Israel’s War on The Truth

CrossFireArabia
Opinion
September 5, 2025

By Najla M. Shahwan

Israel’s military operation in Gaza, in the aftermath of the October 7 attack by Hamas, has become the deadliest, most dangerous conflict for journalists.

Reporting on the Gaza war has become increasingly perilous, with large numbers of journalists and other media personnel killed or deliberately targeted by Israeli armed forces.

Moreover, the Israeli Authorities have since the war began banned the entry of international journalists to Gaza, an unprecedented move in any other conflict in modern history.

It is a ban on the truth and a ban on reporting the facts.

It is the perfect recipe to fuel misinformation, deepening polarisation and dehumanisation.

While the foreign press has been banned from entering Gaza, Palestinian journalists there have been treated by Israel as legitimate military targets.

Palestinian journalists, whether classical “war correspondents” or, more dangerously, operate with varying degrees of independence have been among a precious few remaining actors capable of exposing illegality.

Over the past 22 months, the world has watched the war in Gaza unfold.

The Israeli military onslaught on the Strip continues nonstop, resulting in the killing of more than 65,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children and almost all of the 2.3 million residents displaced multiple times, struggling to survive the dual threats of targeted attacks and starvation.

Palestinian journalists killed, international reporters banned and members of press and influencers covering devastation in Gaza being silenced despite protection under international law.

In its war on the Gaza strip Israel has been running a special campaign for narrative control of how the world understands what was happening.

The vast majority of Palestinian journalists and social media influencers documenting, mass killing, starvation and other Israeli war crimes in Gaza have been killed since then in the deadliest conflict for journalists ever documented, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ).

Even though it is illegal to target journalists, the “Palestinian journalists are being threatened, directly targeted and murdered by Israeli forces, and are arbitrarily detained and tortured in retaliation for their work.

By silencing the press – those who document and bear witness – Israel is silencing the war,” the CPJ said.

In Israel’s latest attacks, two more journalists, Rasmi Salem of Al Manara and Eman Al Zamli, were killed, bringing the total number of journalists killed since the war on the Palestinian enclave began to more than 270.

Earlier, on September 31, Islam Abed, a correspondent for Al Quds Today TV, was also killed in an Israeli air strike on Gaza City.

On August 25, five journalists were killedin a “double -tap” Israeli strike targeting Naser hospital in southern Gaza, which killed at least 21 people.

The journalists killed, all worked or freelanced for international media outlets, including Hossam Al Masri, a cameraman with Reuters, Mariam Abu Daqa, a freelance photojournalist with the Associated Press, and Mohammed Salama, a photographer for Al Jazeera.

Freelance journalists Ahmad Abu Aziz and Moas Abu Taha were also killed, while several other journalists were injured in the attack.

Earlier on August 10, another four Al Jazeera journalists and two freelancers were killed by a targeted Israeli strike on their tent outside Al Shifa hospital in Gaza City.

The Israeli army said it deliberately targeted the Al Jazeera crew – the correspondent Anas Al Sharif, who had reported on the war since its outset, the reporter Mohammed Qreiqeh, the cameraman Ibrahim Zaher, and Mohammed Noufal, a crew driver and cameraman.

The Israeli army claimed it had evidence that Sharif was a Hamas terrorist.

The CPJ and other organisations said that this claim is part of a pattern of misinformation, along with other cases where slain journalists have been labelled as Hamas fighters or operatives, and is without credibility.

Press freedom groups and journalists said that those killings are part of a campaign of intimidation to shut down vital reporting, which Israel has justified internationally with smears and false claims that the targets were undercover Hamas fighters.

To many people outside Gaza, the war flashes by as a doom scroll of headlines and casualty tolls and photos of screaming children, the bloody shreds of somebody else’s anguish but the true unimaginable scale of death and destruction is impossible to grasp, the details hazy and shrouded by internet and cell phone blackouts that obstruct communication, restrictions barring international journalists, extreme, often life-threatening challenges local journalist reporting from Gaza are facing.

Besides, local journalists inside Gaza face displacement, starvation, and extreme violence.

On August 21, 29 member states of the Media Freedom Coalition issued a statement calling for access to the Strip by foreign press and for Israel to ensure the safety of local journalists working inside Gaza.

French President Emmanuel Macron called on Israel to respect international law, emphasising the important role of independent media in covering “the reality of the conflict.”

Germany’s ambassador to Israel Steffen Seibert demanded an investigation and access for international media to Gaza, while United Kingdom’s Foreign Secretary David Lammy also condemned the attacks, calling for the protection of journalists.

