Memorial for David Johnson of the San Quentin 6
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
A Trial Date Is Set on August 26 for Alejandro Orellana, Join the Call for National Protests to Drop the Charges!
https://stopfbi.org/news/a-trial-date-is-set-on-august-26-for-alejandro-orellana-join-the-call-for-national-protests-to-drop-the-charges/
A trial date of August 26 was set for immigrant rights activist Alejandro Orellana at his July 3 court appearance in front of a room packed with supporters. Orellana was arrested by the FBI on June 12 for protesting against ICE in Los Angeles. He faces up to 5 years in prison for two bogus federal charges: conspiracy to commit civil disorder, and aiding and abetting civil disorder.
The Committee to Stop FBI Repression is calling for a national day of protests on the first day of Orellana's trial, August 26th, to demand that the charges be dropped. To everyone who believes in the right to free speech, to protest ICE, and to say no to deportations, we urge you to organize a local protest on that day at the nearest federal courthouse.
Orellana has spent much of his adult life fighting for justice for Chicanos, Latinos, and many others. He has opposed the killings of Chicanos and Latinos by the LAPD, such as 14-year-old Jesse Romero, stood against US wars, protested in defense of others targeted by political repression, and has been a longtime member of the activist group, Centro CSO, based out of East LA. His life is full of examples of courage, integrity, and a dedication to justice.
In contrast, the US Attorney who charged him, Bilal Essayli, believes in Trump's racist MAGA vision and does a lot to carry it out. He defended Trump's decision to defy the state of California and deploy the California National Guard to put down anti-ICE protests. Essayli has charged other protesters, including David Huerta, the president of the Service Employees International Union California, who was held on a $50,000 bond.
Another Centro CSO immigrants rights activist, Verita Topete, was ambushed by the FBI on June 26. They served her a warrant and seized her phone. Orellana and his fellow organizers like Topete stand for the community that protested Trump last month. Essayli represents Trump’s attempts to crush that movement.
This case against Orellana is political repression, meant to stop the growth of the national immigrants rights movement. The basis for his arrest was the claim that he drove a truck carrying face shields for protesters, as police geared up to put down protests with rubber bullets. People of conscience are standing with Orellana. because nothing he did or is accused of doing is wrong. There is no crime in protesting Trump, deportations, and ICE. To protest is his - and our - First Amendment right. It’s up to us to make sure that Essayli and Trump fail to repress this movement and silence Orellana's supporters.
Just as he stood up for immigrants last month, we call on everyone to stand up for Orellana on August 26 and demand the charges be dropped. On the June 27 National Day of Action for Alejandro Orellana, at least 16 cities held protests or press conferences in front of their federal courthouses. We’ll make sure there are even more on August 26. In addition to planning local protests, we ask that organizations submit statements of support and to join in the call to drop the charges.
You can find protest organizing materials on our website, stopfbi.org. Please send information about your local protests and any statements of support to stopfbi@gmail.com. We will see you in the streets!
On August 26, Protest at Your Federal Courthouse for Alejandro Orellana!
Drop the Charges Now!
Protesting ICE Is Not a Crime!
Copyright © 2025 Committee to Stop FBI Repression, All rights reserved.
Thanks for your ongoing interest in the fight against FBI repression of anti-war and international solidarity activists!
Our mailing address is:
Committee to Stop FBI Repression
PO Box 14183
Minneapolis, MN 55414
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
Dear Organization Coordinator
I hope this message finds you well. I’m reaching out to invite your organization to consider co-sponsoring a regional proposal to implement Free Public Transit throughout the San Francisco Bay Area.
This initiative directly supports low-income families, working people, seniors, youth, and others who rely on public transportation. It would eliminate fare barriers while helping to address climate justice, congestion, and air pollution—issues that disproportionately affect disadvantaged communities.
We believe your organization’s mission and values align strongly with this proposal. We are seeking endorsements, co-sponsorship, and coalition-building with groups that advocate for economic and racial equity.
I would love the opportunity to share a brief proposal or speak further if you're interested. Please let me know if there’s a staff member or program director I should connect with.
A description of our proposal is below:
sharethemoneyinstitute@gmail.com
Opinion: San Francisco Bay Area Should Provide Free Public Transportation
The San Francisco Bay Area is beautiful, with fantastic weather, food, diversity and culture. We’re also internationally famous for our progressiveness, creativity, and innovation.
I believe the next amazing world-leading feature we can add to our cornucopia of attractions is Free Public Transportation. Imagine how wonderful it would be if Muni, BART, Caltrain, AC Transit, SamTrans, SF Bay Ferries, and all the other transportation services were absolutely free?
Providing this convenience would deliver enormous, varied benefits to the 7.6 million SF Bay Area residents, and would make us a lovable destination for tourists.
This goal - Free Public Transportation - is ambitious, but it isn’t impossible, or even original. Truth is, many people world-wide already enjoy free rides in their smart municipalities.
New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani is promoting free transit, with a plan that’s gained the endorsement of economists from Chile, United Kingdom, Greece, and the USA.
The entire nation of Luxembourg has offered free public transportation to both its citizens and visitors since 2020. Tallinn, the capital of Estonia, has given free transit to its residents since 2013. In France, thirty-five cities provide free public transportation. Ljubljana, the capital of Slovenia, offers free rides to seniors, disabled, and students. In Maricá (Brazil) – the entire municipal bus system is free. Delhi (India) – offers free metro and bus travel for women. Madrid & Barcelona (Spain) offer free (or heavily discounted) passes to youth and seniors.
Even in the USA, free public transit is already here. Kansas City, Missouri, has enjoyed a free bus system free since 2020. Olympia, Washington, has fully fare-free intercity transit. Missoula, Montana, is free for all riders. Columbia, South Carolina, has free buses, and Chapel Hill, North Carolina, has enjoyed free transit for over a decade. Ithaca, New York, and Madison, Wisconsin, offer free transit to students.
But if the San Francisco Bay Area offered free transit, we’d be the LARGEST municipality in the world to offer universal Free Transit to everyone, resident and visitor alike. (Population of Luxembourg is 666,430. Kansas City 510,704. Population of San Francisco Bay Area is 7.6 million in the nine-county area)
Providing free transit would be tremendously beneficial to millions of people, for three major reasons:
1. Combat Climate Change - increased public ridership would reduce harmful CO2 fossil fuel emissions. Estimates from Kansas City and Tallinn Estonia’s suggest an increase in ridership of 15 percent. Another estimate from a pilot project in New York City suggests a ridership increase of 30 percent. These increases in people taking public transportation instead of driving their own cars indicates a total reduction of 5.4 - 10.8 tons of emissions would be eliminated, leading to better air quality, improved public health, and long-term climate gains.
2. Reduce Traffic Congestion & Parking Difficulty - Estimates suggest public transit would decrease traffic congestion in dense urban areas and choke points like the Bay Bridge by up to 15 percent. Car ownership would also be reduced. Traffic in San Francisco is the second-slowest in the USA (NYC is #1) and getting worse every year. Parking costs in San Francisco are also the second-worst in the USA (NYC #1), and again, it is continually getting worse.
3. Promote Social Equity - Free transit removes a financial cost that hits low-income residents hard. Transportation is the second-biggest expense after housing for many Americans. In the Bay Area, a monthly Clipper pass can cost $86–$98 per system, and much more for multi-agency commuters. For people living paycheck-to-paycheck, this is a significant cost. People of color, immigrants, youth, seniors, and people with disabilities rely more heavily on public transit. 55–70% of frequent transit riders in the Bay Area are from low-to moderate-income households, but these riders usually pay more per mile of transit than wealthy drivers. Free fares equalize access regardless of income or geography.
Free transit would help people 1) take jobs they couldn’t otherwise afford to commute to, thus improving the economy, 2) Stay in school without worrying about bus fare, 3) Get to appointments, child care, or grocery stores without skipping meals to afford transit.
To conclude: Free Public Transit should be seen as a civil rights and economic justice intervention.
The Cost? How can San Francisco Bay Area pay for Free Transit throughout our large region?
ShareTheMoney.Institute estimates the cost as $1.5 billion annually. This sum can acquired via multiple strategies. Corvallis, Oregon, has had free public bus service since 2011, paid for by a $3.63 monthly fee added to each utility bill. Missoula, Montana, funds their fare-free Mountain Line transit system, via a property tax mill levy. Madison, Wisconsin’s transit is supported by general fund revenues, state and federal grants, and partnerships/sponsorships from local businesses and organizations.
Ideally, we’d like the funds to be obtained from the 37 local billionaires who, combined, have an approximate wealth of $885 billion. The $1.5 billion for free transit is only 0.17% of the local billionaire's wealth. Sponsorship from the ultra-wealthy would be ideal. Billionaires can view the “fair transit donation” they are asked to contribute not as punishment or an “envy tax”, but as their investment to create a municipality that is better for everyone, themselves included. They can pride themselves on instigating a world-leading, legacy-defining reform that will etch their names in history as leaders of a bold utopian reform.
Our motto: “we want to move freely around our beautiful bay”
——
Hank Pellissier - Share The Money Institute
Reverend Gregory Stevens - Unitarian Universalist EcoSocialist Network
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........* *..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*  Russia Confirms Jailing of Antiwar Leader Boris Kagarlitsky In a secret trial on June 5, 2024, the Russian Supreme Court’s Military Chamber confirmed a sentence of five years in a penal colony for left-wing sociologist and online journalist Boris Kagarlitsky. His crime? “Justifying terrorism” — a sham charge used to silence opponents of Putin’s war on Ukraine. The court disregarded a plea for freedom sent by thirty-seven international luminaries. Kagarlitsky, a leading Marxist thinker in Russia’s post-Soviet period, recently addressed socialists who won’t criticize Putin: “To my Western colleagues, who…call for an understanding of Putin and his regime, I would like to ask a very simple question. [Would] you want to live in a country where there is no free press or independent courts? In a country where the police have the right to break into your house without a warrant? …In a country which…broadcasts appeals on TV to destroy Paris, London, Warsaw, with a nuclear strike?” Thousands of antiwar critics have been forced to flee Russia or are behind bars, swept up in Putin’s vicious crackdown on dissidents. Opposition to the war is consistently highest among the poorest workers. Recently, RusNews journalists Roman Ivanov and Maria Ponomarenko were sentenced to seven, and six years respectively, for reporting the military’s brutal assault on Ukraine. A massive global solidarity campaign that garnered support from thousands was launched at Kagarlitsky’s arrest. Now, it has been revived. This internationalism will bolster the repressed Russian left and Ukrainian resistance to Putin’s imperialism. To sign the online petition at freeboris.info —Freedom Socialist Party, August 2024 https://socialism.com/fs-article/russia-jails-prominent-antiwar-leader-boris-kagarlitsky/#:~:text=In%20a%20secret%20trial%20on,of%20Putin's%20war%20on%20Ukraine. Petition in Support of Boris KagarlitskyWe, the undersigned, were deeply shocked to learn that on February 13 the leading Russian socialist intellectual and antiwar activist Dr. Boris Kagarlitsky (65) was sentenced to five years in prison. Dr. Kagarlitsky was arrested on the absurd charge of 'justifying terrorism' in July last year. After a global campaign reflecting his worldwide reputation as a writer and critic of capitalism and imperialism, his trial ended on December 12 with a guilty verdict and a fine of 609,000 roubles. The prosecution then appealed against the fine as 'unjust due to its excessive leniency' and claimed falsely that Dr. Kagarlitsky was unable to pay the fine and had failed to cooperate with the court. In fact, he had paid the fine in full and provided the court with everything it requested. On February 13 a military court of appeal sent him to prison for five years and banned him from running a website for two years after his release. The reversal of the original court decision is a deliberate insult to the many thousands of activists, academics, and artists around the world who respect Dr. Kagarlitsky and took part in the global campaign for his release. The section of Russian law used against Dr. Kagarlitsky effectively prohibits free expression. The decision to replace the fine with imprisonment was made under a completely trumped-up pretext. Undoubtedly, the court's action represents an attempt to silence criticism in the Russian Federation of the government's war in Ukraine, which is turning the country into a prison. The sham trial of Dr. Kagarlitsky is the latest in a wave of brutal repression against the left-wing movements in Russia. Organizations that have consistently criticized imperialism, Western and otherwise, are now under direct attack, many of them banned. Dozens of activists are already serving long terms simply because they disagree with the policies of the Russian government and have the courage to speak up. Many of them are tortured and subjected to life-threatening conditions in Russian penal colonies, deprived of basic medical care. Left-wing politicians are forced to flee Russia, facing criminal charges. International trade unions such as IndustriALL and the International Transport Federation are banned and any contact with them will result in long prison sentences. There is a clear reason for this crackdown on the Russian left. The heavy toll of the war gives rise to growing discontent among the mass of working people. The poor pay for this massacre with their lives and wellbeing, and opposition to war is consistently highest among the poorest. The left has the message and resolve to expose the connection between imperialist war and human suffering. Dr. Kagarlitsky has responded to the court's outrageous decision with calm and dignity: “We just need to live a little longer and survive this dark period for our country,” he said. Russia is nearing a period of radical change and upheaval, and freedom for Dr. Kagarlitsky and other activists is a condition for these changes to take a progressive course. We demand that Boris Kagarlitsky and all other antiwar prisoners be released immediately and unconditionally. We also call on the authorities of the Russian Federation to reverse their growing repression of dissent and respect their citizens' freedom of speech and right to protest. Sign to Demand the Release of Boris Kagarlitskyhttps://freeboris.infoThe petition is also available on Change.org *..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........* *..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........* |
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
Mumia Abu-Jamal is Innocent!
