Israel's block on international journalists in Gaza should not be allowed to stand
On Sky News this week we're showing a film about Israel's war in Gaza which has now been going on for more than 620 days.
It is a chastening watch.
Swathes of Gaza's medical infrastructure have been razed, many of the territory's buildings have been destroyed, and tens of thousands of Gazans have been killed, maimed and left hungry and malnourished in a war fought mainly from the air with heavy ordinance dropped on crowded civilian areas.
These extraordinary eyewitness accounts are not brought to our screens by experienced international war correspondents - they are barred from entering Gaza - but by two British medics whose mission was to save lives not to report on the horrors of war.
That visiting surgeons Victoria Rose and Tom Potokar felt compelled to do just that, speaks not only to the tragedy unfolding in Gaza, but to the swingeing restrictions imposed on reporting what is happening there.
In the history of modern warfare, the presence of journalists on the battlefield has been essential in holding the combatants to account and ensuring that war crimes and atrocities are uncovered and prevented.
And Israel stands accused of egregious crimes in Gaza.
Since it launched its war there in response to the Hamas terror attacks of October 7th 2023, in which around 1,200 Israelis and other nationals were murdered and a further 250 taken hostage, more than 55,000 Palestinians have been killed according to the Gazan health authorities. Many of the dead have been women and children.
Earlier this month, former US State Department official Matt Miller told the Sky News Trump100 podcast that Israel had committed war crimes in Gaza. Ex-UN humanitarian chief Martin Griffiths went further, telling Sky News presenter Yalda Hakim that Israel is responsible for genocide there.
It's an accusation supported by Ireland, Spain, and South Africa which is pursuing Israel for genocide at the International Court of Justice - the UN's highest court.
Israel rejects the case against it, claiming that many of the dead are Hamas fighters who have been hiding in tunnels under the hospitals that it has the right to attack in self-defence.
Israeli officials and diplomats deny that its military targets women and children and react with outrage to the suggestion that it is responsible for ethnic cleansing or genocide - accusations of crimes against humanity that are taken as particularly loaded given the dark resonance they have for the Jewish people.
But Israel's confidence in the integrity of its wartime conduct is not matched by a willingness to allow international journalists into Gaza to witness what is going on there for themselves.
Military-organised 'embeds' fall well short of independent journalism
For the course of its longest war, no reporters have been permitted entry to Gaza other than on organised and controlled 'embeds' of a few hours alongside Israeli soldiers.
These managed opportunities fall well short of independent journalism, for which Sky News and other global news organisations must rely on trusted and heroic local reporting teams who lack the support and infrastructure to provide a complete picture of what is going on.
And these Palestinian journalists have paid a heavy price for their work; according to the Committee to Protect Journalists, 185 of them have been killed during the war and 86 imprisoned.
The Foreign Press Association, which represents the interests of international journalists operating in Israel, has been petitioning its High Court of Justice to lift the ban on reporting independently from Gaza.
So far, that legal action has been unsuccessful and last month the court again postponed a hearing in the case without reason or setting a new date.
Israeli officials push back on the need and suitability of allowing journalists to operate independently in Gaza. They say that their military's priority is the rescue of the remaining hostages and the fight against Hamas and that the safety of reporters could not be ensured.
But journalists from Sky News and fellow news organisations have operated in Gaza in previous conflicts, providing details of their location and movements to the Israel Defence Forces.
'We accept the risks'
Moreover, we have decades of experience of covering conflict zones and our reporters are highly trained at doing so. The risks are real, for sure. But they're risks that we accept. It's what we do.
The ongoing denial of access to Gaza feels much less about the safety of journalists and more about preventing proper scrutiny and accountability of the desperate situation there.
The barring of international journalists is accompanied by the active delegitimisation of what reporting on the war has been possible which is often shamefully labelled as anti-Semitic and compared to the darkest periods in Jewish history.
All together this constitutes a war on truth that is at odds with Israel's proud and oft-repeated claim to be the Middle East's only democracy and it should not be allowed to stand.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
41 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
MARK HALPERIN: Netanyahu has seduced Trump by exploiting his biggest weakness... but here's what will derail the leaders' bromance
Let us now praise famous men — and the famously transactional friendships they foster. Benjamin 'Bibi' Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel and amongst the world's longest-running acts in the global political circus, has always possessed a singular talent: the ability to both infuriate and seduce American presidents, often simultaneously.
