Why “Pro-Israel, Pro-Peace” Advocates Cling to Genocide Denial

Posted on by admin

Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, Middle East & North Africa, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

SAN FRANCISCO, USA, Mar 20 2025 (IPS) – Israel’s renewed assault on Gaza comes several months after both Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch issued reports concluding without equivocation that Israel was engaged in genocide. But very few members of Congress dare to acknowledge that reality, while their silence and denials scream out complicity.

In a New York Times interview last weekend, the Senate’s Democratic leader Chuck Schumer put deep moral evasion on display. Among the “slogans” that are used when criticizing Israel, he said, “The one that bothers me the most is genocide. Genocide is described as a country or some group tries to wipe out a whole race of people, a whole nationality of people. So, if Israel was not provoked and just invaded Gaza and shot at random Palestinians, Gazans, that would be genocide. That’s not what happened.”

Schumer is wrong.

The international Genocide Convention defines genocide as “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group” — with such actions as killing, “deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part,” and “imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.”

Such actions by Israel have been accompanied by clear evidence of genocidal intent — underscored by hundreds of statements by Israeli leaders and policy shapers. Scarcely three months into the Israeli war on Gaza, scholars Raz Segal and Penny Green pointed out, a database compiled by the Law for Palestine human rights organization “meticulously documents and collates 500 statements that embody the Israeli state’s intention to commit genocide and incitement to genocide since October 7, 2023.”

Those statements “by people with command authority — state leaders, war cabinet ministers and senior army officers — and by other politicians, army officers, journalists and public figures reveal the widespread commitment in Israel to the genocidal destruction of Gaza.”

Since March 2, the United Nations reports, “Israeli authorities have halted the entry of all lifesaving supplies, including food, medicine, fuel and cooking gas, for 2.1 million people.” Now, Israel’s horrendous crusade to destroy Palestinian people in Gaza — using starvation as a weapon of war and inflicting massive bombardment on civilians — has resumed after a two-month ceasefire.

On Tuesday, children were among the more than 400 people killed by Israeli airstrikes, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu proclaimed that “this is only the beginning.”

It’s almost impossible to find a Republican in Congress willing to criticize the pivotal U.S. backing for Israel’s methodical killing of civilians. It’s much easier to find GOP lawmakers who sound bloodthirsty.

A growing number of congressional Democrats — still way too few — have expressed opposition. In mid-November, 17 Senate Democrats and two independents voted against offensive arms sales to Israel. But in reality, precious few Democratic legislators really pushed to impede such weapons shipments until after last November’s election. Deference to President Biden was the norm as he actively enabled the genocide to continue.

This week, renewal of Israel’s systematic massacres of Palestinian civilians has hardly sparked a congressional outcry. Silence or platitudes have been the usual.

For “pro-Israel, pro-peace” J Street, the largest and most influential liberal Zionist organization in the United States, evasions have remained along with expressions of anguish. On Tuesday the group’s founder and president, Jeremy Ben-Ami, issued a statement decrying “the decision by Netanyahu to reignite this horrific war” and calling for use of “all possible leverage to pressure each side to restore the ceasefire.”

But, as always, J Street did not call for the U.S. government to stop providing the weapons that make the horrific war possible.

That’s where genocide denial comes in.

For J Street, as for members of Congress who’ve kept voting to enable the carnage with the massive U.S.-to-Israel weapons pipeline, support for that pipeline requires pretending that genocide isn’t really happening.

While writing an article for The Nation (“Has J Street Gone Along With Genocide?”), I combed through 132 news releases from J Street between early October 2023 and the start of the now-broken ceasefire in late January of this year. I found that on the subject of whether Israel was committing genocide, J Street “aligned itself completely with the position of the U.S. and Israeli governments.”

J Street still maintains the position that it took last May, when the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to halt its military offensive in Rafah. “J Street continues to reject the allegation of genocide in this case,” a news release said.

It would be untenable to publicly acknowledge the reality of Israeli genocide while continuing to support shipping more weaponry for the genocide. That’s why those who claim to be “pro-peace” while supporting more weapons for war must deny the reality of genocide in Gaza.