FREE HIM NOW!
Write to Mumia at:
Smart Communications/PADOC
Mumia Abu-Jamal #AM-8335
SCI Mahanoy
P.O. Box 33028
St. Petersburg, FL 33733
Join the Fight for Mumia's Life
Since September, Mumia Abu-Jamal's health has been declining at a concerning rate. He has lost weight, is anemic, has high blood pressure and an extreme flair up of his psoriasis, and his hair has fallen out. In April 2021 Mumia underwent open heart surgery. Since then, he has been denied cardiac rehabilitation care including a healthy diet and exercise.
Donate to Mumia Abu-Jamal's Emergency Legal and Medical Defense Fund, Official 2024
Mumia has instructed PrisonRadio to set up this fund. Gifts donated here are designated for the Mumia Abu-Jamal Medical and Legal Defense Fund. If you are writing a check or making a donation in another way, note this in the memo line.
Send to:
Mumia Medical and Legal Fund c/o Prison Radio
P.O. Box 411074, San Francisco, CA 94103
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
Updates From Kevin Cooper
A Never-ending Constitutional Violation
A summary of the current status of Kevin Cooper’s case by the Kevin Cooper Defense Committee
On October 26, 2023, the law firm of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, LLP wrote a rebuttal in response to the Special Counsel's January 13, 2023 report upholding the conviction of their client Kevin Cooper. A focus of the rebuttal was that all law enforcement files were not turned over to the Special Counsel during their investigation, despite a request for them to the San Bernardino County District Attorney's office.
On October 29, 2023, Law Professors Lara Bazelon and Charlie Nelson Keever, who run the six member panel that reviews wrongful convictions for the San Francisco County District Attorney's office, published an OpEd in the San Francisco Chronicle calling the "Innocence Investigation” done by the Special Counsel in the Cooper case a “Sham Investigation” largely because Cooper has unsuccessfully fought for years to obtain the police and prosecutor files in his case. This is a Brady claim, named for the U.S. Supreme court’s 1963 case establishing the Constitutional rule that defendants are entitled to any information in police and prosecutor's possession that could weaken the state's case or point to innocence. Brady violations are a leading cause of wrongful convictions. The Special Counsel's report faults Cooper for not offering up evidence of his own despite the fact that the best evidence to prove or disprove Brady violations or other misconduct claims are in those files that the San Bernardino County District Attorney's office will not turn over to the Special Counsel or to Cooper's attorneys.
On December 14, 2023, the president of the American Bar Association (ABA), Mary Smith, sent Governor Gavin Newsom a three page letter on behalf of the ABA stating in part that Mr.Cooper's counsel objected to the state's failure to provide Special Counsel all documents in their possession relating to Mr.Cooper's conviction, and that concerns about missing information are not new. For nearly 40 years Mr.Cooper's attorneys have sought this same information from the state.
On December 19, 2023, Bob Egelko, a journalist for the San Francisco Chronicle wrote an article about the ABA letter to the Governor that the prosecutors apparently withheld evidence from the Governor's legal team in the Cooper case.
These are just a few recent examples concerning the ongoing failure of the San Bernardino County District Attorney to turn over to Cooper's attorney's the files that have been requested, even though under the law and especially the U.S. Constitution, the District Attorney of San Bernardino county is required to turn over to the defendant any and all material and or exculpatory evidence that they have in their files. Apparently, they must have something in their files because they refuse to turn them over to anyone.
The last time Cooper's attorney's received files from the state, in 2004, it wasn't from the D.A. but a Deputy Attorney General named Holly Wilkens in Judge Huff's courtroom. Cooper's attorneys discovered a never before revealed police report showing that a shirt was discovered that had blood on it and was connected to the murders for which Cooper was convicted, and that the shirt had disappeared. It had never been tested for blood. It was never turned over to Cooper's trial attorney, and no one knows where it is or what happened to it. Cooper's attorneys located the woman who found that shirt on the side of the road and reported it to the Sheriff's Department. She was called to Judge Huff's court to testify about finding and reporting that shirt to law enforcement. That shirt was the second shirt found that had blood on it that was not the victims’ blood. This was in 2004, 19 years after Cooper's conviction.
It appears that this ongoing constitutional violation that everyone—from the Special Counsel to the Governor's legal team to the Governor himself—seems to know about, but won't do anything about, is acceptable in order to uphold Cooper's conviction.
But this type of thing is supposed to be unacceptable in the United States of America where the Constitution is supposed to stand for something other than a piece of paper with writing on it. How can a Governor, his legal team, people who support and believe in him ignore a United States citizen’s Constitutional Rights being violated for 40 years in order to uphold a conviction?
This silence is betrayal of the Constitution. This permission and complicity by the Governor and his team is against everything that he and they claim to stand for as progressive politicians. They have accepted the Special Counsel's report even though the Special Counsel did not receive the files from the district attorney that may not only prove that Cooper is innocent, but that he was indeed framed by the Sheriff’s Department; and that evidence was purposely destroyed and tampered with, that certain witnesses were tampered with, or ignored if they had information that would have helped Cooper at trial, that evidence that the missing shirt was withheld from Cooper's trial attorney, and so much more.
Is the Governor going to get away with turning a blind eye to this injustice under his watch?
Are progressive people going to stay silent and turn their eyes blind in order to hopefully get him to end the death penalty for some while using Cooper as a sacrificial lamb?
An immediate act of solidarity we can all do right now is to write to Kevin and assure him of our continuing support in his fight for justice. Here’s his address:
Kevin Cooper #C65304
Cell 107, Unit E1C
California Health Care Facility, Stockton (CHCF)
P.O. Box 213040
Stockton, CA 95213
www.freekevincooper.org
Call California Governor Newsom:
1-(916) 445-2841
Press 1 for English or 2 for Spanish,
press 6 to speak with a representative and
wait for someone to answer
(Monday-Friday, 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. PST—12:00 P.M. to 8:00 P.M. EST)
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
Resources for Resisting Federal Repression
https://www.nlg.org/federalrepressionresources/
Since June of 2020, activists have been subjected to an increasingly aggressive crackdown on protests by federal law enforcement. The federal response to the movement for Black Lives has included federal criminal charges for activists, door knocks by federal law enforcement agents, and increased use of federal troops to violently police protests.
The NLG National Office is releasing this resource page for activists who are resisting federal repression. It includes a link to our emergency hotline numbers, as well as our library of Know-Your-Rights materials, our recent federal repression webinar, and a list of some of our recommended resources for activists. We will continue to update this page.
Please visit the NLG Mass Defense Program page for general protest-related legal support hotlines run by NLG chapters.
Emergency Hotlines
If you are contacted by federal law enforcement, you should exercise all of your rights. It is always advisable to speak to an attorney before responding to federal authorities.
State and Local Hotlines
If you have been contacted by the FBI or other federal law enforcement, in one of the following areas, you may be able to get help or information from one of these local NLG hotlines for:
Portland, Oregon: (833) 680-1312
San Francisco, California: (415) 285-1041 or fbi_hotline@nlgsf.org
Seattle, Washington: (206) 658-7963
National Hotline
If you are located in an area with no hotline, you can call the following number:
National NLG Federal Defense Hotline: (212) 679-2811
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
1) Netanyahu Broadly Criticized at Home and Abroad After New Gaza Plan
International allies and families of hostages condemned Benjamin Netanyahu’s plan to take control of Gaza City, with the British prime minister calling it “wrong.”
By Adam Rasgon, Reporting from Tel Aviv, Aug. 8, 2025
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel in Jerusalem last month. His office said the Israeli military “will prepare for taking control of Gaza City” while distributing aid to civilians “outside the combat zones.” Ronen Zvulun/Reuters
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faced criticism at home and abroad on Friday after his office announced that the Israeli military would escalate its nearly two-year-old campaign in the Gaza Strip by taking control of Gaza City, a move that would likely further endanger Palestinian civilians and Israeli hostages and deepen Israel’s international isolation.
The chorus of condemnation from longstanding European allies, Arab governments and the families of hostages held by militant groups in Gaza reflected Mr. Netanyahu’s intensifying clash with foreign nations and the supporters of hostages.
It laid bare Israel’s isolation as its government decides, against the advice of its military’s top command, to expand a war that has reduced cities to rubble, killed tens of thousands of Palestinians, and caused a widespread hunger crisis.
“The Israeli Government’s decision to further escalate its offensive in Gaza is wrong, and we urge it to reconsider immediately,” Keir Starmer, the prime minister of Britain, said in a statement. “This action will do nothing to bring an end to this conflict or to help secure the release of hostages. It will only bring more bloodshed.”
Chancellor Friedrich Merz of Germany said that, “until further notice,” his country would not export military equipment that could be used in Gaza, a significant step and a break with the country’s postwar past of support for Israel.
In recent weeks, many European countries have urged Israel to end the war in Gaza. The Hamas-led attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, which ignited the war, killed about 1,200 people and about 250 others were taken captive to Gaza.
Saudi Arabia’s foreign ministry said the “inhumane ideas and decisions” being adopted by the Israeli government “affirm once again that it does not grasp the emotional, historical, and legal connection of the Palestinian people to this land.” The Turkish and Jordanian foreign ministries also condemned the move.
The Hostages and Missing Families Forum, a group representing many families of hostages, said the Israeli government had issued a “death sentence to the living hostages” and ”a disappearance sentence” to the bodies of those killed in captivity.
“There has never been a government in Israel that has acted with such great determination against the national interest,” the group said in a statement. “The security cabinet chose another march of folly on the backs of the hostages, the fighters, and all of Israeli society.”
On Friday, Israel’s security cabinet approved a plan to expand the war by taking control of Gaza City, a pivotal and risky decision that went against the recommendations of the Israeli military.
Before the meeting, Mr. Netanyahu had told Fox News that Israel intended to take control of Gaza, bucking concerns in the leadership of the military about the exhaustion of reservist soldiers and the burdens of governing millions of Palestinians. The prime minister office’s announcement did not explicitly state that the military would carry out a full military takeover of Gaza.
The military leadership would prefer a new cease-fire instead of ramping up fighting, according to three Israeli security officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive issues.
On Friday, Hamas said occupying Gaza City and evacuating its residents was “a new war crime that the occupation’s military intends to perpetrate.”
“We warn the criminal occupation that this criminal adventure will exact a great price,” Hamas said in a statement. “It won’t be a picnic.”
The retired Maj. Gen. Gadi Shamni, one of the last commanders of Israeli forces in Gaza before it withdrew from the territory in 2005, said Mr. Netanyahu’s plan was “more of the same.” It would result in the deaths of more soldiers and hostages, further isolate Israel on the international stage, and deepen the rift between the government and the military, he said.
“This won’t bring progress in any way at all,” he said. “This won’t bring back the hostages and it won’t lead to the defeat of Hamas or make it give up its weapons.”
Since the start of the war, the Israeli military has raided Gaza City several times. But each time, Hamas fighters succeeded in regrouping in neighborhoods where Israeli soldiers had conducted operations.
General Shamni said another raid on Gaza City would fail to bring about a fundamental change to Hamas’s power in Gaza or its position in cease-fire negotiations. And if Israel planned to take over the city ahead of a potential long-term occupation of Gaza, he said, it would take years before the military managed to set up a functioning military government and to degrade Hamas enough to stabilize the situation.
“The state of Israel doesn’t even have the resources for such a thing,” he said. “Where will Israel get all of the money for this?”
Many of the people kidnapped on Oct. 7 have been freed in exchange for Palestinian prisoners; more than three dozen hostages have been killed in captivity, according to an investigation by The New York Times. The bodies of 30 others, according to the Israeli authorities, are being held in Gaza. Up to 20 hostages are believed to still be alive, they said.
“The probability of hostages being killed again is now intensifying,” said Ruby Chen, the father of the American-Israeli soldier Itay Chen, who was abducted by Hamas in the October attack. The Israeli authorities now presume that Mr. Chen’s son is dead.
The prospect of Israel moving into Gaza City also stoked fears among Palestinians in Gaza, who have been repeatedly displaced and struggle to find food, clean water and electricity.
There’s frustration and despair,” said Abdullah Shehab, 32, who has been staying at his sister’s home in Gaza City since he was forced to leave his hometown, Jabalia, at the end of May. “I feel like we’re waiting for a new hell to be brought upon us.”
He said when he saw planes parachuting aid into Gaza on Friday, he imagined a rope extending to the ground and climbing on board.
“I’m ready to leave,” he said. “I love Gaza, but I can’t handle the misery anymore.”
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
2) The Desperate Struggle to Squeeze Aid Into a Starving Gaza
An increasing number of Palestinians are dying from hunger-related causes. Others are weak from months of extreme deprivation and vulnerable to illnesses in a territory short on crucial medical supplies, fuel and clean water, aid workers say.
