Videos of emaciated Israeli hostages in Gaza increase pressure on Netanyahu for a ceasefire
JERUSALEM — New images of emaciated Israeli hostages held in Gaza have horrified Israelis and added pressure on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to reach a ceasefire with Hamas, even as his government considers another expansion of the nearly 22-month war.
The videos released late last week by militant groups Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad show two skeletal hostages pleading for their lives. In one, Evyatar David says he is digging his own grave and speaks of days without food. In the other, Rom Braslavski writhes in agony on a dirty mattress and says injuries in his foot prevent him from being able to stand.
The Associated Press does not normally publish videos of hostages filmed under duress, but is publishing brief excerpts after receiving consent from their families.
The videos led tens of thousands of Israelis to take to the streets on Saturday night and demand a ceasefire deal, in one of the largest turnouts for the weekly protests in recent months.
'In this new video, his eyes are extinguished. He is helpless, and so am I,' Braslavski's mother, Tami, said in a statement.
Warnings of famine in Gaza
The videos were released as warnings about famine among Palestinians are growing in Gaza. Images of starving Palestinians have drawn international condemnation of Israeli policies limiting aid deliveries into the territory.
Families of the hostages fear that the lack of food threatens the remaining hostages, too. Fewer than half of the 50 hostages are believed to be alive.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he was shocked by the images of the two hostages and met with the Red Cross to ask that it bring hostages food and medicine — access that the organization says it has never been granted by Hamas.
'When I see these, I understand exactly what Hamas wants,' Netanyahu said on Sunday. 'They do not want a deal. They want to break us using these videos of horror.'
Netanyahu said the videos renewed his determination to release the hostages and eliminate Hamas. He added that the militant group is starving the hostages 'like the Nazis starved the Jews.'
The International Committee of the Red Cross said it was 'appalled by the harrowing videos' and called for access to the hostages.
Hamas' military wing said it was ready to respond positively to Red Cross requests to deliver food to hostages, if humanitarian corridors for aid deliveries are opened in a 'regular and permanent manner' in Gaza. It also asserted that the hostages 'eat the same food as our fighters and the general public' and denied any intentional starvation of them.
Israel's mission to the UN said it requested an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council on the hostages, which will take place Tuesday. Israel's Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar said he will travel to New York for the meeting.
The videos were being used by Hamas 'to force upon us their conditions on remaining in power in Gaza,' Sa'ar asserted.
Netanyahu on Monday said he will convene the cabinet this week to instruct Israel's military on how to achieve the goals of defeating the enemy, releasing the hostages and assuring that Gaza will no longer pose a threat to Israel: 'all of them, without exception.'
More starvation deaths
The videos of the hostages emerged as experts warn that Gaza faces 'a worst-case scenario of famine ″ because of Israel's blockade.
No aid entered Gaza between March 2 and May 19, and aid has been limited since then. The United Nations says at least 850 people have been killed attempting to access aid near chaotic and dangerous distribution sites set up by Israel and the United States in May.
Gaza's Health Ministry said Monday that five more Palestinian adults died of malnutrition-related causes in the past 24 hours. A total of 87 adults have died of malnutrition-related issues since the ministry started counting such deaths in late June, it said.
Ninety-three children have died of malnutrition-related causes since the war in Gaza began, the ministry said. Israel's government has denied that people are starving to death in Gaza.
About 1,200 people, mostly civilians, were killed in the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on southern Israel that sparked the war, and another 251 were abducted. Israel's retaliatory military offensive has killed more than 60,900 Palestinians, according to Gaza's Health Ministry.
The ministry, which doesn't distinguish between civilians and combatants in its count but says women and children make up over half the dead, is part of the Hamas government and staffed by medical professionals. The UN and other independent experts view its figures as the most reliable casualty count. Israel has disputed the figures but hasn't provided its own.
___
Melanie Lidman, The Associated Press
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Japan Forward
an hour ago
- Japan Forward
Two Atomic Bombs by America Ended the Asia-Pacific War ー Was There a Third Option?
