This is a moment of great peril for the small Caribbean nation of Cuba. Nothing less than its sovereignty is on the line as the US drives its knee into the neck of 10 million Cubans by means of a crushing air and sea blockade and a set of secondary sanctions designed to muscle the nations of the world into compliance to the hegemon.

The issues are not particular to Cuba; we are in the midst of a militant US that is determined to assert domination through force.

It was therefore a pleasure to spend time this week with Luis Ernesto Morejón Rodríguez, Cuba’s Ambassador to New Zealand in Wellington.

Had Israel not launched its unprovoked attack on Iran on Friday night, in direct violation of the UN Charter, Iran would now be taking part in the sixth round of negotiations concerning the future of its nuclear programme, meeting with representatives from the United States in Muscat, the capital of Oman.

Israel’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu claimed he acted to prevent Iran from building a nuclear bomb, saying Iran had the capacity to build nine nuclear weapons. Israel provided no evidence to back up its claims.

On 25 March 2025, Trump’s own National Director of Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, said: 

Even if Iran had the capability to build a bomb, it is quite another thing to have the will to do so.

Any such bomb would need to be tested first, and any such test would be quickly detected by a series of satellites on the lookout for nuclear detonations anywhere on the planet.

It is more likely that Israel launched its attack to stop US and Iranian negotiators from meeting on Sunday.

Only a month ago, Iran’s lead negotiator in the nuclear talks, Ali Shamkhani, told US television that Iran was ready to do a deal. NBC journalist Richard Engel reports:

“Shamkhani said Iran is willing to commit to never having a nuclear weapon, to get rid of its stockpiles of highly enriched uranium, to only enrich to a level needed for civilian use and to allow inspectors in to oversee it all, in exchange for lifting all sanctions immediately. He said Iran would accept that deal tonight.”

Inside Iran as Trump presses for nuclear deal.   Video: NBC News

Shamkhani died on Saturday, following injuries he suffered during Israel’s attack on Friday night. It appears that Israel not only opposed a diplomatic solution to the Iran nuclear impasse: Israel killed it directly.

A spokesperson for the Iranian Foreign Ministry, Esmaeil Baghaei, told a news conference in Tehran the talks would be suspended until Israel halts its attacks:

“It is obvious that in such circumstances and until the Zionist regime’s aggression against the Iranian nation stops, it would be meaningless to participate with the party that is the biggest supporter and accomplice of the aggressor.”

On 1 April 2024, Israel launched an airstrike on Iran’s embassy in Syria, killing 16 people, including a woman and her son. The attack violated international norms regarding the protection of diplomatic premises under the Vienna Convention.

Yet the UK, USA and France blocked a United Nations Security Council statement condemning Israel’s actions.

It is worth noting how the The New York Times described the occupation of the US Embassy in November 1979:

Now it is Israel conducting a “war on diplomacy itself”, first with the attack on the embassy, followed by Friday’s surprise attack on Iran. Scuppering a diplomatic resolution to the nuclear issue appears to be the aim. To make matters worse, Israel’s recklessness could yet cause a major war.

Trump: Inconsistent and ineffective
In an interview with Time magazine on 22 April 2025, Trump denied he had stopped Israel from attacking Iran’s nuclear sites.

In the same interview Trump boasted “I think we’re going to make a deal with Iran. Nobody else could do that.” Except, someone else had already done that — only for Trump to abandon the deal in his first term as president.

In July 2015 Iran signed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) alongside the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and the European Union. Iran pledged to curb its nuclear programme for 10-15 years in exchange for the removal of some economic sanctions. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) also gained access and verification powers.

Iran also agreed to limit uranium enrichment to 3.67 per cent U-235, allowing it to maintain its nuclear power reactors.

Despite clear signs the nuclear deal was working, Donald Trump withdrew from the JCPOA and reinstated sanctions on Iran in November 2018. Despite the unilateral American action, Iran kept to the deal for a time, but in January 2020 Iran declared it would no longer abide by the limitations included in JCPOA but would continue to work with the IAEA.

By pulling out of the deal and reinstating sanctions, the US and Israel effectively created a strong incentive for Iran to resume enriching uranium to higher levels, not for the sake of making a bomb, but as the most obvious means of creating leverage to remove the sanctions.

As a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Iran is allowed to enrich uranium for civilian fuel programmes.

Iran’s nuclear programme began in the 1960s with US assistance. Prior to the Islamic Revolution of 1979, Iran was ruled by the brutal dictatorship of the Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahavi.

American corporations saw Iran as a potential market for expansion. During the 1970s the US suggested to the Shah he needed not one but several nuclear reactors to meet Iran’s future electricity needs. In June 1974, the Shah declared that Iran would have nuclear weapons, “without a doubt and sooner than one would think”.

In 2007, I wrote an article for Peace Researcher where I examined US claims that Iran does not need nuclear power because it is sitting on one of the largest gas supplies in the world. One of the most interesting things I discovered while researching the article was the relevance of air pollution, a critical public health concern in Iran.

In 2024, health officials estimated that air pollution is responsible for 40,000 deaths a year in Iran. Deputy Health Minister Alireza Raisi said the “majority of these deaths were due to cardiovascular diseases, strokes, respiratory issues, and cancers”.

Sahimi describes levels of air pollution in Tehran and other major Iranian cities as “catastrophic”, with elementary schools having to close on some days as a result. There was little media coverage of the air pollution issue in relation to Iran’s energy mix then, and I have seen hardly any since.

An energy research project, Advanced Energy Technologies provides a useful summary of electricity production in Iran as it stood in 2023.

With around 94.6 percent of electricity generation dependent on fossil fuels, there are serious environmental reasons why Iran should not be encouraged to depend on oil and gas for its electricity needs — not to mention the prospect of climate change.

One could also question the safety of nuclear power in one of the most seismically active countries in the world, however it would be fair to ask the same question of countries like Japan, which aims to increase its use of nuclear power to about 20 percent of the country’s total electricity generation by 2040, despite the 2011 Fukushima disaster.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated that Iran’s uranium enrichment programme “must continue”, but the “scope and level may change”. Prior to the talks in Oman, Araghchi highlighted the “constant change” in US positions as a problem.

Trump’s rhetoric on uranium enrichment has shifted repeatedly.

So with Iran seemingly willing to accept reasonable conditions, why was a deal not reached last month? It appears the US changed its position, and demanded Iran cease all enrichment of uranium, including what Iran needs for its power stations.

One wonders if Zionist lobby groups like AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) influenced this decision. One could recall what happened during Benjamin Netanyahu’s first stint as Israel’s Prime Minister (1996-1999) to illustrate the point.

In April 1995 AIPAC published a report titled ‘Comprehensive US Sanctions Against Iran: A Plan for Action’. In 1997 Mohammad Khatami was elected as President of Iran. The following year Khatami expressed regret for the takeover of the US embassy in Tehran in 1979 and denounced terrorism against Israelis, while noting that “supporting peoples who fight for their liberation of their land is not, in my opinion, supporting terrorism”.

The threat of improved relations between Iran and the US sent the Israeli government led by Netanyahu into a panic. The Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz reported that “Israel has expressed concern to Washington of an impending change of policy by the United States towards Iran” adding that Netanyahu “asked AIPAC . . . to act vigorously in Congress to prevent such a policy shift.”

Twenty years ago the Israeli lobby were claiming an Iranian nuclear bomb was imminent. It didn’t happen.

Netanyahu’s Iran nuclear warnings.   Video: Al Jazeera

The misguided efforts of Israel and the United States to contain Iran’s use of nuclear technology are not only counterproductive — they risk being a catastrophic failure. If one was going to design a policy to convince Iran nuclear weapons may be needed for its own defence, it is hard to imagine a policy more effective than the one Israel has pursued for the past 30 years.My 2007 Peace Researcher article asked a simple question: ‘Why does Iran want nuclear weapons?’ My introduction could have been written yesterday.

“With all the talk about Iran and the intentions of its nuclear programme it is a shame the West continues to undermine its own position with selective morality and obvious hypocrisy. It seems amazing there can be so much written about this issue, yet so little addresses the obvious question – ‘for what reasons could Iran want nuclear weapons?’.

“As Simon Jenkins (2006) points out, the answer is as simple as looking at a map. ‘I would sleep happier if there were no Iranian bomb but a swamp of hypocrisy separates me from overly protesting it. Iran is a proud country that sits between nuclear Pakistan and India to its east, a nuclear Russia to its north and a nuclear Israel to its west. Adjacent Afghanistan and Iraq are occupied at will by a nuclear America, which backed Saddam Hussein in his 1980 invasion of Iran. How can we say such a country has no right’ to nuclear defence?'”

This week the German Foreign Office reached new heights in hypocrisy with this absurd tweet.

Iran has no nuclear weapons. Israel does. Iran is a signatory to the NPT. Israel is not. Iran allows IAEA inspections. Israel does not.

Starting another war will not make us forget, nor forgive what Israel is doing in Gaza.

From the river to the sea, credibility requires consistency.

I write about New Zealand and international politics, with particular interests in political economy, history, philosophy, transport, and workers’ rights. I don’t like war very much.

Joe Hendren writes about New Zealand and international politics, with particular interests in political economy, history, philosophy, transport, and workers’ rights. Republished with his permission. Read this original article on his Substack account with full references.

Opposition parties say Aotearoa New Zealand’s government should be going much further, much faster in sanctioning Israel.

Foreign Minister Winston Peters overnight revealed New Zealand had joined Australia, Canada, the UK and Norway in imposing travel bans on Israel’s Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir.

Some of the partner countries went further, adding asset freezes and business restrictions on the far-right ministers.

• READ MORE: Israeli forces kill dozens of Palestinian aid seekers in central Gaza
• US criticises allies as NZ bans two top far-right Israeli ministers
• Other Israeli war on Gaza reports

Peters said the pair had used their leadership positions to actively undermine peace and security and remove prospects for a two-state solution.

Israel and the United States criticised the sanctions, with the US saying it undermined progress towards a ceasefire.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, attending Fieldays in Waikato, told reporters New Zealand still enjoyed a good relationship with the US administration, but would not be backing down.

“We have a view that this is the right course of action for us,” he said.

Behind the scenes job
“We have differences in approach but the Americans are doing an excellent job of behind the scenes trying to get Israel and the Palestinians to the table to talk about a ceasefire.”

Asked if there could be further sanctions, Luxon said the government was “monitoring the situation all the time”.

Peters has been busy travelling in Europe and was unavailable to be interviewed. ACT — probably the most vocally pro-Israel party in Parliament — refused to comment on the situation.

The opposition parties also backed the move, but argued the government should have gone much further.

Greens co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick has since December been urging the coalition to back her bill imposing economic sanctions on Israel. With support from Labour and Te Pāti Māori it would need just six MPs to cross the floor to pass.

Calling the Israeli actions in Gaza “genocide”, she told RNZ the government’s sanctions fell far short of those imposed on Russia.

“This is symbolic, and it’s unfortunate that it’s taken so long to get to this point, nearly two years . . .  the Minister of Foreign Affairs also invoked the similarities with Russia in his statement this morning, yet we have seen far less harsh sanctions applied to Israel.

“We’re well past the time for first steps.”

‘Cowardice’ by government
The pushback from the US was “probably precisely part of the reason that our government has been so scared of doing the right thing”, she said, calling it “cowardice” on the government’s part.

“What else are you supposed to call it at the end of the day?,” she said, saying at a bare minimum the Israeli ambassador should be expelled, Palestinian statehood should be recognised, and a special category of visas for Palestinians should be introduced.

She rejected categorisation of her stance as anti-semitic, saying that made no sense.

“If we are critiquing a government of a certain country, that is not the same thing as critiquing the people of that country. I think it’s actually far more anti-semitic to conflate the actions of the Israeli government with the entire Jewish peoples.”

Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer said the sanctions were political hypocrisy.

“When it comes to war, human rights and the extent of violence and genocide that we’re seeing, Palestine is its own independent nation . . .  why is this government sanctioning only two ministers? They should be sanctioning the whole of Israel,” she said.

“These two Israel far right ministers don’t act alone. They belong to an entire Israel government which has used its military might and everything it can possibly do to bombard, to murder and to commit genocide and occupy Gaza and the West Bank.”

Suspend diplomatic ties
She also wanted all diplomatic ties with Israel suspended, along with sanctions against Israeli companies, military officials and additional support for the international courts — also saying the government should have done more.