By Vivian Yee, Reporting from Cairo, Aug. 8, 2025
Gazans waited to receive meals at a charity kitchen this month. Nearly one in three people in the territory is not eating for days at a time, the United Nations said. Saher Alghorra for The New York Times
An increasing number of Palestinians are dying from hunger-related causes. Others are weak from months of extreme deprivation and vulnerable to illnesses in a territory short on crucial medical supplies, fuel and clean water, aid workers say.
Gazans waited to receive meals at a charity kitchen this month. Nearly one in three people in the territory is not eating for days at a time, the United Nations said.Saher Alghorra for The New York Times
Despite what Israel says are its efforts to bring more food and other aid into Gaza in recent days, the United Nations and other aid groups say it is falling catastrophically short of what is needed to stop fast-accelerating starvation there.
International experts warn that Gaza is fast plunging into famine, with the number of Palestinians dying from hunger-related causes shooting upward over the past month.
Gaza reached that point after Israel escalated its prior siege of the territory to block virtually all aid from March to May, aiming to pressure Hamas into releasing hostages still in Gaza. When Israel allowed aid back in, it did so mostly under a contentious new aid delivery system that resulted in the killings of hundreds of Palestinians and kept all but the strongest and luckiest from getting food.
Now Israel is pausing the fighting in some parts of Gaza each day to help aid convoys move, approving some imported food for sale in Gaza and allowing aid to be airdropped. But all of it is far too little, far too late, aid officials say. Nothing less than a cease-fire will allow the necessary avalanche of aid to flow safely into Gaza, they say.
Israeli leaders’ decision to take control of Gaza City throws the aid system into further doubt.
To have a real impact, aid agencies say Israel needs to allow in the hundreds of thousands of pallets of aid languishing outside Gaza — enough to cover around 100 soccer fields, they say — and help ensure that the aid can be distributed safely. Letting in small numbers of trucks and airdropping supplies is little more than a public relations stunt, aid officials contend.
“It’s a joke, it’s all just theatrics,” Bushra Khalidi, an aid official working on Oxfam’s response in Gaza, said last week.
“We’re talking about two million people. It’s not 100 trucks or a pausing or a few hours of calm that is going to meet the needs of a population that has been starved for months,” Ms. Khalidi said. “Starvation has a long-term impact, and it affects growth of children, and it’s not something that you can reverse by throwing energy bars from the sky.”
Israel says that the level of hunger has been exaggerated and that it is doing its best to lessen it. Israel’s military spokesman has said there is no starvation in Gaza. The Israeli agency coordinating aid for Gaza did not respond to a request for comment.
Israel has also blamed the United Nations for not bringing in more food, while the organization says that Israel frequently denies or delays its requests to bring in convoys, among other challenges.
Many aid workers say airdrops endanger desperate people while feeding only a few, and only those physically able to retrieve it. During previous airdrops, people have been injured by falling aid; others have drowned or crossed into combat zones to retrieve packages that fell there, officials say.
When he recently saw a plane drop aid by parachute, Mohammed Abu Taha, 43, who is sheltering in southern Gaza, ran toward it. By the time he arrived, other Palestinians were fighting over the remaining bags of food. “People are too desperate,” he said. “I ran a lot and got nothing at all.”
Each airdrop delivers at most two truckloads of aid, and usually less, aid officials said.
“Airdrops are the most ineffective, expensive way of delivering aid possible,” said Bob Kitchen, who oversees emergency response at the International Rescue Committee, a group working in Gaza. With nearly one in three people going without food for days at a time, according to the United Nations, clinics treating malnutrition are at or over capacity. Children are becoming too weak to scavenge through trash for food or even to cry, aid workers say.
An international group of experts said in late July that famine thresholds had been reached across much of Gaza. Health officials there say scores of people have died from malnutrition, including dozens of children, though aid workers say that is probably an undercount.
Aid workers say that number could potentially climb to the tens or hundreds of thousands without a rapid surge in aid.
Weakened by months of extreme deprivation, people have few defenses left to stop illnesses as ordinary as diarrhea from killing them.
And those diseases are rampant. The number of people with acute watery diarrhea increased by 150 percent from March to June, and those with bloody diarrhea by 302 percent, health data from aid agencies shows. Those figures, which include only people who can reach medical centers, are most likely an undercount, according to Oxfam.
Staving off famine therefore depends not only on food, but also on fuel to run hospitals, cooking gas to make meals and clean water and sanitation to keep waterborne diseases in check — all of which are absent or nearly absent from Gaza, aid workers say.
Aid agencies have received 200 to 300 trucks in Gaza each day for the past several days, the Israeli agency coordinating aid said. They mainly carried flour along with prepared meals, infant formula, high-energy biscuits, diapers, vaccines and fuel, the United Nations said. Before the war, Gaza received 500 to 600 trucks a day of aid and goods for sale.
The flour provides calories, but will not save those who are severely malnourished after nearly two years of deprivation, aid workers say. Malnourished people need specialized feeding and care. Yet hospitals have few supplies left.
David M. Satterfield, who served as special envoy for Middle East humanitarian issues in the Biden administration, said the only practical solution was to “flood the zone” with aid.
“It’s not rocket science,” he said.
It is too late to reverse developmental and cognitive harm to young children who have been malnourished for months, experts say.
“The damage is already done, and that’s going to be a lifelong impact for a lot of people,” said Beckie Ryan, the Gaza response director for CARE. “What we can do is mitigate that going forward and stop it getting worse. But it does require a huge amount of supplies and aid to be able to come in as soon as possible.”
The death toll from the war has passed 60,000, according to Gaza’s health ministry.
Israel cut off aid to Gaza in retaliation for the October 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel in which some 1,200 people were killed and around 250 were taken hostage. Limited aid deliveries later resumed under a United Nations-run system, until March, when Israel imposed another total blockade.
In May, Israel largely replaced the U.N. aid system by backing a new operation mainly run by American contractors. Israeli officials said that was the only way to ensure the food would not fall into Hamas’s hands.
At least 859 Palestinians seeking food from the private sites have been killed since May 27, in most cases by Israeli soldiers, according to the U.N. Human Rights Office. Israeli officials have said they fired shots in the air when crowds came too close or endangered their forces.
The violence has renewed calls to allow the United Nations to resume managing aid. The New York Times reported that the Israeli military had never found proof that Hamas systematically stole aid from the United Nations — a charge Israel frequently repeated.
“We are struggling to understand why you need to come out with parallel shadow systems, when we had a fully functional aid distribution system in Gaza managed by the U.N. and international agencies,” said Jamil Sawalmeh, who oversees ActionAid’s Gaza response.
Even with Israeli pauses in fighting, it is dangerous for aid trucks to move around Gaza. While Israel is approving more movement by aid groups, which have to be coordinated in advance, teams still faced delays and other obstacles, the United Nations said.
The American ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, said on Wednesday that the number of the U.S.-backed sites could soon quadruple.
An Israeli security official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity in line with military rules, said Israel was increasing the number of trucks entering Gaza, including by withdrawing some forces and working to open a third crossing into the enclave.
Even when trucks can move, little makes it to the aid warehouses where humanitarian agencies collect supplies before distributing them.
Most of it is taken by the thousands of Palestinians, including some armed gangs, who regularly wait near the trucks’ route to grab whatever they can, aid workers say. But doing so can be deadly, with 514 killed since May 27, mostly by Israel’s military, according to U.N. figures.
On Wednesday, Ehab Fasfous, 52, a resident of the southern Gazan city of Khan Younis, inched toward the trucks’ route, aware, he said, that Israeli soldiers could open fire if he ventured too close. He shared a series of videos of the mayhem he saw next: hundreds, perhaps thousands of people closing in on the trucks from every direction.
At one point in the videos, which he said he took, a man menaces another person with a knife near a bag of flour.
Mr. Fasfous went home empty-handed.
“They’ve deprived us of so much that now we’re behaving like animals,” he said.
Only those who can brave such dangers get aid, aid officials say. The people most in need — like pregnant women, older adults or the sick — receive only what aid groups bring them, unless they can pay the astronomical prices of what little food is available in markets, aid workers say.
“We have to find a way for assistance to reach the weakest,” said Antoine Renard, the World Food Program’s director for the Palestinian territories, who visited Gaza this week.
The price of flour has dropped precipitously in recent days, according to Gaza government statistics, but it remains unaffordable for all but the few who still have resources.
Yaser Shaban, 58, spends his salary as a Palestinian civil servant and his savings on flour, canned food and herbs at the market.
If he goes to a privately run center or tries to take aid from a truck, “I have no guarantees I’ll bring something back,” he said. “And if I get killed, what chances does my family have then?” he said.
Adam Rasgon and Abu Bakr Bashir contributed reporting.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
3) ‘Arab Forces’ Running Gaza? Netanyahu’s Goal Leaves Many Questions
The Israeli cabinet agreed to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s military plan, but the quandary of who will eventually govern Gaza remains intractable.
By Aaron Boxerman, Reporting from Jerusalem, Aug. 9, 2025
Gathering aid airdropped on Gaza City on Thursday. The Israeli government announced on Friday that its military would prepare to seize control of the city. Credit...Saher Alghorra for The New York Times
Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, said this week that Israel wanted to hand over control of Gaza to unnamed “Arab forces” after Hamas’s defeat. It is not clear whether Mr. Netanyahu has any takers at the moment.
Several hours after his remarks, the Israeli cabinet on Friday signed off on Mr. Netanyahu’s latest proposal: for the Israeli military to take over Gaza City. The cabinet also stipulated that Hamas’s main rival, the Palestinian Authority, not administer postwar Gaza.
Both moves further complicated the prospect that Arab countries might be willing to help pick up the pieces. Israel has razed much of Gaza during its nearly two-year war against Hamas, which has killed more than 60,000 people, according to health officials in the territory, who do not distinguish between civilians and combatants.
Some Arab governments have suggested that they would be willing to play a role in stabilizing the enclave, such as backing a postwar international security mission. At times, officials have floated the idea that Arab countries would send their own soldiers.
But, according to analysts, Arab leaders want that mission to ultimately turn Gaza over to the Palestinian Authority, which they view as the main feasible alternative to Hamas. They also want a political path toward Palestinian statehood. Both of these outcomes would cross red lines for Mr. Netanyahu’s government.
“If Netanyahu says yes to something like this, it means the end of the war, the withdrawal of Israeli forces and, most importantly, the collapse of the government,” said Michael Milshtein, a former senior Israeli intelligence officer. “Netanyahu isn’t willing to go there.”
Israel vowed to topple Hamas after the Palestinian militants launched the deadly Oct. 7, 2023, attacks, which killed about 1,200 people, with 250 taken hostage, according to Israel.
Nearly two years later, Israel has yet to decisively defeat Hamas. Gaza’s two million residents are enduring widespread hunger after Israeli restrictions on aid.
Mr. Netanyahu’s cabinet approved the latest plan to seize Gaza City over the objections of Israel’s security chiefs, who have raised questions about whether war-weary Israeli reserve soldiers would be in a condition to carry out the advance.
Even if Israeli troops do advance into Gaza City, military analysts say, they would most likely do little to tip the balance in the war. Israeli forces have repeatedly attacked across Gaza without successfully compelling Hamas to accept Israeli demands like laying down its arms.
It would also probably take weeks for Israel to carry out the attack, leaving time for the government to change course — either following international pressure or because Hamas agreed to a truce.
More immediately, Arab countries might change their stance on postwar governance in an effort to prevent a major offensive on Gaza City. On Saturday, a host of Arab and Islamic countries, including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt, condemned the latest Israeli plans as “a dangerous and unacceptable escalation.”
In late July, several Arab nations, including Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia, as well as the Arab League, backed an initiative that aimed to provide both sides with an offramp. The announcement came at a conference organized by France and Saudi Arabia in support of an independent Palestinian state. The declaration included unusually tough language from Arab governments condemning the Hamas-led attacks in 2023. It also called on Hamas to demilitarize, give up its rule in Gaza and free the hostages.
Joined by about a dozen other countries, the Arab nations also said that they supported an international security mission. According to the plan, that mission would help transfer security responsibility to the Palestinian Authority.
But Israel has appeared to rule out that option. On Friday, the cabinet said it had conditioned ending the war on establishing an administration “that is neither Hamas nor the Palestinian Authority.”
The Palestinian Authority, governed by its 89-year-old president, Mahmoud Abbas, administers parts of the Israeli-occupied West Bank. The authority used to govern Gaza, too, but Hamas won elections there in 2006 and took full control in 2007.
Hamas officials say they are willing to give up their rule in Gaza as part of a comprehensive deal to end the war. But they insist on maintaining their military wing, which Israeli critics say would leave them effectively in charge.
Natan Sachs, a Middle East analyst in Washington, said, “The two main obstacles remain the same: Hamas’s reluctance to give up control, no matter what the cost to the Gaza Strip, and Netanyahu’s reluctance to threaten his coalition in any way.”
It is far from clear whether Arab states would be willing to risk their own soldiers’ lives in Gaza or pay the more than $50 billion estimated to rebuild.
With no other feasible option, Israel is gradually moving toward assuming full control, said Mr. Milshtein, the former intelligence officer. The Arab nations’ proposals in July were “not ideal,” he noted, but far better than Israel’s establishing a costly and bloody military administration.
