Latest news with #British-Israeli
Middle East Eye
16-07-2025
- Politics
- Middle East Eye
ICC judges reject Israel's request to withdraw Netanyahu arrest warrant
Judges at the International Criminal Court (ICC) on Wednesday rejected Israel's request to withdraw arrest warrants for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant. Israel made the request while the ICC reviews its challenge over the court's jurisdiction to weigh in on its war on Gaza. The decision, dated 9 July 2025, was published on the ICC website on Wednesday. The judges also rejected an Israeli request to suspend the court's broader investigation into alleged crimes in the occupied Palestinian Territories. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Israel argued that the warrants should be withdrawn, citing a decision by appeals judges at the ICC in April that ordered a lower panel to reconsider Israel's objections about the court's jurisdiction in Gaza. However, the judges rejected that reasoning, saying that Israel's jurisdictional challenge was still pending and the warrants would remain in place until the court ruled on that issue specifically. The ICC has come under intense pressure to drop its war crimes probe. Earlier this month, a senior legal advisor to the US State Department issued a dramatic threat to the court's oversight body, warning that "all options are on the table". "We will use all appropriate and effective diplomatic, political and legal instruments to block ICC overreach," Reed Rubinstein, the US representative, warned. The threat came just before the Trump administration announced it was imposing sanctions on Francesca Albanese, the UN's special rapporteur for Palestine. The sanctions follow Albanese's scathing report on 30 June, in which she named over 60 companies, including major US technology firms like Google, Amazon and Microsoft, which she said were involved in "the transformation of Israel's economy of occupation to an economy of genocide". Israel's effort to stop the ICC has, to date, failed to bear fruit. Middle East Eye revealed on Tuesday that a British-Israeli defence lawyer threatened in May to ''destroy" the British chief prosecutor of the ICC, Karim Khan, unless he withdrew the arrest warrants.
Al Jazeera
16-07-2025
- Politics
- Al Jazeera
ICC prosecutor warned to drop Netanyahu case or be ‘destroyed': Report
The chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), Karim Khan, has been warned that if arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant are not withdrawn, he and the ICC would be 'destroyed', the Middle East Eye (MEE) reports. The warning was delivered in May to Khan by Nicholas Kaufman, a British-Israeli defence lawyer at the court linked to a Netanyahu adviser who said the Israeli leader's legal adviser told him he was 'authorised' to make Khan a proposal that would allow Khan to 'climb down the tree', the news website said. According to a note of the meeting on file at the ICC and seen by MEE, Kaufman told Khan to apply to the court to reclassify the warrants and underlying information as 'confidential'. This, it was suggested, would allow Israel to access the details of the allegations, which it could not do at the time, and challenge them in private – without the outcome being made public. Kaufman warned Khan that if it emerged Khan was applying for more arrest warrants for far-right Ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich over their promotion of illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, then 'all options would be off the table.' Kaufman told Khan: 'They will destroy you, and they will destroy the court.' The ICC issued arrest warrants against Netanyahu, Gallant and Hamas leader Mohammed Deif in November on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity over the Hamas-led October 7, 2023, attacks on Israel and Israel's subsequent genocidal war in Gaza. Deif has since been confirmed dead. Since then, the Israeli defendants are internationally wanted suspects, and ICC member states are under legal obligation to arrest them although several have been wary to agree to it. Francesca Albanese, the United Nations special rapporteur on the human rights situation in the occupied Palestinian territory, hit out this month against countries that have allowed Netanyahu to fly over their airspace en route to the United States, suggesting that they may have flouted their obligations under international law. Albanese said the governments of Italy, France and Greece needed to explain why they provided 'safe passage' to Netanyahu, who they were theoretically 'obligated to arrest' as an internationally wanted suspect when he flew over their territory on his way to meet US President Donald Trump for talks. All three countries are signatories of the Rome Statute, the treaty that established The Hague-based ICC in 2002. Kaufman told MEE: 'I do not deny that I told Mr Khan that he should be looking for a way to extricate himself from his errors. I am not authorised to make any proposals on behalf of the Israeli government nor did I.' Khan and his wife, Dato Shyamala Alagendra, who also attended the meeting with Kaufman, both confirmed this to be a threat, according to the note of the meeting seen by MEE. Netanyahu's office did not respond to requests for comment from MEE. At the time of the meeting, Khan was facing investigation over sexual misconduct claims. Two weeks later, Khan stepped down on indefinite leave after the publication by The Wall Street Journal of new allegations of sexual assault. Khan has strenuously denied all the allegations against him. MEE revealed details of Khan's meeting with Kaufman on May 1 at a hotel in The Hague. Kaufman is an ICC defence lawyer whose current work includes representing Rodrigo Duterte, the former president of the Philippines currently in ICC custody. He was arrested on an ICC warrant over allegations that 'crimes against humanity' were committed during what his government called its 'war on drugs'.