Daily Mail
41 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Sunny Hostin leaves The View hosts speechless as she defends Iran and complains about Israel
The View 's Sunny Hostin found herself at odds with her co-hosts this week during a fiery debate about the legality of Israel 's preemptive strikes on Iran. Hostin, a former federal prosecutor, argued that Israel's bombings violate international law and needed to be done 'diplomatically.' But co-hosts Alyssa Farah Griffin, Sara Haines, and Joy Behar weren't buying it, given Iran's own heinous track record. All three pointed out how Tehran is the world's leading funder of terrorism, and that it does not play by the conventional rules of foreign policy. 'Well, Iran's launched tons of missiles against Israel in the last few years,' Griffin said Wednesday. 'That is fine, but you have to do that legally and under international criminal law,' Hostin replied. The remark led Behar to note: 'I'm not sure Iran does things legally.' Hostin continued to push back, but once the dust settled, she turned to the camera to assure viewers she was not anti-Semitic. 'Under international law, Israel should not be preemptively striking another country,' she explained. 'We really need to have a bird's-eye view of what's going on. 'If that's okay for Israel to do, if that's okay for our president to do, is that okay for another country to do to us?' she added, leading Behar to point out the threat Iran poses to Israel. 'Well think of it this way,' Behar said. 'What if Canada was saying - was going to build a nuclear bomb and they threatened to kill us all. What would we do?' 'You have to do it diplomatically, Joy - you can't just bomb a country,' Hostin shot back. 'What's so diplomatic about having a nuclear bomb and threatening another country?' Behar replied. Hostin responded by saying Iran 'doesn't necessarily' have nuclear weapons at this point. 'No, but they're building it,' Behar declared. 'Obama acknowledged that they were building,' Griffin added. Hostin, however, continued to blame Trump for the conflict. At this point Haines looked to have had enough and questioned how Hostin could defend the rights of the Iranian government given its funding of terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah. 'Israel has had a target on its back its entire existence from every terrorist organization known to man, and Iran is the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism,' Haines argued. 'Doesn't mean you can proactively bomb a country,' Hostin fired back. 'I'm not going to defend the legal-ness of a terrorist nation that's been funding people killing people for decades and say, well, they didn't follow the rules,' Haines continued. 'They've never followed rules'. Co-host Whoopi Goldberg stressed that such issues are why global organizations like the United Nations exist. 'Which is why I recommend what's going on right now because the US is not actively involved,' Haines said. Griffin pointed out that Iran has launched ballistic missile attacks on US forces in Iraq as recently as three years ago. 'They have attacked Israel, preemptively,' the former Trump aide added. 'They are a terrorist nation.' Hostin went on to ask: 'So, we should do what they do?' Griffin asserted that it was up to the Iranian people to rid themselves of their regime. 'Can I just say this so I don't get a bunch of hate mail - criticism of the Israeli government is not anti-Semitic,' Hostin concluded 'I am criticizing Benjamin Netanyahu. I am criticizing Israel. I am not an anti-Semite. But, under international criminal law, what is happening now is not legal. That's the line.'