“At this point, all of the choices are bad, and we need to pick the least bad option,” Mr. Milshtein said. “Occupying all of Gaza would be a catastrophe.”
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
4) How Three Journalists Tracked the Deadly Aid Crisis in Gaza
Interviews, data, witness footage, satellite imagery, photography and more helped the reporters capture a deteriorating situation.
By Patrick Healy, Aug. 8, 2025
Patrick Healy oversees the Trust team, which works to deepen people’s understanding of Times journalism.
Palestinians rushing to collect aid dropped by aircraft over Gaza City on Thursday. Saher Alghorra for The New York Times
How do journalists cover a conflict they can’t witness firsthand? That’s one of the hardest parts of reporting on the Israel-Hamas war: Israel restricts outside journalists from entering Gaza on their own, though a few have entered with the Israeli military; they can’t interview people or walk with them to document the dangers of getting food. They can’t talk to Hamas militants or Israeli soldiers freely.
But war reporters find ways to get the truth. Last month, after a number of violent incidents near aid sites in Gaza, several of my New York Times colleagues huddled and discussed why the sites had become so deadly. That question led them to examine satellite imagery, video from Gaza and data from Israel, the U.N. and other sources, and to report with officials and others in the region.
The reporting resulted in a Times article, “How Did Hunger Get So Much Worse in Gaza?,” which uses maps and graphics to show readers the situation in Gaza and how hundreds of Palestinians have been killed, many of them by Israeli forces, while heading toward these aid sites.
I hosted an online conversation with three colleagues who worked on the piece to discuss why they pursued the story, how a collaboration like this works at The Times and what their reporting brought to light. This conversation has been edited and condensed.
Patrick Healy, assistant managing editor based in New York: I was a Boston Globe reporter in Afghanistan after Sept. 11, and in Iraq in 2003, and was able to get to cities like Kandahar and Falluja to talk to a lot of people. Gaza is so different — The Times has two local journalists on the ground there, but this war also forces reporters to think about storytelling beyond the in-person interview. Why did you decide to pursue this story?
Aaron Boxerman, reporter based in Jerusalem: Gaza’s humanitarian crisis has been a key reporting target for us since the war began. And things have deteriorated dramatically, beginning in March with an Israeli decision to block practically all aid going into Gaza. We wanted to map out how some of these policies had played out on the ground, where the situation has also been complicated by rampant lawlessness. Hamas has also made it difficult for journalists on the ground to operate freely, and intimidates its critics in Gaza, which has a chilling effect on people.
Lauren Leatherby, visual editor based in London: It was becoming clear we were seeing a situation even more dire than we had seen before, between the repeated incidents of Palestinians being killed near aid sites and some of the photos and videos coming out of Gaza.
Healy: So, you had a lot of data — how do you bring a story like that together?
Elena Shao, graphics editor based in New York: Numbers and figures are hard to make personal. We typically hear from people whose firsthand experience lends context and intimacy to the data. With Gaza, those interviews are harder to come by, so we have to turn to other sources — witness footage, satellite imagery, historical documents, social media channels and posts — to piece together accurate accounts that are truthful to people’s experiences.
Healy: What was an initial piece of reporting that helped you think about the story?
Leatherby: The number of children reported to have malnutrition this summer was its highest since data became available. The number of Palestinians killed while seeking aid was also the highest it had ever been. The data showed trends that echoed the warnings from dozens of aid organizations and human rights groups. And Israel’s own aid data showed less food going into Gaza than during most other times in the war.
Those separate elements together painted a pretty stark picture.
Shao: A question on my mind was: What does it practically take for Gazans to get aid under the new Israeli aid system? My colleagues Bora Erden and Samuel Granados created a map showing the time it would take to walk to the beginning of the mandated routes to the four aid sites.
Healy: Why was that map important?
Shao: It showed that many Gazans had to walk hours through Israeli militarized zones to get food from the sites. By mid-June, the Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation announced the locations of the sites only a half-hour in advance, and closed them less than 15 minutes after opening.
Healy: What can data show that other reporting can’t? And how do we verify data?
Boxerman: Much of our reporting about the on-the-ground situation at the new aid sites focused on interviewing witnesses to the shootings nearby. That testimony is invaluable, but it’s often just a piece of the puzzle, people recounting flashes of a chaotic scene. Data helps us really get a fuller sense of what we’re hearing.
Leatherby: We cross-reference as much of our visual reporting as possible, especially in situations where we can’t be on the ground. We check videos and photos on social media or captured by independent sources against satellite imagery and other footage, making sure that structures and other identifying features match. We also cross-reference with traditional reporting and photography.
Healy: How was satellite imagery useful in your reporting?
Leatherby: Videos and photos of Palestinians going to the new aid sites showed long journeys, sometimes passing by Israeli military vehicles. Analyzing satellite imagery let us map the military positions that aid seekers needed to pass to get to distribution sites.
Shao: We also used satellite imagery to measure the distance people needed to travel along designated routes. You can see where large and dense crowds of Gazans gathered to wait for aid.
Healy: Take me inside your collaboration, which involved multiple journalists with specific expertise.
Leatherby: During breaking news moments, visual reporters at The Times verify imagery coming from the scene. We also use data, satellite imagery and other digital and open-source reporting techniques to report and tell stories as thoroughly as possible. The goal is to help readers get a full understanding of what’s going on. These methods of reporting can be especially effective in places like Gaza, where outside journalists aren’t allowed.
Healy: In the end, what stood out to you about this piece?
Leatherby: I think the strength of this piece is fact-driven reporting that draws on a lot of elements: interviews, data, videos, satellite imagery, mapping and photography. It brought together a lot of threads that we’ve written about before into one place.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
5) There’s Barely Any Food in Gaza, and Barely Any Cash to Buy It
Palestinians who fear being killed or seriously injured during rushes to obtain aid are being forced to pay exorbitant fees to take out money to buy food.
By Adam Rasgon and Iyad Abuheweila, Visuals by Saher Alghorra, Aug. 9, 2025
Adam Rasgon reported from Jerusalem and from Ramallah, in the West Bank, and Iyad Abuheweila reported from Istanbul. Saher Alghorra took photographs and video in Gaza City.
Repairing a damaged bank note. A cottage industry making such fixes has sprung up in Gaza because of the shortage of cash.
Amid the widespread hunger crisis in Gaza, many Palestinians in the enclave have chosen to avoid aid sites and trucks carrying food, fearing they could be trampled or killed by gunfire. Instead, they have prioritized buying what food they can from the small number of markets and shops that still operate in the territory.
But finding enough money to buy food in Gaza is difficult because of an extreme shortage of hard cash itself. Banks and A.T.M.s have been destroyed and shut down, and since the Hamas-led attacks on Oct. 7, 2023, Israel has not allowed any large injections of physical cash by the banking sector into the enclave. That has opened up a black market for obtaining Israeli shekels, the predominant currency, with Palestinians forced to pay exorbitant rates to gain access to their money to feed themselves and their families.
At the same time, there has been a huge surge in the price of basic goods since the start of the war, especially in the face of Israeli restrictions on the entry of food into the territory. A 55-pound sack of flour is around $180, two pounds of sugar is about $10, and a similar amount of tomatoes about $20, according to surveys carried out this week by the Gaza Governorate Chamber of Commerce in three cities. Prices have come down since more goods have entered in recent days, but they are still far higher than before the war.
Some Palestinians have taken to selling their belongings. Some urge friends and family overseas to send funds. But even Palestinians with money in their bank accounts, including those receiving regular salaries from international organizations, are paying commissions of roughly 50 percent to people who have stockpiles of Israeli shekel notes for access to their own cash.
Those people — who are essentially using the cash they previously accumulated to make more money — have typically set up shop at internet cafes or on street corners in Gaza City, Deir al Balah and Khan Younis. They, or their representatives, offer bank notes to customers who then transfer funds online in exchange, according to residents of Gaza who use the system.
Shahad Ali, 22, writes for international publications about what it is like to live in Gaza, and she receives wire transfers for her dispatches. Ms. Ali, whose mother was killed in the war and whose family home was destroyed, said that to get $300, she was forced to pay a commission of $144.
“It’s so frustrating to receive only a part of what you work so hard for,” Ms. Ali said.
The struggle for hard cash
Gaza has long suffered from a shortage of hard cash but the war has made it much worse, said Bashar Yasin, general manager of the Association of Banks in Palestine, an organization that represents the banking sector.
“We’re talking about an old problem that has turned into an absolute disaster,” Mr. Yasin said.
Since Hamas took control of the territory in 2007, Israel has rarely permitted Palestinian banks to transfer shekel notes into the territory.
Working on worn-out bank notes in Gaza.
“It’s completely unjust,” said Nidal Kuhail, 31, a resident of Gaza City who helps support his parents and five sisters. He worked at a Thai restaurant before the war but says that he now has nothing left in his account and that he spends most of his days trying to find money, including contacting anyone abroad who may be able to send funds to support him and his family.
“We need every shekel we can get,” Mr. Kuhail said.
Where did the money go?
It is not clear how much money is actually in circulation in Gaza.
In the first seven months of the war, many wealthy Palestinians who fled Gaza took their shekels with them, Mr. Yasin said.
Money in bank vaults was also looted. About $180 million of the $290 million that was stored in banks before the Oct. 7 attack has been taken, Yahya Shunnar, governor of the Palestine Monetary Authority, the Palestinian bank regulator, said. It is unclear who was responsible, Mr. Shunnar said, noting that both Hamas and Israel had the resources to blow vaults open and take money.
The Israeli military said that it had seized “large amounts of cash belonging to Hamas and used to fund its military operations.” It did not directly respond to questions about whether it had taken money from bank vaults.
Izzat al-Rishq, the Qatar-based director of Hamas’s media office, did not respond to a request for comment.
Mr. Shunnar said that no fresh cash was injected into the system partly because the Palestine Monetary Authority feared that it could be stolen again. Still, the regulator sent a letter to the Israeli authorities this year requesting that they examine the possibility of sending money into the territory, Mr. Shunnar said, but did not receive a reply.
COGAT, the Israeli military agency that regulates affairs in Gaza, said that Israel would not permit the transfer of shekel notes into Gaza, citing what it described as “Hamas’s reliance on cash to sustain its military operations.”
As old bank bills have disintegrated, a repair service has sprung up to fix them, with tape, glue and craft knives used to piece them together.
Palestinian financial and economic experts have argued that the best solution would be for people in Gaza to use digital payments. During the cease-fire from January to March this year, digital payments were more widely accepted. But those services were disrupted after Israel restarted the war and sent a sternly worded letter to the biggest Palestinian bank.
In that letter, dated April 24, a senior official in the Israeli Finance Ministry, Yoray Matzlawi, wrote to the chief executive of the Bank of Palestine, Mahmoud Shawa, saying that information from the Israeli authorities had indicated that e-wallets were being exploited by militants in Gaza. Mr. Matzlawi asked the Bank of Palestine to take “immediate action.”
PalPay, a digital payments company in which the Bank of Palestine has a majority stake, responded by reducing the limit for daily e-wallet transactions to 500 shekels, about $145, from 3,000 shekels, and freezing the opening of new e-wallets, according to an official at the Bank of Palestine, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive topics. The official said that the bank took the action to ensure it was maintaining international standards related to tackling money laundering and terrorism financing and to comply with guidance from the Palestine Monetary Authority.
Yet even for those who still have some access to e-wallets, they are difficult to use after two years of a devastating war.
Patchy internet access and recurring cellular network and power outages make connectivity inconsistent.
The number of vendors accepting digital currency has decreased as they have come under pressure to hold on to cash, according to a UNICEF report from June 2025. Those who still do charge a premium: Goods that had been selling at about 90 shekels, or $26, would instead cost around 120 shekels, Ms. Ali said.
Ultimately, Palestinians say, the only way for life to improve in Gaza is for a new cease-fire between Israel and Hamas to be agreed on, echoing calls from aid agencies and foreign governments.
“Stopping the war is essential,” said Faisal al-Shawa, deputy chairman of the board of PalTrade, a Palestinian business advocacy organization.
Saed Abu Aita, 44, was wounded at the beginning of the war and has a piece of shrapnel stuck in his chest. He was displaced from his home in Jabaliya and now lives in a tent with his family in central Gaza. He has started selling his clothes to get money to buy flour.
“Nothing is easy for us,” he said. “We’re put through unending torment to get the simplest of things. When will our misery end?”
Natan Odenheimer contributed reporting from Jerusalem.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
6) At ‘Alligator Alcatraz,’ Did a Detainee Just Faint or Need CPR?
Homeland Security says a detainee fainted. But other accounts say the man was unconscious. One witness said the guards did not seem to know how to check his pulse.
By Patricia Mazzei, Aug. 8, 2025
Patricia Mazzei has reported on the Everglades immigration detention center for the past month from Miami, including interviewing detainees and attending court hearings.
The immigration detention center in the Florida Everglades known as Alligator Alcatraz. Eva Marie Uzcategui/Reuters
For two days this week, the fate of Luis Manuel Rivas Velásquez was a harrowing mystery.
Imprisoned at the immigration detention center in the Florida Everglades known as Alligator Alcatraz, Mr. Rivas had not made his usual daily call to his sister in Venezuela. And detainees started telling their families that they had seen Mr. Rivas unconscious, receiving CPR.