Middle East Eye
15-07-2025
- Politics
- Middle East Eye
ICC lawyer linked to Netanyahu advisor warned Khan to drop war crimes probe or be ‘destroyed'
The British chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court was warned in May that if arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant were not withdrawn, he and the ICC would be 'destroyed". The warning was delivered to Karim Khan by Nicholas Kaufman, a British-Israeli defence lawyer at the court who told Khan he had spoken to Netanyahu's legal advisor and, according to a note of the meeting lodged on file at the ICC and seen by Middle East Eye, was 'authorised' to make him a proposal that would allow Khan to 'climb down the tree'. He told Khan to apply to the court to reclassify the warrants and underlying information as 'confidential'. This, it was suggested, would allow Israel to access the details of the allegations, which it could not do at the time, and challenge them in private – without the outcome being made public. But Kaufman warned that if it emerged the chief prosecutor was applying for more arrest warrants, for far-right ministers Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich over their promotion of illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, then 'all options would be off the table". New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Kaufman told Khan: 'They will destroy you and they will destroy the court.' Khan and his wife, who also attended the meeting, both understood this to be a threat, according to the note of the meeting seen by MEE. Kaufman told MEE: 'I do not deny that I told Mr Khan that he should be looking for a way to extricate himself from his errors. I am not authorised to make any proposals on behalf of the Israeli government nor did I.' Kaufman said he had told Khan he feared that bringing more arrest warrants would encourage further US sanctions that would risk destroying the court, and that adopting a policy like 'Samson' and bringing the whole court down on him and its employees would not serve the purpose for which the court was conceived. Netanyahu's office did not respond to requests for comment. At the time of the meeting, Khan was facing investigation over sexual misconduct claims. Two weeks later Khan stepped down on indefinite leave following the publication by the Wall Street Journal of new and more serious sexual assault allegations. This followed a failed attempt to have him suspended, with a United Nations probe into the allegations ongoing – and just as he was reportedly preparing to seek arrest warrants for more members of the Israeli government. Khan has strenuously denied all the allegations against him. Middle East Eye can exclusively reveal details of the prosecutor's meeting with Kaufman on 1 May this year at a hotel in The Hague, the Dutch capital which hosts the ICC. Kaufman is an ICC defence lawyer whose current work includes representing Rodrigo Duterte, the former president of the Philippines currently in ICC custody and facing trial on a charge of crimes against humanity over the deaths of thousands of people during Duterte's so-called 'war on drugs'. The meeting came as Khan faced mounting pressure over his investigation into alleged Israeli war crimes in Gaza and the occupied Palestinian territories, which had led to the court issuing warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant in November 2024. 'Snakes in the grass' According to the note seen by MEE, Kaufman texted Khan at 10.48pm on 26 April, to offer to meet up with him to share 'an insight into the Israeli mentality regarding the current state of litigation'. Kaufman told Khan he had been contacted by a reporter at the Wall Street Journal. He said he had refused to cooperate but he did talk to the reporter extensively about Palestine because the reporter had heard that Kaufman had been 'informally/indirectly advising Gallant'. Kaufman said that he was not interested in discussing the 'scandalous allegations people raise' and said it was sad that he had 'to deal with the snakes in the grass in your own office'. 'I felt myself at liberty to tell him my personal views on the Palestine situation and the case against the Israeli officials which I felt had brought the court into serious disrepute' - Nicholas Kaufman He asked to meet the following week and Khan agreed. Kaufman told MEE he is not advising Gallant. He said he had spoken to the Wall Street Journal journalist but had told him that he knew nothing about allegations that Khan had sexually harassed a woman in his office. He said he had told Khan he was not interested in discussing the allegations. He said by 'snakes in the grass', he was referring to people at the court who were joking about the allegations and whose conduct he considered to be scandalous. He told MEE he had offered Khan a meeting "because as an Israeli ICC lawyer, who had experienced the shock of 7.10.23, I was well placed to understand the matter', and because he knew that