Norman Solomon is the national director of RootsAction.org and executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy. The paperback edition of his latest book, War Made Invisible: How America Hides the Human Toll of Its Military Machine, includes an afterword about the Gaza war.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Belarus: A Sham Election That Fools No One

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Europe, Featured, Headlines, Human Rights, Nuclear Energy – Nuclear Weapons, Press Freedom, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Credit: Sergei Gapon/AFP via Getty Images

LONDON, Feb 7 2025 (IPS) – Alexander Lukashenko will soon begin his seventh term as president of Belarus. The official result of the 26 January election gave him 86.8 per cent of the vote, following an election held in a climate of fear. Only token opposition candidates were allowed, most of who came out in support of Lukashenko. Anyone who might have offered a credible challenge is in jail or in exile.

No repeat of 2020

In office since 1994 as the so far only president of independent Belarus, Lukashenko is by far Europe’s longest-serving head of state. The 1994 vote that brought the former Soviet official to power was the country’s only legitimate election. Each since has been designed to favour Lukashenko.

He only faced a serious threat in 2020, when an outsider candidate, Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, was able to run a campaign that captured the popular imagination. Lukashenko’s response was to arrest opponents, repress protests, restrict the internet, deny access for electoral observers and then blatantly steal the election.

When people took to the street in mass protests against electoral fraud, Belarus seemed on the brink of a democratic revolution. But Lukashenko’s government launched a brutal defence, using security forces to violently attack protesters and arresting over a thousand people. It dissolved opposition political parties and raided and shut down civil society organisations: over a thousand have been forcibly liquidated since 2020.

Lukashenko’s regime has gone after those in exile, kidnapping and allegedly killing Belarusians abroad. Belarus is among the 10 states most engaged in transnational repression. They authorities have also deprived the estimated 300,000 people who’ve fled since 2020 of their ability to vote.

By embracing repression, Lukashenko made a choice to abandon his policy of balancing between the European Union (EU) and Russia. When the EU imposed sanctions in response to the 2020 election fraud, Russia offered a package of loans. In 2022, when Russia launched its full-scale assault on Ukraine, some of its forces entered Ukraine from Belarus.

Shortly after Russia began its full-scale invasion, a constitutional referendum held in Belarus, marked by the same lack of democracy as its elections, formally ended the country’s neutrality and non-nuclear status. In December 2024, the two states signed a security treaty allowing the use of Russian nuclear weapons in the event of aggression against Belarus, and Lukashenko confirmed that the country hosts dozens of Russian nuclear warheads.

Belarus has also been accused of instrumentalising migrants to try to destabilise neighbouring countries. In 2021, it relaxed its visa rules for people from Middle Eastern and North African countries and encouraged flights to Belarus. Thousands were taken to the borders with Lithuania and Poland and left to try to cross them in desperate conditions, freezing and without essentials, subjected to security force violence on both sides. Migrants were unwitting pawns in Lukashenko’s game to strike back at his neighbours. Attempted crossings and human rights violations have continued since.

Renewed crackdown

Just to be on the safe side, Lukashenko launched another crackdown in the months leading up to the election. The intent was clearly to ensure there’d be no repeat of the expression of opposition and protests of 2020.

Starting in July 2024, Lukashenko pardoned around 250 political prisoners, releasing them from jail. His likely aim was to soften international criticism in the run-up to the vote. But these weren’t the high-profile prisoners serving long sentences, such as Nobel Peace Prize winner Ales Bialiatski, a founder of the Viasna Human Rights Centre, who received a 10-year sentence in 2023, or protest leader Maria Kolesnikova, sentenced to 11 years in 2021. Those pardoned had to publicly acknowledge their guilt and repent.

The freed jail spaces were quickly filled, with over a hundred friends and relatives of political prisoners detained. In February 2024, authorities detained at least 12 lawyers who’d defended political prisoners. In December, they arrested seven independent journalists. Belarus has the world’s fourth highest number of jailed journalists.

People have been jailed merely for following Telegram channels deemed ‘extremist’ or making social media comments. Over 1,700 people reportedly faced charges for political activities in 2024. Prison conditions are harsh. People may be forced to do hard labour, kept in solitary confinement, sent to freezing punishment cells, denied access to their families and have medical care withheld.

On election day, Lukashenko’s dictatorial style was on full display. He held a press conference where he promised to ‘deal with’ opposition activists in exile and said they were endangering their families in Belarus, adding that some opponents ‘chose’ to go to prison. He also didn’t rule out the prospect of running for an eighth term in 2030.