After Mr. Rivas’s sister started a social media campaign, the Department of Homeland Security announced late Wednesday that Mr. Rivas was alive. He had “fainted,” a spokeswoman said.
But according to accounts from detainees, Mr. Rivas, who came from Venezuela, was in much more serious condition. Mr. Rivas, 38, was unconscious on the cell floor, with guards seeming to not know how to take his pulse, according to a recording of a conversation with a detainee, Mr. Rivas and Mr. Rivas’s lawyer that was obtained by The New York Times.
The accounts raise questions about medical care and treatment at the detention center, one of many unknowns regarding its day-to-day operations. Florida officials have defended the center, the first run by a state for federal immigration detainees, as an example of how a state can swiftly try to assist the Trump administration with its crackdown on illegal immigration. Other states have said they plan to follow a similar model.
But Everglades detainees say poor conditions at the center have persisted, and federal judges have had to pry information out of the government regarding basic matters. On Thursday, a federal judge ordered a two-week halt to further construction at the facility, pending the completion of a hearing in a lawsuit filed by environmentalists seeking to protect the Everglades.
Rumors about a serious medical episode at the detention center began on Tuesday night. Two separate recordings of phone conversations from the center circulated among Miami immigration activists, state lawmakers and journalists. In the conversations, detainees told their relatives that they had seen one or two unresponsive men inside the center. They worried that at least one of them had died.
By Wednesday morning, questions from the news media and state lawmakers prompted the Florida Division of Emergency Management, which runs the facility, to declare that the rumors about deaths were false. “There have been no life-threatening medical incidents or deaths,” Stephanie Hartman, a spokeswoman for the division, said in a statement.
That day, however, Mr. Rivas failed to call his sister, Ada Velásquez, she said in an interview.
Her alarm grew, she said, after the wife of another detainee called to share that her husband had seen Mr. Rivas receiving cardiopulmonary resuscitation.
Her husband had described the dramatic scene in detail, the wife said in an interview with The Times on Friday. She declined to be identified for fear of making her husband’s presence at the Everglades detention center known to his sick mother.
Her husband told her, she said, that guards had taken Mr. Rivas away as if he were dead. The fact that Mr. Rivas was alive, she added, may have been because a detainee had been a nurse in Cuba and knew how to administer CPR.
A second account came from a recorded conversation on Thursday with Mr. Rivas; his lawyer, Eric Lee; and a second detainee, a Cuban man who did not identify himself.
On the recording, not previously made public, the Cuban detainee described seeing Mr. Rivas unconscious on his bunk after having flulike symptoms.
Three detainees dragged Mr. Rivas to the door of the group cell, the Cuban detainee said. “They left him lying on the floor,” he said of the guards. “They didn’t even know how to take his pulse.”
At one point, a guard tried to give Mr. Rivas water, but the Cuban detainee said he had told him to stop, fearing that Mr. Rivas could suffocate. After about half an hour, Mr. Rivas was wheeled away on a stretcher, the Cuban detainee said.
The detainee said, “Everyone is getting sick.”
Mr. Rivas had been in the U.S. for about a year, according to his sister, before she had helped bail him out of a Miami-Dade County jail. Homeland Security said that Mr. Rivas had “a rap sheet that includes an arrest for robbery in Miami.” He had been detained in the Everglades since late July.
His case garnered social media attention, in part because Ms. Velásquez posted an Instagram video pleading for her brother’s body. Mr. Rivas, who describes himself as a master of ceremonies for automobile events who posts frequently about cars, has more than 250,000 followers on the platform.
Ms. Velásquez received fierce criticism for posting that her brother was dead. Yet, she said, that led Homeland Security to state that Mr. Rivas was alive.
Late on Wednesday, Ms. McLaughlin, the Homeland Security spokeswoman, said that Mr. Rivas had “fainted and was taken to the hospital out of precaution.”
“ICE takes its commitment to protecting those in its custody very seriously,” she added. “We ensure illegal aliens have access to adequate medical care.” Her office did not respond on Friday to a request for further comment about his case.
The Florida Division of Emergency Management did not respond to a request for comment on Friday regarding Mr. Rivas’s case or health conditions inside the detention center.
On his lawyer’s recording, Mr. Rivas sounded winded and congested but said that he was feeling a little better. The source of his illness is still unclear. Mr. Rivas asked for his medical record but was denied, his lawyer said, adding that he was told he had a “respiratory infection.”
Mr. Lee said that his client had signed self-deportation papers at the detention center earlier this week, before his medical episode.
“All he wants to do is go back to Venezuela,” Mr. Lee said. “There’s no reason whatsoever for him not to be let out.”
Mr. Rivas had said he would call his sister on Friday morning. As of Friday evening, neither his sister nor his lawyer had heard from him.
Alain Delaquérière contributed research.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
7) Behind Europe’s Anguished Words on Gaza, a Flurry of Hard Diplomacy
Images of starving children and Israel’s planned expansion of settlements spurred Britain, France and Germany to a tougher stance. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was undeterred.
By Michael D. Shear, Steven Erlanger and Roger Cohen, Aug. 10, 2025
Michael D. Shear reported from London, Steven Erlanger from Berlin and Roger Cohen from Paris.
On the morning of July 23, Chancellor Friedrich Merz of Germany and President Emmanuel Macron of France met to discuss the Gaza crisis at a 112-year-old baroque revival mansion overlooking Lake Tegel in Berlin.
Mr. Macron told Mr. Merz that he was under immense pressure at home and would most likely recognize a Palestinian state at the United Nations in late September, according to two officials familiar with the discussion, who requested anonymity to discuss private diplomatic conversations. It was a timeline, Mr. Merz responded, that gave everyone room to consider his next move.
The next day, without telling the Germans, Mr. Macron announced his decision publicly, saying that recognition of Palestine showed France’s “commitment to a just and durable peace.”
It was part of a remarkable surge of Middle East diplomacy among the European powers that first accelerated on July 19, with the widespread publication of horrific pictures of starving children, and peaked 10 days later, with a similar announcement on a Palestinian state by Prime Minister Keir Starmer of Britain.
Together, these moves amounted to a declaration of independence from the Trump administration on a major strategic issue that the Europeans have long tried to approach in tandem. Interviews with a dozen officials and diplomats revealed a frantic and at times uncoordinated push for peace after years of debate, propelled by the conclusion they could no longer wait for the United States to lead or restrain Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister.
A key part of the diplomatic effort was an eight-point plan developed quietly by British officials over the past six months and circulated among Europeans on July 29 by Jonathan Powell, Mr. Starmer’s national security adviser and a veteran mediator. Mr. Powell was an architect of the Good Friday Agreement, which ended decades of bloody conflict in Northern Ireland, and has advised on several conflicts since.
A day after Mr. Powell began circulating the British plan, 22 Arab nations signed onto a declaration that mirrored its main goals at a United Nations conference co-hosted by Mr. Macron and the Saudis. The declaration, which reflected a concerted French and Saudi diplomatic effort over several months, included for the first time a demand from the Arab League that Hamas disarm and give up power in Gaza.
After months of incremental actions, Europe’s diplomatic surge reflected the global outrage over the carnage in the enclave, but also an attempt to present Israel with a transformative show of will from Arab nations that might unlock peace negotiations. Officials familiar with the deliberations in all three countries said the flurry of activity was driven by evidence of widespread malnutrition and starvation in Gaza, growing demands from constituents for action and a conclusion that the United States had abandoned its efforts to push for peace or curtail Israeli military action.
It is unclear whether the diplomacy will make any difference on the ground. Since Hamas killed about 1,200 people and took 250 others hostage on Oct. 7, 2023, more than 60,000 Palestinians have been killed in the Israeli offensive, according to Gaza health officials, who do not distinguish between civilians and combatants.
But a senior adviser to Mr. Macron on the Middle East, who asked not to be identified to discuss private diplomacy, was blunt: We had to act.
On Thursday, Mr. Netanyahu effectively rebuffed Europe’s calls for peace when his security cabinet approved an expansion of the war in Gaza. His decision to escalate the war prompted even Mr. Merz, a strong supporter of Israel, to suspend any shipments of German arms that could be used in Gaza.
‘Waiting to Die’
It was mid-July when Mr. Starmer, his foreign secretary, David Lammy, and their aides realized that their long-running debate over recognizing a Palestinian state had reached a tipping point.
For months, they had insisted that the time was not right. In the year since Labour took office, they had denounced Israel’s bombardment of Gaza, imposed sanctions on two far-right Israeli ministers and demanded more aid be allowed into the territory. But as late as July 16, Mr. Lammy maintained to frustrated Labour lawmakers that recognizing Palestine was not the same as establishing a viable state for Palestinians alongside Israel.
“I actually want to see two states,” Mr. Lammy, who traveled twice to the occupied West Bank before becoming foreign secretary, said during a committee hearing. But he suggested that recognizing Palestine at that moment would be more of “a symbolic thing.”
But the calculus changed quickly. On July 18, Israel announced an expansion of settlements in the occupied West Bank, a move the British government denounced as a “flagrant breach of international law” that would critically undermine any chance of a two-state peace.
The next day, the news media published pictures of starving children in Gaza, their bones protruding from emaciated bodies.
It was a one-two punch, according to two senior British officials. The situation on the ground was rapidly deteriorating. Public pressure on Mr. Starmer was growing.
On July 23, Sarah Champion, a Labour lawmaker, received a call from a friend in Gaza who was struggling to find food. “My family and friends are just waiting to die now,” she said her friend told her.
The next morning, Ms. Champion sent WhatsApp messages and emails to her colleagues, asking them to sign a letter calling on the prime minister to recognize Palestine.
In the end, more than 255 signed.
One Card to Play
Mr. Macron’s announcement came late on July 24. “Peace is possible,” he wrote on social media, sharing a letter to Mahmoud Abbas, the president of the Palestinian Authority.
His language reflected the pressure he felt to move quickly: “It is urgent to implement the only viable solution to fulfill the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people.”
Mr. Macron had been signaling for weeks that he wanted to make the announcement, but at times appeared hesitant. A British official said Britain had discussed a joint recognition of Palestine, but Mr. Macron made his announcement without telling them, either.
After almost two years of war, French diplomats were frustrated by Israel’s refusal to curb its military action or to plan for the postwar stabilization of Gaza. Mr. Macron had lost patience with President Trump, who no longer seemed to support a two-state solution and appeared uninterested in pressuring Mr. Netanyahu.
The French president wanted momentum in the quest for peace, in part to support moderate Arab states that also want progress toward a Palestinian state.
With France being the only nuclear power in the European Union, a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council and home to both the largest Jewish and the largest Muslim communities in Western Europe, Mr. Macron knew recognition of Palestine would resonate with many other nations.
“France had basically one card to play,” said Rym Momtaz, an expert in French foreign policy at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “Recognition of a Palestinian state.”
‘Real Starvation Stuff’
Given its Nazi history and its status as one of Israel’s most important allies, Germany had always been unlikely to recognize a Palestinian state before it was established. But Mr. Merz was determined to be a part of the diplomatic efforts.
A day after Mr. Macron’s announcement, the German chancellor, the French president and Mr. Starmer issued a joint statement calling for an end to the war, the release of hostages, the disarmament of Hamas, an enormous influx of aid and a halt to any Israeli plans to annex more territory.
The trio held a call the next morning. They agreed the situation was “appalling,” according to a British written summary of the meeting. Food was trickling into Gaza, but not fast enough. There was no prospect of a cease-fire.
The three nations — known as the E3 — have more influence when they are aligned. Their unity also gives them political cover domestically. So Germany has not criticized either France or Britain on their decisions to recognize a Palestinian state, in part, a senior German official said, because it needs E3 unity to help manage its own sharp domestic critics on Gaza.
On Sunday, July 27, Mr. Merz spoke with Mr. Netanyahu directly.
The chancellor left the call frustrated, according to a person familiar with the conversation, who spoke anonymously given the sensitivity of the subject, after the Israeli prime minister insisted during the call that there was no starvation in Gaza and that Hamas was stealing the ample food being delivered.
The next day, Mr. Merz and Mr. Macron called in to a meeting between Mr. Trump and Mr. Starmer in Scotland. The Europeans urged Mr. Trump to pressure Mr. Netanyahu to allow more aid into Gaza, according to an official who spoke on the condition of anonymity given the sensitivity of the subject.
After the meeting, Mr. Trump acknowledged the dire situation. “That’s real starvation stuff, I see it, and you can’t fake that,” Mr. Trump told reporters. “We have to get the kids fed.”
A Unity Conference
The day after Mr. Trump left Britain, Mr. Starmer made it official. He would recognize Palestine unless Israel moved swiftly to end the war and embark on a path toward a permanent peace.
Mr. Lammy echoed his boss in a speech at the United Nations.
“It is with the hand of history on our shoulders that His Majesty’s Government therefore intends to recognize the State of Palestine,” he said. He received a standing ovation. Canada joined Britain and France soon after.
Mr. Starmer’s announcement surprised the Germans. They already viewed Mr. Macron’s announcement as counterproductive, hardening Israel’s tone and Hamas’s stance in cease-fire negotiations in Qatar, which had collapsed.