“This government has been doing everything to do nothing . . .  to appease allies that have dangerously overstepped unjustifiable marks, and they should not be silent.

“It’s not a war, it’s an annihilation, it’s an absolute annihilation of human beings . . .  we’re way out there supporting those allies that are helping to weaponise Israel and the flattening and the continual cruel occupation of a nation, and it’s just nothing that I thought in my living days I’d be witnessing.”

She said the government should be pushing back against “a very polarised, very Trump attitude” to the conflict.

“Trumpism has arrived in Aotearoa . . .  and we continue to go down that line, that is a really frightening part for this beautiful nation of ours.

“As a nation, we have a different set of values. We’re a Pacific-based country with a long history of going against the grain – the mainstream, easy grind. We’ve been a peaceful, loving nation that stood up against the big boys when it came to our anti nuclear stance and that’s our role in this, our role is not to follow blindly.”

Undermining two-state solution
In a statement, Labour’s foreign affairs spokesperson Peeni Henare said the actions of Smotrich and Ben-Gvir had attempted to undermine the two-state solution and international law, and described the situation in Gaza as horrific.

“The travel bans echo the sanctions placed on Russian individuals and organisations that supported the illegal invasion of Ukraine,” he said.

He called for further action.

“Labour has been calling for stronger action from the government on Israel’s invasion of Gaza, including intervening in South Africa’s case against Israel in the International Court of Justice, creation of a special visa for family members of New Zealanders fleeing Gaza, and ending government procurement from companies operating illegally in the Occupied Territories.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

The New Zealand Foreign Minster’s decision to issue a travel ban against two Israeli far-right politicians is little more than a tokenistic gesture in opposing Israel’s actions.

It is an attempt to appease growing opposition to Israel’s war, but the fact that Israel has killed more than 54,000 innocent people in Gaza, a third under the age of 18, still leaves the New Zealand government unmoved.

Foreign Minister Peters gave the game away when he commented that the sanctions were targeted towards two individuals, rather than the Israeli government.

• READ MORE: US criticises allies as NZ bans two top far-right Israeli ministers
• UK and allies to sanction far-right Israeli ministers Ben-Gvir, Smotrich
• Why Israel’s ‘humane’ propaganda is such a sinister facade
• Other Israeli war on Gaza reports

Issuing travel bans against two Israeli politicians, who are unlikely to visit New Zealand at any stage, is the easy option.

It appears to be doing something to protest against Israel’s actions when actually doing nothing. And it doesn’t contradict the interests of the United States in the Middle East.

Under the government of Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, New Zealand has become a vassal state of American imperialism.

New Zealand has joined four other countries, the United States, Britain, Australia and Norway, in issuing a travel ban. But all four countries continue to supply Israel with arms.

Unions demand stronger action
Last week, the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions demanded that the New Zealand government take stronger action against Israel. In a letter to Winston Peters, CTU president Richard Wagstaff wrote:

“For too long, the international community has allowed the state of Israel to act with impunity. It is now very clearly engaged in genocide and ethnic cleansing in Gaza.

“All efforts must be made to put diplomatic and economic pressure on Israel to end this murderous campaign.”

THE CTU has called for a series of sanctions to be imposed on Israel. They include “a ban on all imports of goods made in whole or in part in Israel” and “a rapid review of Crown investments and immediately divest from any financial interests in Israeli companies”.

The CTU is also calling for the expulsion of the Israeli ambassador.

This article was first published on Steven Cowan’s website Against The Current. Republished with permission.

The United States has denounced sanctions by Britain and allies — including New Zealand and Australia — against Israeli far-right ministers, saying they should focus instead on the Palestinian armed group Hamas.

New Zealand has banned two Israeli politicians from travelling to the country because of comments about the war in Gaza that Foreign Minister Winston Peters says “actively undermine peace and security”.

New Zealand joins Australia, Canada, the UK and Norway in imposing the sanctions on Israel’s Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir.

• READ MORE: UK and allies to sanction far-right Israeli ministers Ben-Gvir, Smotrich
• Why Israel’s ‘humane’ propaganda is such a sinister facade
• Other Israeli war on Gaza reports

Peters said they were targeted towards two individuals, rather than the Israeli government.

“Our action today is not against the Israeli people, who suffered immeasurably on October 7 [2023] and who have continued to suffer through Hamas’ ongoing refusal to release all hostages.

“Nor is it designed to sanction the wider Israeli government.”

The two ministers were “using their leadership positions to actively undermine peace and security and remove prospects for a two-state solution”, Peters said.

‘Severely and deliberately undermined’ peace
“Ministers Smotrich and Ben-Gvir have severely and deliberately undermined that by personally advocating for the annexation of Palestinian land and the expansion of illegal settlements, while inciting violence and forced displacement.”

The sanctions were consistent with New Zealand’s approach to other foreign policy issues, he said.

“New Zealand has also targeted travel bans on politicians and military leaders advocating violence or undermining democracy in other countries in the past, including Russia, Belarus and Myanmar.”

New Zealand had been a long-standing supporter of a two-state solution, Peters said, which the international community was also overwhelmingly in favour of.

“New Zealand’s consistent and historic position has been that Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories are a violation of international law. Settlements and associated violence undermine the prospects for a viable two-state solution,” he said.

“The crisis in Gaza has made returning to a meaningful political process all the more urgent. New Zealand will continue to advocate for an end to the current conflict and an urgent restart of the Middle East Peace Process.”

‘Outrageous’, says Israel
Israel’s Foreign Minister Gideon Saar said the move was “outrageous” and the government would hold a special meeting early next week to decide how to respond to the “unacceptable decision”.

His comments were made while attending the inauguration of a new Israeli settlement on Palestinian land.

Peters is currently in Europe for the sixth Pacific-France Summit hosted by French President Emmanuel Macron in Nice.

US State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce told reporters: “We find that extremely unhelpful. It will do nothing to get us closer to a ceasefire in Gaza.”

Britain, Canada, Norway, New Zealand and Australia “should focus on the real culprit, which is Hamas”, she said of the sanctions.

“We remain concerned about any step that would further isolate Israel from the international community.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Protesting New Zealanders donned symbolic masks modelled on a Palestinian artist’s handiwork in Auckland’s Takutai Square today to condemn Israel’s starvation as war weapon against Gaza and the NZ prime minister’s weak response.

Coming a day after the tabling of Budget 2025 in Parliament, peaceful demonstrators wore hand-painted masks inspired by Gaza-based Palestinian artist Reem Arkan, who is fighting for her life alongside hundreds of thousands of the displaced Gazans.

The “bodies” represented more than 53,000 Palestinians killed by Israel’s brutal 19-month war on Gaza.

• READ MORE: Children among 29 ‘starvation-related deaths’ in Gaza; Israel pounds Strip
• Australia’s Wong condemns ‘abhorrent, outrageous’ Israeli comments over blocked aid
• Other Israeli war on Gaza reports

The protest coincided with Prime Minister Christopher Luxon addressing the Trans-Tasman Business Circle in Auckland.

The demonstrators said they chose this moment and location to “highlight the alarmingly tepid response” by the New Zealand government to what global human rights organisations — such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch — have branded as war crimes and acts of collective punishment amounting to genocide.

“This week, we heard yet another call for Israel to abide by international law. This is not leadership. It’s appeasement,” said a spokesperson, Olivia Coote.

“The time for statements has long passed. What we are witnessing in Gaza is a humanitarian catastrophe, and New Zealand must impose meaningful sanctions.

“Israel’s actions, including the deliberate targeting of civilian infrastructure, forced displacement, and obstruction of humanitarian aid, constitute grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of which we are signatories.”

Green Party Co-Leader Chlöe Swarbrick challenged Prime Minister Luxon in Parliament over his government’s response earlier this week, saying: “We’ve had lots of words. We need action.”

Luxon claimed that sanctions were in place — but the only measure taken has been a travel ban on 12 extremist Israeli settlers from the West Bank.

“This is an action that does nothing to protect the more than two million Palestinians in Gaza who face daily bombardment, siege, and starvation,” Coote said.

The protesters are calling on the New Zealand government to act immediately by:

• Imposing sanctions on Israel; and
• Suspending all diplomatic and trade relations with Israel until there is an end to hostilities and full compliance with international humanitarian law.

“This government must not be complicit in atrocities through silence and inaction,” Coote said.

“The people of Aotearoa New Zealand demand leadership as the world watches a genocide unfold in real time.”

Al Jazeera reports that Israeli strikes have killed at least 85 people in Gaza since the early hours of Thursday, according to medical sources, and casualties are continuing to mount amid unrelenting bombardments.

Gaza’s Health Ministry said 29 children and elderly people who had died in recent days in Gaza had been registered as “starvation-related deaths”, and thousands more were at risk of starving.

In the absence of any measures taken by the New Zealand government to respond to the genocide being committed by Israel in Gaza, Green Party co-leader Chloe Swarbrick is doing the principled thing by trying to apply countervailing pressure on Israel to stop its brutal actions in Gaza and the Occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem.

New Zealand is a state party to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948).

As a contracting party New Zealand has a clear obligation to respond to a genocide when it is indicated and which it must “undertake to prevent and to punish”.

• READ MORE:  ‘Wiped out’: Israel kills ‘entire family’ in latest attacks on Gaza
• Other articles by John Hobbs

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) in January 2024, deemed that a “plausible genocide” is occurring in Gaza. That was a year ago. Thousands of Palestinians have died since the ICJ’s determination.

The New Zealand government has failed its responsibilities under the Genocide Convention by applying no pressure to influence Israel’s military actions in Gaza. There are a number of interventions New Zealand could have chosen to take.

For example, a United Nations resolution which New Zealand co-sponsored (UNSC 2334) when it was a non-permanent member of the Security Council in 2015-16 required states to distinguish in their trading arrangements between Israeli settlements in the Occupied West Bank and the rest of Israel.

New Zealand could have extended this to all trading arrangements with Israel.

Diplomatic pressure needed
Diplomatic pressure could have been put on Israel by expelling the Israeli ambassador to New Zealand. Finally, New Zealand could have shown well-needed solidarity with Palestine by conferring statehood recognition.

In contrast, Swarbrick is looking to bring her member’s Bill to Parliament to apply sanctions against Israel for its ongoing illegal presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza).

The context is the UN General Assembly’s support for the ICJ’s recent report which requires that Israel’s illegal occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem comes to an end.

New Zealand, along with 123 other general assembly members, supported the ICJ decision. It is now up to UN states to live up to what they voted for.

Swarbrick’s Bill, the Unlawful Occupation of Palestine Sanctions Bill, responds to this request, in the absence of any intervention by the New Zealand government. The Bill is based on the Russian Sanctions Act (2022), brought forward by then Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta, to apply pressure on Russia to cease its military invasion of Ukraine.

While Swarbrick’s Bill has the full support of the opposition MPs from Labour and Te Pāti Māori she needs six government MPs to support the Bill going forward for its first reading.

Andrea Vance, in a recent article in the Sunday Star-Times, called Swarbrick’s Bill “grandstanding”. Vance argues that the Greens’ Bill adopts “simplistic moral assumptions about the righteousness of the oppressed [but] ignores the complexity of the conflict.”

‘Confict complexity’ not complicated
The “complexity of the conflict” is a recurring theme which dresses up a brutal and illegal occupation by Israel over the Palestinians, as complicated.

It is hardly complicated. The history tells us so. In 1947, the UN supported the partition of Palestine, against the will of the indigenous Palestinian people, who comprised 70 perent of the population and owned 94 percent of the land.

In 1948, Jewish paramilitary groups drove more than 700,000 Palestinian people out of their homeland into bordering countries (Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, Syria, the UAE) and beyond, where they remain as refugees.

Finally, the 1967 illegal occupation by Israel of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza. This occupation, which multiple UN resolutions has termed illegal, is now over 58 years old.

This is not “complicated”. One nation state, Israel, exercises total power over a people who have been dispossessed from their land and who simply have no power.

It is the unwillingness of countries like New Zealand and its Anglosphere/Five-Eyes allies (United States, United Kingdom, Canada and Australia) and the inability of the UN to enforce its resolutions on Israel, which makes it “complicated”.

Historian on Gaza genocide
One of Israel’s most distinguished historians, Emeritus Professor Avi Shlaim at Oxford University, in his recently published book Genocide in Gaza: Israel’s Long War on Palestine, now chooses to call the situation in Gaza “genocide”.