Khan was 'under fire' over the Palestine investigation. He said: 'As friends, we had known each other for years, so I felt myself at liberty to tell him my personal views on the Palestine situation and the case against the Israeli officials which I felt had brought the court into serious disrepute.' On the evening of Tuesday 29 April, Kaufman told Khan he had spoken that afternoon to Roy Schondorf, Netanyahu's legal advisor. According to the note, Khan agreed to meet him for a coffee while he was out with his family. They met, joined by Khan's wife, Shyamala Alagendra, at 6.30pm on Thursday at the Hotel Des Indes. The Hotel Des Indes in The Hague on 13 October 2017 (Wikimedia Commons) According to the note, Kaufman told Khan he considered him a friend and said he had his differences with Netanyahu. However, he continued, that in his view Khan should have 'gone for lower level suspects' because, he said, by indicting Netanyahu and Gallant he had 'basically indicted Israel'. Kaufman also mentioned he was in contact with Netanyahu's adviser, Schondorf, and knew Khan had also met him. Khan told Kaufman that he would neither confirm nor deny 'any meetings I may have'. 'Well I know you have,' Kaufman replied. Kaufman confirmed to MEE that he had spoken to Schondorf. US threatens ICC: Drop Israel war crimes probe or 'all options on the table' Read More » He said: 'Roy Schondorf, like me, is an Israeli lawyer and extremely knowledgeable of ICC affairs. In fact, he is one of a handful of Israeli lawyers who knows how the court works. We gossip frequently about the ICC and I told him that I would be meeting Karim Khan.' Schondorf did not respond to a request for comment. According to the note, Kaufman then made a proposal that 'he said he was authorised to make' – a way, as he put it, for Khan to 'climb down the tree'. He told Khan to apply to the court to reclassify the warrants and underlying information as 'confidential'. This, it was suggested, would allow Israel to access the details of the allegations, which it could not do at the time, and challenge them in private – without the outcome being made public. Kaufman asked Khan if a recent report that he was preparing warrant applications for Israeli suspects related to the West Bank was true. The conversation took place before it was reported that Khan's office was preparing further arrest warrants for far-right ministers Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich over their promotion of illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank. Khan did not respond to Kaufman's question but asked why Israel did not 'proceed with complementarity', which would entail investigating the alleged war crimes in the domestic courts. He said the Israeli attorney general 'can easily look into this'. Kaufman said this was impossible, but told him there could be a 'non-criminal, non-investigative process' and Khan could give the evidence he had to that 'Israeli process'. But he warned that these options would be 'off the table' if it emerged that Khan had applied for more warrants. According to the note, Kaufman also told Khan that if the existing warrants were not withdrawn, or if he applied for more warrants, 'they will destroy you and they will destroy the court'. The note records that after the meeting, Khan's wife, who is also a lawyer, said to him, 'That was a clear threat.' Khan agreed. Kaufman told MEE: 'There was absolutely no threat.' He said that he had no authority to make any proposals to Khan on behalf of Netanyahu's office. UK lobbying US against sanctioning ICC over Israel war crimes probe Read More » 'I have no authority to make any offers such that I can take them off the table. Clearly Mr Khan thinks that I am more powerful than I am.' Kaufman confirmed to MEE that he had suggested to Khan that he should reclassify the warrants as confidential so that Israel could challenge the substance of the case. He said he believed Khan was 'clearly afraid to do so. He would have agreed if he was sufficiently confident of his evidence.' Kaufman told MEE he had not suggested to Khan that he could give evidence to a 'non-criminal, non-investigative process' in Israel and said this did not make legal sense. He said: 'What I did say was that Karim Khan should trust Israel's civil society to fight for accountability in the local courts.' The meeting took place less than two weeks before the Wall Street Journal published allegations that Khan was accused of sexual assault. Until then reported allegations against Khan had been of harassment – including Khan 'sexually touching' the complainant, putting his hand in the complainant's pocket and demanding to be let into her hotel room in the middle of the night. Khan has denied all allegations. There is no suggestion of any connection between the Kaufman-Khan meeting and the publication of the Wall Street Journal allegations. Sanctions and threats The revelations about the warning delivered to Khan by Kaufman come with the prosecutor