That same day, Mr. Powell began sharing drafts of the British plan with the allies in the hopes of seizing a moment when heightened global outrage was being met with new examples of political will. Mr. Powell and others in the British government had been working on the plan for months, and had struggled to get Arab leaders to sign on. Now, along with France and Germany, they tried again.
It was unclear to the diplomats whether Mr. Trump would support the plan, which incorporated some of the same ideas that officials in foreign capitals had proposed in the past to no avail.
According to two European officials, it called for a technocratic Palestinian government for Gaza linked to a reformed Palestinian Authority; an international security force; a full withdrawal by Israel; U.S.-led monitoring of the cease-fire; and — ultimately — two independent states.
The British plan also presented an “annex of implementation” with a timeline that included the previously scheduled U.N. conference, sponsored by France and Saudi Arabia, aimed at reviving efforts toward a two-state solution. The plan envisioned Arab commitments at the conference and an eventual cease-fire in Gaza, culminating in a Saudi- and French-led peace plan for two states at the U.N. General Assembly in September.
Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia had long said he wanted to normalize relations with Israel, but insisted that the war with Gaza needed to be resolved first and that there be concrete progress toward a Palestinian state.
Despite asking several times, French officials said they were unable to determine whether the United States still supported a two-state, Israeli-Palestinian peace. Secretary of State Marco Rubio reacted with fury to the idea of the conference, calling it “ill timed” and “a publicity stunt.”
The Europeans pushed hard ahead, despite the criticism. Mr. Starmer made calls to several Arab leaders, seeking support for the road map outlined in Mr. Powell’s document, including the disarmament of Hamas and the creation of a potential U.N.-led force to keep the peace after the war ended. Mr. Macron and Mr. Merz had similar discussions.
The conference’s final declaration surprised many veterans of Mideast diplomacy. “Hamas must end its rule in Gaza and hand over its weapons to the Palestinian Authority, with international engagement and support,” the document said, the first time such a call had been made collectively by all the Arab nations.
The declaration also welcomed the idea of “a temporary international stabilization mission” in Gaza that would operate at the direction of the United Nations.
In another era, under a different Israeli government, the declaration might have been embraced by Israel as an offramp from almost two years of brutal war.
It might also have been a moment for the United States to assert its leverage as Israel’s closest ally and the historic guarantor of its security. But Mr. Trump has shown little interest in pressuring Mr. Netanyahu to restrain his military or to wind down the war. The president has not objected publicly to the Israeli decision to take over Gaza City.
Instead, Israel and the United States both rejected the U.N. declaration.
Diplomats in Britain, France and Germany, many of whom had worked for years toward peace between Israel and Palestinians, expressed frustration at the lack of engagement by Mr. Trump, perhaps the only person in the world with the ability to push the Israeli prime minister to change course.
They acknowledged that Mr. Netanyahu’s actions in recent days are evidence that American power is necessary to make a real difference on the ground in the conflict.
Still, several said that while they had known Mr. Netanyahu was likely to dismiss the idea, they had to try. The alternative, they said, was to simply walk away — a choice few were willing to make.
Aurelien Breeden and Ségolène Le Stradic contributed reporting from Paris.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
8) Far-Right Israeli Minister Calls for Quicker Military Moves in Gaza
Bezalel Smotrich, the hard-line finance minister, called a plan to gradually expand operations in Gaza “foolish,” saying that Israel should move more decisively and quickly to defeat Hamas.
By Isabel Kershner, Reporting from Jerusalem, Aug. 10, 2025
Palestinians waiting for aid in Gaza City last month. The Israeli military is preparing to take control of the city. Saher Alghorra for The New York Times
A far-right Israeli minister has blasted a plan by the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to gradually expand military operations in Gaza, calling it a “foolish” half-measure that would undermine efforts to defeat the militant group.
Israel’s security cabinet approved a decision by a majority vote early Friday for the military to prepare to take control of Gaza City as a first step. But those preparations are expected to take weeks or months, potentially leaving open options for a diplomatic maneuver that would halt or reverse the military operation.
Bezalel Smotrich, Israel’s hard-line finance minister, said in a video statement on Saturday night that he did not support the decision. He called on Mr. Netanyahu to reconvene the security cabinet and pledge to go for a “sharp, clear path” to a decisive victory over Hamas with “no more stops in the middle.”
Mr. Netanyahu said at a news briefing on Sunday that the cabinet had decided to dismantle Hamas in Gaza City and also in the central areas of the enclave, where the military has largely not operated before. He declined to elaborate on how long that would take.
“Given Hamas’s refusal to lay down its arms, Israel has no choice but to finish the job and complete the defeat of Hamas,” Mr. Netanyahu said. “Dismantling the two remaining Hamas strongholds,” he added, referring to Gaza City and the central areas, and showing them on a map, “is the best way to end the war.”
The comments by Mr. Smotrich could again threaten the stability of Mr. Netanyahu’s fractious and tenuous coalition government. Mr. Smotrich and another right-wing minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir, have vowed to leave the coalition if Mr. Netanyahu relented on his tough line on Gaza and Hamas.
Mr. Smotrich said Mr. Netanyahu had assured him of “a dramatic plan” to defeat Hamas by means of a “lightning-fast military victory.”
But Mr. Netanyahu had done an “about face,” he said, and along with the cabinet had “decided once again to do more of the same: launching a military operation that is not aimed at resolving the issue.” Instead, Mr. Smotrich added, the new plan’s objective was to pressure Hamas to agree to a partial deal that would usher in a temporary cease-fire and see hostages being held in Gaza exchanged for Palestinian prisoners in Israel.
Israel’s security cabinet deliberated on Thursday night about how to proceed in Gaza, and released an ambiguous pre-dawn statement on Friday with few details.
The cabinet set a deadline of Oct. 7 for the military to complete the evacuation southward of the hundreds of thousands of Palestinian residents of Gaza City, before any military push into the city, according to an Israeli official speaking on the condition of anonymity to share details of the confidential discussion.
It will also take time for the military to call up enough reserve forces to carry out the mission, and the details of the plan could always change.
Mr. Smotrich has been pressing for Israel to impose sovereignty in Gaza and pave the way for renewed Jewish settlement there, 20 years after Israel withdrew its forces and evacuated all of its settlers from the enclave.
Oct. 7 is a symbolic date that will mark the second anniversary of the Hamas-led attack on Israel that ignited the war. About 1,200 people were killed in the attack, with 250 taken hostage, according to the Israeli authorities. More than 60,000 people have been killed in Gaza since the war began, according to health officials in the territory, who do not distinguish between civilians and combatants.
The risk for Mr. Netanyahu is that his latest plan could cost the lives of many more Palestinians and Israeli soldiers while also endangering the 20 hostages believed to still be alive.
Israel captured much of Gaza City, the main city in the enclave, in the first months of war, before relinquishing it all on the false assumption that the military had achieved operational control of the area.
Mr. Smotrich said that if Hamas were to agree to a deal, Israel would “retreat once again” and allow the militant group to recover and to rearm. He stopped short of saying he would resign but said he had “lost faith” in Mr. Netanyahu.
Tzvi Sukkot, a member of Mr. Smotrich’s Religious Zionism party, suggested on Sunday that it might be time to break with Mr. Netanyahu’s coalition and for Israel to go to an early election. The next election is currently scheduled for October 2026.
But Mr. Ben-Gvir, the leader of another far-right party on whose support Mr. Netanyahu relies, praised the plan to conquer all of Gaza City and said it would involve displacing one million Palestinians.
The government’s plan has prompted international censure as well as mounting domestic opposition, not least because it goes against the recommendations of the military high command.
Relatives of the hostages and of victims of the Hamas-led October 2023 attack have called on Israeli businesses and workers to go on strike on Aug. 17, aiming to shut down the economy to protest the cabinet decision.
Myra Noveck and Lia Lapidot contributed reporting.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
9) In Election Cases, Supreme Court Keeps Removing Guardrails
The justices, having effectively blessed partisan gerrymandering, may be poised to eliminate the remaining pillar of the Voting Rights Act.
By Adam Liptak, Reporting from Washington, Aug. 10, 2025
President Lyndon B. Johnson signing the Voting Rights Act of 1965 in a ceremony in the President’s Room at the Capitol. Associated Press
If Republicans succeed in pulling off an aggressively partisan gerrymander of congressional districts in Texas, they will owe the Supreme Court a debt of gratitude.
In the two decades Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. has led the Supreme Court, the justices have reshaped American elections not just by letting state lawmakers like those in Texas draw voting maps warped by politics, but also by gutting the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and amplifying the role of money in politics.
Developments in recent weeks signaled that some members of the court think there is more work to be done in removing legal guardrails governing elections. There are now signs that court is considering striking down or severely constraining the remaining pillar of the Voting Rights Act, a towering achievement of the civil rights movement that has protected the rights of minority voters since it was enacted 60 years ago last week.
Taken together, the court’s actions in election cases in recent years have shown great tolerance for partisan gamesmanship and great skepticism about federal laws on campaign spending and minority rights. The court’s rulings have been of a piece with its conservative wing’s jurisprudential commitments: giving states leeway in many realms, insisting on an expansive interpretation of the First Amendment and casting a skeptical eye on government racial classifications.
At bottom, the court’s election-law decisions seem aimed at dismantling decisions of the famously liberal court led by Chief Justice Earl Warren from 1953 to 1969.
In his memoirs, Chief Justice Warren described decisions establishing the equality of each citizen’s vote as his court’s most important achievements. That made them more important in his view even than Brown v. Board of Education, which ordered the desegregation of public schools.
Richard L. Hasen, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, said the Roberts court may be moving in the opposite direction.
“At least some of the conservative justices on the court seem ready to turn the clock back to the early 1960s,” he said, “when courts imposed very little constraints on the most blatant power grabs, and before Congress exercised its constitutional powers to protect voting rights.”
President Trump’s effort to create five additional Republican House seats in Texas, for instance, is possible in part thanks to a 2019 Supreme Court decision that said federal courts have no role to play in assessing the constitutionality of voting maps distorted by politics.
Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the majority in that 5-to-4 decision, Rucho v. Common Cause, acknowledged that “excessive partisanship in districting leads to results that reasonably seem unjust.” Indeed, quoting an earlier decision, he said that drawing voting districts to give the party in power lopsided advantages was “incompatible with democratic principles.”
But in a telling statement reflecting his view of the judicial role in protecting voters, the chief justice wrote that federal courts were powerless to address this grave problem. “Partisan gerrymandering claims,” he wrote, “present political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts.”
In dissent, Justice Elena Kagan said the court had betrayed its most fundamental commitment — to protect democracy.
“These gerrymanders enabled politicians to entrench themselves in office as against voters’ preferences,” she wrote. “They promoted partisanship above respect for the popular will. They encouraged a politics of polarization and dysfunction. If left unchecked, gerrymanders like the ones here may irreparably damage our system of government.”
The Rucho decision was part of a larger trend, said Derek T. Muller, a law professor at Notre Dame.
“These developments reflect a federal judiciary increasingly unwilling to engage in judicial review of the political process,” he said. “And political actors in response are flexing the new power they have.”
The drama in Texas, spurred by Mr. Trump’s desire to bolster Republican chances of retaining control of the House in next year’s midterm elections, caused Democratic lawmakers to leave the state in a bid to stall the plan. The controversy also shows signs of growing into a national fight, with Republican- and Democratic-led state legislatures hatching plans to redraw House maps for partisan advantage.
“We tell ourselves this story that every two years, voters go into the voting booth and pick their member of the House of Representatives,” Pamela Karlan, a law professor at Stanford and a former Justice Department official in Democratic administrations, said on a podcast last week. “And right now it’s the other way around. The politicians are going into a room and picking their voters.”
Writing for the majority in the Rucho case, Chief Justice Roberts said that state courts and independent redistricting commissions still have a role to play in addressing partisan gerrymandering.
At the federal level, though, what remained after Rucho was mostly a part of the Voting Rights Act. It was concerned with discrimination against minority voters and not with partisanship, though race and political affiliations are often hard to untangle.
For nearly 50 years, the central provision of the law imposed federal supervision on states with a history of discrimination, requiring advance approval from the Justice Department or a federal court for all sorts of changes to voting procedures.
The court effectively eliminated that part of the law — its Section 5 — in 2013 in Shelby County v. Holder, by a 5 to 4 vote. That led to a wave of measures making it harder to vote.
But Chief Justice Roberts, again writing for the majority, said the main remaining tool in the Voting Rights Act, its Section 2, remained available. That part of the law allowed for after-the-fact challenges to voting maps that unlawfully diluted minority voting power.
“Section 2 is permanent, applies nationwide and is not at issue in this case,” the chief justice wrote.
Now Section 2 may be in peril, in two ways.
On the last day of the Supreme Court term in June, the justices announced that they would not immediately decide a case from Louisiana testing voting maps that included two majority Black districts to satisfy the Voting Rights Act. A lower court said race had played too large a role in the process, while the state said lawmakers had been motivated by permissible partisan politics.
In an unsigned order in June, the court said it would hear a second argument in the case in the term starting in October.
Such re-arguments are rare, and they can signal that the court is about to convert a routine case into a blockbuster. In 2009, for instance, the court called for a second argument in the Citizens United campaign finance case, turning a minor and quirky case about a movie few had seen into a judicial landmark.
