Latest news with #Israel-Palestine
Middle East Eye
8 hours ago
- Politics
- Middle East Eye
Trump resumes visa applications for international students, but with increased vetting
The State Department announced on Wednesday that it is ending the pause on visa applications for foreign students. However, the process, which has been suspended since May, will include intensive online vetting, including requiring applicants to set all of their social media privacy settings to 'public'. The State Department said it needed to 'ensure that those applying for admission into the United States do not intend to harm Americans and our national interests'. The announcement also asserted that applicants needed to prove that they would 'engage in activities consistent with the terms for their admission', which is being seen as an attempt to deter students from participating in pro-Palestine activism on university campuses in the US. On 25 March, the Trump administration arrested Tufts graduate Rumeysa Ozturk after her profile was posted on a pro-Israel doxxing website. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Ozturk had been targeted for writing an opinion article in a student newspaper the year before, criticising Tufts University's response to a pro-divestment vote from the student senate. Ozturk was released from detention in May, but her detention set a precedent for a larger crackdown by the Trump administration on foreign students. In April, the visas of thousands of international students were revoked seemingly indiscriminately. Several students went into hiding or self-deported over fears that they would be arrested. The Trump administration abruptly backtracked on the decision to revoke visas weeks later. Wednesday's move to review the social media accounts of foreign students is also not the first time the Trump administration has used social media vetting to monitor international students. On 9 April, the Trump administration announced that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) would be screening the social media accounts of international students at universities affiliated with 'antisemitic activity'. The State Department also reportedly told consulates to prioritise applicants hoping to attend a college where less than 15 percent of the student body were international students. On 28 May, US President Donald Trump asserted that Harvard University should cap international enrollment at 15 percent. Chinese international students Chinese international students have come under particular scrutiny from the Trump administration in recent months. The 270,000 Chinese international students studying in the US make up around a quarter of the 1.1 million international students in the country. On 28 May, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that the DHS would be working closely with the State Department to 'aggressively revoke visas for Chinese students'. Rubio's statement singled out students 'with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields'. It reflects accusations from the Trump administration that Chinese international students pose a national security risk. On 11 June, Trump backtracked on the plan to revoke visas for Chinese students. He posted that the presence of Chinese international students 'has always been good with me'.
Middle East Eye
8 hours ago
- Health
- Middle East Eye
Bombing hospitals is a red line - unless Israel is doing it
On Thursday morning, Iranian missiles struck Soroka hospital in Beersheba, triggering expressions of outrage from Israeli officials. National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir likened the Iranian regime to 'Nazis who fire missiles at hospitals, the elderly and children'. President Isaac Herzog evoked imagery of a baby in intensive care and a doctor rushing between beds. Culture Minister Miki Zohar declared on social media that 'only the scum of the earth fires missiles at hospitalized children and elderly people in their sick beds'. The chair of Israel's medical association, Zion Hagay, decried the strike as a war crime and urged the international medical community to condemn it. This swift and unified condemnation by Israeli political and medical leadership underscores a striking contradiction: these same actors not only ignored but openly justified the destruction of Gaza's hospitals over the past two years. Since 7 October 2023, Israeli air strikes and ground invasions have decimated Gaza's healthcare infrastructure. The World Health Organisation has recorded around 700 attacks on healthcare facilities. Major hospitals - al-Shifa, Nasser and the Indonesian hospital, among others - have been besieged, bombed and dismantled. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Israeli officials frame these hospitals as military targets and Hamas 'shields'. Shifa, the largest hospital in Gaza, was placed under siege and then invaded, with the attack hailed by Israeli media as a victory. Meanwhile, the Israeli Medical Association remained silent. In one of its rare statements after a year and a half of Israel's repeated and targeted attacks on hospitals and civilian infrastructure, the association echoed the state's narrative, stating that health facilities and personnel must not be targeted 'unless these are being used as a base for terrorist activities'. Selective moral outrage What is especially striking about this moment is the selective moral outrage from Israeli officials. The same ministers who justified the systematic dismantling of Gaza's healthcare system now describe an attack on an Israeli hospital as a red line, a war crime. Herzog's sentimental imagery of doctors rushing between beds evokes the stark reality in Gaza, where health workers have been shot and shelled in operating rooms, imprisoned, or forced to abandon their patients under fire. International medical voices have played along. While many doctors and health workers have spoken out, many others have remained silent, with no real actions taken to hold Israel accountable. Follow Middle East Eye's live coverage of the Israel-Palestine war It would be a mistake to treat these official statements as being detached from the public mood in Israel. Most Israelis have defended the destruction of Gaza's healthcare infrastructure. Public discourse has normalised the idea that Palestinian hospitals are legitimate military targets, even celebrating their destruction in some cases. This normalisation is not incidental. It is part of a broader dehumanisation of Palestinians, where even a child under anaesthesia in a Gaza operating room is not seen as a victim, but as collateral damage or a 'shield'. The outrage over Soroka thus reveals a deeper truth: in the eyes of many institutions and audiences, some lives are inherently more valuable than others. When Israeli hospitals are struck, the world responds with empathy and urgency. When Palestinian hospitals are dismantled - patients killed in their beds, doctors arrested mid-surgery - the world hesitates, rationalises or remains silent. How can Palestinian medics 'cooperate' with Israeli health bodies during a genocide? Read More » This is not simply a double standard; it reflects an entrenched hierarchy of whose suffering matters. Israeli leaders speak today of moral lines, of civilians and children, of hospitals as sanctuaries. Yet for nearly two years, those very values have been systematically violated in Gaza, with hardly a whisper of regret. This situation reveals not only hypocrisy but also the cynical confidence that comes with impunity. It reflects how the boundaries of Israeli grief and outrage are drawn narrowly around Jewish Israeli lives, grounded in the certainty that Israel will face no consequences. This moment puts the international system to the test. While some medical and humanitarian groups have expressed concern, most international stakeholders have remained silent in the face of the destruction of Gaza's entire health system. Will medical journals, international associations and UN bodies respond to the attack on an Israeli hospital with the kind of swift condemnation and concrete actions they failed to take when hospitals in Gaza were bombed? The world should have acted when the first operating room was hit in Gaza. It should not take an Israeli facility being targeted for them to remember that hospitals are meant to be protected spaces. If an attack on a hospital is a red line, this must be true for all hospitals, not just those serving Israelis. If international law is to mean anything, it must protect everyone, with the same standards applied to every violation. Anything less is not only hypocrisy; it is complicity. The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
Middle East Eye
9 hours ago
- Health
- Middle East Eye
Israeli officials accused of 'hypocrisy' over Iranian strike that hit hospital