and the court facing unprecedented pressure from the US over the ICC's investigation into alleged Israeli war crimes. Khan was sanctioned by the US in February, and four ICC judges were sanctioned in June over their role in issuing the arrest warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant. In comments to Israel's Kan public broadcaster last month, Kaufman described the sanctioning of the judges as a 'further warning shot across the bows' of the ICC which he said was 'meant to be designed to encourage the dropping of the arrest warrants for Prime Minister Netanyahu and former defence minister Gallant'. Numerous reports in the US and British media have claimed that Khan sought arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant on 20 May 2024 to win support in the context of sexual misconduct allegations against him. The Wall Street Journal claimed in an editorial on 16 May this year that Khan had used the arrest warrants to 'distract from his own behaviour'. It described the ICC's case against Netanyahu as 'tainted'. Exclusive: David Cameron threatened to withdraw UK from ICC over Israel war crimes probe Read More » But in fact, as previously reported by MEE, the prosecutor's decision to apply for warrants was made six weeks before allegations were made against him in late April. MEE has been told by multiple sources that on 16 March 2024, Khan's extensive team of lawyers and researchers had decided they would be in a position to apply for warrants by the end of April. On 25 March, Khan informed the US administration of his decision and forewarned them the warrants would be applied for by the end of April. Over the following two months, pressure on Khan mounted. On 23 April David Cameron, then the British foreign secretary, threatened in a phone call with Khan that the UK would defund and withdraw from the ICC if the court issued arrest warrants for Israeli leaders. Last month MEE revealed details of the call, in which Cameron told Khan applying for the warrants would be like 'dropping a hydrogen bomb'. The British Foreign Office and Khan both declined to comment in response to the report, while Cameron did not respond to multiple requests by MEE for comment. Khan faced more pressure from other sources. In a virtual meeting with ICC officials in May, US Republican Senator Lindsey Graham threatened sanctions against them if Khan applied for the warrants, according to British barrister Andrew Cayley, who oversaw the ICC's Palestine investigation. These threats would not dissuade Khan from applying for the warrants. It was on 29 April 2024, over a month after the decision to apply for warrants was made, that one of Khan's staff made harassment allegations against him. The allegations were referred to the court's Internal Oversight Mechanism (IOM), its investigative body, on 3 May. But an investigation was closed days later after the woman said she did not want to cooperate with it. This means that when Khan announced he was applying for arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant on 20 May, there was no investigation against him. Months later, in October, as speculation began to increase that ICC judges would soon issue arrest warrants for Israeli leaders, an anonymous account on social media platform X began circulating details of the sexual misconduct allegations against Khan. UN urged to take legal action at ICJ to uphold Francesca Albanese's immunity Read More » According to the Wall Street Journal, an anonymous source also sent information about the allegations to journalists in an email that contained the phone numbers of the complainant and an advisor to Khan, Thomas Lynch, next to the Hebrew word for telephones. The IOM then opened another investigation, which was closed in early November. Two investigations into the allegations had been opened and closed when the UN's Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) opened its own external investigation, which is ongoing. Since being subjected to sanctions by the US in February, Khan has had his American visa revoked and his wife and children have been banned from travelling to the country. His bank accounts have also been frozen in the UK. Khan declined to comment on the matters raised in this article. He has repeatedly denied all allegations of wrongdoing. The ICC also finds itself in a precarious position. In a further threat to the court last week, the US State Department's legal advisor Reed Rubinstein warned that 'all options remain on the table' unless all arrest warrants and the investigation into alleged Israeli war crimes are dropped. The US also last week imposed sanctions against Francesca Albanese, the UN special rapporteur for the occupied Palestinian territories, who it said had 'directly engaged' with the ICC. If the US sanctions the court as an institution, as some experts believe it might, it would prevent many banks and software companies from dealing with it – potentially crippling the ICC's ability to function.