Time for change

Lukashenko promises more of the same: continuing autocracy and closed civic space. For generations of Belarusians who’ve known nothing but his rule, and with opposition voices so ruthlessly suppressed, it may be hard to imagine anything else. The possibilities opened up in 2020 have been ruthlessly shut down.

But the wheels of history will keep turning, and the 70-year-old dictator won’t last forever. Some kind of cessation of hostilities in Ukraine may well come this year, forcing Lukashenko to make friends beyond Vladimir Putin. If Russia winds down its booming war economy, the ensuing economic shock in Belarus, which largely depends on Russia, could trigger public anger.

Meanwhile, potentially increased scrutiny could come from the International Criminal Court: in September 2024, the government of Lithuania requested an investigation into crimes against humanity allegedly committed by Belarusian authorities. If this move gains momentum, Lukashenko could find himself in an uncomfortable spotlight. States could also intensify sanctions: Canada and the UK have done so following the election.

If Belarus attempts to reengage with them, democratic states should insist that no thaw in relations is possible without tangible human rights progress . This should start with the release of all political prisoners, guarantees for the safety of exiled activists and a reversal of attacks on civic space.

Andrew Firmin is CIVICUS Editor-in-Chief, co-director and writer for CIVICUS Lens and co-author of the State of Civil Society Report.

For interviews or more information, please contact research@civicus.org.

  Source

Venezuela: The Democratic Transition That Wasn’t

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Democracy, Economy & Trade, Featured, Headlines, Latin America & the Caribbean, Migration & Refugees, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Credit: Juan Barreto/AFP via Getty Images

MONTEVIDEO, Uruguay, Feb 3 2025 (IPS) – Venezuela stands at a critical juncture as Nicolás Maduro begins a controversial third term as president. His 10 January inauguration, following a post-election period marked by widespread protests against election fraud and heightened repression, represents a significant setback for democratic aspirations in a country devastated by years of economic collapse and political oppression. Maduro’s confirmation at the helm is the latest chapter in a decades-long process that has transformed Venezuela from a beacon of leftist democratic aspirations into a full-blown authoritarian regime, where the last shred of legitimacy – popular election – has now vanished.

The implications of Venezuela’s crisis extend far beyond its borders, triggering the largest refugee exodus in the Americas and creating significant challenges for neighbouring countries. Almost eight million Venezuelans live abroad, with projections suggesting another two or three million might leave in the coming years.

This crisis comes at a moment when, unlike in the past, two key factors potentially leading to a democratic transition are present: unprecedented opposition unity capable of sustaining a protest movement and growing international support, with progressive Latin American governments increasingly distancing themselves from Maduro. However, Maduro’s willingness to use violent repression and his ability to maintain military loyalty suggest a difficult path ahead for democratic restoration.

Election fraud and post-election repression

The 2024 presidential election initially sparked hopes for democratic change. These hopes were crushed when Maduro declared himself the winner despite clear evidence that opposition candidate Edmundo González Urrutia had secured a significant victory.

The election campaign unfolded against a backdrop of intensifying civic space restrictions and was far from free and fair. The government disqualified popular opposition leader María Corina Machado and blocked her proposed replacement, forcing the opposition to field González Urrutia. Additional irregularities included systematic persecution of opposition leaders, abuse of public resources, media manipulation and voter suppression tactics, particularly targeting the estimated four million Venezuelan voters abroad.

Despite these challenges, the opposition demonstrated unprecedented unity and organisation. Through its Plan 600K initiative, it mobilised around 600,000 volunteers to monitor polling stations, collect the tallies produced by voting machines and independently calculate results. Their parallel count revealed that González won around 67 per cent of votes compared to Maduro’s 29 per cent, figures supported by independent exit polls. However, the National Electoral Council stopped publishing results after counting 40 per cent of votes, eventually declaring an implausible Maduro victory without providing any supporting data.

Fraud sparked widespread unrest, with 915 spontaneous protests erupting across Venezuelan cities in the two days following the election. The regime’s response was swift and severe. It labelled protests a ‘fascist outbreak’ and charged many protesters with terrorism and incitement to hatred. Security forces used deadly force, resulting in at least 25 deaths, while pro-government paramilitaries engaged in intimidation and violence.