That decision, which allowed unlimited campaign spending by corporations and unions, overturned two precedents and struck down part of a bipartisan 2002 law that sought to limit the role of money in politics.
In their order in June in the new case from Louisiana, the justices said they would pose additional questions “in due course.”
They chose the evening of Friday, Aug. 1 to do so.
The question was a doozy, asking the parties to file supplemental briefs on whether Louisiana’s “intentional creation of a second majority-minority congressional district violates the Fourteenth or Fifteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.”
The question can be read in several ways. But it certainly suggested that the court may consider holding Section 2 unconstitutional.
Section 2 bars any voting procedure that “results in a denial or abridgment of the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race.” That happens, the provision goes on, when racial minorities have less opportunity to elect representatives of their choice than other voters.
Conservative justices have long argued that there is a tension between the statute’s goal of protecting minority voting rights and a colorblind conception of the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause.
Holding Section 2 unconstitutional could be a boon for Republicans, said Nicholas Stephanopoulos, a law professor at Harvard, as it would allow states to eliminate minority-opportunity districts altogether.
That would make it easy, he said, to draw completely Republican maps in Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and elsewhere.
Even if the court stops short of holding Section 2 unconstitutional, it could do great damage to it in another case the court may consider in the term that starts in October. A theory recently adopted by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit says that only the government, not voters and other private parties, can sue to enforce the provision.
The Supreme Court paused the Eighth Circuit’s ruling last month, but it may well agree to hear a promised appeal in the coming months, particularly as three members of the court — Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Neil M. Gorsuch — noted dissents.
Accepting the Eighth Circuit’s theory, Professor Karlan said, would cripple the law calling the private right of action “critical to having a V.R.A. at all.”
The controversies over voting rights point to a larger issue about the nature of democracy, said Samuel Issacharoff, a law professor at New York University.
“The majority of today should always fear that it may find itself in the minority tomorrow and that its rules can be used against it,” he said. “What happens when this breaks down? What happens if the majority of today sees this as the last chance to take it all?”
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
10) U.S. Military Is Preparing to Deploy National Guard in D.C., Official Says
The deployment is part of President Trump’s crackdown on street crime in the city.
By Eric Schmitt, Aug. 11, 2025
National Guard troops were deployed in Los Angeles over the summer. Credit...Philip Cheung for The New York Times
The U.S. military is preparing to activate National Guard troops in Washington, D.C., as part of President Trump’s crackdown on street crime in the city, a Defense Department official said on Monday.
Mr. Trump had not approved any official deployment orders as of early Monday. But he is expected to announce at a news conference at the White House that up to several hundred District of Columbia National Guardsmen will be sent to support law enforcement officers in the capital, the Defense Department official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss operational matters. No other details were available early Monday.
In a Truth Social post Monday morning, Mr. Trump said: “I will, MAKE OUR CAPITAL GREAT AGAIN!” Though crime rates in Washington, D.C., have been falling, Mr. Trump has claimed that they are “totally out of control” and has threatened a federal takeover.
The National Guard troops, whose possible activation was previously reported by Reuters, would probably not have arrest authorities. Instead, they would support law enforcement officials or free them up to carry out patrol duties, the Defense Department official said.
The Trump administration also plans to temporarily reassign 120 F.B.I. agents in Washington to nighttime patrol duties as part of Mr. Trump’s crackdown, according to people familiar with the matter. Most of the agents will be pulled from their regular duties at the F.B.I.’s Washington field office, the people said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to describe details of an effort that were not meant to be public.
The troop activation in Washington comes after the deployment this summer of nearly 5,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles with orders to help quell protests that had erupted over immigration raids and to protect the federal agents conducting them. All but about 250 of those National Guard troops have since been withdrawn.
In his first term, Mr. Trump called up National Guard soldiers and federal law enforcement personnel to forcibly clear peaceful protests during the Black Lives Matter protests after the police killing of George Floyd in 2020.
Unlike a state’s governor, the District of Columbia does not have control over its National Guard, giving the president broad leeway to deploy those troops.
Devlin Barrett contributed reporting.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
11) Israeli Critics Say Netanyahu Plan to Capture Gaza City Lacks Clear Aims
There have been vague statements by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but there is little clarity over the operation.
By Patrick Kingsley, Reporting from Jerusalem, Aug. 11, 2025
The scene on Monday after an Israeli strike killed several Al Jazeera journalists in Gaza City. Saher Alghorra for The New York Times
Since its announcement on Friday, Israel’s plan to capture Gaza City has been roundly criticized inside and outside Israel. Palestinians and foreign leaders say the plan will prolong the war and the suffering of Palestinian civilians. The Israeli left says it will likely endanger hostages still held by Hamas. The Israeli right says it will not do enough to defeat the Palestinian armed group.
Now, a new criticism is emerging within Israel: There is little clarity over what exactly this operation would involve.
While there have been vague proclamations by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s military has yet to complete the tactical battle plan. There has been no public confirmation of how long any occupation of the city will last — or when it will begin, and how it will differ from Israel’s capture of Gaza City in the opening months of the war in 2023.
Intense Israeli strikes continued overnight into Monday, killing several Al Jazeera journalists and forcing the displacement of civilians in some Gaza City neighborhoods. But the Army has not yet mobilized the tens of thousands of military reservists who will most likely be needed to carry out the broader operation. And while Israel has threatened to force out the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians still living in Gaza City, it has yet to order their expulsion.
Over the weekend, Mr. Netanyahu doubled down on the threat to capture Gaza City, saying at a press briefing that Israel had “no choice” but to proceed because Hamas had not surrendered.
Yet he gave little further detail about the plan.
“What does Netanyahu want? Does he want a hostage deal or to conquer Gaza?” asked Nahum Barnea, one of Israel’s best-known columnists, in an analysis published on Monday in Yediot Ahronot, a centrist broadsheet.
“I don’t understand what the military meaning of ‘seizing control’ is,” Mr. Barnea added. “I’m not sure that anyone in the military does either.”
Regardless of its meaning, Mr. Netanyahu’s decision to continue any kind of war has enraged foreign leaders, some of whom are pushing for Israel to hand over power in Gaza to an international force backed by the United Nations.
President Emmanuel Macron of France said in a statement on Monday that the expansion of the war constituted “a disaster of unprecedented gravity and a headlong rush into permanent war. “Israeli hostages and the people of Gaza will continue to be the first victims of this strategy.”
Mr. Macron added: “To this end, we propose a U.N.-mandated stabilization mission to secure the Gaza Strip, protect the civilian population, and support Palestinian governance. That alone, Mr. Macron said, “can meet the needs of the people of Gaza and carry out operations to disarm and demilitarize Hamas.”
Mediators are still trying to bring about a truce between Israel and Hamas. Some Israeli officials say that by announcing a major escalation in the conflict while delaying its enactment, Mr. Netanyahu may simply be trying to pressure Hamas into making greater concessions in those negotiations.
The decision to seek control of Gaza City has angered all sides — including Palestinians, Israeli critics of Mr. Netanyahu who say it should never have been made at all and Israeli right-wingers who say the plan does not go far enough.
“The only tangible idea is to protract the war. The details do not matter to Netanyahu,” said Alon Pinkas, an Israeli political commentator and former ambassador.
“The war never had clear political objectives aligned with military operations. There was never an endgame, never a political vision of postwar Gaza,” Mr. Pinkas said in an interview, adding that the latest Israeli proposal “evinces this to its highest and most dangerous form.”
Those at the other end of the political spectrum also decried the lack of detail provided, saying that it showed Mr. Netanyahu was not serious about defeating Hamas.
“The plan is only ‘more of the same,’” said Hallel Biton Rosen, writing for the website of the far-right Channel 14 news network. “We must not stop. We must continue with full force until total victory.”
The gap between Mr. Netanyahu’s ambitions and his actions is a familiar one: It extends a pattern of behavior that he has displayed since the war began in October 2023.
From the earliest weeks of the war, Mr. Netanyahu avoided making detailed plans for the war’s endgame, according to an investigation published last month by The New York Times. Officials in Israel and the U.S. say that decision has made it harder to steer the war toward a denouement.
Throughout the war, the prime minister often made bold claims about the damage he hoped to wreak on Hamas, and he has often been unable to make good on those promises. While decimating Gaza, ruining the lives of Palestinian civilians, the Israeli military has failed to dislodge Hamas’s remaining fighters.
In March, Mr. Netanyahu broke a cease-fire with Hamas to begin a military operation that he said would destroy the group. When it failed to do so, he expanded the campaign in May, again on the pretext that extra aggression would finally force Hamas to either surrender on the battlefield or make compromises at the negotiating table.
Three months later, that expanded operation had failed to either defeat Hamas or secure the release of the remaining hostages — leading Mr. Netanyahu to announce the even grander plan to capture Gaza City.
The decision to do so marks a return to a tactic that Mr. Netanyahu tried at the start of the war, when he first ordered the Israeli Army to capture Gaza City. Back then, the Israeli military took control of most of the city, but relinquished it to avoid getting bogged down in an attritional war, which allowed Hamas to retake control.
It is still unclear how, second time around, Israel intends to prevent a similar outcome.
Myra Noveck, Rawan Sheikh Ahmad and Ségolène Le Stradic contributed reporting.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
12) Israeli Strike Kills 4 Al Jazeera Journalists, Network Says
Anas al-Sharif, a well-known correspondent, was among those killed. Israel said it had targeted Mr. al-Sharif, claiming he worked for Hamas, which he had denied.
By Ephrat Livni, Published Aug. 10, 2025, Updated Aug. 11, 2025
Mr. al-Sharif in Gaza City last year. The Committee to Protect Journalists said last month that it was “gravely worried” about his safety. AFPTV, via Agence France-Presse
An Israeli strike near a hospital in Gaza City on Sunday night killed four Al Jazeera journalists, the network said, and Gazan health officials reported at least one additional fatality.
The Israeli military confirmed that it had conducted a strike targeting one of the men killed, whom it accused of being a Hamas fighter posing as a reporter, an allegation that he and the network had rejected.
The Government Media Office in Gaza, which is run by Hamas, said in a statement that a strike on a “journalists’ tent near Al-Shifa Hospital” killed two reporters — Anas al-Sharif and Mohammed Qraiqeh — and three photographers — Ibrahim Zaher, Moamen Aliwa and Mohammed Noufal — and called the attack “deliberate and premeditated.”
The director of Al Shifa hospital, Dr. Mohammed Abu Salmiya, told The New York Times that an Israeli drone strike on a tent in front of Al Shifa hospital in Gaza City, which was housing journalists, killed seven people, including five journalists and two others, and wounded eight.
Al Jazeera reported that four of the five journalists who were killed in the strike worked for its network. In a statement, the network condemned what it called “the premeditated assassination" of correspondents and photographers, calling the attack “a desperate attempt to silence voices in anticipation of the occupation of Gaza.”
The Israeli military in a statement on Sunday said that it had struck in Gaza City without specifying where, and said that it had targeted “the terrorist Anas al-Sharif, who posed as a journalist for the Al Jazeera network,” and had taken steps “to mitigate harm to civilians.”
The military accused Mr. al-Sharif of being “the head of a terrorist cell” that was “responsible for advancing rocket attacks against Israeli civilians” and soldiers. The Israeli statement said that it had previously “disclosed intelligence information and many documents found in the Gaza Strip, confirming his military affiliation to Hamas.”
Mr. al-Sharif, a well-known correspondent for Al Jazeera, was among six of the network’s reporters based in Gaza whom Israel accused in October 2024 of being fighters for Hamas and Palestinian Jihad. At the time, the Israel military distributed what it said were documents seized from Gaza that showed membership lists, phone directories and salary slips for members of the Qassam Brigades and the Al-Quds Brigades, the armed wings of the two groups. The lists included names matching those reporters.
But Al Jazeera and Mr. al-Sharif denied the accusation, with the network saying the allegations were “fabricated.”
Last month, the Committee to Protect Journalists said it was “gravely worried” about Mr. al-Sharif’s safety, accusing the Israeli military of targeting him with a “smear campaign, which he believes is a precursor to his assassination.” The organization said that the Israeli military had “stepped up” its campaign to discredit Mr. al-Sharif “since the journalist cried on air while reporting on starvation in Gaza.”
Israel has long had an antagonistic relationship with Al Jazeera, the Qatar-based broadcaster, and the tensions have only escalated during the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza.
While other major media outlets have been blocked from entering the enclave by Israel and Egypt, Al Jazeera has managed to position numerous reporters on the ground, providing a steady stream of stories about the harrowing conditions for civilians amid mass privation and hunger.
More than 61,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza since the war began, according to local health officials who do not distinguish between civilians and combatants.
Al Jazeera has accused Israel of trying to conceal the brutality of the war. Israel says that the outlet supports Hamas and that some of its journalists are themselves militants, an allegation the broadcaster has strongly rejected.
Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, have long called the network a “mouthpiece” for Hamas. Last year, Israel shut down Al Jazeera in the country and shuttered its offices on security grounds, and Israeli forces later raided the channel’s offices in the West Bank.