The National
06-07-2025
- Entertainment
- The National
Journalists slate 'cowardly' BBC after cut to 'high risk' Glastonbury shows
One member of the trio - rapper Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh, who performs under the name Mo Chara – was charged with a terrorism offence for allegedly displaying the flag of proscribed terrorist organisation Hezbollah at a gig last year, and the group had garnered much attention after old videos of their shows revealed one member saying: 'The only good Tory is a dead Tory. Kill your local MP.' After much speculation ahead of the festival, the BBC opted to cut the live feed of their performance. But elsewhere, it was punk rap duo Bob Vylan that came under the spotlight. Following a speech criticising UK complicity over Israel's actions in Gaza, frontman Bobby Vylan led a chant of 'death, death to the IDF [Israel Defense Forces]' during a set on Saturday afternoon. It was broadcast live by the BBC, despite the corporation having deemed the group 'high risk' before the festival. READ MORE: The National set to launch collaboration with Declassified UK What happened next has since been described as a 'media circus' by journalists speaking to the Sunday National, as the BBC scrambled to apologise for the group's 'deplorable behaviour'. The corporation called the chant 'antisemitic', adding that the feed should have been cut, and it has since gone on to announce it will not broadcast acts deemed as 'high risk' in future. This was all happening in the same week a documentary on the destruction of Gaza's hospitals by Israel was shown on Channel 4 after it was binned by the BBC. The BBC received more complaints about Bob Vylan's performance than any other issue in more than four years, but ex-BBC reporter Karishma Patel said its response was a sign of how 'timid and cowardly' the corporation was becoming in its journalism. 'Live broadcasting is a risky business, but it doesn't mean the BBC should be afraid to broadcast live,' she said. 'I think the BBC is moving toward being more timid, more editorially anxious, because people at the top are not following due process, they're not carefully considering their editorial decisions, they are apologising and censoring very quickly. 'Complaints from one side seem to have a lot of influence over the BBC and seem to result in panicked, editorially unsound judgements, and I think we are seeing a BBC that is willing to sacrifice its core journalistic principles in order to keep certain groups happy.' She added: "I'm very concerned about the BBC becoming cowardly in refusing to air quality journalism, but journalists within the BBC are also very concerned about that too." (Image: Habie Schwarz) British-Israeli journalist Rachel Shabi (above) said the BBC's decision not to broadcast 'high-risk' performances following the Bob Vylan incident was 'stupid and censorious'. '[It is] stupid, censorious and a minefield: who decides what is 'high-risk'?,' she said. 'Decision-makers at the top of the BBC do not seem to care about damage to its reputation or credibility." She added: 'There's a wider problem with the BBC in that they are shredding their reputation over Gaza. 'I've spoken with journalists who are working inside the BBC and they are tearing their hair out, not just because the coverage of this [Israel/Gaza] has been so shocking, that they just want to be able to do their job and report things accurately and they don't seem to be able to, but these are people who work at the BBC because they believe in the institution and they can see its reputation being shredded over this and they're worried about that. 'That should be a far greater concern for the BBC.' Too quick to apologise? An official report published by the broadcaster on Thursday showed that some 3396 people had complained about the IDF chant. The last time the number of complaints topped 2000 was October 2022, when a BBC News special on Rishi Sunak, entitled 'Our New Prime Minister', was said to have been biased in favour of the Conservatives and their approach to public spending. But Patel claimed the BBC was too quick to apologise for streaming Bob Vylan's show. READ MORE: Homelessness is out of control in Glasgow. Who will solve it? 