Social media platforms erupted on Thursday, following Israel's condemnation of an Iranian missile strike on Soroka hospital in Beersheba, southern Israel, which the Israeli government labelled a war crime. The Israeli government described the attack as a deliberate violation of international law, citing the targeting of a civilian medical facility. But the condemnation was met with swift backlash online, where many accused Israel of hypocrisy. הקו האדום נחצה. המשטר הדיקטטורי מטהרן עבר את הגבול ופועל כמו ארגון טרור ברברי. הירי למרכז הרפואי ״סורוקה״ ולעבר אוכלוסיה אזרחית הוא פשע מלחמה מתועב. מדינת ישראל, יחד עם שותפינו בעולם החופשי, מחויבים ונחושים לשים לזה סוף אחת ולתמיד. — Uriel Busso-אוריאל בוסו (@BussoUriel) June 19, 2025 Translation: The red line has been crossed. The dictatorial regime in Tehran has crossed the line and is acting like a barbaric terrorist organisation. The shooting at the Soroka Medical Centre and the civilian population is a heinous war crime. The State of Israel, together with our partners in the free world, are committed and determined to put an end to this once and for all. People on social media pointed out that for nearly two years, Israeli forces have systematically dismantled Gaza's healthcare system - bombing hospitals, raiding emergency wards, and forcing medical staff and patients to evacuate under fire. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters For two years, the Israeli Medical Association and its ethics committee have said nothing about Israel's systematic destruction of Gaza's healthcare system, including the annihilation of 35 hospitals, the killing of babies in incubators, and patients in their hospital beds. 1/3 — Ghada Majadli غادة مجادلة (@GMajadli) June 19, 2025 'If attacking a hospital is a war crime, then the radical Jewish extremists are the greatest war criminals. Of the 36 hospitals in the Gaza Strip, only 9 remain operational, all the others having been destroyed by Israeli bombing.' Another added, 'If this is a war crime then so are the IDF's actions bombing every hospital in Gaza,' another person wrote. As of May of this year, just 19 of Gaza's 36 hospitals remain operational, with at least 94 percent of all hospitals in the besieged enclave damaged or destroyed, according to the World Health Organisation (WHO). The WHO recorded 697 attacks on healthcare infrastructure by Israel in the Gaza Strip since October 2023. "If this is a war crime then so are the idfs actions bombing every hospital in gaza," another added. 🚨 Reality check: Netanyahu, - You bombed Al-Shifa Hospital, killing patients and doctors. - Flattened Indonesian Hospital, where even ambulances were hit. - Struck Al-Ahli Arab Hospital, where babies died in incubators. - Turned Nasser Medical Complex into rubble. Children… — زماں (@Delhiite_) June 19, 2025 Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also addressed the incident, posting a video from the hospital site. 'We accurately hit nuclear targets and missile targets, and they hit a hospital, where people can't even get up and run away. They are harming not far from here - there is a children's and infants' ward here,' he said. A social media user responded, 'Coming from the war criminal who: Bombed 35 hospitals in Gaza. Bombed 2 hospitals in Iran. Bombed 40 Hospitals in Lebanon. You have no self awareness and also the hospital itself was not bombed by Iran, stop placing military facilities near your hospitals.' It is hypocritical for Benjamin Netanyahu to declare the recent bombing of an Israeli hospital by Iran as a war crime when in the first two months of Israel's bombing of Gaza CNN identified 20 out of 22 hospitals as being damaged or completely destroyed. — Pismo Clam (@WaveRambler) June 19, 2025 Israeli Minister of Culture and Sports Miki Zohar said on X that "the evil Iranian regime had crossed all moral lines". One person on X replied, 'You and your equals are the most evil thing that we witness unfortunately. Your evilness can be seen first in Gaza when your evil government destroyed all the hospitals there. Bombing a hospital is evil yes, but look first in the mirror before barking for sympathy…' Many users also took aim at Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz, accusing him of hypocrisy after he said "[Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali] Khamenei will be held accountable for his actions'. Others turned their focus to what they perceived as glaring bias in western media coverage, particularly the stark contrast in how outlets report on Israeli versus Palestinian suffering. Many pointed out that while the strike on Soroka hospital was immediately framed as a deliberate attack by Iran, coverage of Israel's repeated bombings of Gaza's hospitals was often muddled with vague qualifiers or unverified framing. Irish journalist Barry Malone wrote, "The difference between the reporting on a hospital being hit in Israel and the reporting on hospitals being hit in Gaza is a such a striking example of Western media bias. Genuinely could be taught in journalism school." The Palestinian writer and journalist Hamza Yusuf also pointed out the difference in tone, posting: 'No 'health officials say'? No 'according to locals'? No 'Likud-run health ministry claims'? Interesting.' Others argued that Israel had itself paved the way for this moment - that the very normalisation of hospital bombings was a direct result of its own military campaign in Gaza.