Every August 6, on the anniversary of the atomic bomb attack against Hiroshima and Nagasaki, an argument is remade. It reasons that Harry Truman, president of the United States of America, had two choices to end the Asia-Pacific War. He could force a surrender through the use of nuclear weapons or proceed with an invasion of the Japanese home islands. According to the contention, the option of the atomic bomb attack was the better of the two. It was touted as quicker, with an ultimately lower death toll. This assertion is nonsense, and always has been. There were never two options ー there were three. The third was to do what 99.9% of generals, commanders and statesmen have done throughout the history of warfare: Drop the insistence of unconditional surrender and negotiate. In this year of 2025, the two-option argument is even more nonsensical than usual. There are ongoing wars for which the option of negotiation will inevitably prevail. They include the Israel-Iran War and the war between Russia and Ukraine. Satellite image showing the entrance to a tunnel destroyed in a US airstrike, at a nuclear facility in Isfahan, central Iran, on June 22. (provided by Maxar Technologies, Reuters via Kyodo) Inappropriate Comparisons Curiously, when it comes to Israel-Iran, US President Donald Trump has been doing his best to draw parallels with the Asia-Pacific War and its dual option narrative. On June 17 he announced that he sought the "unconditional surrender" of Iran. In the wake of the US bombing of the Iranian Fordo nuclear facility, he evoked Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Both the 1945 atomic bombs and his strike on Iran "ended the war," he proclaimed. It is possible that President Trump is trying to pull the rug out from underneath Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu by insisting that the problem of the Iranian nuclear program has been resolved and further military action is not required. A more likely scenario, however, is that he is attempting to magnify the scope of his achievement. In any event, the Hiroshima/Nagasaki parallel is ridiculous. Iran has not been militarily defeated (let alone forced to surrender unconditionally). Moreover, the failure of the US strike against the Iranian nuclear program makes negotiations even more certain. Inevitability of Negotiations Between Russia and Ukraine When it comes to the Russia-Ukraine War, differences between it and the Asia-Pacific War are undeniably stark. There will be no unconditional surrender from either of the combatants. That war has reached a stalemate and will end with a ceasefire, followed by a negotiated agreement. President Trump has famously attempted to effectuate such a deal. Some reports say he suggests allowing the Russians to keep most of what they occupy. Meanwhile, Ukraine gains a measure of security assuredness through the increased presence of American business interests. In particular, that would come within the mining sector. President Trump has portrayed Russian President Vladimir Putin as both reasonable and conciliatory. The initial aim of Putin was to wipe Ukraine off the map but he presently seems content to settle for the eastern regions that he presently holds. It is quite a compromise on the part of Putin, Trump has suggested. Trump has also focused on the loss of life extracted by the war, implying that loss of territory is preferable to continued Ukrainian casualties. The Japan of 1945 was asking for considerably less than President Trump is prepared to concede to the Russians. And far more lives were in the balance. On the eve of the Hiroshima attack, the Japanese were merely seeking to preserve the integrity of the imperial system via assurances that the Emperor would not be put on trial. The Allies were also fully aware of this reality as they had broken the Japanese codes. Yet, the demand for unconditional surrender was maintained. Atomic bombing of Hiroshima (©US Army via Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum, HO) The Belligerent Mindset of Unconditional Surrender Unconditional surrender is a rarely exercised option, not a default setting. Having demanded unconditional surrender, a belligerent power does not acquire justification in resorting to war crimes when the price of total victory becomes too steep. Moreover, perceived or real, the war crimes of one's adversary do not legitimize one's own. Many nonetheless claim that the Japanese militarist regime was so abhorrent that the ends justify the means. Even when those means constitute an unconditional surrender obtained via nuclear attack. This is an argument that could perhaps be made by an Asian whose country had been subjected to colonization. When forwarded by a member of the West, as it generally is, a measure of ignorance or hypocrisy is more than often present. There are two ways of interpreting the Asia-Pacific War. The first is as a war between Asia in tandem with the West, against the Japanese aggressor. The second is as an imperial war for control over imperial possessions, conducted by combatants universally devoid of clean hands. Unsurprisingly, the West prefers the first of these scenarios. The second scenario is accurate. In earlier articles for JAPAN Forward, I have suggested that those prepared to justify the nuclear attacks on the basis of their success in comprehensively destroying the culture of Japanese imperialism should also recognize the impact of Japan in bringing down the ethos that buttressed the Western imperial presence in Asia. The Western empires, the British Empire in particular, were sustained by the myth of white supremacy. The ritualized humiliation that the Japanese wrought upon the white imperialists captured in Asia destroyed this myth, and brought forward the timetable for Asian self-determination by a generation at least. A Clean Break with the Past