Over 1,000 rabbis accuse Israel of weaponizing hunger
The letter, published on Friday, surpassed 1,000 signatures by early Monday. Jonathan Wittenberg, a UK-based rabbi, told The Jewish Chronicle last week that he was leading a campaign to break through 'the callous indifference to starvation' and appeal to 'the moral reputation not just of Israel, but of Judaism itself.'Israel has blamed poor international coordination and Hamas, which it accuses of stealing food and attacking distribution points. Israeli officials argue that the armed group is using the 'famine narrative' as leverage in hostage talks.West Jerusalem has pledged to 'improve the humanitarian response,' resuming food airdrops and implementing 'tactical pauses' over the weekend to allow more than 100 trucks to deliver supplies to Gaza. Lazzarini, however, dismissed the measures as 'a smokescreen,' accusing Israel of 'whitewashing its image.' He insisted that Israel should instead unblock access for 6,000 aid trucks waiting to enter the enclave.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
5 hours ago
- Russia Today
Israeli government tries to fire head of Netanyahu corruption probe
The Israeli government voted unanimously on Monday to fire Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, who is currently prosecuting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for corruption. The move was immediately suspended by the Israeli High Court. Netanyahu and his supporters have accused Baharav-Miara of exceeding her powers by blocking decisions by the elected government, including a move to dismiss the head of Israel's domestic security agency. In a statement after the vote, Baharav-Miara called her dismissal 'unlawful' and vowed that she and her office would remain faithful to the law and continue to act professionally and honestly. 'This is a fateful blow to the rule of law, equality before the law, human rights, and the ability of the law enforcement system to deal with government corruption,' she added. The attempt to fire the attorney general for the first time in the country's 78-year history was immediately frozen by the High Court until justices can rule on its legality. The government is barred from appointing a new attorney general and influencing Baharav-Miara's operations before further instructions are issued. Netanyahu did not take part in the hearing or vote on Baharav-Miara's dismissal due to a conflict of interest over his ongoing criminal trial and the attorney general's role as head of the prosecution. Three criminal cases have been opened against Netanyahu, who has been charged with bribery, fraud, and breach of trust. He could face up to ten years in prison over the bribery allegations, while the fraud and breach of trust charges each carry up to three years. Several hearings in Netanyahu's long-running corruption trial have been canceled after a court accepted requests by the prime minister on classified diplomatic, security, and health grounds. Opposition politicians have criticized the attorney general's dismissal, calling it part of Netanyahu's controversial judicial reform plan which sparked one of the largest protests in Israel's history. Opponents claim that the reform would violate democratic principles as the ruling coalition would concentrate more power in its hands and Netanyahu would attempt to avoid criminal liability.
Russia Today
7 hours ago
- Russia Today
Former ICC judges slam sexual misconduct investigation into chief prosecutor
The International Criminal Court's handling of a sexual misconduct investigation into chief prosecutor Karim Khan raises major questions over its timing and procedural irregularities, according to four former judges. The case followed Khan's decision to seek arrest warrants for Israeli leaders over the Gaza war. Khan applied for arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defense minister Yoav Gallant in May 2024, accusing them of crimes against humanity. The ICC official had also previously secured a warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin over the alleged deportation of Ukrainian children. Neither Russia nor Israel recognizes the ICC's jurisdiction. Moscow has condemned the court's accusations as 'outrageous' and stressed that its decisions are legally 'null and void for Russia.' While the warrant for Putin was welcomed by Kiev's Western backers – including the US, despite Washington's own non-recognition of the court – the Netanyahu case prompted a backlash. The US imposed sanctions on Khan and four ICC judges, calling the charges politically motivated and warning of further punitive steps. Shortly after the Israeli warrants were issued, allegations of sexual misconduct against Khan surfaced. Former ICC judge Cuno Tarfusser told Middle East Eye he was 'deeply disturbed, even scandalized,' by the proceedings, claiming the investigation appeared 'tailored' for Khan. Another former judge warned the process had entered 'bandit country' where 'anything can happen.' The court's oversight body, the Assembly of States Parties, drew further scrutiny for publicly naming Khan and outsourcing the investigation to the UN's Office of Internal Oversight Services, even though the ICC's own mechanism had previously closed two internal probes after the complainant declined to cooperate. As noted by MEE, the original complaint was made as Khan prepared the Israeli warrants. The allegations re-emerged months later just before the warrants were announced, and escalated in May 2025 as Khan reportedly pursued further charges against Israeli officials. Le Monde has also reported that British lawyer Andrew Cayley, who led the ICC's Palestine investigation, had been warned by Dutch intelligence that he was 'an enemy of Israel' and later advised by the UK Foreign Office that he could face US sanctions. He subsequently resigned.