The crackdown extended beyond protesters to target opposition and civil society leaders. Several prominent figures were forced into hiding or exile, while others faced arbitrary detention. Repression intensified in the lead-up to Maduro’s inauguration, with 75 new political detentions in the first 11 days of January alone.

Inauguration day

Maduro’s inauguration reflected both the regime’s isolation and its increasingly authoritarian character. Only two presidents – from Cuba and Nicaragua – attended the ceremony, while other governments sent lower-level representatives. The swearing-in ceremony took place 90 minutes earlier than scheduled, out of fear that the opposition’s president-elect, in exile in Spain, could somehow materialise its declared intention to enter Venezuela and hold a parallel counter-inauguration.

The government implemented extraordinary security measures to make sure this wouldn’t happen, closing land borders with Brazil and Colombia, shutting down Venezuelan airspace and deploying an unprecedented number of security forces throughout Caracas. The militarisation extended to the closure of opposition-controlled neighbourhoods and the pre-emptive detention of dozens of opposition figures.

Maduro’s inaugural address and subsequent appearances were particularly confrontational. He announced plans for constitutional changes to further consolidate power and declared the beginning of a new phase of governance based on a strong alliance between civilian authorities, military forces, the police and the intelligence apparatus. He openly discussed Venezuela’s readiness to take up arms against intervention alongside Cuba and Nicaragua, framing political opposition as a threat to national sovereignty.

International responses and regional implications

In the Americas, only Bolivia, Cuba, Honduras and Nicaragua recognise Maduro as the legitimately elected president, with only an additional handful worldwide, including China, Iran and Russia, maintaining their support.

The USA responded to Maduro’s inauguration by increasing the reward it offers for information leading to Maduro’s arrest to US$25 million, while also targeting his inner circle with new sanctions. The European Union also imposed new sanctions. The G7’s foreign ministers and the High Representative of the European Union issued a joint statement condemning Maduro’s ‘lack of democratic legitimacy’ and the ongoing repression of civil society and the political opposition.

Most significantly, the positions of Latin American states appear to be slowly shifting, with some left-wing leaders, notably those of Brazil and Colombia, not automatically siding with the Maduro regime for the first time. However, Colombia’s pragmatic approach reveals the complexities faced by Venezuela’s neighbours: while not accepting the official election results at face value, Colombia has stopped short of condemnation and has been careful to maintain its diplomatic relations, citing the need to manage border issues and the refugee situation.

Prospects for democratic change

The path to democratic transition faces significant obstacles, with military support remaining crucial to Maduro’s hold on power. The regime has secured military loyalty through a combination of institutional integration, coercion and economic privilege, with high-ranking military officers reaping generous rewards. The regime has found additional layers of protection in security structures including the National Bolivarian Guard, special police units and pro-government militias, and the Bolivarian National Intelligence Service, strongly backed by G2, Cuba’s secret service.

But the authoritarian regime has vulnerabilities. Growing international isolation, combined with continued economic deterioration, may eventually strain the system of patronage that maintains elite loyalty, including among the military. The opposition’s commitment to peaceful resistance, while seemingly ineffective in the short term, continues to earn it moral authority and international support.

While the combination of peaceful resistance, international pressure and potential internal divisions within the regime may eventually create conditions for change, the immediate future suggests a continuing struggle between an entrenched authoritarian system and a resilient democratic movement. The outcome will have profound implications for Venezuela and for all of Latin America.

Inés M. Pousadela is CIVICUS Senior Research Specialist, co-director and writer for CIVICUS Lens and co-author of the State of Civil Society Report.

For interviews or more information, please contact research@civicus.org.

  Source

Safeguarding Civil Society – a New Global Initiative Could Become a Game-Changer

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, Press Freedom, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Sarah Strack is Forus Director

Credit: Hivos. EU SEE

JOHANNESBURG, Jan 31 2025 (IPS) – Across the world, civil society faces increasing pressure—from restrictive laws on civil society operations to digital surveillance, funding restrictions, and direct attacks on human rights defenders. In response, a global civil society coalition is stepping up. The newly launched European Union System for an Enabling Environment for Civil Society (EU SEE) spans 86 countries, equipping civil society actors, governments and other stakeholders with the data, tools, and resources needed to anticipate and respond in real time to shifts in the enabling environment—ensuring that civil society can thrive, freely express itself, and actively shape its context.