A case could further be made that it was precipitous for Japan to lose its empire at a stroke. Under that perception, it was bad both for the colonized people of Asia and for Japan itself. Asia was not freed by the fall of Japan. Subhas Chandra Bosesits in the distinguished visitor's box of the Japanese parliament listening to Japanese Prime Minister Tojo declare support for Indian Independence, 16th June 1943. (©Netaji Museum and Centre for Studies in Himalayan Languages Society & Culture, Giddha Pahar, Darjeeling district, West Bengal) Following surrender, the Western colonial powers attempted reassert control, often with the assistance of Japanese troops kept at arms. These efforts, however, were ultimately for nought. The carefully crafted myth of white superiority that had allowed so few to control so many was a casualty of the war. Colonial presence within high density Asia could not be reclaimed. The slow and painful colony disbursement that the Western powers endured over the next 30 years was an ordeal that the Japanese might be glad to have avoided. Complimentary Aims Arguments against the demand for unconditional surrender are just as strong. The most compelling can be found in the manner in which the US and Japan coordinated their aims after the Japanese surrender. One of the principal concerns of the Japanese throughout the 1920s and 30s was the direction in which China would ultimately go. Nineteenth-century exploitation by the imperial West had left the Chinese government impotent, leading to its fall in 1912. From 1912 until 1949, China was fractured. Two regimes emerged as potential unifying forces: the right wing Kuomintang (KMT) of Chiang Kai-shek, and the Communist Party under Mao Zedong. A scene from a painting of Chiang Kai-Shek in the Kinmen museum (©Robert D Eldridge) The Japanese were no less adamant than the United States of America that the Communists should not prevail. As with America, they sought to be the voice that a governing rightwing Chinese administration could not ignore. In short, America and Japan had the same fundamental aim when it came to China. They both sought to be the dominant influence over a ruling rightwing regime. Unsurprisingly, after Japan's surrender, the Japanese forces based within China eagerly cooperated with America by acting in the interests of the KMT. In occupied Japan itself, after a brief period, the US concluded that its fundamental aims and those of Japan within Asia were largely complementary. Many lives would have been saved if this reality had been acted upon prior to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Showa Emperor and General Douglas MacArthur. Japan's postwar constitution was drafted on General MacArthur's orders. Three Options, Not Two Arguments for and against the morality and merit of the atomic attacks against Hiroshima and Nagasaki exist in abundance and will continue to be advanced for generations to come. However, the US had more than a duality of options. It could have ended the war through negotiation - the manner in which the vast majority of wars are concluded. This is the 80th anniversary of the Hiroshima attack. With negotiations inevitable in the Russia-Ukraine War, one hopes that the nonsense of the two-option argument has finally become clear. Moving forward, that debate should be directed towards the legitimate arguments that exist — both for and against those attacks. RELATED: Author: Paul de Vries Find other reviews and articles by the author on Asia Pacific history on JAPAN Forward.
Winnipeg Free Press
4 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
France and Saudis vow to keep up momentum for ‘two-state solution' to Israel-Palestinian conflict
UNITED NATIONS (AP) — After decades of inaction and frozen negotiations, the issue of an independent Palestinian state living in peace with Israel returned to the spotlight at a high-level U.N. conference — and France and Saudi Arabia, which spearheaded the effort, are determined to keep up the momentum. But hurdles for a two-state solution that would see Israel living side-by-side with an independent Palestine are very high. War in Gaza — a crucial part of a hoped-for Palestinian state — drags on with escalating violence in the West Bank, the other main component. And Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his right-wing government vehemently oppose an independent Palestinian state, which the Israeli leader says would be a reward for terrorism after Hamas' Oct. 7, 2023, attacks against his country. Nonetheless, after eight decades of conflict between Israel and Palestinians, pressure is growing for a two-state solution, as last week's high-level U.N. conference co-chaired by France and Saudi Arabia demonstrated — even if it was boycotted by Israel and its close ally, the United States. The conference illustrated that many believe a political solution is possible The French U.N. ambassador, Jerome Bonnafont, conceded in an Associated Press interview that without a Gaza ceasefire and massive humanitarian aid for over 2 million Palestinians sliding toward famine, 'it will be extremely difficult to move forward to define a new way of administering Gaza as part of Palestine' – and he said these are priority issues. But the conference demonstrated that a majority of the U.N.'s 193 member nations are 'convinced that there is a possibility of a political solution,' he said, and that is 'what its follow-up will continue to promote.' About 160 of the U.N.'s 193 member nations participated, 125 spoke in support of a two-state solution (forcing the meeting into an unexpected third day), and between 40 and 50 were represented by a government minister. An independent state of Palestine is recognized by over 145 countries, and the meeting sparked new pledges of recognition by three of the seven members of the powerful Group of Seven — France, United Kingdom and Canada — as well as Malta. A statement by seven others, including Australia, New Zealand, Finland and Portugal, expressed 'positive consideration' of following suit. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot and Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farham are determined not to let the spotlight fade. They are planning 'an event' during the annual gathering of world leaders at the General Assembly, which starts Sept. 23, when the new pledges are expected to be officially announced. The conference was notable for being co-chaired by an Arab and Western nation, and for setting up eight working groups with diverse chairs to make proposals on key issues for a two state solution — security for Israel and an independent Palestine, political reforms, legal problems, humanitarian assistance, economic development and Gaza reconstruction, to name some. The result was a seven-page 'New York Declaration.' The French and Saudi foreign ministers sent the declaration, with a lengthy annex of recommendations from the working groups, to all 193 U.N. members and asked them to endorse it by early September, before the world leaders' gathering. The declaration, which also was endorsed by the European Union and Arab League, urges Israel to commit to a Palestinian state, and urges further recognitions as 'an essential and indispensable component of the achievement of the two-state solution.' The declaration contains some stronger language For the first time, the Arab League's 22 member nations condemned 'the attacks committed by Hamas against civilians' in southern Israel on Oct. 7, and agree that 'Hamas must end its rule in Gaza and hand over its weapons to the Palestinian Authority.' It sets out a plan to then move to an independent, demilitarized Palestine, including deployment of a U.N. Security Council-mandated 'temporary international stabilization mission' supported by the Palestinian Authority. It would protect civilians, help build support for a Palestinian state and its security forces, and provide 'security guarantees for Palestine and Israel.' Richard Gowan, the International Crisis Group's U.N. director, gave French President Emmanuel Macron credit 'for raising the level of ambition for the conference,' and helping make it 'more symbolically significant than many diplomats expected.' The meeting gave weighty states including France, Britain and Canada the opportunity 'to signal their discontent with Israeli policy,' he said, and it gave Palestinians seeking a peaceful road to statehood 'some political ammunition.' Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, who hosted a Hamas delegation in Istanbul last week to discuss Gaza's humanitarian crisis and stalled ceasefire talks, noted growing global support for the Palestinians and a Palestinian state — and Israel's increasing isolation. Bonnafont, the French ambassador, had messages for Israel's opponents and Israelis seeking more territory. 'We say to those who are hostile to Israel, the way to peace is certainly not to deny the right of existence to Israel. This is the way to perpetual war,' Bonnafont said. 'And the real way to defend the Palestinians is to give them a state, and the only way to give them a state is a two-state solution — and we have demonstrated concretely that this solution exists and is feasible.'
Montreal Gazette
7 hours ago
- Montreal Gazette
Montreal Pride chair resigns amid backlash for barring Jewish LGBTQ2+ group from parade
The chairman of the board of Montreal Pride resigned Monday as the organization continued to face mounting criticism for banning a Jewish LGBTQ2+ group from its annual parade. In a statement, the organization said Bernard Truong informed the board of directors he was stepping down 'for personal reasons.' His resignation came as the group faced national backlash for excluding Ga'ava, a Jewish LGBTQ2+ organization, from the event. In response to his resignation, the board said it 'quickly convened' to ensure a smooth transition and appointed Marlot Marleau as the new chair. 'This change within the board has no impact on the activities of the Montreal Pride Festival, which are currently underway,' the statement reads. 'All teams, staff and volunteers remain deeply committed to delivering a unifying festival, true to its mission of amplifying the voices of 2SLGBTQIA+ communities and creating inclusive, safe and meaningful spaces.' The organization insisted the leadership change was unrelated to the controversy over the barring of Ga'ava from the parade. 'No, Truong's resignation is not related to that,' said Michael Grégoire from the festival's press relations team when asked about the timing. 'Bernard Truong is leaving the board of directors for personal reasons.' As of Monday afternoon, the board of directors webpage had been removed from Montreal Pride's website. According to his LinkedIn profile, Truong works as a senior director at Desjardins. On Friday, five federal MPs signed a joint letter condemning the decision to exclude Ga'ava, calling it 'profoundly hurtful' and urging organizers to reverse it. 'Ga'ava has long provided a vital space for queer Jews to express both their sexual and religious identities with pride,' the MPs wrote. 'Its exclusion sends a message that Jewish identity is not welcome in LGBTQ+ spaces.' Fierté Montréal has since confirmed the group was barred from marching after a complaint led the event's ombudsperson to intervene. Carlos Godoy, Ga'ava's president, told The Gazette that organizers accused the group of hate speech for labelling its critics 'pro-terror' and 'pro-Hamas.' He called the charge 'outlandish and ludicrous.' The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs was also reportedly excluded, although Fierté Montréal organizers have not publicly acknowledged that decision.