Russia Today
8 hours ago
- Russia Today
Here's why the Russia-Syria bond can't be severed
After the fall of the Assad regime on December 8, 2024, Syria underwent a sharp shift in its political configuration. A fragmented coalition of opposition forces came to power, led by the group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (banned in Russia). The leader of the transitional period became Ahmed al-Sharaa, better known by his former name, Abu Mohammad al-Julani. However, few have seriously considered what the real position of the new authorities within Syria itself would be. The formal seizure of power and control over the capital does not necessarily mean stability or recognition from the entire Syrian society. The country remains deeply fragmented – along ideological, ethnic, sectarian, and territorial lines. The fragmented opposition, despite its nominal unification under a political umbrella, faces enormous challenges: the absence of a unified governance mechanism, competition among various factions, internal mistrust, and pressure from both local field commanders and external sponsors. Furthermore, large segments of the population, exhausted by years of war, may view the new authorities with skepticism or even hostility – especially considering the participation of radical elements in the new leadership. Therefore, the key question remains not only maintaining external legitimacy but also whether the new administration can build a sustainable governance system, provide basic public services, restore the economy, and achieve even minimal societal consensus. It is worth noting that immediately after the fall of Assad, the West and a number of global media outlets were quick to proclaim what they called a 'Russian defeat in the Middle East.' The media sphere was filled with predictions about the complete withdrawal of the Russian military contingent from Syrian territory, and the loss of Moscow's strategic positions and influence in the region. However, the course of events proved to be entirely different. The new authorities in Damascus, despite the internal political transformation, clearly recognize the role and importance of Russia as one of the key foreign policy actors, influencing both Syria's internal stability and broader regional and global processes. Moreover, representatives of the transitional government have expressed their interest in maintaining constructive relations with Moscow – including cooperation in the areas of security, economics, and post-war reconstruction. Less than two months after the change of power in Damascus, on January 28, 2025, the first official foreign delegation arrived in Syria – a Russian interdepartmental mission. The visit became an important foreign policy signal and effectively marked the beginning of a new stage in relations between Moscow and the new Syrian leadership. At that time, the Special Representative of the President of Russia for the Middle East and Africa, Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov, held talks with the head of the new Syrian administration, al-Sharaa. In a statement issued by the Syrian authorities following the meeting, it was emphasized that the parties discussed 'issues of restoring relations' between Syria and Russia. 'The Russian side confirmed its support for the positive changes currently taking place in Syria. The talks included discussions about Russia's role in rebuilding relations with the Syrian people through concrete measures such as compensation and assistance with reconstruction,' the statement said. The head of the new Syrian administration, in turn, expressed his commitment to principled engagement with all interested parties, emphasizing that Syria's future must be built on the foundations of justice, dignity, and sovereignty. The statement also noted that the restoration of relations with former foreign partners must take into account the lessons of the past, respect the will of the Syrian people, and, above all, serve their interests. Thus, the visit of the Russian delegation became not only a symbolic gesture recognizing the new political reality in Syria but also a sign of both sides' desire to reconsider the format of cooperation in the context of rapid changes within the country and in the region as a whole. A logical continuation of the political dialogue between Moscow and the new administration in Damascus was the reciprocal visit of a Syrian delegation to Russia. The visit was led by Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shibani and Defense Minister Murhaf Abu Qasra. This step was not only a symbol of Damascus's desire to strengthen bilateral relations but also an important signal to the entire region about its intention to preserve its strategic partnership with Moscow. Russian President Vladimir Putin received al-Shibani at the Kremlin. A large delegation of representatives from the transitional administration accompanied him to Moscow, highlighting the seriousness of the Syrian side's approach to developing interstate cooperation. On July 31, al-Shibani also held talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. The head of Russian diplomacy stressed that Moscow is closely monitoring the development of the transitional period in Syria and expressed hope that the Syrian people would be able to overcome the current challenges and restore normal life in the country. During the meeting, Lavrov also invited Syrian interim president al-Sharaa to participate in the upcoming Russia–Arab League summit scheduled for October 15 – an important step toward Syria's reintegration into the regional diplomatic arena. Al-Shibani, in turn, confirmed the new Syrian leadership's interest in deepening cooperation with Russia, including in the areas of foreign policy, security, and economic recovery. As part of the visit, Russian Defense Minister Andrey Belousov also met with his Syrian counterpart, Abu Qasra. They discussed prospects for military-technical cooperation and the situation in the Middle East as a whole. Both sides emphasized the importance of coordinating efforts in combating remaining pockets of extremism and maintaining regional stability. All recent contacts between Moscow and Damascus clearly demonstrate the new Syrian authorities' interest in preserving and developing