“We are appalled and shocked to see Israel continue to kill journalists with no accountability, as the world watches. It is critical for the international community to step up and take concrete action to ensure the safety of Gaza’s remaining journalists,” International Press Institute (IPI) Executive Director Scott Griffen said.

“As more journalists in Gaza are killed, fewer remain to carry on their work, which means we know less about what is actually happening on the ground.”

“The unabated killing of journalists during the course of this conflict has grave implications for journalists not only in Gaza, who have sacrificed so much and endured such unimaginable violence to cover this war – but also for journalists’ safety all over the world,” Griffen added.

Despite growing global condemnation and concerns over breaches of international law, Israel is continuing its military assault on Gaza and it is likely that more journalists will die as a result.

International journalists must independently report from Gaza and support their Palestinian colleagues who continue to do a heroic job at a heavy price.

The international community must act fast to ensure that journalists are kept safe and hold Israel to account for the deaths of all journalists whose killings may have been targeted. Journalists are civilians, and it is illegal to attack them in a war zone.

Reliable information about wars and conflicts is essential for the wellbeing of local populations and is necessary to enlighten the world on the forces behind wars and the toll on civilians.

The author writes for The Jordan Times.

CrossFireArabia

Dr. Marwan Asmar holds a PhD from Leeds University and is a freelance writer specializing on the Middle East. He has worked as a journalist since the early 1990s in Jordan and the Gulf countries, and been widely published, including at Albawaba, Gulf News, Al Ghad, World Press Review and others.

Opinion

Oslo: Strangling The Dove

Dr Khairi Janbek
May 10, 2026

By Dr Khairi Janbek

When we do a recap of the Oslo Agreements, they were a series of accords between Israel and the PLO signed in 1993. It was a process meant to lead to a permanent settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict within five year, including decisions on borders, refugees, security, Jerusalem and settlements.

But right from the start, voices were divided over the process, while for others, the whole idea had a built-in mechanism for failure from the start. The Palestinians started seeing that the Oslo Agreements were neither ending the establishment of Israeli settlements nor the end to occupation, while for the Israelis it didn’t seem to end their security concerns.

Indeed, it is pointless to think which comes first, the chicken or the egg, because two different fears and logistics persisted from the start. But also, it is important to think about the circumstances which brought about the idea of launching the process, and which did put the PLO in a tough position for being perceived as supporting the wrong side which lost; Iraq.

The room for manoeuvre for the late Yasser Arafat was very tight as he stood to lose the legitimacy of the PLO.

What one is trying to say is that, right from the start, outside official circles, many on the Palestinian side were against Oslo probably as many as was the case on the Israeli side.

The gradual erosion of Oslo mainly through the continued Israeli actions kept feeding extremism on both sides. Nevertheless, the concept was not revoked by any Israeli government because of its effect on Arab public opinion, pressure which is likely to block any peace initiative. Moreover, the international atmosphere was not conducive for such an initiative.

Having said that, one cannot claim that the international atmosphere is currently more indifferent to the abrogation of the Oslo, rather Israel seems to have more leeway in undertaking unilateral actions with more impunity.

Of course, it is not international law that can be counted on in this respect but rather, at least for the time being Donald Trump’s disapproval of the idea of annexing the West Bank by Israel. This is despite the fact that all the Israeli actions of dividing the West Bank from north to south first and currently from west to east, goes unnoticed. But the important thing has been till now, and don’t say the magic word, end of Oslo.

However, the recent development is that Israeli political parties, the partners in Netanyahu’s government are all pushing openly, for the abrogation of the Oslo agreements and cancelling out all the Israeli obligations towards it.

One can only say such an open declaration is a matter of principle by the Israeli government, because the changes on the ground are there for all to see. One supposes all parties are playing for time to see the end of the Palestinian national aspirations.

The columnist is a Jordanian writer based in Paris, France

Opinion

How Trump Burned Western Friendships

CrossFireArabia
May 7, 2026

By Jassem Al-Azzawi

Something remarkable is happening today in the corridors of western powers. America’s closest allies are no longer whispering their frustrations behind closed doors; they are now shouting them from the podiums of their parliaments and in press conferences. And US president Donald Trump is responding in kind. The transatlantic alliance, painstakingly built over eight decades, is now fracturing in a live broadcast.

The immediate cause is the American-Israeli war on Iran, launched on 28 February, 2026, without consulting NATO partners, United Nations, or even Washington’s closest friends. But the rift runs deeper than a single conflict; it reflects a strategy that is indifferent to its allies, or even openly contemptuous of them.

“The Americans clearly lack a strategy.”