From Paraguay to Uganda, Indonesia to Botswana and Pakistan, the latest reports from civil society organisations paint a sobering picture of deteriorating operational environment and growing restrictions.

    • In Paraguay, new legislation imposes excessive bureaucratic hurdles on CSOs, while 78% of citizens feel unrepresented in parliament and 84% believe elections are fraudulent.
    • In Uganda, ahead of the 2026 elections, journalists and activists face increasing state repression, with the government using digital surveillance laws to stifle dissent.
    • In Pakistan, authorities have blocked access to independent media, used the military court system to sentence 60 civilians, and restricted funding for NGOs deemed critical of the government.
    • In Indonesia, anti-NGO rhetoric is rising, restrictive funding laws limit CSO resources, and police continue to suppress public protests.
    • In Botswana, despite constitutional guarantees of free expression, civil society actors advocating for democratic reforms face harassment, and restrictive assembly laws limit peaceful protests.
    • In Pakistan the not-for-profit status of NGOs has been withdrawn and now every income of NGOs even under grants from global charities is taxable unless the NGO applies for tax exemption and gets it approved every year. This process has opened new ways of corruption for Federal Bureau of Revenue Authorities. Local and national charities are also facing immense challenges to open their bank accounts. One of the Bank Manager in Balochistan province of Pakistan said “NGO Bank accounts are punishment for us”.

“Pakistani NGOs face immense challenges, not only from state-led systemic and structural barriers but also from social and cultural norms. We are constantly walking a double-edged sword to fight for our fundamental freedoms,” says Zia ur Rehman, Chair of the Pakistan Development Alliance, which is enhancing the Pakistan Civic Space Monitor through the EU SEE initiative.

This is a moment of reckoning for civil society. We cannot afford to wait for the grip to be tightened on civic freedoms and civil society’s environment. As we face multiple challenges and common struggles, no single organisation or sector can confront these issues alone. Now is the time to come together and build a diverse global coalition of defenders for civil society—a “united front” that harnesses data, innovation, and collaboration to protect and sustain an enabling environment for civil society worldwide.

As Intan Kusuma of the International NGO Forum on Indonesian Development (Infid) explains, “In many countries, the escalating issue of shrinking space for civil society organisations has arisen. EU SEE will be assisting civil society in both preventing and proactively addressing legal and policy changes that might affect civil society operations. This effort will include a series of actions, such as national-level monitoring, which will generate early warnings to provide timely support to those in need.”

Yet generating data alone is not enough—collective influence, and support from policymakers, donors, and the public are also needed to turn these insights into meaningful change.

Creating an enabling environment for civil society involves shifting laws, social attitudes, and resources that not only protect fundamental freedoms but actively facilitate civil society’s ability to operate effectively and sustainably. Within such an environment, civil society can engage in political and public life without fear of reprisals, openly express its views, and actively participate in shaping its context.

Country-specific insights on these dimensions can drive evidence-based advocacy, shape policy discussions, support civil society organisations refine their strategies, access flexible financial support mechanisms, and build solidarity networks at national, regional, and global levels.

“A vibrant and free civil society provides the very foundation from which we can address the world’s most pressing challenges,” says Mandeep Tiwana, interim co-Secretary General at CIVICUS. “Civil society is the heartbeat of democracy, the voice of the marginalised, and the catalyst for social justice. We must defend it with unwavering resolve.”

Policymakers, too, must rise to the challenge. The data and trends highlighted by monitoring systems like EU SEE serve as a springboard for governments to enact policies that protect and nurture civil society. This means committing to international frameworks that uphold freedom of expression, halting internet shutdowns, fight disinformation campaigns, surveillance abuses, and ultimately build accountability and support action.

International institutions and donors must align their funding and diplomatic efforts with the pressing needs identified by civil society monitoring initiatives. Funders must prioritise flexible, long-term support for civil society, ensuring organisations have the resources to resist crackdowns.

At the same time data and follow-up actions can be used by the media to uncover patterns of repression, highlight emerging threats and opportunities, and keep the microphone on at national and global levels – bringing these issues to the forefront of public discourse.