The Israeli military last summer killed Ismail al-Ghoul, an Al Jazeera reporter in Gaza, in an airstrike that also took the life of another reporter. The Israeli military claimed Mr. al-Ghoul was a member of Hamas’s military wing.
Mr. al-Sharif was posting on social media until shortly before he died. “Relentless bombardment,” he wrote on X in what would be one of his final messages. “For two hours, the Israeli aggression has intensified on Gaza City.”
The strike on Mr. al-Sharif and the others in Gaza City came after Israel’s security cabinet on Friday voted to intensify its military operations in the area and to take over the city, where much of Gaza’s population has been sheltering after repeated displacement orders since the Oct. 7, 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel that killed about 1,200 people in Israel, led to the abduction of about 250 and set off the war in Gaza.
Foreign journalists have not been allowed to enter Gaza to report independently from the enclave, so most of the reporting emerging from the war has come from Palestinian reporters. In recent weeks, as a hunger crisis has gripped Gaza, and reporters on the ground have talked about losing the strength to work, news organizations have called on Israel to let in more aid and reporters.
Mr. al-Sharif described himself as “drowning in hunger” late last month.
Ameera Harouda, Fatima AbdulKarim, and Iyad Abuheweila contributed reporting.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
13) The Palestinian Who Led a Militia, a Theater and a Jailbreak
Zakaria Zubeidi inspired Palestinians and horrified Israelis. Freed from jail during a recent truce, he questions what his many lives have achieved.
By Patrick Kingsley and Fatima AbdulKarim, Reporting from Ramallah, West Bank, Aug. 12, 2025
When Zakaria Zubeidi was suddenly freed from an Israeli prison in February, it was a rare and fleeting moment of joy for Palestinians.
Hundreds turned out in Ramallah, a Palestinian city in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, to celebrate Mr. Zubeidi’s arrival from jail, cheering him as a returning hero. They chanted his name as he took his first steps of freedom, some of them hoisting him on their shoulders. A child clutched a tin of hair gel that Mr. Zubeidi had given him six years ago, before he was jailed. “I want to show Uncle Zakaria that I kept it,” said Watan Abu Al Rob, 11, “and I’ll only use it now that he is free.”
Mr. Zubeidi, 49, is the best-known of the Palestinian prisoners swapped for Israeli hostages during a brief truce in Gaza earlier this year. In the early 2000s, he inspired Palestinians — and terrified Israelis — by leading a militant group affiliated with Fatah, Hamas’s secular rival.
He drew international attention when, several years later, he stopped fighting and helped set up a theater. Jailed a decade later, he cemented his legend when he briefly escaped prison through a tunnel, before being recaptured days later.
Now, months after his release, Mr. Zubeidi has become emblematic of something else: a sense of hopelessness that imbues Palestinian life. In a recent conversation with The New York Times — his first major interview as a free man — Mr. Zubeidi said he felt that his life as a militant, a theater leader and a prisoner had ultimately proved futile. None of it had helped forge a Palestinian state, he said, and it may never do so.
“We have to reconsider our tools,” Mr. Zubeidi said in an interview in Ramallah. “We founded a theater, and we tried cultural resistance — what did that do?” he asked. “We tried the rifle, we tried shooting. There’s no solution.”
As if to illustrate his point, Mr. Zubeidi removed several dentures from his jaw — revealing an entirely toothless mouth. His teeth and jaw had been broken, Mr. Zubeidi said, during his recent incarceration. He was already in custody during Hamas’s raid on Israel in October 2023; in the weeks that followed, the prison guards repeatedly beat him, he said. The descriptions of his treatment echoed testimonies from at least 10 other prisoners jailed in Israel since the start of the war who were interviewed by The Times.
In a statement, the Israel Prison Service said it was “not aware of the claims you described, and as far as we know, no such events have occurred.”
Cut off from the news media in jail, Mr. Zubeidi emerged after 16 months of war to discover that Gaza had been decimated by Israel’s counterattack. He found large parts of Jenin, his hometown in the northern West Bank, destroyed and depopulated by Israeli raids. His own home — in an area sealed off by the Israeli military — was unreachable. His 21-year-old son, also a militant, had been killed in an Israeli strike. On every front, Palestinian strategies seemed to be failing.
“But what is the solution?” Mr. Zubeidi asked. “I’m asking that question myself.”
As a young militant, Mr. Zubeidi had a clearer sense of mission.
In the early 2000s, following the collapse of peace talks, he joined a militia in Jenin in the belief that it was the best way of achieving Palestinian sovereignty. The immediate spur was a provocative visit by an Israeli leader, accompanied by hundreds of police officers, to a major mosque complex in Jerusalem that is built on the site of an ancient Jewish temple. Protests and unrest broke out in Arab areas of Israel, prompting a deadly Israeli crackdown that horrified Mr. Zubeidi.
As the protests escalated into an armed uprising, known as the second intifada, Mr. Zubeidi joined the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, a major Fatah-affiliated armed group in Jenin, swiftly rising in the ranks to become its leader.
To Israelis, Mr. Zubeidi was a terrorist. Palestinians killed roughly 1,000 Israelis during the five-year intifada, as the uprising morphed from protests to bombing and shooting attacks on Israeli buses, nightclubs, hotels and cafes. Mr. Zubeidi denies involvement in any murder, but he was accused of ordering several of these attacks, including a shooting at the offices of a political party that killed several people. He was eventually charged with 24 offenses, mostly related to violence, but no verdict was reached before his release.
“His release is dangerous,” Bella Avraham, the wife of a victim of that attack, told the Israeli news media after Mr. Zubeidi was freed in February. “I expect the state to hunt him down until his last day.”
To Palestinians, however, Mr. Zubeidi was a freedom fighter who led the defense of Palestinian land against an occupying army. Israelis killed about 3,000 Palestinians during the second intifada. When the Israeli military raided Jenin in 2002, destroying much of Mr. Zubeidi’s neighborhood, he led a squad of gunmen that tried to repel the attack. He drew international attention after featuring in a documentary, “Arna’s Children,” that chronicled some of this paramilitary activity.
In one memorable scene, the filmmakers documented an argument about guerrilla tactics between Mr. Zubeidi and a fellow fighter, Ala Sabbagh. Mr. Zubeidi survived the Israeli raid by hiding in the ruins, and disapproved of Mr. Sabbagh’s decision to survive by surrendering to the soldiers.
“I’d never give myself up,” Mr. Zubeidi boasted to his friend. “Never!”
“I’d rather die,” Mr. Zubeidi added later.
In time, Mr. Zubeidi took a more nuanced approach to battling Israel. As the Israeli and Palestinian leaderships tried to restore calm, Israel offered an amnesty in 2007 to hundreds of militants, including Mr. Zubeidi, on the condition that they give up their arms.
Mr. Zubeidi accepted, telling interviewers at that time that the intifada had failed. He shifted his focus to a theater he had recently founded with a leftist Israeli actor and a Swedish activist. The Freedom Theater in Jenin organized drama workshops for young people in the city — a program that continues — and staged adaptations of works like “Waiting for Godot” and “Animal Farm.”
Mr. Zubeidi did not direct any plays, but his involvement in the theater’s administration helped insulate it from the opposition of Jenin’s conservative residents.
Mr. Zubeidi’s ultimate goal was still to end the Israeli occupation, he said. But his involvement in the theater reflected an evolving approach to achieving that goal. His aim was not to replace or renounce armed Palestinian activity, but to provide it with an intellectual and cultural ballast.
“The media said Zakaria moved from armed struggle to cultural struggle,” Mr. Zubeidi told us, referring to himself in the third person. “But it’s not about being one thing or another,” he added. “How did I open the theater door? I broke it with my rifle.”
Accusing him of breaking the terms of his amnesty, Israel rearrested him in 2019, setting the stage for his most memorable exploits yet. As he awaited trial in 2021, Mr. Zubeidi escaped his prison cell through a 32-yard tunnel that a group of fellow inmates had dug from their cell’s bathroom.
Though all six escapees were rearrested within days, and Mr. Zubeidi was convicted for the jailbreak, their quest for freedom captivated and galvanized Palestinians, enshrining Mr. Zubeidi’s cult status. Until Israel’s bombardment devastated the territory, murals commemorating the escape could be found on walls as far away as Gaza City.
Yet Mr. Zubeidi looks back on the escape with characteristic ambivalence, viewing it as both necessary and counterproductive.
“It was impossible for me to be imprisoned and not seek freedom,” he said. “The prisoner who does not think about escaping prison does not deserve freedom.”
He got stuck in the tunnel for 10 minutes and had to be dislodged by a fellow escapee, he said. When he finally felt the warm night air on his skin, he said, it was like “freedom flooding into my veins.”
Yet the escape ultimately achieved little, he said.
He always knew it would end in death or recapture, he said, and sure enough, Israeli policeman found Mr. Zubeidi days later, hiding in a truck.
The episode prompted the Israeli prison service to impose harsher conditions on Palestinian prisoners, and Mr. Zubeidi himself was placed in solitary confinement.
For Mr. Zubeidi, it is an outcome that exemplifies the bind faced by all Palestinians, whether they oppose Israel through peaceful or violent means.
The intifada failed to dislodge Israel. But the Palestinian Authority, the semiautonomous body that cooperates with Israel to administer Palestinian cities in the West Bank, has failed to achieve statehood with its peaceful approach.
For many Israelis, that is because the P.A. is too insincere, too incompetent and too weak to be trusted with a state.
But Mr. Zubeidi says it is Israel that is the obstacle — too strong to be defeated with violence, and too selfish to reward genuine Palestinian partnership with statehood.
“There is no peaceful solution and there is no military solution,” he said. “Why? Because the Israelis don’t want to give us anything.”
“It’s impossible to uproot us from here,” Mr. Zubeidi concluded. “And we don’t have any tools to uproot them.”
Still, Mr. Zubeidi has not given up the search for an answer. Since his release, he said, he has begun studying for a Ph.D. at Birzeit University, a leading Palestinian college, that he hopes will help him better understand the complexities of the conflict.
The subject?
Israel studies.
Lia Lapidot contributed reporting from Tel Aviv and Gabby Sobelman from Rehovot, Israel.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
14) Strike That Killed 5 Journalists Was Aimed at One of Them, Israel Says
Officials accused Anas al-Sharif of being a Hamas operative posing as a reporter. Al Jazeera says he and the other four victims all worked for the network.
By Matthew Mpoke Bigg, Aug. 11, 2025
Al Jazeera staff members gathering at the network’s studios in Doha, Qatar, on Monday, to remember their colleagues killed in Gaza. Ibraheem Abu Mustafa/Reuters
Palestinians in Gaza held a funeral procession on Monday for journalists for the Al Jazeera network who were killed in an Israeli airstrike on Sunday that has been condemned by the United Nations and media watchdog organizations.
Israel’s military said it carried out the attack on the tent where the men had worked near a hospital in Gaza City. Al Jazeera said five of its journalists were killed. A hospital official said that in total, seven people were killed.
Here’s a brief look at the journalists:
Anas al-Sharif
A correspondent with the Qatar-based network, Mr. al-Sharif had delivered many live on-air reports, often from the scene of recent bombardments in Gaza. With news organizations generally barred by Israel from entering the territory, he and other Al Jazeera reporters have become symbols of the determination to broadcast reports about the war and conditions in that enclave to the Arab world.
Israel’s military said on social media on Sunday that it had conducted a targeted strike on Mr. al-Sharif, whom it accused of being a Hamas fighter posing as a reporter. In a statement, it called him “the head of a terrorist cell” and said it had taken steps to mitigate civilian harm.
Al Jazeera refuted that charge, and in a statement called the killing “a desperate attempt to silence the voices exposing the impending seizure and occupation of Gaza.”
Israel’s government has accused Al Jazeera reporters of serving the interests of Hamas by presenting an exaggerated and distorted picture of conditions in Gaza.
Mr. al-Sharif, a 28-year-old father of two, was born in the Jabaliya refugee camp in northern Gaza and graduated from Al-Aqsa University’s Faculty of Media, Al Jazeera said on its website. His father was killed by Israel in an airstrike on the family home in December 2023, the network said.
Mohammed Qreiqeh
Al Jazeera said that Mr. Qreiqeh, 33, a correspondent, had made his final live report shortly before he was killed. He was born in Gaza City and lived in the city’s Shujayea neighborhood, it said, adding that he held a degree in journalism and media from the Islamic University of Gaza. His brother had been killed in an airstrike on Gaza City earlier this year, the website said.
Ibrahim Zaher
A cameraman with the network, Mr. Zaher, 25, was from the Jabaliya camp in northern Gaza, Al Jazeera said.
Mohammed Noufal
The network described Mr. Noufal, 29, as an assistant. Its website said he too was from Jabaliya. It said that his mother and brother had been killed in earlier Israeli attacks and that his brother, Ibrahim, worked as a cameraman for the network.
Moamen Aliwa
Al Jazeera identified Mr. Aliwa, 23, as a cameraman, but gave no further biographical information about him. The network has not responded to a request for more detail about Mr. Aliwa and the other journalists killed.
Reuters news agency reported that a freelance reporter, Mohammad Al-Khaldi, also died in the attack, citing medics at al-Shifa hospital in northern Gaza. The hospital director said the attack killed seven people in all, and wounded a number of others.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*