region may take advantage of the instability.

Algeria's Options

Algeria is unlikely to accept the termination of the agreement and will likely work with international parties, such as the United Nations and the African Union, to pressure Mali to reconsider. The Algerian government may also consider economic measures to deter the Malian government from antagonizing them further.

However, if the situation escalates, Mali's new partners, such as Russia and Turkey, may have to choose between Algeria and Mali. Analysts believe that Russia's support for the military junta harms the interests of the region and disregards the concerns of traditional partners like Algeria.

The termination of the peace and reconciliation agreement in Mali has raised concerns about the potential for a civil war and regional instability. Algeria, as a key mediator and sponsor of the agreement, will likely work with international partners to pressure Mali to reconsider. The situation remains tense, and the future of Mali's stability and relations with Algeria and other countries hangs in the balance.