For those believing in the power of civil society, the choice before us is clear: either stand by as enabling environments deteriorate—whether in your own country or elsewhere—or take collective action. By leveraging data and closely examining global trends, let’s act together to push back against repression and build a world where civil society not only survives but thrives.

The EU System for an Enabling Environment for Civil Society (EU SEE) is a consortium of international organisations and Network Members. The civil society organisations that form this global partnership have a wealth of experience monitoring, protecting and strengthening the conditions that enable civil society to thrive. The initiative is implemented by: CIVICUS, Democracy Reporting International, European Partnership for Democracy, Forus, Hivos and Transparency International.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Antisemitism On The Rise Among Younger Generations

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Gender, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, LGBTQ, TerraViva United Nations

Melissa Fleming, Under-Secretary-General for Global Communications, addresses the United Nations Holocaust Memorial Ceremony: Holocaust Remembrance for Dignity and Human Rights in observance of the International Day of Commemoration in memory of the victims of the Holocaust. Credit: UN Photo/Manuel Elías

UNITED NATIONS, Jan 28 2025 (IPS) – The United Nations (UN) held the annual Holocaust Memorial Ceremony on January 27 with the theme “Holocaust Remembrance for Dignity and Human Rights”. This year – 2025 – marks the 80 year anniversary of the end of World War II and the liberation of Nazi concentration camps that resulted in the deaths of over 6 million Jews. This event included testimonies from Holocaust survivors, underscoring the importance of understanding and remembrance. With Holocaust denial and attacks on Jews on the rise, it is important to take meaningful steps as a society to combat racism and antisemitism.

The opening remarks at this ceremony was delivered by UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, in which he emphasized the vast scale of minorities who were targeted by the Nazi party as well as the UN’s commitment to remember and honor these victims.

“Every year on this day, we come together to mark the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau. We mourn the six million Jews murdered by the Nazis and their collaborators as they sought to destroy an entire people. We grieve the Romani Sintis, people with disabilities, LGBTQIA+ people, and all those enslaved, persecuted, tortured, and killed. We stand alongside victims, survivors, and their families. And we renew our resolve to never forget the atrocities that so outraged the conscience of humankind,” said Guterres.

Guterres went on to elaborate on the importance of remembrance. Although survivors of the Holocaust have continued to share their stories, it is a societal responsibility to fight for justice. “Remembrance is not only a moral act , remembrance is a call to action. To allow the Holocaust to fade from memory would dishonor the past and betray the future,” he said.

The UN Deputy Representative for the United States Dorothy Shea also spoke at this conference, underscoring that Holocaust remembrance is especially important as of today with antisemitism on the rise again, especially among younger generations. “Holocaust denial and distortion are also on the rise. They are a form of antisemitism and are often coupled with xenophobia.  History shows, as hatred directed at Jews rises, violence and attacks on the foundations of democracy are not far behind…The data also highlights a troubling increase in antisemitic attitudes among younger demographics, with significant implications for future societal dynamics,” she said.

On January 14, the Anti Defamation League (ADL) released the Global 100 Survey, a study that analyzes trends of antisemitic beliefs around the world. The survey studied around 58,000 people in 103 countries to represent the 94 percent of the entire adult population. It found that approximately 46 percent of adults worldwide harbor some form of antisemitic beliefs, equal to roughly 2.2 billion people. These numbers are nearly double the amount recorded in ADL’s 2014 survey and mark the highest level on record since the beginning of ADL’s surveys.

Additionally, the survey found that approximately 20 percent of the studied population had not heard about the Holocaust. Roughly 48 percent believe in the Holocaust’s historical accuracy, with this percentage being even lower, at an alarming 39 percent among 18-34 year olds. Furthermore, 50 percent of respondents younger than 35 years of age reported elevated levels of antisemitic beliefs.

ADL surveyors also analyzed a possible link between worldwide levels of antisemitism and the Israeli Defense Forces’ (IDF) extensive acts of brutality against Palestinians during the Israel-Hamas War. Approximately 23 percent of respondents indicated support for Hamas.

Overall, sentiments towards Israel were relatively mixed, with 71 percent of respondents believing that their nation should have diplomatic relations with Israel and 75 percent believing that their nation should welcome tourism from Israeli people. Additionally, about 67 percent of respondents believed that their nations should not boycott Israeli goods.

