‘Death to America, Israel': Huge crowds flood streets as Iran mourns commanders killed in strikes
Tehran's streets were flooded with grief and fury on June 28 as thousands gathered for the state funerals of top Iranian Revolutionary Guard generals and nuclear scientists killed in Israeli airstrikes. Among those honoured were IRGC commander Gen. Hossein Salami and Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh, the head of Iran's ballistic missile program, both killed on June 13 when Israel launched a full-scale offensive targeting Iran's nuclear infrastructure.
Show more
Show less
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
23 minutes ago
- First Post
Trump revives proposal for Israel-Hamas ceasefire in Gaza, release of hostages: Report
After a ceasefire between Israel and Iran, US President Donald Trump has revived talks for a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip and the release of remaining hostages taken during the October 7 terrorist attack, according to a report. read more Israeli military patrols near the Al Shifa Hospital compound in Gaza City amid the ongoing ground operation against Hamas in the northern Gaza Strip on November 22, 2023. (Photo: Reuters) After brokering a ceasefire in the Israel-Iran war, US President Donald Trump has revived talks to end the war in the Gaza Strip, according to a report. The Israel-Hamas deal reached in January collapsed in March and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel ordered the resumption of attacks. Several thousands of Palestinian casualties have been reported since the resumption of attacks, many of them as they gathered to receive humanitarian aid. The Jerusalem Post has reported that Trump has revived talks for a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas in Gaza and the release of remaining hostages taken during the October 7 terrorist attack. A US source said that the administration was 'optimistic' about reaching the deal. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Trump came to power with the promise of ending wars in Gaza and Ukraine. Instead, he entered a new war with Iran. Moreover, instead of ending the war in Gaza, he has become party to the conflict by announcing the takeover of Gaza and conversion of the strip into a resort town after the expulsion of all Palestinians. The declaration, which critics say amounts to ethnic cleansing, would effectively killed the two-state solution. 75% work done for Israel-Hamas deal: Source A source told The Post that 75 per cent of issues have been resolved in recent weeks. 'The remaining 25 per cent includes key matters such as the humanitarian situation, the conclusion of the war itself, and the guarantees Israel is demanding to prevent Hamas from rearming,' the source said. One option being discussed is the exile of Hamas leaders from Hamas once a ceasefire is reached, according to the newspaper. Hamas has previously rejected the idea. Around the same time that the report emerged, it was reported that Netanyahu held a meeting with senior ministers and defence officials on Sunday to discuss the war in Gaza. The Post reported that that one of the questions discussed in the meeting was whether Israel should send a delegation for indirect talks with Hamas either to Qatar or Egypt.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
23 minutes ago
- First Post
Iran's fatwa against Trump and Netanyahu: How serious is this threat?
Iran's top Shiite cleric has issued a fatwa labelling Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu as enemies of Islam, urging Muslims to resist them. Framed in religious language and referencing divine punishment, the fatwa follows renewed tensions in West Asia. But is this decree a serious threat or a symbolic act? read more US President Donald Trump meets with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, US, April 7, 2025. File Image/Reuters A fatwa (powerful religious decree) has been issued by Grand Ayatollah Naser Makarem Shirazi, one of Iran's top Shiite clerics, naming United States President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as enemies of the Islamic community. This fatwa — delivered following recent escalations between Iran, Israel and the United States — directly identifies both leaders as mohareb, or individuals who wage war against God. The religious order explicitly calls on Muslims globally to confront those who 'threaten the leadership and integrity of the Islamic Ummah.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Under Iranian Islamic law, the designation of mohareb is a serious one, legally warranting harsh penalties that may include execution, crucifixion, amputation of limbs, or exile. 'Those who threaten the leadership and integrity of the Islamic Ummah are to be considered warlords,' Makarem declared. Further urging the faithful to act, the fatwa states that Muslims who endure hardships in their opposition to these leaders would be considered mujahid fi sabilillah — warriors in the path of God. 'May God protect the Islamic community from the evil of the enemies and hasten the reappearance of the Master of the Age and Time,' the ruling added, alluding to the Shiite messianic figure known as the Mahdi. The fatwa arrives shortly after a period of armed conflict now being referred to as the '12-Day War.' On June 13, Israeli airstrikes targeted Iranian nuclear and military infrastructure, resulting in the deaths of prominent scientists and military commanders. In retaliation, Iran launched ballistic missiles at Israeli cities. The United States soon entered the conflict by striking three nuclear sites in Iran. This conflict was the culmination of months of rising tensions, marked by repeated warnings from Trump himself that any move by Iran toward weapons-grade uranium enrichment would prompt US intervention. What we know about fatwas A fatwa, by definition, is a legal or theological ruling made by an Islamic scholar or authority. These decrees have historically spanned a wide spectrum — ranging from legal clarifications on ethical matters to highly politicised calls for violence. While many fatwas are benign or even humanitarian in their focus, others have been used to justify violent acts against individuals seen as blasphemous or adversarial to Islam. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The case of Salman Rushdie remains the most well-known example in modern history. In 1989, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini issued a fatwa condemning Rushdie to death following the publication of The Satanic Verses. The decree, though non-binding in a legal sense, had life-altering consequences. Rushdie spent years in hiding and survived a near-fatal stabbing in 2022 — 33 years after the fatwa was first declared. Despite Iran's political shifts over the years, including the more moderate presidency of Mohammad Khatami in the late 1990s, that fatwa was never officially rescinded. Religious decrees of this nature are not bound by time. There is no expiry. In the eyes of many believers, a fatwa from a revered authority is eternal and sacred. In his post on X (formerly Twitter), British-Iranian commentator Niyak Ghorbani criticised the recent fatwa against Trump and Netanyahu, describing it as a calculated act of state-endorsed extremism. ⭕️Very Important: This is not just a threat to Iranians — it's a global danger. A top Iranian cleric has issued a fatwa openly calling for violent jihad against Western leaders, not just Iranian dissidents. This is a clear act of state-backed incitement to international… — Niyak Ghorbani (نیاک) (@GhorbaniiNiyak) June 29, 2025 STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'The West must realise: the Islamic Republic is not only targeting its own people — it is preparing for global violence in the name of religion,' he wrote. A history of fatwas inciting violence The global implications of such fatwas are not theoretical. In many cases, they have resulted in violence, assassinations, and lasting fear. In 1992, Egyptian intellectual Farag Fouda was shot dead by Islamist militants after being accused of apostasy. His assassination followed a fatwa from religious scholars labeling him an enemy of Islam. Two years later, Egyptian Nobel laureate Naguib Mahfouz was stabbed in the neck by an extremist influenced by another fatwa. Several Western figures have also been targeted. Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh, who co-created a short film critical of the treatment of women in Islam, was murdered in Amsterdam in 2004. He was shot and stabbed by a Dutch-Moroccan Islamist who reportedly acted in line with religious directives. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Dutch politician Geert Wilders received death threats after his statements on Muslim immigration led to a fatwa calling for his beheading, issued by Australian imam Feiz Muhammad in 2010. In the United States, television host David Letterman became a target when a Muslim militant called for his assassination after he joked about the killing of an Al Qaeda figure on his show. The creators of South Park, Matt Stone and Trey Parker, were similarly threatened after depicting the Prophet Mohammed — albeit in a bear suit — sparking outrage and warnings of violent retaliation. Even religious figures outside Islam have been fatwa targets. Jerry Falwell, the American evangelical pastor, once described Prophet Mohammed as a terrorist in a 2002 interview. A fatwa for his death followed, though Falwell later died of natural causes. Fatwas can also lead to mass political consequences. Al-Qaeda's 1998 fatwa calling for jihad against Americans and Israelis followed the US embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD That fatwa, signed by Osama bin Laden, justified its stance as a response to perceived Western aggression against Muslims. Not just extremism: Fatwas can also be peaceful While many fatwas attract attention due to their violent implications, others highlight peace, ethics, and coexistence. In 2005, a group of North American Islamic scholars issued a fatwa declaring all acts of terrorism forbidden in Islam. They stated, 'It is haram, forbidden, to cooperate or associate with … any act of terrorism or violence.' The fatwa also encouraged Muslims to work with law enforcement in protecting civilians. Fatwas reflect the intentions and beliefs of the clerics issuing them, and their weight largely depends on the influence and credibility of those scholars among their followers. In places like India, institutions such as the Darul Uloom in Deoband (Uttar Pradesh) issue thousands of fatwas each year. These rulings often address questions of daily life, ethics or personal conduct within an Islamic framework. The Darul Uloom's 12-volume fatwa compilation has even been compared to US Supreme Court proceedings in terms of its complexity and reach. So how serious is the threat against Trump and Netanyahu? Although fatwas are non-binding religious opinions, their danger lies in how they are interpreted and acted upon. Clerics with a vast audience can mobilise not only devout followers but also extremists willing to act violently. In a world already polarised by ideology and religion, a fatwa from a prominent authority can be seen as a divine command. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD As history has shown, even decades-old fatwas can incite violence long after their original context is forgotten. Rushdie's near-fatal stabbing in 2022 serves as a chilling reminder. It is not only sanctioned operatives that carry out such attacks — self-radicalised individuals, lone actors or religious vigilantes often act without state direction. The fatwa from Ayatollah Makarem thus poses a long-term risk. While it may not lead to immediate action, it could inspire attacks in the years to come, carried out by individuals who believe they are fulfilling a religious duty. With Makarem calling for Trump and Netanyahu to be made to 'regret their words and mistakes,' the fatwa stops short of a direct death order, but the implications are clear to those familiar with such rhetoric. Also Watch: With inputs from agencies
Indian Express
31 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Europe's dilemma: How long can it kick the can on Israel's human rights violations in Gaza?