The breaking point was starkly illustrated in the frank remarks made by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz to students in Marsberg, northwest Germany. Merz likened the conflict with Iran to past US failures in Afghanistan and Iraq.

“It’s clear the Americans don’t have a strategic plan,” he said, describing Washington’s approach as “ill-conceived.”

He went even further, suggesting that the US was being “humiliated” by Tehran’s negotiating tactics which is a stunning public accusation from a Chancellor who, until recently, was one of Washington’s most hawkish European allies.

Trump reacted furiously, writing on his TruthSocial platform that Merz “doesn’t know what he’s talking about” and threatening to reduce the number of US troops stationed in Germany, currently at 36,436. He then told the German chancellor to mind his own business:

“The Chancellor of Germany should spend more time ending the war between Russia and Ukraine, where he has been completely ineffective, and fixing his own battered country… rather than meddling in the affairs of those who are eliminating the Iranian nuclear threat.”

This verbal sparring is transcending all diplomatic norms and is shakening the foundations of the US-European axis.

Starmer: “I’m fed up,” he says publicly.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer invested considerable political capital in cultivating a working relationship with Trump, but that investment has now proven costly. When asked about Trump’s threats to destroy Iran, Starmer told ITV:

“These are not words I would ever use, because I speak from our British values and principles.”

The harshest language came when Starmer placed Trump alongside Vladimir Putin as partners in causing British economic hardship, telling Talking Points:

“I’m fed up with seeing families and businesses across the country struggling with fluctuating energy bills because of Putin’s or Trump’s actions around the world.”

On British military involvement, Starmer was unequivocal: “I will not change my mind, and I will not back down. It is not in our national interest to join this war, and we will not do so.” Trump rewarded this initial stance with a statement to The Sun newspaper: “Starmer has not been cooperative. The relationship is clearly not what it used to be,” he said.

Meanwhile, the International Monetary Fund underscored the scale of the material risks by lowering its 2026 growth forecast for Britain to 0.8 percent. This is a direct consequence of the energy shock Trump’s trade war has inflicted on British households.

Sanchez and Carney: Europe and Canada Draw a Line

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez has emerged as the most vocal European leader in his criticism of Trump and his uncompromising stance. After Trump threatened to sever all trade ties with Madrid following Spain’s refusal to allow US troops to use the Rota and Morón air bases, Sanchez did not back down. When the ceasefire was announced, his judgment was scathing:

“A ceasefire is always good news, but this temporary relief cannot make us forget the chaos, destruction, and lives lost. The Spanish government will not applaud those who set the world ablaze just because they have finally appeared with a bucket of water.”

For his part, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney offered a broader structural indictment, stating in a speech at the Lowy Institute in Sydney:

“Geostrategically, dominant powers are increasingly acting without restraint or respect for international norms and laws, while others bear the consequences.”

He described the war as “a failure of the international order,” adding that “the United States and Israel acted without engaging the United Nations or consulting allies, including Canada.”

The alarm bells were not only ringing abroad; Senate Democrats launched a fierce campaign to reclaim congressional authority over a war they deemed illegal, unauthorized, and a diplomatic disaster.

Senator Tim Kaine’s diagnosis was accurate: “There was no clear justification, no clear plan, and no effort to engage allies or Congress. When you make diplomacy impossible, you make war inevitable.”

Senator Chris Murphy was even more blunt.

“We have never seen a foreign conflict so publicly mismanaged. We have become a laughingstock around the world, while hurting Americans who are now paying billions more in fuel prices.” Senator Tammy Duckworth linked the current disaster to America’s post-World War II pattern, saying:

“Our duty is to ensure that our nation never again slides into an endless, self-serving war.” Despite this, all six war powers resolutions introduced by the Democrats failed due to Republican loyalty to Trump, even as the war cost the lives of 13 Americans in its first month and the price of a gallon of gasoline reached $4.30.

Time for reckoning has come…

Whether Trump’s antagonism toward allies is a strategic dismantling or simply the impulsiveness of a leader who confuses aggression with strength, the result is the same. He threatened to withdraw from NATO, imposed trade sanctions on Spain, threatened to withdraw troops from Germany, and pushed the “special relationship” with Britain to the brink of collapse. Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s warning also came to light.

Trump will “re-examine” Washington’s commitments to allies who did not support the war, as a declaration of “conditional friendship.”

America’s friends are being pushed away, its adversaries are watching, and the West, for the first time since 1945, is genuinely unsure whether it can rely on Washington.

Jassem Al-Azzawi is an Iraqi writer and journalist who contributed this article to the Arabic website, Al Rai Al Youm and appears in Crossfirearabia.com.