“Antisemitism is nothing short of a global emergency, especially in a post-October 7 world. We are seeing these trends play out from the Middle East to Asia, from Europe to North and South America,” said Jonathan A. Greenblatt, ADL’s CEO. According to the report, the highest levels of antisemitism are concentrated in the Middle East and North Africa, with the western world harboring relatively lower levels.

The global resurgence of antisemitism is particularly alarming as it has resulted in increased levels of hate crimes and discrimination. “Antisemitic tropes and beliefs are becoming alarmingly normalized across societies worldwide. This dangerous trend is not just a threat to Jewish communities—it’s a warning to us all. Even in countries with the lowest levels of antisemitic attitudes globally, we’ve seen many antisemitic incidents perpetrated by an emboldened small, vocal and violent minority,” said Marina Rosenberg, ADL Senior Vice President for International Affairs.

To effectively combat antisemitism on a global scale, it is imperative for governments, humanitarian organizations, and social media platforms to establish new measures that encourage more diverse and understanding attitudes. This requires action from all individuals to achieve societal progress in eliminating hateful beliefs.

It’s clear that we need new government interventions, more education, additional safeguards on social media, and new security protocols to prevent antisemitic hate crimes. This fight requires a whole-of-society approach – including government, civil society and individuals and now is the time to act,” said Greenblatt.

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

‘Digital platforms amplify the Israeli narrative while systematically silencing Palestinian voices’

Posted on by admin

Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Featured, Headlines, Human Rights, Middle East & North Africa, Migration & Refugees, Press Freedom, TerraViva United Nations

Jan 2 2025 (IPS) –  
CIVICUS discusses the challenges Palestinian civil society faces in resisting digital suppression and advocating for justice with Palestinian lawyer and researcher Dima Samaro.

As the director of Skyline International for Human Rights, Dima advocates for digital freedoms and human rights in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). She is a board member of Innovation for Change, MENA Hub, and the Surveillance in the Majority World Network, and volunteers with Resilience Pathways, which helps Palestinian civil society organisations (CSOs) reclaim the narrative amid Israeli efforts to manipulate public opinion, block funding and restrict civic space.

Dima Samaro

How are digital platforms influencing the narrative on Palestine?

Digital platforms have become key to shaping narratives about Palestine, often amplifying the Israeli narrative while systematically silencing Palestinian voices. Platforms such as Meta, TikTok and X, formerly Twitter, routinely remove Palestinian content under vague ‘policy violations’. This has intensified since October 2023, with the Israeli Cyber Unit issuing over 9,500 takedown requests, 94 per cent of which were approved. These actions have resulted in the removal of posts, shadow bans – a form of censorship that limits visibility of pro-Palestinian content without user notification – and account suspensions, and have extended to the censorship of hashtags such as #FreePalestine.

Algorithmic bias further marginalises Palestinian narratives. For example, Instagram once mistranslated the Arabic phrase ‘alhamdulillah’ – praise be to God – next to a Palestinian flag as ‘terrorists fighting for their freedom’. On WhatsApp, AI-generated images depicted militarised scenes as illustrations for ‘Palestinian’ but benign cartoons for terms such as ‘Israeli boy’ or ‘Israeli army’. While these incidents are often dismissed as technical errors, they reveal a systemic bias.

Policies such as Meta’s Dangerous Organisations and Individuals framework are heavily influenced by US terrorism designations and stifle Palestinian discourse by prohibiting expressions of ‘praise’ or ‘support’ for major political movements. Meanwhile, hate speech targeting Palestinians – including posts celebrating violence or calling for the destruction of Gaza – often goes unchecked. While ads inciting violence against Palestinians are allowed, the use of terms like ‘Zionist’ is flagged as hate speech. This double standard silences Palestinian voices while enabling propaganda that justifies collective punishment and shields atrocities from scrutiny.

Platform complicity goes beyond censorship. In April, +972 Magazine reported that WhatsApp, which belongs to Meta, played a role in supporting the Israeli AI surveillance system Lavender, which has been linked to the killing of civilians in Gaza. These disturbing revelations suggest direct corporate complicity in violations of international law.