their partnership with Russia – even in the face of obvious and growing pressure from Western countries. The new administration in Damascus, having come to power amid a deep internal and external crisis, understands that sustainable recovery in Syria is impossible without strategic allies. And Russia, with its military, diplomatic, and economic capabilities, remains such an ally. Undoubtedly, Moscow also shows a measured interest in strengthening ties with Syria's new political reality. Given the vast investments – both political and military – made over years of conflict, Russia is keen to maintain its influence in the region and assist in the formation of a stable governance system in Damascus. It is expected that al-Sharaa will visit Russia in October this year to participate in the high-level Russia–Arab League summit. If held, this visit could become a milestone in shaping a new diplomatic architecture for Syrian–Russian relations. Relations between Moscow and Damascus have deep historical roots. Since the early 1950s, the Soviet Union – and later Russia – has consistently provided Syria with military, economic, and technical support. During the Cold War, and especially throughout the Arab-Israeli conflicts, Moscow was one of the few reliable foreign policy partners for Damascus. This relationship was not purely pragmatic; it was founded on ideological solidarity, mutual respect, and shared geopolitical interests. Today, against the backdrop of escalating Israeli aggression and the West's overt silence in response to regular airstrikes on Syrian territory, the issue of national security has become more critical than ever for Damascus. The new leadership must urgently formulate a strategy to protect the country from further fragmentation and external interference. Despite ongoing engagement with Ankara and a degree of pragmatism in its relations with Türkiye, many Syrian politicians and military officials still view Russia as the only power truly capable of strengthening Syria's defense capabilities. Only Moscow possesses the necessary resources, political will, and regional authority to act as a guarantor of Syria's territorial integrity, a deterrent against external threats, and a reliable partner in the country's national revival. Russia remains not only an important military-political partner of Syria, but also a key trade and economic partner, whose role is difficult to overstate in the context of post-war reconstruction. Amid destroyed infrastructure and severe resource shortages, it is Russia that is seen as capable of playing a decisive role in ensuring Syria's food security. Stable supplies of Russian grain, fertilizers, and fuel are already viewed in Damascus as the foundation for stabilizing the domestic market and ensuring basic social standards for the population. Beyond this, humanitarian ties between the two countries have traditionally played an important role. Russia has long been one of the primary destinations for Syrian students pursuing higher education abroad. Hundreds of Syrians study annually at Russian universities – from medical schools to engineering and public administration institutes. Many of them return home to become the backbone of Syria's professional class, which is especially vital for restoring state institutions. Historically, Russia has played a significant role in training Syrian professionals in critical fields such as healthcare, construction, energy, and public administration. During both the Soviet and post-Soviet periods, Russia educated a substantial number of Syrian specialists who later ensured the functioning of key sectors in the Syrian economy and social system. In today's shifting international environment, shaped by broad geopolitical changes, Damascus is acutely aware of the evolving nature of the global order. The collective West, once a unified political bloc, is now fragmented. The Trump administration, having returned to power in the US, behaves increasingly unpredictably on the world stage – focusing on domestic priorities and demonstrating reduced strategic engagement in the Middle East. Meanwhile, EU countries are mired in their own crises – energy, social, and institutional – and are incapable of formulating a coherent, unified policy toward the region, particularly in the context of their protracted confrontation with Russia. Amid this context, the shift in the global balance of power is becoming increasingly evident. The center of gravity in world politics and economics is gradually moving toward the so-called 'Global Majority' – nations outside the Western alliance. The growing influence of organizations such as BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) is becoming a defining feature of the new world order. In these frameworks, Russia is not merely a participant but one of the leading powers shaping an alternative agenda based on sovereignty, non-interference, and multipolarity. The new Syrian administration understands these dynamics and is striving to shape its foreign policy in accordance with the new realities. Damascus is working to diversify its international partnerships – deepening its strategic alliance with Russia, developing relations with China, Iran, India, and other non-Western powers, while also leaving room for pragmatic dialogue with Western countries, based on national interests and the principle of sovereign equality. In the context of Syria's transitional phase and national renewal, preserving and expanding these ties takes on strategic importance. Educational and humanitarian programs between Moscow and Damascus not only help restore Syria's human capital, but also lay the long-term foundation for a sustainable partnership rooted in mutual support and historical solidarity. In this context, it is fair to assert that Russia's role in Syria will not weaken, but rather strengthen. The relationship between Moscow and the new Syrian leadership has a strong historical, political, and strategic foundation, and in the evolving global order, it is gaining new momentum. This partnership serves the mutual interests of both sides – in the fields of security, economic development, and humanitarian cooperation, as well as in building a stable regional architecture based on respect for sovereignty and mutual benefit.