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
EU cites ‘indications' Israel is breaching human rights obligations over conduct in Gaza
The EU has said 'there are indications' that Israel is in breach of human rights obligations over its conduct in Gaza, but stopped short of calling for immediate sanctions. 'There are indications that Israel would be in breach of its human rights obligations under article 2 of the EU-Israel association agreement,' states a leaked document from the EU's foreign policy service, seen by the Guardian. Couched in the typically cautious language of Brussels, the document nevertheless represents a significant moment in Europe's relations towards a longstanding ally. The closely guarded paper, which will be presented by the EU foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, to European foreign ministers on Monday, cites assessments by the international court of justice, the office of the high commissioner for human rights, and numerous other UN bodies, while saying that it does not represent 'a value judgment' by any EU official. The finding has been seen as a foregone conclusion since a review of the EU-Israel agreement was put on the agenda last month by 17 EU member states, led by the Netherlands, a traditional ally of Israel. EU officials were tasked to see whether Israel's internal and international relations were based on 'respect for human rights and democratic principles' against the backdrop of near-daily fatal shootings of Palestinian civilians seeking food. The review was triggered by Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip, amid widespread horror over the ongoing bombardment that has laid the territory waste and killed more than 55,600 people – mostly civilians – since 7 October 2023, according to the Gaza health ministry. The EU discussion is complicated by Israel's airstrikes on Iran, which may restrain some governments from putting pressure on Israel. Soon after Israel began waging war against Iran, the European Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, 'reiterated Israel's right to defend itself'. She has previously faced criticism for not speaking up over the humanitarian consequences for Palestinians of Israel's onslaught. The EU-Israel association agreement, signed in 1995, underpins a trade relationship worth €68bn (£58bn) between 27 European countries and the Middle Eastern country. The EU is Israel's largest market and accounts for about one-third of its trade. Israel is also a member of the EU's Horizon research funding programme, and has secured grants worth €831m since the current programme began in 2021. The document emerged after more than 100 campaign groups urged the commission this week to suspend the association agreement. 'A weak or inconclusive review of Israel's compliance with article 2, and/or failure by the commission and council to suspend at least part of the association agreement, would ultimately destroy what's left of the EU's credibility [and] further embolden Israel authorities to continue their atrocity crimes,' reads the statement, signed by 113 civil society groups including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. Eve Geddie, the head of Amnesty International's EU office, said the decision to launch a review had come 'tragically, devastatingly late' and that while it was important, as time passed Israeli forces had become 'more and more emboldened'. Separately, eight EU member states have written to Kallas urging her to look into discontinuing trade of goods and services from the occupied Palestinian territory. The letter, organised by Belgium, states the EU is obliged to respond to an opinion from the international court of justice last July ordering Israel to end its occupation of Palestinian territories as soon as possible. In a landmark – albeit non-binding –ruling, the court said other states were under an obligation not to recognise the occupation as lawful. 'We have not seen a proposal on how to effectively discontinue trade of goods and services with the illegal settlements,' states the letter, calling for the EU to set out a timeline for reaching 'full compliance' with the advisory opinion around its first anniversary. EU policy on Israel has been hobbled by difficulties finding unanimity among 27 member states with starkly different views, from countries that have recognised Palestine, including Spain and Ireland, to staunch allies of the Israeli president, Benjamin Netanyahu, such as Hungary and the Czech Republic. The tide turned last month when the Netherlands, a strong ally of Israel, launched a call to review the EU-Israel association agreement, following the largest protests on Dutch streets over a foreign policy question in decades. The Dutch foreign minister, Casper Veldkamp, a former ambassador to Israel, argued that Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip was a breach of international law and therefore the association agreement. An unexpectedly large number of countries agreed, although the question was not put to a vote. The EU is far from united over what to do next. A full suspension of the agreement, which requires unanimity, is seen as impossible, given the certainty of a veto from Hungary, the Czech Republic or Germany. The EU only needs a weighted majority to suspend favourable trade terms or Israel's participation in Horizon, but even those outcomes are highly uncertain. Hildegard Bentele, a German centre-right MEP who chairs the European parliament's Israel delegation, criticised moves to question the agreement. 'This will not have any influence on the Israeli government. I am very sure about it. This will put us in a less influential position,' she said in an interview earlier this month. Kallas's predecessor Josep Borrell, however, has criticised Europe for shirking its moral responsibilities over Gaza. In a typically outspoken speech, he argued the EU should use the association agreement as a lever to demand that humanitarian law is respected. In a further illustration of the EU's foreign policy knots, Hungary is blocking EU sanctions against Hamas and violent Israeli settlers. Kallas earlier this week voiced frustration at critics that have accused the EU of silence and inaction, citing the need to find consensus. 'Sanctions need unanimity. And again I'm representing 27 [countries].' She argued that presenting sanctions that would inevitably fail was pointless: 'I feel better myself that I've done something, but actually I know that this will not go through … and then it will just show that we don't have a common position.'