Digital platforms are distorting narratives, dehumanising Palestinians and normalising violence against an already oppressed and besieged population. They actively suppress efforts to document war crimes and manipulate information. They must be held accountable for this.

What challenges does Palestinian civil society encounter?

Palestinian CSOs work under immense pressure, facing arbitrary arrests, travel bans, funding cuts and violence. In October 2021, Israel designated six prominent Palestinian human rights groups as terrorist organisations. These unfounded accusations delegitimised their work, fuelling defamation campaigns and enabling harassment and other restrictions on their work.

Many human rights defenders have also become targets of digital surveillance. Pegasus spyware, developed by the Israeli company NSO Group, has been used to hack the devices of Palestinian activists and human rights defenders, putting their safety and work at risk. This surveillance has been widely condemned by organisations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.

But the crackdown on Palestinian civil society goes beyond digital tactics: human rights defenders are harassed, arbitrarily detained and physically attacked. In Gaza, the situation has worsened after October 2023. Several civil society workers have been killed, injured or detained, and many have been displaced by the ongoing bombardment. The destruction of infrastructure has further hampered their work.

Journalists also face violence. Gaza has become the world’s deadliest place for journalists, with 195 media workers killed to date, many of them deliberately targeted while carrying out their duties. This loss of independent reporting creates a massive information gap, leaving human rights violations unreported and unchecked.

To make matters worse, international donors such as Germany, Sweden and Switzerland have suspended funding over unsubstantiated allegations of links to terrorism. The European Union’s imposition of ‘anti-incitement’ clauses also stigmatises Palestinian CSOs by forcing them to prove their neutrality, limiting their ability to document human rights violations without risking their safety.

How is Skyline International helping address these challenges?

We work at the intersection of technology, social media and human rights in Palestine and the region. We track, monitor and document human rights violations committed by states and corporations, particularly in the digital sphere. This includes tracking digital surveillance, analysing the ethical implications of AI in conflict settings and advocating for the protection of fundamental online rights such as freedom of expression, access to information and the right to privacy.

In Palestine, we support civil society activists and journalists by tackling online censorship and digital bias. We work closely with human rights defenders to document cases of over-enforcement of policies, content takedowns, account suspensions and algorithmic bias by social media platforms, as well as the illegal use of spyware and new technologies to target media workers. We also condemn Israel’s use of digital tools to target journalists in Gaza and Lebanon. Our aim is to draw national and international attention to these violations and advocate for the protection of press and online freedoms, ensuring that journalists can report without fear of retribution.

We also hold technology companies to account for their impact on human rights. In September, for example, we sent an open letter to Binance, a leading cryptocurrency exchange, expressing serious concerns about allegations of a mass seizure of Palestinian crypto wallets at Israel’s request. These actions exacerbate the economic and financial blockade of Gaza, making it even more difficult to access essential resources such as water, food and medical supplies. We demanded transparency regarding the criteria used to determine which accounts were frozen and immediate action to mitigate the humanitarian impact on Palestinian users. Although Binance responded, it didn’t provide a clear explanation or take any action.

What can the international community do to support Palestinian civil society?

Support for the work of Palestinian civil society is crucial to documenting abuses and advocating for justice. But this support must go beyond expressions of solidarity or charity. We need our allies to support our struggle for freedom and dignity.

The international community must move beyond empty rhetoric and take tangible action. It must also do more than just provide financial aid: it must put political pressure on Israel to end its occupation and respect Palestinian human rights. This includes protecting activists, fighting Israel’s constant attempts to criminalise and silence our work and holding accountable those who profit from the ongoing genocide. It means stopping arms exports to Israel and holding tech platforms accountable for their complicity in suppressing Palestinian voices, amplifying hate speech and facilitating Israeli surveillance and repression.

GET IN TOUCH
Website
Facebook
Twitter
Dima on Twitter

SEE ALSO
Palestine: ‘The international community has failed to stop the genocide, not because it can’t, but because it won’t’ Interview with Tahreer Araj 26.Nov.2024
‘AI-powered weapons depersonalise the violence, making it easier for the military to approve more destruction’ Interview with Sophia Goodfriend 23.Nov.2024
Palestine: ‘Ending impunity for violations of Palestinians’ rights would strengthen global norms that protect all humanity’ Interview with Kifaya Khraim 11.Nov.2024

  Source