The developments in West Asia — particularly the US bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities and the Israel-Iran ceasefire — have delayed the European Union's review process of its Association Agreement (AA) with Israel. The AA provides a framework for political and economic ties between the EU and Israel. Apart from other provisions, it also establishes a free trade area between the two. On June 20, the office of the EU Special Representative (EUSR) for Human Rights submitted a note to the European Council regarding Israel's compliance with the EU-Israel Association Agreement. The note focused on Article 2 of the Agreement, which includes human rights and democratic principles as essential elements. A formal request for a review of Article 2 was made by the Netherlands and supported by 16 other EU member states. Although the Netherlands is a strong supporter of Israel, its move was seen as a response to strong public anger and widespread street protests in the country against Israel's actions in 'restricted' EUSR document was circulated to all member states ahead of the summit meeting but was leaked by some European media outlets. Based on reports concerning the blockade, denial, or limited access to humanitarian aid; the unprecedented killing and injury of civilians; attacks on hospitals and medical facilities; displacement; attacks on journalists; settlement consolidation and expansion in the West Bank; and arbitrary detentions, the note concludes that 'Israel would be in breach' of its human rights obligations under Article 2 of the Agreement. In response to the EU's move to re-examine its Association Agreement on the basis of human rights, Israel labelled the step 'outrageous and indecent'. It stated that at a time when the country is facing an existential threat, the EU's 'review' of its relations with Israel amounts to a 'moral distortion'. In the lead-up to the European Council meeting, some European countries appeared to harden their stances against Israel. Nine EU countries — Belgium, Finland, Ireland, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, and Sweden — called on the EU to develop a plan to halt trade with Israeli settlements. They emphasised the need to ensure that EU policies do not contribute, directly or indirectly, to the perpetuation of an illegal situation. The EU is Israel's largest trading partner, accounting for around 43 billion euro in trade. In 2024, 32 per cent of Israel's total goods trade was with the EU. Although the EU does not recognise Israeli sovereignty over the occupied Palestinian territories, products from these areas are often labelled as 'Made in Israel,' potentially misleading European consumers. However, at the European Council meeting, the mood was cautious. The shift towards human rights seems to have dissipated amid developments related to Iran. The Council summit was dominated by issues such as European defence, Ukraine, trade issues with the US, as well as sudden developments in the Middle East. It called for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and the unconditional release of all hostages, and urged Israel to fully lift its blockade on Gaza. However, instead of taking concrete action, the meeting merely took note of the EUSR report on Israel's compliance with Article 2 of the Agreement. The Council was invited to continue discussions on possible follow-up measures in July 2025, 'depending on the evolution of the situation on the ground'. In his public statement, European Council President Antonio Costa asserted that the humanitarian situation in Gaza is 'catastrophic and human rights are being violated' and the EUSR review has confirmed it. He added that the situation is unacceptable and the EU foreign ministers will discuss the next steps. Although the EU adopted a cautious approach, some European leaders expressed strong frustration. Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez criticised EU leaders for not suspending the trade agreement with Israel, despite what he described as 'the catastrophic genocide'. He asserted that it was 'more than obvious that Israel is violating Article 2 of the EU-Israel Agreement.' He further stated that the EU has imposed 18 sanctions against Russia for its aggression, yet Europe, with its double standards, is incapable of suspending an Association Agreement with Israel. However, reaching a consensus on this issue within the EU will be extremely difficult. While Ireland has also supported a suspension, many others — including Austria, Bulgaria, Germany, Greece, and Hungary — remain close allies of Israel. Many of the conflicts in the Middle East are deeply rooted in European history. While the EU has a historic responsibility to play a more proactive role, its effectiveness has been limited by the divergent positions of its member states on Israel and the recognition of the State of Palestine. As a result, it has often been convenient for Europe to allow the US to take the lead in the region. Even during the current Iran-Israel war, when the Iranian Foreign Minister was meeting his counterparts in Europe, President Trump doubted the impact of these talks, saying, 'Iran doesn't want to speak to Europe, Iran wants to speak to us'. Today, numerous EU member states recognise Palestine. However, major powers such as France, Germany, and Italy — while supporting a two-state solution — prefer a negotiated peace settlement over unilateral recognition. Despite the difficulties in reaching a consensus on the issue, the human rights situation in Gaza will remain a serious topic in major EU discussions. The EU cannot ignore taking action indefinitely. As former EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell Fontelles recently wrote: 'If Europe bears responsibility for its victims, it also bears responsibility for the victims of its victims'. The writer is Chief Coordinator, DAKSHIN – Global South Centre of Excellence at RIS, New Delhi, and Professor of European Studies at JNU