In arriving at this position, he points to the language and narratives being adopted by Israeli politicians:

“Israeli President Isaac Herzog proclaimed that there are no innocents in Gaza. No innocents among the 50,000 people who were killed and nearly 20,000 children.

“There are quotes from [Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu] that are genocidal, as well as from his former Minister of Defence, Yoav Gallant, who said we are up against ‘human animals’.

“I hesitated to call things genocide before October 2023, but what tipped the balance for me was when Israel stopped all humanitarian aid into Gaza. They are using starvation as a weapon of war. That’s genocide.”

There is growing concern among commentators about the ability of international rules-based order to function and hold individuals and states to account.

Institutions such as the UN, the ICJ and the ICC are simply unable to enforce their decisions. This should not come as a surprise, however, as the structure of the UN system, established at the end of the Second World War was designed to be weak by the victors, with regard to its enforcement ability.

Time NZ supports determinations
It is time that New Zealand supported these same institutions by honouring and looking to enforce their determinations.

Accordingly, New Zealand needs to play its part in holding Israel to account for the atrocities it is inflicting on the Palestinian people and stand behind and support the Palestinian right to self-determination.

Swarbrick is absolutely right to introduce her Bill.

At the very least it says that New Zealand does care about the plight of the Palestinian people and is willing to stand behind them. It is the morally correct thing to do and incumbent on the government to provide support to Swarbrick’s Bill — and not just six of its members.

John Hobbs is a doctoral candidate at the National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies (NCPACS) at the University of Otago. This article was first published by the Otago Daily Times and is republished with the author’s permission.

A Palestinian advocacy group has called on NZ Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Foreign Minister Winston Peters to take a firm stand for international law and human rights by following the Maldives with a ban on visiting Israelis.

Maher Nazzal, chair of the Palestine Forum of New Zealand, said in an open letter sent to both NZ politicians that the “decisive decision” by the Maldives reflected a “growing international demand for accountability and justice”.

He said such a measure would serve as a “peaceful protest against the ongoing violence” with more than 51,000 people — mostly women and children — being killed and more than 116,000 wounded by Israel’s brutal 18-month war on Gaza.

• READ MORE: Contact with US-Israeli captive in Gaza lost after Israeli attack, says Hamas
• Israel’s war on Gaza death toll tracker
• Just six NZ government MPs needed to pass Unlawful Occupation of Palestine Sanctions Bill
• NZ imposes travel bans on extremist Israeli settlers
• Other war on Gaza reports

Since Israel broke the ceasefire on March 18, at least 1630 people have been killed — including at least 500 children — and at least 4302 people have been wounded.

The open letter said:

“Dear Prime Minister Luxon and Minister Peters,

“I am writing to express deep concern over the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza and to urge the New Zealand government to take a firm stand in support of international law and human rights.

“The Maldives has recently announced a ban on Israeli passport holders entering their country, citing solidarity with the Palestinian people and condemnation of the ongoing conflict in Gaza.

“This decisive action reflects a growing international demand for accountability and justice.

“New Zealand has a proud history of advocating for human rights and upholding international law. In line with this tradition, I respectfully request that the New Zealand government consider implementing a temporary suspension on the entry of Israeli passport holders. Such a measure would serve as a peaceful protest against the ongoing violence and a call for an immediate ceasefire and the protection of civilian lives.

“I understand the complexities involved in international relations and the importance of maintaining diplomatic channels. However, taking a stand against actions that result in significant civilian casualties and potential violations of international law is imperative.

“I appreciate your attention to this matter and urge you to consider this request seriously. New Zealand’s voice can contribute meaningfully to the global call for peace and justice.”

Sincerely,
Maher Nazzal
Chair
Palestine Forum of New Zealand

JUST IN: Maldives President officially signs the law banning Israelis from entering the country. pic.twitter.com/rKRnlEw6WK

— BRICS News (@BRICSinfo) April 15, 2025

The Middle East Eye reports that Maldives ban on Israelis from entering the country was a protest against Israel’s war on Gaza in “resolute solidarity” with the Palestinian people.

President Mohamed Muizzu signed the legislation after it was passed on Monday by the People’s Majlis, the Maldivian parliament.

Muizzu’s cabinet initially decided to ban all Israeli passport holders from the idyllic island nation in June 2024 until Israel stopped its attacks on Palestine, but progress on the legislation stalled.

A bill was presented in May 2024 in the Maldivian parliament by Meekail Ahmed Naseem, a lawmaker from the main opposition, the Maldivian Democratic Party, which sought to amend the country’s Immigration Act.

The cabinet then decided to change the country’s laws to ban Israeli passport holders, including dual citizens. After several amendments, it passed this week, more than 300 days later.

“The ratification reflects the government’s firm stance in response to the continuing atrocities and ongoing acts of genocide committed by Israel against the Palestinian people,” Muizzu’s office said in a statement.

Gaza’s Health Ministry said on Sunday that at least 1,613 Palestinians had been killed since 18 March, when a ceasefire collapsed, taking the overall death toll since Israel’s war on Gaza began in October 2023 to 50,983.

The ban went into immediate effect.

“The Maldives reaffirms its resolute solidarity with the Palestinian cause,” the statement added.

Last year, in response to talk of a ban, Israel’s Foreign Ministry advised its citizens against travelling to the country.

The Maldives, a popular tourist destination, has a population of more than 525,000 and about 11,000 Israeli tourists visited there in 2023 before the Israeli war on Gaza began.

Green Party co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick called on New Zealand government MPs today to support her Member’s Bill to sanction Israel over its “crazy slaughter” of Palestinians in Gaza.

Speaking at a large pro-Palestinian solidarity rally in the heart of New Zealand’s largest city Auckland, she said Aotearoa New Zealand could no longer “remain a bystander to the slaughter of innocent people in Gaza”.

In the fifth day since Israel broke the two-month-old ceasefire and refused to begin negotiations on phase two of the truce — which was supposed to lead to a complete withdrawal of Israeli troops from the besieged enclave and an exchange of hostages — health officials reported that the death toll had risen above 630, mostly children and women.

• READ MORE: Israel attacks southern Lebanon, kills 130 in two days in Gaza
• Israel’s former chief justice Aharon Barak fears state risks ‘civil war’
• Israel’s top court halts government’s decision to fire Shin Bet chief
• Other Gaza genocide reports
• Video clips and other images

Five children were killed in a major overnight air attack on Gaza City and at least eight members of the family remained trapped under the rubble as Israeli attacks continued in the holy fasting month of Ramadan.

Confirmed casualty figures in Gaza since October 7, 2023, now stand at 49,747 with 113,213 wounded, the Gaza Health Ministry said.

For more than two weeks, Israel has sealed off border crossings and barred food, water and electricity and today it blew up the Turkish-Palestinian Friendship Hospital, the only medical institution in Gaza able to provide cancer treatment.

“The research has said it from libraries, libraries and libraries. And what is it doing in Gaza?” said Swarbrick.

‘Ethnic cleansing . . . on livestream’
“It is ethnic cleansing. It is apartheid. It is genocide. And we have that delivered to us by  livestream to each one of us every single day on our cellphones,” she said.

“That is crazy. It is crazy to wake up every single day to that.”

Swarbrick said Aotearoa New Zealand must act now to sanction Israel for its crimes — “just like we did with Russia for its illegal action in Ukraine.”

She said that with the Green Party, Te Pāti Māori and Labour’s committed support, they now needed just six of the 68 government MPs to “pass my Unlawful Occupation of Palestine Sanctions Bill into law”.

“There’s no more time for talk. If we stand for human rights and peace and justice, our Parliament must act,” she said.

In September, Aotearoa had joined 123 UN member states to support a resolution calling for sanctions against those responsible for Israel’s “unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in relation to settler violence”.

“Our government has since done nothing to fulfil that commitment. Our Unlawful Occupation of Palestine Sanctions Bill starts that very basic process.

“No party leader or whip can stop a Member of Parliament exercising their democratic right to vote how they know they need to on this Bill,” she said to resounding cheers.

‘No hiding behind party lines’
“There is no more hiding behind party lines. All 123 Members of Parliament are each individually, personally responsible.”

Several Palestinian women spoke of the terror with the new wave of Israeli bombings and of their families’ personal connections with the suffering in Gaza, saying it was vitally important to “hear our stories”. Some spoke of the New Zealand government’s “cowardice” for not speaking out in opposition like many other countries.

About 1000 people took part in the protest in a part of Britomart’s Te Komititanga Square in a section now popularly known as “Palestine Corner”.

Amid a sea of banners and Palestinian flags there were placards declaring “Stop the genocide”, “Jews for tangata whenua from Aotearoa to Palestine”, “Hands off West Bank End the occupation” , “The people united will never be defeated”, “Decolonise your mind, stand with Palestine,” “Genocide — made in USA”, and “Toitū Te Tiriti Free Palestine”.

The ceasefire-breaking Israeli attacks on Gaza have shocked the world and led to three UN General Assembly debates this week on the Middle East.

France, Germany and Britain are among the latest countries to condemn Israel for breaching the ceasefire — describing it as a “dramatic step backwards”, and France has told the UN that it is opposed to any form of annexation by Israel of any Palestinian territory.

Meanwhile, Sultan Barakat, a professor at Hamad Bin Khalifa University in Qatar, told Al Jazeera in an interview that the more atrocities Israel committed in Gaza, the more young Palestinian men and women would join Hamas.

“So it’s not going to disappear any time soon,” he said.

With Israel killing more than 630 people in five days and cutting off all aid to the Strip for weeks, there was no trust on the part of Hamas to restart the ceasefire, Professor Barakat said.

Green Party co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick says the need for Aotearoa New Zealand to impose sanctions against Israel has grown more urgent after airstrikes on Gaza resumed, killing more than 400 people.

Swarbrick lodged a member’s bill in December and said that with all opposition parties backing it, the support of just six backbench government MPs would mean it could skip the “biscuit tin” and be brought to Parliament for a first reading.

“I feel as though every other day there is something else which adds urgency, but yes — I think as a result of the most recent round of atrocities and particularly the public focus, attention, energy and effort that is being that has been put on them, that, yes, parliamentarians desperately need to act.

• READ MORE: Israel keeps pounding Gaza for second day, Hamas says door open for talks
• Netanyahu commits a new ‘bloodbath in Gaza’ to save himself
• Other Gaza genocide reports

Swarbrick claimed there were government MPs who were keen to support her bill, saying it was why her party was publicly pushing the numbers needed to get it across the line.

“We have the most whipped Parliament in the Western world,” she said. “We would hope that parliamentarians would live up to all of those statements that they make about their values and principles when they do their bright-eyed and bushy-tailed maiden speeches.

“The time is now, people cannot hide behind party lines anymore.

“I know for a fact that there are government MPs that are keen to support this kaupapa.”

Standing order allowance
Standing Order 288 allows MPs who are not ministers or undersecretaries to indicate their support for a member’s bill.

If at least 61 MPs get behind it, the legislation skips the “biscuit tin” ballot.

If answered, Swarbrick’s call would be the first time this process is followed.

Labour confirmed its support for the bill last week.

A coalition spokesperson said the government’s policy position on the matter remained unchanged, including in response to Swarbrick’s bill.

New Zealand has consistently advocated for a two-state solution to the Middle East conflict.

Swarbrick pointed to New Zealand’s support — alongside 123 other countries — of a UN resolution calling for sanctions against those responsible for Israel’s presence in the occupied Palestinian territories, including in relation to settler violence.

Conditional support
The government’s support for the resolution was conditional and included several caveats — including that the 12-month timeframe for Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories was “unrealistic”, and noted the resolution went beyond what was initially proposed.

None of the other 123 countries which supported the resolution have yet brought sanctions against Israel.

“Unfortunately, in the several months following that resolution in September of last year, our government has done nothing to fulfil that commitment,” Swarbrick said.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ permanent representative to the UN Carolyn Schwalger in September noted that the Resolution imposed no obligations on New Zealand beyond what already existed under international law, but “New Zealand stands ready to implement any measures adopted by the UN Security Council”.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon in December said the government had a long-standing position of travel bans on extremist Israeli settlers in the occupied territories, and wanted to see a two-state solution developed.

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said its military pressure against Hamas was to secure the release of the remaining hostages taken by Hamas during the October 7 attack, and “this is just the beginning”.

Israel continues to deny accusations of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity.