Middle East Eye
9 hours ago
- Politics
- Middle East Eye
Khamenei assassination could draw Hezbollah into Israel-Iran hostilities, say sources
Hezbollah may join the war between Israel and Iran if the United States intervenes directly, or if Iran's supreme leader is killed, sources close to the Lebanese group have told Middle East Eye. On 14 June, Hassan Fadlallah, a Hezbollah lawmaker, stated: 'Iran knows how to defend itself.' The comments were widely interpreted in Lebanese political circles as a sign that the war-weary group did not want to intervene in support of its Iranian allies. A Hezbollah official also told Reuters last week that the group 'will not initiate an attack on Israel in response to strikes on Iran'. However, sources close to the party have said to MEE that the Reuters report is inaccurate. One source said that Hezbollah had ideological 'red lines', namely direct American military involvement in the war, or the assassination of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Those scenarios would 'shift the calculations' and may push the group into the conflict. The source would not be drawn on exactly what that role in the war would look like. A senior Iranian official echoed one of the red lines, saying to Al Jazeera that Hezbollah would intervene if Washington did so. Both the red lines have been hinted at by US President Donald Trump in recent days. CBS reported that Trump had approved plans to directly attack Iran, but had not yet made a final decision on it. On Khamenei, the president said on Tuesday that Washington knew where the supreme leader was, but would not kill him 'for now'. 'Existential battle' The Axis of Resistance - a group of non-state actors across the region allied to Iran - sees the current conflict as an 'existential battle', a second source close to Hezbollah told MEE. Ali Rizk, a Lebanese security analyst and expert on Hezbollah, said that the killing of Khamenei, taken in isolation, would not necessarily pose an existential threat to Hezbollah. 'It's quite likely Hezbollah would intervene should the regime's survival be at stake' – Ali Rizk, Lebanese security analyst 'I think what the existential threat for Hezbollah would be is for the Islamic Republic to be destroyed,' Rizk told MEE. 'It's quite likely Hezbollah would intervene should the regime's survival be at stake. 'Hezbollah's relations to Iran are linked. There's an ideological level, not just Shia, but Wilayat al-Faqih,' he said, referring to a doctrine in Shia Islam that governments should be led by Islamic jurists who have the highest levels of expertise. Rizk added that if the US became involved militarily, the conflict could 'snowball towards regime change', which most likely would draw Hezbollah into getting involved. 'Support front' like Gaza and Syria wars Tom Barrack, the US special envoy for Syria, warned Hezbollah against getting involved. 'I can say on behalf of President Trump… that would be a very, very, very bad decision,' he told reporters on Thursday in Beirut, shortly after meeting Lebanese officials, including parliament speaker Nabih Berri. The second source told MEE: 'If necessary, and if the Iranian regime is threatened, the party is ready to enter this battle through a support front, as happened with Gaza and Syria.' Hezbollah opened a battlefront with Israel on 8 October 2023, in support of Palestinians under Israeli attack in Gaza. 'Iran's Revolutionary Guard has become heavily involved in the Hezbollah's organisation and is overseeing its rebuilding' - Source close to Hezbollah For around a year, the conflict was limited to cross-border exchanges of fire. However in September, Israel exploded thousands of pagers belonging to Hezbollah members, before launching a huge bombing campaign and ground invasion. More than 3,900 Lebanese were killed. The war left Hezbollah severely weakened, killing much of its senior leadership, including its leader Hassan Nasrallah. A ceasefire was agreed in November, though Israel continues to carry out frequent attacks on south Lebanon and Beirut suburbs. The Israeli army still occupies several posts in southern Lebanon. In Syria, meanwhile, Hezbollah ground forces had fought for several years in support of its ally, President Bashar al-Assad. But the Assad dynasty's five-decade rule fell in December, in a surprise assault by rebel forces which was helped by the months-long depletion of Hezbollah. 'In coordination with the IRGC' Since a new Lebanese administration was appointed in February, after two years of deadlock, discussions have been ongoing between the government and Hezbollah about the future of the group's vast weaponry. The government in Beirut instructed the Lebanese army to communicate with Hezbollah and ensure they kept Lebanon out of the conflict, a Lebanese official told MEE. Several government meetings were held about the repercussions of the conflict, the official said, including meetings at the presidential palace between President Joseph Aoun and the heads of Lebanon's security agencies. Rizk said military involvement would be politically challenging for Hezbollah. 