'I think the BBC was quick to apologise for this without considering the accuracy of the claim that the chant is antisemitic. We've seen Jewish voices saying we don't agree with that [that it was antisemitic], and I feel those voices need to be represented too,' she said. Shabi said politicians and the media conflating criticism of Israel with antisemitism is 'dangerous'. She said: 'These attempts to portray people who are angry about the IDF for good reason as having been motivated by this antisemitism that lurks in their hearts is just so bad faith. 'I think it's dangerous when things that are actually criticism of Israel get described as antisemitism. We're already in an environment where people are low on information about racism, including antisemitism, and there isn't a high degree of literacy around these subjects. 'The result of officials like politicians and media constantly focusing on antisemitism or what they see as it, more than anything else, and secondly redefining it in these terms, the effect of that is catastrophic for anyone who credibly wants to engage in tackling antisemitism.' Zack Polanski (below), a Green London Assembly member who is running for leadership of the party, is Jewish himself and said he did not believe the chant was antisemitic. (Image: Scottish Greens) 'I don't think it is antisemitic. We know Jewish people and the Israeli Defense Force are two very different bodies and there are increasingly groups of people including myself who are speaking out against Benjamin Netanyahu and his genocidal war,' he said. 'At the same time, I would never condone people shouting death to anyone or anything because I always want to push for diplomacy.' A distraction from the real story The real concern is that while the media coverage of the Bob Vylan fallout was going on, Israel had attacked a café in Gaza with an indiscriminate 500lb bomb. Experts in international law said the use of such a munition despite the known presence of many unprotected civilians, including children, women and elderly people, was almost certainly unlawful and may constitute a war crime. It was the latest episode in the ongoing slaughter of Gazans, with starving Palestinians queuing for food being shot daily. Shabi said it was shocking the mainstream media chose to 'obsess' over a punk rapper's chant rather than cover the death and destruction in Gaza. 'I found it shocking that the media would be so preoccupied with this [Bob Vylan] and give so much attention to it, and it was particularly galling because those few days were horrendous in Gaza,' she said. Shabi went on: 'What we're missing here is, what is going on that that ends up being a chant at Glastonbury? 'I think people have been watching the most horrific images coming out of Gaza and what Palestinians are going through, which is just a living hell. "Every morning we wake up to death in Gaza, staving people being indiscriminately shot as they wait for aid, just the most grotesque things you could imagine and we've been seeing that for 20 months while our media and our government has been in this defence of Israel as it does this and it's making people lose their minds, because it's such a profound wrong. 'People can see it and feel this helplessness and despair that we have a political climate that seems to be endorsing it." A BBC spokesperson said: 'The BBC is fully committed to reporting the Israel/Gaza conflict impartially, accurately and to the highest standards of journalism. "We provide a range of perspectives on the conflict, hold representatives and officials to account and, where appropriate, challenge views on air. "Our journalists reporting in both English and Arabic have decades of extensive knowledge and experience in covering the region. 'We strongly reject the notion – levelled from different sides of this conflict – that we are pro or anti any position. It is our duty to report what is happening, and we do that without an agenda. 'International journalists including the BBC are not allowed access into Gaza. While we are reporting extensively on what is happening in the strip, this is clearly detrimental to our ability to report and hold those in power to account. We therefore call for the Israeli government to permit our journalists immediate access."