South African genocide case against Israel
However, South Africa has taken a case of genocide against Israel to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the trial remains ongoing with 14 countries having confirmed that they are intervening in support of South Africa.

The attack on Israel in 2023 left 1139 people dead, with about 250 hostages taken.

UN Secretary General António Guterres said in a tweet he was “outraged” by the Israeli airstrikes.

“I strongly appeal for the ceasefire to be respected, for unimpeded humanitarian assistance to be re-established and for the remaining hostages to be released unconditionally,” he said.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

I am outraged by the Israeli airstrikes in Gaza.

I strongly appeal for the ceasefire to be respected, for unimpeded humanitarian assistance to be reestablished and for the remaining hostages to be released unconditionally.

— António Guterres (@antonioguterres) March 18, 2025

New Zealand Foreign Minister Winston Peters’ refusal to join 79 other countries trying to protect the International Criminal Court (ICC) after vicious attacks and sanctions issued by US President Trump is unconscionable.

Endless New Zealand politicians, including the present government, have pointed to our support for a rules-based international system.

The ICC is a key part of that system but Winston Peters has jettisoned this policy in favour of a US-First approach, rather than a New Zealand-First approach.

• READ MORE: World leaders react to Trump sanctions on International Criminal Court

In fact, we can find no evidence that Peters has ever uttered a word of real criticism of the US in his entire political career.

Within the past two weeks Winston Peters has:

• Openly welcomed Israeli soldiers and Israeli war criminals coming into New Zealand, with no questions asked, for “rest and recreation” from their genocide in Gaza
• Refused to condemn Trump’s racist plans for the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from Gaza so his son-in-law can turn it into a “Riviera of the Middle East”.  This is an intended international crime of epic proportion, and now
• Refused to join 79 countries supporting the International Criminal Court against Trump’s actions

The countries we are refusing to join in criticising Trump include two other Five Eyes countries — the UK and Canada — as well as Germany, France, Ireland, Switzerland, Sweden, Netherlands, Greece, Norway, Portugal, Spain and so on.

Extremist camp
Winston Peters has put New Zealand in the hard-right international minority extremist camp with Trump. This is creepy and cowardly complicity with a state whose values we do not share.

His ministry has been at great pains over the past year to state how much our government supports the work of the ICC. The MFAT website states: “We have also been clear in our support of the International Criminal Court’s mandate in Palestine.”

But when the ICC issues arrest warrants against Israeli leaders for war crimes and crimes against humanity, our government goes completely silent.

Will Winston Peters now copy his master and revoke an immigration ban on 33 Israeli settlers responsible for leading pogroms against Palestinian communities in the Occupied West Bank, as Trump did a few days ago?

US policy towards Palestine underlines the case for New Zealand to leave the Five Eyes US international spy network.

An independent foreign policy means making our own decisions and working with the great majority of like-minded countries who support international institutions, such as the ICC and the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

Instead, we have a foreign minister who is in the US pocket and blindly working for the interests of Trump and his robber barons.

John Minto is national chair of the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA).

New Zealand’s Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) has congratulated the Nelson City Council on its vote today to boycott companies which trade with illegal Israeli settlements in Palestinian territories.

The city council (pop. 58,000) — New Zealand’s 15th-largest city — became the latest local body to change its procurement policy to exclude companies identified by the UN Human Rights Council as being complicit in the building and maintenance of illegal Israeli settlements on Palestinian land.

“Nelson City Council is taking action while our national government is looking the other way”, PSNA chair John Minto said in a statement.

• READ MORE: This year, Arab-American political power came to the fore over Gaza
• Other BDS movement reports

“It is [Prime Minister] Christopher Luxon who should be ending all New Zealand dealings with companies involved in the illegal Israeli settlements.

“Instead, our government is cowardly complicit with Israeli war crimes.”

It is a war crime to move citizens onto land illegally occupied as Israel is doing.

Nelson City Council joins Environment Canterbury and the Christchurch City Council — New Zealand’s second largest city — which both adopted this policy earlier this year.  Other local bodies are believed to be following.

“We also congratulate local Palestine solidarity activists in Nelson who have organised and battled so well for this historic win today. They are the heroes behind this decision,”minto said.

Minto said following the move by Nelson city representatives, “we are renewing our call for the government to act”.

He again called for the government to:

• Ban all imports from the illegal Israeli settlements;
• Direct the Superfund, Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) and Kiwisaver providers to end their investments in all Israeli companies and other companies supporting the illegal Israeli settlements; and
• Direct New Zealand government agencies to end procurement of goods or services from all Israeli companies and other companies supporting the illegal Israeli settlements.

Christchurch, New Zealand’s third-largest city, today became the first local government in the country to sanction Israel by voting to halt business with organisations involved in illegal settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories.

It passed a resolution to amend its procurement policy to exclude companies building and maintaining illegal Israeli settlements on Palestinian land.

It was a largely symbolic gesture in that Christchurch (pop. 408,000) currently has no business dealings with any of the companies listed by the United Nations as being active in the illegal settlements.

• READ MORE: ‘Split vote’ on council’s Israel sanction
• Christchurch Council votes to boycott companies linked to Israeli settlements
• Other NZ and Palestine reports

However, the vote — 10 in favour, two against and three abstentions — also rules out any future business dealings by the city council with such companies.

The sanctions vote came after passionate pleas to the council by John Minto, president of the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA), and University of Canterbury postcolonial studies lecturer Dr Josephine Varghese.

“We’re delighted the council has taken a stand against Israel’s ongoing theft of Palestinian land,” said Minto in a statement welcoming the vote.

He had urged the council to take a stand against companies identified by the UN Human Rights Council as complicit in the construction and maintenance of the illegal settlements.

‘Failure of Western governments’
“It has been the failure of Western governments to hold Israel to account which means Israel has a 76-year history of oppression and brutal abuse of Palestinians.

“Today Israel is running riot across the Middle East because it has never been held to account for 76 years of flagrant breaches of international law,” Minto said.

“The motion passed by Christchurch City today helps to end Israeli impunity for war crimes.” (Building settlements on occupied land belonging to others is a war crime under international law)

“The motion is a small but significant step in sanctioning Israel. Many more steps must follow”.

The council’s vote to support the UN policy was met with cheers from a packed public gallery. Before the vote, gallery members displayed a “Stop the genocide” banner.

Minto described the decision as a significant step towards aligning with international law and supporting Palestinian rights.

“In relation to the council adopting a policy lined up with the United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334, this resolution was co-sponsored by the New Zealand government back in 2016,” Minto said, referencing the UN resolution that Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories “had no legal validity and constituted a flagrant violation under international law”.

‘Red herrings and obfuscations’
In his statement, Minto said: “We are particularly pleased the council rejected the red herrings and obfuscations of New Zealand Jewish Council spokesperson Ben Kepes who urged councillors to reject the motion”

“Mr Kepes presentation was a repetition of the tired, old arguments used by white South Africans to avoid accountability for their apartheid policies last century – policies which are mirrored in Israel today.”

Dr Varghese said more than 42,000 Palestininians — at least 15,000 of them children — had been killed in Israel’s war on Gaza.

“Boycotting products and services which support and benefit from colonisation and apartheid is the long standing peaceful means of protest adopted by freedom fighters across the world, not only by black South Africans against apartheid, but also in the Indian independent struggle By the lights of Gandhi,” she said.

“This is a rare opportunity for us to follow in the footsteps of these greats and make a historic move, not only for Christchurch City, but also for Aotearoa New Zealand.

“On March 15, 2019 [the date of NZ’s mosque massacre killing 51 people], we made headlines for all the wrong reasons, and today could be an opportunity where we make headlines global globally for the right reasons,” Dr Varghese said.

You could be forgiven if you missed the recent International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion that Israel’s long-standing occupation of Palestine is illegal.

The landmark ruling sank without trace in Aotearoa New Zealand and aside from an anaemic tweet from the Minister of Foreign Affairs has barely caused a ripple in official circles.

However, the court’s July 19 decision is a watershed in holding Israel to account for its numerous breaches of international law and United Nations resolutions and while western governments prefer to look the other way, this is no longer tenable.

• READ MORE: ICJ says Israel’s presence in Palestinian territory is unlawful
• Other Israeli War on Palestine reports
• This weekend’s rallies for Palestine protesting over NZ ‘complicity’

The ICJ has found not only that Israel’s 57-year occupation of Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem is illegal but that BDS (Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions) are an obligation on governments to impose on Israel.

The wording is unambiguous. The ICJ says:

“The State of Israel’s continued presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory is unlawful [and it] is under an obligation to bring to an end its unlawful presence . . .  as rapidly as possible.”

And goes on to say:

“All States are under an obligation not to recognise as legal the situation arising from the unlawful presence of the State of Israel in the [Occupied Palestinian Territory] and not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by the continued presence of the State of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.”

NZ government must reevaluate
Not rendering “aid or assistance” to Israel to continue its illegal occupation means the New Zealand government must re-evaluate its entire relationship with Israel.

For a start government investments in companies profiting from Israel’s illegal occupation must be withdrawn; imports or procurement of services from companies in the illegally-occupied Palestinian territories must be stopped and visas for young Israelis coming to New Zealand after serving in support of Israel’s illegal occupation must cease.

A host of other government policies to impose BDS sanctions against Israel must follow — the type of sanctions we imposed against Russia for its invasion and occupation of parts of Ukraine.

This ICJ ruling comes as western governments such as New Zealand shamefully provide political cover for Israel’s illegal occupation and wholesale slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza. Most of the victims are women and children.

By April Israel had dropped over 70,000 tonnes of bombs on Gaza, surpassing the bombing of Dresden, Hamburg, and London combined during World War II, in one of the most densely populated areas in the world.

Israel has killed the equivalent of all the children in more than 100 average sized New Zealand primary schools and yet our Prime Minister has refused to condemn this slaughter, refused to call for an immediate, permanent ceasefire or join South Africa’s genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice.

Our Prime Minister describes the situation in Gaza as catastrophic but refuses to utter a single word of condemnation of Israel. Mr Luxon has replaced principled political action with bluff and bluster.

Widening chasm with international law
The gap between what our government does and what international law demands is a widening chasm.

Gaza exists as an illegally occupied and densely populated area because Israeli militias conducted a massive ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from 1947 to 1949 to artificially create a majority Jewish state on Palestinian land.

Eighty percent of Gazans are descendants of the victims of this ethnic cleansing.

Under cover of its war on Gaza, Israel’s ethnic cleansing continues today in the occupied West Bank. Illegal Israeli settlers, with the backing of Israeli Occupation Forces are driving Palestinians off their land.

Numerous Palestinian towns and rural communities have been attacked in pogroms with arson, looting and killing leaving “depopulated” areas behind for Israel to settle.

There are now more than 700,000 illegal Israeli settlers in more than 200 settlements and settlement outposts on Palestinian land in the occupied territories of East Jerusalem and the West Bank.

700,000 settlers declared illegal
It is these settlers and settlements the International Court of Justice has declared illegal.

As well as responsibilities on individual states to end support for Israel’s illegal occupation, the ICJ ruling says the world should take collective action requesting “The UN, and especially the General Assembly . . .  and the Security Council, should consider the precise modalities and further action required to bring to an end as rapidly as possible the unlawful presence of the State of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.”

New Zealand must regain its moral courage and become a leader in helping end the longest-running military occupation in modern history.

John Minto is national chair of the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA). This article was first published by The Daily Blog and is republished by Asia Pacific Report with the author’s permission.

Pro-Palestinian anti-war activists in Australia have protested in Melbourne, disrupting a defence expo set to open on Wednesday.

Protesters gathered yesterday in front of companies connected to weapons manufacturing across Melbourne as police were called to prevent an escalation of the events, according to 7News Melbourne.

Many police cars and units were visible in front of company buildings to prevent an escalation of the protests.

• READ MORE: Israel’s war on Gaza live: Hamas rejects media reports of new conditions
• Thousands of anti-war activists to disrupt weapons expo as Melbourne braces for biggest protest in decades
• Netanyahu and the Israeli protesters are on the same genocidal page

Protests are expected to move across the city to different areas ahead of the Land Forces Military Expo on Wednesday, with more than 25,000 participants, potentially one of the biggest in the country in decades.

On Sunday, Extinction Rebellion activists blocked Montague Street near the Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre where the expo is being held.

Pro-Palestinian protesters in Australia have been urging the government to impose sanctions on Israel for its genocidal war on Gaza.

Israel has continued a devastating military offensive in the Gaza Strip since an attack by Hamas resistance forces on October 7, 2023, despite a UN Security Council resolution demanding an immediate ceasefire.

More than 40,000 Palestinians have since been killed, mostly women and children, and more than 91,700 wounded, according to local health authorities.

As the Israeli war enters its 12th month, vast tracts of Gaza lie in ruins amid a crippling blockade of food, clean water, and medicine.

Israel has also intensified its attacks on the Occupied West Bank in recent weeks, killing at least 692 Palestinians.

Extinction Rebellion disruption
Formed in 2018, Extinction Rebellion has employed disruptive tactics targeting roads and airports to denounce the extraction and burning of fossil fuels, reports Al Jazeera.

However, since the war on Gaza, they have also taken a strong position on the fighting and have called for an immediate ceasefire.

“If we believe in climate and ecological justice, we must seek justice in all forms. The climate and ecological emergency has roots in centuries of colonial violence, exploitation and oppression,” the UK-based group said in a statement in November.

The New Zealand government remains disturbingly quiet on the unfolding genocide in Gaza.

New Zealand’s silence is clearly undermining its self-image as a principled and independent state within the United Nations. It is following its Anglosphere English-speaking partners (United States, UK, Canada, and Australia) in avoiding putting in place any sanctions against Israel — as has been done with Russia — in response to its invasion of Ukraine.

Not only is New Zealand doing nothing to influence Israel to stop its slaughter of Palestinian children and civilians, New Zealand is at risk of being seen to be complicit in a genocide. New Zealand, as a contracting party to the UN Convention on Genocide, has a responsibility under the convention.

• READ MORE: At least 25 killed in Israeli strikes on Gaza today, including infant
• ‘Traumatised, exhausted’: 1 million ‘trapped’ as south Gaza war rages – World Food Programme
• Other War on Gaza reports

It is doubtful that New Zealand’s “performance” in the UN General Assembly (UNGA), where it typically votes the “right way”, supporting a ceasefire and Palestinian membership of the UN, provides a get out of jail card for New Zealand vis-a-vis its responsibilities under the convention.

That the New Zealand government is ignoring the spate of decisions by UN international bodies calling out Israel for contravening international humanitarian and criminal law is, if anything, puzzling.

These bodies are the guardians of the international rule of law. Member states of the UN are obliged to support their decisions actively, not just in voice, and again, New Zealand’s rhetoric historically is that it supports the international rule of law.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) deemed that a probable genocide is occurring in Gaza and has recently called for an immediate ceasefire in Rafah. The International Criminal Court (ICC) has recommended that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Yoav Gallant be held criminally liable for the act of starvation inflicted against the Palestinian people.

New Zealand also stubbornly refuses to recognise Palestinian statehood, even though it has been argued by successive New Zealand governments, since 1993, that it supports the Oslo Accords and its key feature, the two-state solution.

This positioning has always provided a convenient smoke screen for New Zealand to appear to be supportive of an independent Palestinian state but in reality successive New Zealand governments have shown no real interest in doing so.

Importantly, New Zealand fails to distinguish between Israel as the occupier of Palestinian land and the Palestinians as the occupied people. Given this inequivalence, the New Zealand rhetoric of “leaving it to the parties” to agree what Palestinian state arrangements and borders might look like is laughable, if it wasn’t so cruel.

There are now more than 700,000 Israeli illegal citizens which have been illegally transferred (settled) by Israel to the Occupied Territories — which under a two-state solution would be a future Palestinian state. This area is tiny, only about half the size of the area of Auckland (which is about 5600 sqkm.) It makes the task of an independent and sovereign Palestinian state near impossible to achieve.

The illegal transfer of Israeli citizens on to Palestinian land in the Occupied West Bank has a clear purpose — to transfer Palestinians off their land.

By remaining quiet the New Zealand government is effectively ignoring the rules-based order which it has historically argued it bases its foreign policy decision-making on. Indeed, this shift or “reset” in New Zealand foreign policy was intimated by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Winton Peters, in a recent speech to the NZ Institute of International Affairs.

Aware of the growing criticism of the lack of independence in New Zealand foreign policy, the minister stated that “New Zealand’s independent foreign policy does not, and never has, meant we are a non-aligned nation, although that is the way some critics in politics and the media see us . . .  We take the world as it is, and this realism is a shift from our predecessors’ vaguer notions of an indigenous foreign policy that no-one else understood, let alone shared.”

This is clearly a move to a more “realpolitik” approach to international relations, where New Zealand’s “interests” are paramount. Our values are clearly a secondary consideration, and it is only by good luck that our interests and values might align.

As a recent Palestinian speaker in New Zealand, Professor Mazim Qumsiyeh, so rightly put it, “in the end we will not remember the words of our enemies but we will remember the silence of our friends.” Accordingly, New Zealand must employ all of its endeavours to place real pressure on Israel to stop its genocidal attack on the Palestinian people now.

It only needs to look to its Ukrainian/Russian playbook, to begin to do the right thing.

John Hobbs is a doctoral candidate at the National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies (NCPCS), University of Otago.

From France to Australia, university pro-Palestine protests in the United States have now spread to several countries with students pitching on-campus camps.

And students at Columbia and other US universities remain defiant as campuses have witnessed the biggest protests since the anti-Vietnam war and anti-apartheid eras in the 1960s and 1980s.

But authorities have cracked down at some institutions against the peaceful demonstrations with at least 550 being arrested in the US, reports Al Jazeera.

• READ MORE: Other War on Gaza reports

Clashes between students and police officers have been reported across the US during intensifying university protests with encampments in at at least 20 institutions.

Ali Harb, a Washington-based commentator on US foreign policy, Arab-American issues, civil rights and politics, says the Gaza-focused campus protest movement “highlights a generational divide over Israel” in the US.

Young people are willing to challenge politicians and college administrators across the country, he says.

“The opinion gap — with younger Americans generally more supportive of Palestinians than the generations that came before them — poses a risk to 81-year-old Democratic President Joe Biden’s re-election chances,” says Harb.

“It could also threaten the bipartisan backing that Israel enjoys in Washington.”

Divestment from Israel
What started as the Gaza solidarity encampment at Columbia University, where students camped inside campus to push their institute to divest from companies linked to Israel, has since spread to campuses in California, Texas and other states.

The students are protesting against Israel’s war on Gaza, where Israel’s military offensive has killed more than 34,000 people and its blockade has caused starvation.

Students have been demonstrating worldwide in support of Gaza since the outbreak of the war on October 7.

Following the Columbia encampments, the protests have further spread to universities from France to Australia. Here is a summary:

In Paris, France, Sorbonne University students have taken to the streets. Additionally, the Palestine Committee from Sciences Po, is organising a protest where students set up about 10 tents on Wednesday. Despite a police crackdown, the protesters regathered on Thursday.

In Australia, students from the University of Sydney set up pro-Palestine encampments on Tuesday, and they were continuing to protest yesterday. Also, University of Melbourne students have pitched tents on the south lawn of their main campus.

In Rome, Italy, students from Sapienza University organised demonstrations, sit-ins and hunger strikes on April 17 and April 18.

Investigating Israeli ties
In the United Kingdom, students from the University of Warwick’s group Warwick Stands With Palestine have occupied the campus piazza. In Leicester, a protest broke out on Monday in which students from the University of Leicester Palestine Society also participated.

Last month, students from the University of Leeds occupied a campus building in protest against the university’s involvement with Israel.

Hicham, a student protesting at Sciences Po, which is also called the Paris Institute of Political Studies, told Al Jazeera, “We have a few demands but one of them is to start investigating all of the ties they [Sciences Po] have with the state of Israel, which [are] academic and financial”.

The students are calling on the French government to provide more help to the Palestinians.

Safeguard Gaza universities plea
Meanwhile, nearly 30 Palestinian academics in the UK have called for “swift” action to safeguard universities in Gaza.

The statement, whose signatories include Ghassan Abu Sittah, who has worked at al-Shifa and Alhi Arab hospitals in Gaza during the war, urged “friends and colleagues to take immediate steps to defend the integrity of Palestinian universities in occupied Palestine against the current plans and measures seeking to destroy them”.

It added: “Having turned the universities of Gaza into detention centres before demolishing them, forcibly rendering Palestinian scholars, scientists, researchers and students homeless once again, Israel’s campaign of scholasticide has turned its attention to eliminating future independent Palestinian educational life in Gaza.”

The academics also said they demand the institutions created by Palestinians in the face of “immense challenges” are not destroyed “but instead are rebuilt”.

“They serve as a symbol of resilience and hope for the Palestinian people as a whole.”

STATEMENT: Palestinian academics in the UK are urging swift action to safeguard Gaza’s universities and are calling for public commitments to aid in their rebuilding efforts. pic.twitter.com/NEtz2mFqUW

— British Palestinian Committee (@BritPalCommitt) April 26, 2024

Speakers at a Palestine solidarity rally in Auckland’s Takutai Square today hailed the strong stance of Ireland over Israel’s genocidal war against Gaza – in contrast to a weak New Zealand position – while two blocks away in Te Komititanga Square (Britomart) hundreds of revellers were celebrating St Patrick’s Day.

“The Irish have been strong supporters of Palestine because of their experience of British settler colonialism,” Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) secretary Neil Scott told the cheering protest crowd.

“The Great Potato Famine starting in 1845 killed a million Irish and caused two million more to flee and become refugees around the world.

• READ MORE: Israel’s war on Gaza live: Children, women killed in Deir el-Balah attack

“They celebrate today like Palestinians will celebrate here in Aotearoa and in Palestine once the vicious murderous yoke of Zionist domination is taken from their necks.”

The Irish Prime Minister (Taoiseach), Leo Varadkar, has been in the United States for the past week and had a direct message for US President Joe Biden when they met yesterday.

While he was complimentary about Biden and his administration, Varadkar also told the US president about Dublin’s wish for an immediate ceasefire.

“You know my view that we need to have a ceasefire as soon as possible to get food and medicine in and the hostages out,” he told reporters after the meeting.

Permanent ceasefire call
While Varadkar has called for a permanent ceasefire, Biden wants a temporary one of at least six weeks as part of a hostage deal.

This exchange followed a plea in an RTÉ interview by former Irish president Mary Robinson, speaking urgently as chair of The Elders group of former statespeople.

She said: “We need a ceasefire and we need the opening up of Gaza with every avenue . . . for aid to get in.”

Acknowledging Ireland’s initiatives over Gaza, including strong speeches by Irish MEPs in the European Parliament, PSNA’s Scott spoke about today’s rally being part of Israeli Apartheid Week called by the global BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) movement.

“Back in the day, NZ voted for the Apartheid Convention, so we have obligations under that law. But to date – nothing.

“So who has written reports and documented Israeli apartheid? Here are some of the reports overtime,” he said, citing at least 10 global reports damning Israeli apartheid.

Two of the first reports mentioned were from Israeli NGOs, the 2020 Yesh Din report entitled “The Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the crime of apartheid” and B’Tselem the following year with “A regime of Jewish supremacy from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea: This is apartheid”.

The most recent reports have come in 2022 from Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and the UN Human Rights Council report of the special rapporteur.

“Report after report. Report after report . . .”, said Scott.

“To date, our successive [NZ] governments have refused to condemn Israeli apartheid – a crime against humanity.”

He condemned officials at the Auckland office of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) for refusing on Friday to accept a Palestinian solidarity deputation and statement for Chief Executive Chris Seed and Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters.

Terror business network
Another speaker, Billy Hania, an Aotearoa Palestinian advocate, talked about the importance of supporting the BDS movement and boycotts, which had been vitally important in ending apartheid in South Africa, and he cited several Israeli companies and affiliates operating in New Zealand.

“The list goes on. When the government acts on behalf of business that causes death and harm to our people in Palestine,” he said.

“It’s a terror network of politics and business and that must be opposed.

“You must be vocal and it’s okay to say that we live here on a land that has been colonised and we support with our money and taxes a government that condones terrorism.

“And that’s how it is. You should not be ashamed of saying that or scared of saying that because these are the facts.

“When we invest in an Israeli company in our Super Fund that rains white phosphorus up to the minute it burns our children to the bone, that is terror.”

12 killed in attack
Al Jazeera reports that Israeli attacks on Deir el-Balah in central Gaza have killed at least 12 people and wounded many more, including children, according to videos and witnesses.

Meanwhile, 13 aid trucks have arrived safely in Jabaliya and Gaza City, the first convoys carrying food and supplies to have travelled from the south to the north of the enclave without incident in four months.

At least 31,645 Palestinians have been killed and 73,676 wounded by Israeli attacks in Gaza since October 7, the Palestinian Health Ministry has reported.

Despite the carnage, United Nations resolutions and international court rulings, Israel’s war in Gaza has the potential to get much worse. Unless Hamas frees all Israeli hostages by March 10, Israel may launch an all-out offensive in Rafah, a city of 1.5 million people, cornered against the border with Egypt.

The US has continued to block UN Security Council resolutions calling for an immediate ceasefire. But President Joe Biden has cautioned Israel against a Rafah ground assault without a credible plan to protect civilians.

More direct calls for restraint have come from the UN secretary-general and the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court.

• READ MORE: Israeli siege has placed Gazans at risk of starvation − prewar policies made them vulnerable in the first place
• Why Egypt refuses to open its border to Palestinians forcibly displaced from Gaza
• The UN’s top court didn’t call for a ceasefire in Gaza – how does NZ respond now?

To its credit, New Zealand, along with Australia and Canada, added its voice in a joint statement on February 15:

A military operation into Rafah would be catastrophic […] We urge the Israeli government not to go down this path […] Palestinian civilians cannot be made to pay the price of defeating Hamas.

New Zealand also reiterated its commitment to a political settlement and a two-state solution. Given how hard some other countries are pushing for a ceasefire and peace, however, it is fair to ask whether the National-led coalition government could be doing more.

NZ absent from a crucial case
So far, New Zealand’s most obvious contribution has been to deploy a six-member defence force team to the region to deter Houthi rebel attacks on commercial and naval shipping in the Red Sea.

This collaboration with 13 other countries is on the right side of international law. But the timing suggests it is more about preventing the Israel-Gaza situation from spreading and destabilising the region than about protecting international waterways per se.

Furthermore, there is a risk of New Zealand’s response appearing one-sided, considering its relative silence on other fronts.

For example, following the interim ruling by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the application of the Genocide Convention to Israel’s devastation of Gaza, a second opinion is being sought from the court over the legality of Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory.

Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad Al-Malki told the court his people were suffering “colonialism and apartheid” under Israeli occupation. It was the latest round in a monumental debate central to any lasting peace process.

More than 50 countries presented arguments at the ICJ last week, the most to engage with any single case since the court was established in 1945. But New Zealand was not present in the oral proceedings.

This absence matches New Zealand’s abstention at the United Nations General Assembly vote that referred the case to the ICJ. A country that prides itself on an independent foreign policy seems to have lost its voice.

Doctors Without Borders warns that Gaza’s whole healthcare system is collapsing as Israel continues to intensify its attacks.

Follow our LIVE coverage: https://t.co/bo5Dp2wxPd pic.twitter.com/lyy6NQiRhX

— Al Jazeera English (@AJEnglish) February 29, 2024

An even-handed foreign policy
New Zealand does call for the observance of international humanitarian law in Gaza. It has been less vocal, though, about calling for accountability for war crimes, no matter which side commits them.

The International Criminal Court, New Zealand’s permanent representative to the UN has said, is “a central pillar in the international rules-based order and the international criminal justice system”.

Directly supporting that sentiment would mean calling for independent investigations of all alleged crimes in the current Israel-Gaza conflict.

Given countries it considers friends and allies do more to register their disapproval of the situation, New Zealand needs to consider whether its own current sanctions system is adequate.

The White House has begun to sanction individual Israeli settlers in the occupied Palestinian territories, accusing them of undermining peace, security and stability. Britain has also placed sanctions on a small number of “extremist” settlers. France has recently identified and sanctioned 28 such individuals.

Govt designates Hamas as terrorist entity https://t.co/b2EQyehohr

— Newshub Politics (@NewshubPolitics) February 29, 2024

However, New Zealand has remained silent, until this week declaring the political wing of Hamas a “terrorist” entity — a decision being criticised — and banning an unspecified number of extremist Israeli settlers from travelling to New Zealand.

This prompts an obvious question: if sanctions can be applied to both Russia and Iran for their actions, should New Zealand now follow the lead of its allies and take active measures to express its disapproval of what is happening in Gaza and the occupied territories?

Dr Alexander Gillespie is professor of Law at the University of Waikato. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

The Biden administration has officially re-designated Ansarallah – the dominant force in Yemen also known as the Houthis – as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist entity.

The White House claims the designation is an appropriate response to the group’s attacks on US military vessels and commercial ships in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, saying those attacks “fit the textbook definition of terrorism”.

Ansarallah claims its actions “adhere to the provisions of Article 1 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide,” since it is only enforcing a blockade geared toward ceasing the ongoing Israeli destruction of Gaza.

• READ MORE: US redesignates Yemen’s Houthis as ‘global terrorists’

One of the most heinous acts committed by the Trump administration was its designation of Ansarallah as a Foreign Terrorist Organisation (FTO) and as Specially Designated Global Terrorists (SDGT), both of which imposed sanctions that critics warned would plunge Yemen’s aid-dependent population into even greater levels of starvation than they were already experiencing by restricting the aid that would be allowed in.

One of the Biden administration’s only decent foreign policy decisions has been the reversal of that sadistic move, and now that reversal is being partially rolled back, though thankfully only with the SDGT listing and not the more deadly and consequential FTO designation.

US Re-Designates Houthis as ‘Specially Designated Global Terrorists’
The designation will hamper aid deliveries and could complicate a peace deal between the Saudis and Houthis
by Dave DeCamp@DecampDave #Yemen #Houthis #SaudiArabia #RedSea #Gaza https://t.co/6bXDM0MdiU pic.twitter.com/K8mj2itz2f

— Antiwar.com (@Antiwarcom) January 17, 2024

In a new article for Antiwar about this latest development, Dave Decamp explains that as much as the Biden White House goes to great lengths insisting that it’s going to issue exemptions to ensure that its sanctions don’t harm the already struggling Yemeni people,

“history has shown that sanctions scare away international companies and banks from doing business with the targeted nations or entities and cause shortages of medicine, food, and other basic goods.”

DeCamp also notes that US and British airstrikes on Yemen have already forced some aid groups to suspend services to the country.

Still trying to recover
So the US empire is going to be imposing sanctions on a nation that is still trying to recover from the devastation caused by the US-backed Saudi blockade that contributed to hundreds of thousands of deaths between 2015 and 2022. All in response to the de facto government of that very same country imposing its own blockade with the goal of preventing a genocide.

That’s right: when Yemen sets up a blockade to try and stop an active genocide, that’s terrorism, but when the US empire imposes a blockade to secure its geostrategic interests in the Middle East, why that’s just the rules-based international order in action.

Today, in response to these continuing threats and attacks, the United States announced the designation of Ansarallah, also known as the Houthis, as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist – Jake Sullivan, U.S. National Security Advisorhttps://t.co/D5d8MylujK pic.twitter.com/pSFUzCR7qk

— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) January 17, 2024

It just says so much about how the US empire sees itself that it can impose blockades and starvation sanctions at will upon nations like Yemen, Venezuela, Cuba, Iran, Syria and North Korea for refusing to bow to its dictates, but when Yemen imposes a blockade for infinitely more worthy and noble reasons it gets branded an act of terrorism.

The managers of the globe-spanning empire loosely centralised around Washington literally believe the world is theirs to rule as they will, and that anyone who opposes its rulings is an outlaw.

Based on power
“What this shows us is that the “rules-based international order” the US and its allies claim to uphold is not based on rules at all; it’s based on power, which is the ability to control and impose your will on other people.

The “rules” apply only to the enemies of the empire because they are not rules at all: they are narratives used to justify efforts to bend the global population to its will.

We are ruled by murderous tyrants. By nuclear-armed thugs who would rather starve civilians to protect the continuation of an active genocide than allow peace to get a word in edgewise.

Our world can never know health as long as these monsters remain in charge.

Caitlin Johnstone is an Australian independent journalist and poet. Her articles include The UN Torture Report On Assange Is An Indictment Of Our Entire Society. She publishes a website and Caitlin’s Newsletter. This article is republished with permission.

Two years ago New Zealand joined 22 other countries in supporting the Ukrainian case against Russia at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for its invasion of Ukraine.

We sent a legal team to The Hague where the ICJ is based and our representatives spoke directly to the court on New Zealand’s behalf. We used international law to argue the Russian invasion was illegal and warranted sanction by the ICJ.

Successive New Zealand governments for as long as I can remember have said we believe in an “international rules-based order” of which the ICJ and the ICC are an important part.

• READ MORE: War on Gaza: A textbook case of genocide
• Jordan backs South Africa ICJ genocide file against Israel over Gaza atrocities
• War on Gaza: The fate of global justice hangs on South Africa’s ICJ case

This makes sense because we are a small country without the economic or military clout to take unilateral action to protect our interests. Like other small countries we rely on international rules to provide a measure of protection when bigger countries, like Russia in this case, break the rules.

We have used such rules ourselves by making applications to the World Trade Organisation (WTO) when our trade interests have been threatened. Without such rules the biggest bully will win every time.

Last week South Africa filed papers at the ICJ alleging Israel’s actions in Gaza over the past 12 weeks amount to genocide.

South Africa said it “is gravely concerned with the plight of civilians caught in the present Israeli attacks on the Gaza Strip due to the indiscriminate use of force and forcible removal of inhabitants”.

It described its case saying “acts and omissions by Israel . . .  are genocidal in character, as they are committed with the requisite specific intent . . .  to destroy Palestinians in Gaza as a part of the broader Palestinian national, racial and ethnical group”.

Their court papers go on to claim that, “the conduct of Israel — through its state organs, state agents, and other persons and entities acting on its instructions or under its direction, control or influence — in relation to Palestinians in Gaza, is in violation of its obligations under the Genocide Convention”.

This case is important because Israel, the Palestinian Authority (PA), and South Africa are all signatories of the Genocide Convention and are bound to abide by any decision made by the court.

The most important part of South Africa’s case is its application for an interim injunction to stop Israel’s indiscriminate killing immediately. If this interim injunction is successful it could put in place an immediate ceasefire to end the war and Israel’s indiscriminate killing of Palestinians.

It would allow unfettered humanitarian aid to enter Gaza where the need for food, water, fuel, medicine and vaccinations is desperate.

This is the outcome the majority of people in New Zealand, and across the world, want to see. New Zealand should back up the South African case which is most likely to get a first hearing on January 11.

So far, Bolivia, Ireland, Jordan, Malaysia, Maldives, Namibia, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Palestine, Turkey, Venezuela and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation have supported the South African legal action.

Those who have been paying attention will not be surprised at claims of genocide.

Genocide always begins with words and there is a wealth of reporting on the dehumanising language being used by Israel’s political and military leaders to set the scene for what has followed.

For example, Israel’s President Isaac Herzog said “it is an entire nation out there that is responsible”, and two days after the attack Israeli Minister of Defence Yoav Gallant spelt out genocidal intentions saying:

“We are imposing a complete siege on Gaza. No electricity, no food, no water, no fuel. Everything is closed. We are fighting human animals, and we will act accordingly.”

Israelis more generally have taken up this talk across social media with calls for Gaza to be “flattened,” “erased” or “destroyed”. More tragic is a social media post showing Israeli children singing “we will annihilate everyone” in Gaza.

Israel’s Defence Minister’s statement matches the UN Convention closely to the point where Israeli scholar of the Holocaust and Genocide Studies, Raz Segal, has described Israel’s rhetoric and actions as “a textbook case of genocide”.

It is clear Israel’s political and military leaders have a case to answer before the International Court of Justice, just as Russia does for its invasion of Ukraine.

South Africa has filed a case at the International Court of Justice in the Hague, accusing Israel of committing genocide in Gaza. International law expert Francis Boyle, who has argued successfully at the ICJ, says he believes “South Africa will win an order against Israel.” pic.twitter.com/4Ebz02vxVc

— Democracy Now! (@democracynow) January 2, 2024

As well as backing South Africa’s case at the International Court of Justice we should also call for a swift, well-resourced International Criminal Court investigation into war crimes committed in the October 7 attack on Israel and the Israeli response.

This investigation should include examining the crimes of genocide and apartheid.

Palestinians deserve our support as much as the people of Ukraine.

John Minto is the national chair of the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) and a contributor to Asia Pacific Report. This article was first published by The Post and is republished with the author’s permission.

Fiji’s Court of Appeal has ruled that the Russian luxury yacht Amadea, seized by the US government but docked in western Fiji, will stay in the country for at least another month.

Defence lawyers acting for the vessel’s registered owners, Millemarin Investment Limited, sought a stay order in the Fiji Court of Appeal after High Court judge Justice Deepthi Amaratunga refused their application.

Haniff and Tuitoga had sought a stay order on his Tuesday ruling to grant Fijian authorities the power to enforce a US Justice Department (DOJ) warrant to seize the Amadea.

• READ MORE: Graham Davis: Behind the saga of the ‘seized’ Russian super yacht Amadea
• Other Amadea super yacht reports

The Amadea, which arrived in Fiji on April 12 after an 18-day crossing from Mexico, is according to the US government owned by Russian oligarch Suleiman Kerimov.

Kerimov faces money laundering charges in the US and is also part of a wider network of oligarchs, close associates of the Russian President Vladimir Putin who are sanctioned by the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union.

“The US Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control designated Kerimov as part of a group of Russian oligarchs who profit from the Russian government through corruption and its malign activity around the globe, including the occupation of Crimea,” the Department of Justice said in a statement issued Thursday morning in Washington DC.

“According to court documents, Kerimov owned the Amadea after his designation. Additionally, Kerimov and those acting on his behalf and for his benefit caused US dollar transactions to be routed through US financial institutions for the support and maintenance of the Amadea.”

US police boarded boat
On Thursday, Fijian police with US law enforcement who have been in the country since the Amadea arrived in Fiji from Mexico, boarded the yacht.

Justice Amaratunga told the court on Friday afternoon the Fiji Mutual Assistance Act, which facilitated the enforcement of US seizure action, limited his ability to stay his earlier order.

Haniff and Tuitoga lawyers received their stay on Friday evening, keeping the Amadea in Lautoka while they take the 30 days allowed to appeal the ruling to execute US seizure orders.

Meanwhile, the boat has a team of US marshals, the US Coast Guard, the Federal Bureau of Investigations, and Fiji police.

The skipper and some crew are believed to still be on the vessel.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

If you’re as confused as most people by the exact circumstances surrounding the continuing presence in Fiji of the Russian super yacht Amadea, join the club. Here’s our modest attempt to cut through the fog.

Twelve days ago — on April 14 — the CJ Patel Fiji Sun newspaper trumpeted an exclusive with Police Commissioner Sitiveni Qilihio, reporting that the Amadea had been seized. It had not. In fact, it still hasn’t been formally seized.

What happened last week is that the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) obtained a restraining order from the High Court to prevent the Amadea from leaving Fiji. Until that order was granted, there was every possibility in the intervening period of the vessel leaving.

• READ MORE: Other Amadea reports on Asia Pacific Report

In fact, lawyers for the owners were arguing that there was no legal justification to detain the Amadea any longer after they had reportedly paid an amount in fines for customs infringements.

It was only when the High Court granted the restraining order that leaving was no longer a legal option.

Indeed, all along there has been a suspicion that the vessel might try to make a run for it. It has a significant armoury and the security forces would have already factored in their ability to prevent a determined attempt to leave.

This application was lodged by the Office of the DPP on a warrant issued by the United States government. The papers are from Washington DC and passed through the Attorney-General’s Office before carriage of the matter was given to the DPP under the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act.

A second case
Now there is a second case that has been brought before the High Court for the Amadea to be seized. Yes, taken from the owners altogether in line with the American-led sanctions that have been imposed on the nautical playthings and other toys of Russian oligarchs and Vladimir Putin’s cronies the world over.

The High Court will hand down its judgment next Tuesday (May 3), which is expected to be in Washington’s favour.

And sometime after that, the Amadea will presumably become the property of the US government and sail off into the sunset under the command of Uncle Sam in the direction of the US.

It has been an astonishing saga. The original, mostly European crew, had orders to sail from the Mexican port of Mazanillo across the entire Pacific to the Russian port of Vladivosok via Lautoka, where the Amadea has been refuelled and resupplied.

Their services have evidently been terminated and an entirely Russian crew has been on standby to take over when it finally gets permission to sail. Alas for them, their journey to Fiji will have been in vain.

Incredibly, there is still doubt about the vessel’s true ownership. The whole world has been told that it belongs to the Russian oligarch, Suleiman Kerimov, but there is still evidently no conclusive proof — the vessel’s ownership evidently buried in a labyrinth of multiple shelf companies in places like the British Virgin Islands and the Cayman Islands.

For the purposes of the High Court case in Suva, the owner is officially stated as being Millemarin Investment Limited. Is it Suleiman Kerimov?

No evidence about Kerimov
Millemarin Investment’s local lawyer, Feizal Hannif, told the court there was no evidence that it is. He said the vessel’s beneficial owner was in fact one Eduard Khudaynatov. But counsel for the DPP, Jayneeta Prasad, argued that the ownership of the vessel was not an issue. It was subject to a US warrant and the ownership issue was for the American courts to decide.

So fortunately unravelling all of this is not Fiji’s problem. But what was Police Commissioner Sitiveni Qiliho doing 12 days ago telling the Fiji Sun that the Amadea had been seized when we won’t know that for certain until next Tuesday, nearly three weeks after the Sun “scoop”?

And is there going to be any attempt to set the official record straight?

Australian-Fijian journalist Graham Davis publishes the blog Grubsheet Feejee on Fiji affairs. Republished with permission.

The High Court in Suva has allowed an application by the public prosecutor to stop the super yacht Amadea belonging to Russian billionaire Suleiman Kerimov from leaving its waters.

Kerimov, who was not on board, is facing sanctions from the United States, Britain and the European Union over Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Fiji’s Director of Public Prosecutions Christopher Pryde filed the application on Tuesday — a week after the yacht moored at the Lautoka Wharf without customs clearance.

• READ MORE: Other Amadea reports

Pryde confirmed that the US was seeking to seize the vessel.

In his application, he requested that: “Amadea be restrained from leaving Fijian waters until the finalisation of an application to register a warrant to seize the property and that a US warrant to seize the Amadea be registered.”

The court is yet to hear the application.

FBC News reports says a second application for the US to seize the yacht will be heard today.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

The seizure of a super yacht — reportedly owned by a sanctioned Russian oligarch — by the US government in Spain recently could point to a similar scenario playing out in Fiji in relation to the Amadea which is berthed at Lautoka port.

The US Embassy in Suva did not answer Fiji Times queries yesterday on whether it had made an application to Fiji for the seizure of Amadea.

Fiji police are investigating the ship and the circumstances of its arrival in Fiji.

• READ MORE: Russian billionaires head for Turkey to flee Western sanctions
• Earlier reports on the Amadea
• US seizes Russian super yacht docked in Spain
• France seizes Russian oligarch’s yacht amid EU sanctions

Last week, Spain acted on a request from the US Department of Justice to seize a $180 million yacht, Tango, owned by sanctioned Russian oligarch Viktor Vekselberg.

“Together, with our international partners, we will do everything possible to hold accountable any individual whose criminal acts enable the Russian government to continue its unjust war,” said Attorney-General Merrick Garland after the seizure of Tango.

Al Jazeera reports that a yacht linked to a Russian aluminium tycoon arrived in a bay near the southwestern Turkish resort of Gocek yesterday, as more Russian billionaires head for Turkey to flee Western sanctions over Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Oleg Deripaska, founder of Russian aluminium giant Rusal, has been sanctioned by the US, United Kingdom and European Union.

Super yacht arrives
A witness saw the 73-metre yacht Clio arrive off the coast of Gocek in the Aegean coastal province of Mugla.

The Cayman Islands-flagged vessel remains in the bay off Gocek.

The arrival of the Clio in Turkish waters came after two super yachts linked to Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich, who made a surprise appearance at Ukraine-Russia peace talks in Istanbul this month, docked in Turkish ports.

Anish Chand is the Fiji Times West Bureau chief reporter. Republished with permission.

Fiji is making a mockery of its stand in the United Nations in condemning Russia’s war against Ukraine by allowing the Russian super yacht Amadea to berth in the western port of Lautoka, says opposition People’s Alliance party leader Sitiveni Rabuka.

He called on government to send it on its way immediately.

He made the comment as police are investigating why the Amadea had entered and stopped inside Fiji’s territorial waters before a clearance from Customs was issued.

• READ MORE: Fiji investigates arrival of Russian oligarch’s vessel, questions captain
• ‘We don’t do Russians’, says Fiji health minister
• Other Ukraine war reports

Police Commissioner Brigadier General Sitiveni Qiliho said the super yacht was being investigated for alleged breach of Fiji’s Exclusive Economic Zone.

The super yacht belonging to a Russian billionaire sanctioned by the USA, United Kingdom and Europe came into port at Lautoka on Tuesday.

Public sources say the Amadea is owned by Suleiman Kerimov, a Russian oligarch who is currently sanctioned over Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Marine Traffic, a marine analytics service, started showing Amadea in Fiji waters from daytime on Tuesday and by 6pm it was headed to the Lautoka Wharf.

Left Mexico last month
The Amadea left Manzanillo port in Mexico on March 24.

The 106-metre yacht risks being seized by the US, UK or any European Union country after they placed sanctions on Kerimov’s assets.

According to Fiji port requirements, any yacht arriving into Fiji must obtain approval from the Ministry of Health, Ministry of Trade and Transport and the Immigration Department.

“We have heard about it [Amadea] but nothing has come to Immigration,” said Immigration Secretary Yogesh Karan.

Questions sent to the Ministry of Health had not been answered on publication by The Fiji Times.

Anish Chand is the Fiji Times West Bureau chief reporter. Republished with permission.

“We don’t do Russians.” This was the response from Fiji’s Health Minister Dr Ifereimi Waqainabete when asked about the arrival on Tuesday of Russian super yacht Amadea.

“We’ll need clarification on that then we can comment on that,” he said. “We don’t do Russians.”

While the Prime Minister’s office did not respond to queries on the subject, the United States Embassy in Suva and the Delegation of the European Union in the Pacific said they had been in contact with the Fiji government over the presence in Fiji of the super yacht.

• READ MORE: Other Ukraine war reports

The Amadea, which arrived on Tuesday and was still in port yesterday, is owned by Russian billionaire Suleiman Kerimov.

Kerimov is on the United States, British and European Union sanctions list that came out after Russia’s invasion on Ukraine. Yachts owned by other sanctioned individuals have been seized all over the world.

“Seizing assets of Russian oligarchs supporting the invasion of Ukraine is a part of the sanction regime applied by the European Union,” said Sujiro Seam, Ambassador of the Delegation of the European Union.

“Several Russian oligarchs’ yachts have already been impounded in the European Union. The European Union is cooperating with partners around the world on the matter, including in the Pacific.

Consulting with Fiji
“The European Union is aware of reports of the presence of Amadea in Lautoka and, together with like-minded partners, is consulting with the government of Fiji.”

The US Embassy in Fiji also issued a similar statement, saying they are “cooperating with Fijian authorities on the matter”.

“The United States is committed to finding and seizing the assets of the oligarchs who have supported the Russian Federation’s brutal, unprovoked war of choice against Ukraine,” Stephanie Fitzmaurice, the regional public affairs officer said.

We are working closely with governments and private sector partners in Europe, and the entire world, including Fiji, on this issue.”

According to Fijian entry requirements, yachts must seek approval from the Ministry of Health, Ministry of Trade and Tourism and the Immigration Department before departing their last port.

Anish Chand is the Fiji Times West Bureau chief reporter. Republished with permission.

A New Zealand protest flotilla has arrived outside the luxury Northland home of Russian oligarch Alexander Abramov.

The eight vessels sailed to Helena Bay, north of Whangārei, early today to protest over the two-week-old Russian invasion of Ukraine facing the private estate owned by Abramov.

Locals on kayaks and boats were expected to join them.

• READ MORE: Billionaire steel magnate heads list of Russians with NZ business interests
• NZ government to sanction Putin and supportive oligarchs

The flotilla is asking the government to freeze Abramov’s New Zealand assets.

Although he is one of the few super-rich influential Russians with assets in New Zealand — a handful of wealthy Russians are estimated to have $60 million invested in the country — he is not on the official sanctions list intended to put pressure on Russia to stop the invasion of Ukraine.

The government has said the list will remain under review.

Greenpeace joins protest
The global environmental campaigner Greenpeace has joined the flotilla.

Greenpeace programme director Niamh O’Flynn is on board a yacht, and told RNZ the water was a bit choppy, but demonstrators plan to remain on their vessels in the bay and stay for a few hours to get their message across.

“The main message is that we need to do our bit to end this war peacefully, and that means sanctioning oligarchs, it means freezing the assets of oligarchs like Alexander Abramov, immediately.”

She said sanctioning oligarchs puts pressure on Russian President Vladimir Putin to end the war.

On February 24, the government announced a list of officials from the Russian government and others involved in the invasion of Ukraine, who are named in a targeted travel ban.

On March 9, the new Russia Sanctions Bill was passed by Parliament under urgency by all parties. It allows for New Zealand to impose harsher sanctions.

Some Northlanders living near Abramov’s lodge earlier put up Ukrainian flags on their properties.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

With the cabinet meeting on Monday agreeing to targeted Russian sanctions legislation, New Zealand is preparing to circumvent its normal United Nations-based response to international crises.

The Russia Sanctions Bill will allow additional sanctions against Russia, including the ability to:

• freeze assets in NZ;
• prevent people and companies from moving their money and assets to NZ to escape sanctions imposed by other countries; and
• stop super yachts, ships and aircraft from entering NZ waters or airspace.

Passing the law under urgency this week is justified due to Russia being one of the UN Security Council member states, allowing it to use its veto power to block any proposed UN sanctions.

• READ MORE: Ukraine crisis: how do small states like New Zealand respond in an increasingly lawless world?
• As the Ukraine war drags on, how secure will Putin’s hold on power remain?
• Russian sanctions are biting harder than it could have imagined, and it’ll get worse

But this is a sad development, and a break with 30 years of diplomatic history. Since 1991, New Zealand has worked within the UN framework and largely based its sanctions regimes around what the UN has mandated.

Over Ukraine, New Zealand has taken some small and supplementary steps against Russia, such as travel bans and export controls over technologies that may have military value. But this has been inadequate compared with the actions of its allies, and the rapidly worsening situation.

Ukrainians in NZ urge Govt to seize Russian financial interests https://t.co/F0CfTrl7zI pic.twitter.com/XMgJeV8GAn

— 1News (@1NewsNZ) February 28, 2022

NZ must align with allies
To create a new sanctions regime outside the UN system, New Zealand will need to take into account various important factors, including the law’s scope and how it fits with the actions of its allies.

Above all, the legislation must recognise this is a unique situation and must not create a precedent that enables other actions outside the UN system. The new law must expressly state why the urgent actions are justified and the objectives it wants to achieve, and it should have a sunset clause whereby it will lapse on a set date unless expressly renewed.

The law must be effective, proportionate and targeted. Anti-Russian hysteria must be avoided. Due process, fairness to those involved, and compliance with existing international obligations, must be uppermost.

Detail must be applied to the creation of a cross-party sanctions committee and a monitoring group. The evidence used to justify sanctions should come from secure and robust sources, which should be as transparent as possible.

Coordination with friends and allies is uppermost. It’s not a question of how large New Zealand’s sanctions are, but rather that they are consistent with those of other countries. If there are inconsistencies, these risk being exploited both politically and economically.

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken says the U.S. and its allies are having a “very active discussion” about banning the import of Russian oil and natural gas in the latest escalation of their sanctions in retaliation for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. https://t.co/qk2wtRvSS6

— The Associated Press (@AP) March 6, 2022

Military aid an option
In a normal situation, a “laddering” process for sanctions is used: sanctions start softly (sporting or cultural events, for instance) and escalate (with some diplomatic restrictions) towards increasingly harsh trade restrictions prohibiting goods, from luxuries to near essentials.

Exclusion from airspace, maritime zones and even travel restrictions for ordinary citizens may be added to the mix, as Russia is increasingly isolated from the wider world. With events moving so fast already, New Zealand is already halfway up the ladder.

Military aid needs to be an option, too. The goal is to help the Ukrainians fight for their own freedom, without putting foreign “boots on the ground”. A distinction between lethal and non-lethal aid (such as body armour, communications equipment, food and medical kit) will need to be made.

Again, the question is not one of scale but consistency with friends and allies. The symbolism of such support is important. Supplementing the efforts of Australia, for example, would be useful.

The new law may also need to cover those New Zealanders who want to fight in Ukraine — on either side. New Zealanders without dual Ukrainian citizenship are unlikely to be given prisoner of war status if they’re captured.

Such volunteers will be in a grey area of domestic law, too, as current legislation covering the activities of mercenaries, or those who seek to go overseas to fight for terrorist groups, is inadequate.

Fighting the Russian invasion of a sovereign country is not an act of terrorism, and some may be willing to fight without significant financial incentives. The government should make the rules clear — again, consistent with friends and allies.

Putin says sanctions over Ukraine are like a declaration of war https://t.co/znr6yxpxEG

— BBC News (World) (@BBCWorld) March 5, 2022

Risk of unintended consequences
Despite what Vladimir Putin has suggested, sanctions are not an act of war. They are an unfortunate but sometimes necessary non-military strategy aimed at changing or ending a country’s harmful actions.

But even if New Zealand and other like-minded countries apply maximum pressure through sanctions, there is no guarantee Putin will change his policies.

Sanctions have the best chances of success when a country’s leadership feels affected by the pressure of its own citizens — or in Russia’s case, its oligarch class, as the prime minister hinted.

So, sanctions may work better with Russia than North Korea. But there is also a risk, if Putin starts to feel this pain, that he will respond in unexpected ways.

The only real certainty is significant collateral economic damage — for Russia and the world, including New Zealand. Everyone will see or feel the impact as economic and diplomatic relationships hit turbulence. Right now, however, there is no viable alternative.

Dr Alexander Gillespieis professor of law, University of Waikato. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

In response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, New Zealand’s government is implementing a range of measures, including a travel ban on Russian officials and limiting diplomatic engagements.

Earlier today, Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta condemned Russia’s actions and said she would provide another update later.

An adviser to Ukraine’s president said about 40 people had been killed so far amid Russia’s invasion with multiple air, land and sea attacks, according to Al Jazeera.

• READ MORE: Russia-Ukraine live news: Moscow launches full-scale invasion
• Russia invades Ukraine in Europe’s ‘darkest hours’ since World War II
• Selwyn Manning and Dr Paul Buchanan on Russia, Ukraine and global bipolarity

Oleksii Arestovich, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s aide, also said that several dozen people had been wounded. He did not specify whether the casualties included civilians.

In a statement after 10.30pm, Mahuta and Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern released a joint statement once again condemning Russia and calling on the country to cease its military operations in Ukraine.

“This is an unprovoked and unnecessary attack by Russia,” Ardern said. “By choosing to pursue this entirely avoidable path, an unthinkable number of innocent lives could be lost because of Russia’s decision.

“We call on Russia to do what is right and immediately cease military operations in Ukraine, and permanently withdraw to avoid a catastrophic and pointless loss of innocent life.”

International efforts disregarded
Mahuta said Russia had disregarded consistent international efforts for a diplomatic de-escalation of the Ukraine crisis and “they must now face the consequences of their decision to invade”.

New Zealand will introduce targeted a travel ban against Russian government officials and other individuals associated with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, prohibit the export of goods to Russian military and security forces, and suspend bilateral foreign ministry engagement until further notice.

The travel ban will stop intended individuals from obtaining visas to enter or transit New Zealand.

The government said while exports from New Zealand under the now-prohibited category were extremely limited, a blanket ban removed the ability for exporters to apply for a permit, and sent a clear signal of support to Ukraine.

“Officials have been engaging with affected businesses about the possible economic and trade impacts a military conflict could have on them. Russia is our 27th largest export market, with dairy accounting for about of half of those exports,” Mahuta said.

“In applying these measures, New Zealand joins other members of the international community, in responding to this breach of Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sovereignty.”

The new sanctions are in addition to existing bans put in place following Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea.

Mahuta said she had also asked officials to give advice on how New Zealand could contribute to possible humanitarian response options, given “serious concerns” about the military conflict.

She said her “thoughts today are with the people in Ukraine impacted by this conflict”.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Since the coup in Myanmar on February 1, the international community has struggled to agree on coherent action against the military (also known as the Tatmadaw).

Tough action by the UN Security Council has been stymied by China, Russia, India and Vietnam, who see the Myanmar crisis as an internal affair.

Outside the UN, a strong, coordinated response by Myanmar’s neighbours in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has also been lacking due to their reluctance to interfere in each other’s affairs. Thai political expert Thitinan Pongsudhirak called it an “existential crisis” for the bloc

• READ MORE: As killings, beatings and disappearances escalate, what’s the end game in Myanmar?
  
• Ethical minefields: the dirty business of doing deals with Myanmar’s military
  
• Resistance to military regime in Myanmar mounts as nurses, bankers join protests – despite bloody crackdown

This reluctance, which has now cost the lives of over 500 civilians, rules out the use of military force to stop the violence, peacekeeping operations or even a humanitarian intervention.

It has left the international community with one remaining option for a coordinated response that could change the military’s behaviour: the imposition of economic sanctions. But even this action has been subject to much debate.

Follow the money
General sanctions that try to change the behaviour of authoritarian regimes by damaging their economies have proven problematic in the past.

Many leaders have invariably found ways around the sanctions, meaning civilians have disproportionately borne the costs of isolation.

In contrast, targeted sanctions against the specific financial interests that sustain authoritarian regimes have been more effective. These can impose pressure on regimes without affecting the broader population.

This is where the international community has the greatest potential to punish the Tatmadaw.

Since the US and other countries pursued more general sanctions on Myanmar in the 1990s and 2000s — with mixed results — the international community has gained a greater understanding of the Tatmadaw’s transnational revenue streams.

In particular, in 2019, the UN Fact-Finding Mission (UNFFM) on Myanmar released a report detailing the diverse Tatmadaw-linked enterprises that funnel revenue from foreign business transactions to the military’s leaders and units.

More recently, this list of potential targets has been expanded by non-government organisations and investigative journalists.

Researchers have also outlined the Tatmadaw’s dealings in illegal trade in drugs, gemstones, timber, wildlife and human trafficking.

The extent of information on the Tatmadaw’s financial flows shows just how vulnerable the military’s leaders are to international pressure.

Tracking the military’s legal and illegal business dealings makes it possible to identify its business partners in other countries. Governments in those countries can then take legal action against these business partners and shut off the flow of money keeping the junta afloat.

To some degree, this is starting to happen with Myanmar. The US and UK recently decided, for instance, to freeze assets and halt corporate trading with two Tatmadaw conglomerates — Myanmar Economic Corporation and Myanma Economic Holdings Limited. Both of these oversee a range of holdings in businesses that divert revenues directly to the Tatmadaw.

Myanmar’s trading partners can do more
This is only a starting point, though. To tighten the pressure on the junta, targeted sanctions need to be imposed against the full suite of entities identified by the UNFFM. These include groups like Justice for Myanmar and journalists.

The sanctions need to be accompanied by broader investigations into the Tatmadaw’s revenues from illicit trade. To counter this, Human Rights Watch has urged governments to enforce anti-money laundering and anti-corruption measures, including the freezing of assets.

Singapore’s central bank has reportedly told financial institutions to be on the look-out for suspicious transactions or money flows between the city-state and Myanmar. Singapore is the largest foreign investor in the country.

Moreover, for maximum impact, targeted sanctions need to be imposed not just by the West, but by Myanmar’s largest trading partners in the region. This includes Singapore, along with China, India, Indonesia, Japan and Thailand.

Business leaders in these countries have historically had the closest ties with Myanmar’s military and business elites. But their participation in a multi-national targeted sanctions strategy is not out of the question. For one, this would not require direct intervention within Myanmar, something they are loath to do. Imposing targeted sanctions would merely entail enforcing their domestic laws regarding appropriate business practices.

International action is becoming more urgent. Beyond the concerns about the killings of unarmed civilians, there is a larger issue of the violence extending beyond Myanmar’s borders. There are growing fears the crisis could turn Myanmar into a failed state, driving refugee flows capable of destabilising the entire region.

In short, this is no longer an “internal” matter for Myanmar — it is becoming a transnational problem that will affect regional peace and security. The tools are there to stop the financial flows to the Tatmadaw and curtail their operations. It is critical to act before the Myanmar crisis grows into an international disaster.

Dr Jonathan Liljeblad is a senior lecturer at the Australian National University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.