'The existential threat for Hezbollah would be for the Islamic Republic to be destroyed' - Ali Rizk, security analyst 'It's going to put the Lebanese state in a difficult situation, and it could upset ties between Aoun and Hezbollah,' Rizk told MEE. 'They have established good ties with the president.' Hezbollah is widely regarded to be the most heavily-armed non-state group in the world. Its arsenal includes a wide range of drones, rockets and long-range missiles. Many of its most prized weapons are thought to be held in tunnels dug deep underground. The second source said that Hezbollah had undergone a structural re-organisation since its most recent war with Israel, in coordination with Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. 'Since the war, the Revolutionary Guard has become heavily involved in the party's organisation and is overseeing its rebuilding,' they said. 'Thus, any decision the party makes will be in coordination with the Revolutionary Guard, which views this war as a battle to preserve the [Iranian] regime and prevent its collapse.' They said that despite over a year of conflict with Israel, Hezbollah retained fighting capabilities and weapons out of reach of Israeli air strikes.
Middle East Eye
9 hours ago
- Politics
- Middle East Eye
Far more Americans oppose US strikes on Iran than support them: Poll
Fewer than half of Americans surveyed oppose US strikes on Iran, with that figure dwarfing the number of people who do support military action, a new poll published by The Washington Post on Wednesday has found. A random sampling of 1,008 US adults was texted by the paper to respond to several questions on what may be impending US operational involvement in air strikes on Iran, following Israel's attacks, which began on 13 June. Results showed that 45 percent of respondents oppose US strikes "at this time" and only 25 percent said they support them, creating a significant 20-point margin. The remaining 30 percent of respondents said they were "unsure". Among Democrats, two-thirds oppose US military action, while among Republicans, only 24 percent are opposed. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Those who said they do not identify with either political party largely oppose the strikes, at a figure of 44 percent. The results showed that households with links to the US military showed less opposition to US strikes than those with no links. Still, in both cases, the majority of respondents do not want the US to attack Iran. When The Post asked how much news they've heard about Israel's attacks on Iran and Iran's retaliation, 39 percent of respondents said "a good amount", but it was unclear what their sources of news were. Opposing military action However, The Post noted that support for US strikes on Iran was highest among people paying the most attention to the news. The caveat is that even within this particular group, more respondents oppose military action than support it. Nearly equal amounts of US adults - 31 percent and 30 percent, respectively - said they either heard "a great deal" of news or "little to nothing" about Israel and Iran. Only one-fifth of all respondents said Iran's nuclear potential poses "an immediate threat" to the US. Most are Republicans. Nearly half of all respondents, 48 percent, said it is a "somewhat serious threat", while 23 percent said it is a "minor threat". 'No war on Iran': New Yorkers rally against US and Israeli regime change plans Read More » Just seven percent of respondents do not believe Iran's nuclear potential poses any threat to the US at all. Among Republicans, Democrats, and those who identify with neither, between 45 and 50 percent of respondents said the threat is "somewhat serious". The vast majority of those surveyed, 82 percent, expressed concern about US involvement in the conflict, with 39 percent saying they are "very concerned". Democrats looked to be the most concerned, while Republicans were the least concerned, the results showed. The figures come as President Donald Trump reportedly weighs the prospect of dropping a one-of-a-kind 30,000 lb "bunker-buster" bomb on Iran's Fordow nuclear plant. Israel has made it clear it wants the US to join its attacks on Iran, not only to dismantle its nuclear capability, but also to collapse its governing structure. Iran maintains that its nuclear research and enrichment are only for civilian purposes and to meet its energy needs. The UN's nuclear watchdog and US intelligence assessments both indicate that Iran does not yet have the required elements to build a nuclear weapon.