Days of Palestine
05-07-2025
- Politics
- Days of Palestine
Experts Say Western Media Is Enabling Gaza Genocide and Rewriting History
As Israel's war on Gaza continues to expand across the region, media analysts, historians, and human rights advocates are sounding the alarm over how Western media outlets are shaping global perception—and potentially helping erase evidence of what they describe as genocide. At a powerful panel hosted by the International Centre of Justice for Palestinians (ICJP) in London, speakers accused mainstream Western news organisations of minimising, distorting, or outright denying the scale of atrocities in Gaza. They warned that this could have devastating consequences for historical truth and future accountability. 'This isn't just a media failure—it's a war on memory,' said Dr. Omar al-Ghazzi, an associate professor at the London School of Economics. 'How this war is covered now will become the history future generations inherit.' Systematic Media Bias New findings from the Centre for Media Monitoring (CFMM) highlighted widespread editorial patterns that soften or sideline Palestinian suffering. Media analyst Faisal Hanif said the BBC alone removed references to genocide in Gaza over 100 times in the past year. The use of emotionally charged words also revealed a double standard. The term 'massacre,' for instance, was found to be used 18 times more when describing Hamas attacks than Israeli attacks, even when Palestinian death tolls were far higher. 'That's not accidental,' said Hanif. 'It reflects a systemic bias and an uncritical acceptance of Israeli government narratives, especially those targeting Palestinian journalists.' Palestinian Voices Dismissed or Put 'On Trial' Rachel Shabi, a British-Israeli journalist, aimed at international media outlets to echo Israel's justification for banning foreign reporters from Gaza under the pretext of 'safety.' Meanwhile, she said, Palestinian journalists are often smeared as Hamas sympathisers. 'They [Western media] fall into the trap without calling it out,' Shabi said. 'And even when Palestinian voices are included, their grief and testimony are often discredited—as if they're unreliable narrators of their own trauma.' Genocide Denial in Real Time Prominent historian Avi Shlaim called Israel's media strategy a form of aggressive propaganda that suppresses criticism by labelling it antisemitic. Professor Martin Shaw, a leading genocide scholar, said the world is witnessing a form of 'implicatory denial'—a chilling concept where atrocities are acknowledged but not acted upon. 'The media is starting to shift, but still lags behind the reality on the ground,' Shaw warned. 'Even when there's recognition of genocide, we're not seeing any meaningful action to stop it.' He added that the era of Western-led 'humanitarian intervention' is over: 'Today, the powerful do what they want—and they don't even bother dressing it up.' Media as a Tool of Geopolitics Wadah Khanfar, former Director General of Al Jazeera, connected the media narrative to broader Western geopolitical agendas. He accused Western powers of using the war to reshape the Middle East while silencing Arab perspectives in the process. 'This is about more than Gaza. It's about designing a future for the region without the people who live in it,' Khanfar said. He specifically criticised Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, calling him 'arrogant' for believing he can dictate the future unilaterally. Khanfar warned that unchecked Israeli impunity, especially with recent airstrikes on Iran, could ignite wider instability and possibly push the region towards nuclear brinkmanship. 'We are being dragged into a new dark age,' he said. Cracks Within Israel Adding a rare internal perspective, Daniel Levy, a former Israeli peace negotiator, questioned whether Israel's strategy is sustainable at all. 'Is this the third Jewish kingdom?' he asked, implying that Israel could be repeating cycles of overreach and collapse seen in ancient times. Levy noted growing disillusionment inside Israel itself, with more reservists refusing to report for duty and doubts rising even among staunch supporters. 'More and more Israelis are starting to see these endless wars as leading the country toward a place of no return.' International Law: Powerful in Theory, Weak in Practice Tayab Ali, director of the ICJP, said the failure to apply international legal frameworks consistently is feeding Israel's sense of impunity. 'The legal systems are excellent in theory—but they're selectively applied in practice,' he said. 'And that reinforces Israel's belief that its actions, no matter how extreme, will be shielded.' Levy also rejected Western narratives suggesting peace will follow Iran's elimination, calling such thinking 'legally flawed and strategically naïve.' A Moment of Reckoning As the war drags on, one thing became clear in the panel's final message: this is not just a humanitarian crisis—it's a crisis of truth, memory, and justice. And if the media fails to uphold its duty, future generations may never know what really happened. Shortlink for this post:
