Met refuses to probe British nationals accused of war crimes in Gaza
Al Mayadeen | May 5, 2026
The Metropolitan Police has refused to open an investigation into ten British nationals accused of committing war crimes and crimes against humanity during the genocide in Gaza. According to Novara Media, the decision follows the submission of a 240-page dossier of evidence by the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights and the Public Interest Law Centre.
The Met stated that the material provided “did not meet the threshold required” to launch a formal investigation. This decision came despite support from more than 70 legal experts and proof of the targeted killing of civilians, attacks on hospitals, and the forced displacement of Palestinians involving the nationals between 2023 and 2024.
Human rights barrister Michael Mansfield KC condemned the Met’s refusal as a denial of accountability and a misapplication of legal standards, and legal representatives stressed that the police applied the wrong test by requiring evidence sufficient for prosecution before even opening an investigation.
Concerns over lack of accountability
Consequently, legal advocates have raised concerns about accountability for British dual nationals involved in the aggression against Gaza. The case has intensified debate over how UK authorities handle cases involving international crimes committed abroad by British citizens.
Raji Sourani of the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights accused the British establishment of politicizing international law and shielding perpetrators from accountability.
Human rights groups involved in the case say the refusal reflects a wider pattern of inaction by UK authorities regarding crimes in Gaza.
The Metropolitan Police decision comes amid concerns about the UK government’s approach to monitoring breaches of international law abroad. Reports have also pointed to the closure of a Foreign Office unit previously tasked with tracking such cases.
UK shuts down unit tracking Israeli violations of International Law
The Metropolitan Police decision comes amid concerns about the UK government’s approach to monitoring breaches of international law abroad.
Recently, the Foreign Office unit responsible for tracking potential breaches of international law by “Israel” in Gaza and, more recently, Lebanon has been closed as part of departmental spending cuts, according to The Guardian. The closure follows a review led by Olly Robbins, the permanent secretary at the Foreign Office, who was dismissed last week by the prime minister over the Peter Mandelson scandal.
The decision comes just weeks after Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper said that respect for international law would be a cornerstone of the department’s work under her leadership. The shutdown of the international humanitarian law cell appears to contradict that stated policy direction.
The closure also ends funding for the Conflict and Security Monitoring Project run by the Centre for Information Resilience, which carried out large-scale open-source monitoring of incidents in occupied Palestine and Lebanon. The programme was the only UK-based system collecting and analysing human rights and conflict data in these areas, supporting assessments on potential breaches of international humanitarian law and informing decisions on issues such as arms export licensing to “Israel”.
Israel’s Obliteration Ecocide from Gaza to Lebanon and Beyond
By Dan Steinbock | Palestine Chronicle | May 3, 2026
Lebanon accuses Israel of committing ecocide in country since 2023. It is an extension of Israel’s destruction of Gaza – and its obliteration doctrine.
Israeli military aggression has “reshaped both the physical and ecological landscape” of southern Lebanon, according to the Lebanese report (which does not consider the impacts of Israel’s latest barrage of attacks this spring).
In her foreword, Lebanon’s minister for the environment, Tamara el Zein, notes: “The scale and intentionality of the damage to forests, agricultural lands, marine ecosystems, water resources, and atmospheric quality constitute what must be recognized as an act of ecocide, with consequences that extend far beyond immediate destruction.”
Obliteration ecocide in Lebanon
Released by the country’s National Council for Scientific Research and presented by the environment ministry, the report accuses Israel of “ecocide” during the 2023–2024 war and subsequent escalations. It frames environmental destruction not as incidental “collateral damage” but as a systematic transformation of ecosystems.
Key findings are damning. They include:
- 5,000 hectares of forest destroyed
- Massive agricultural losses ($118m direct infrastructure damage; much larger indirect losses)
- Soil contamination (including high phosphorus levels)
- Air pollution from repeated strike cycles
- Destruction of orchards and irrigation systems
Minister el Zein characterizes this as “intentional ecological destruction” affecting food systems, public health, and the long-term viability of southern Lebanon’s rural economy.
International reporting on the same dossier highlights an estimated total damage burden of over $25 billion when recovery costs and economic losses are included. The figure is a combined total from the assessments by the Lebanese report and the World Bank Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment (RDNA) 2025.
This framing aligns with a growing legal discourse around “ecocide” as a potential international crime, particularly where environmental damage is widespread, long-term, and strategically embedded in military operations.
It is also aligned with UN reporting on the broader Israel–Lebanon escalation, confirming extensive infrastructure destruction, civilian displacement, and strikes affecting residential areas.
As the ecocide of Gaza has gone effectively unpunished by the international community, the Netanyahu government is extending the environmental devastation into Lebanon and the proximate region.
Obliteration Doctrine in Gaza
In The Obliteration Doctrine (2025), related commentaries and excerpts, I define this doctrine as the lethal mix of scorched earth policy, collective punishment, and civilian victimization, coupled with massive indiscriminate bombardment and systematic use of artificial intelligence (AI).
The concept is vital because it connects the dots between military strategies, aerial bombardment, lethal deployment of artificial intelligence (AI) and international law, particularly the Geneva Conventions and the Genocide Convention. As Professor William Schabas, a leading scholar of genocide, notes, “the Obliteration Doctrine” “adds a new term to the lexicon on genocide, notably in the application of international law and its judicial mechanisms.”
Modern warfare in Gaza is no longer just counterinsurgency but systems-level destruction of the environmental and infrastructural substrate of life—water, soil, agriculture, energy, and urban continuity.
This interpretation overlaps with empirical reporting on Gaza’s environmental collapse:
- Satellite analysis shows 38–48% of tree cover and farmland destroyed
- Severe contamination of soil and groundwater
- Large-scale destruction of greenhouses and irrigation systems
- Air pollution from sustained bombardment and debris burning
These patterns are described in independent investigations as producing conditions of near-uninhabitability in many parts of Gaza.
Warfare is no longer bound by battlefield geography. It becomes the restructuring—or “obliteration”—of ecological systems that sustain civilian life.
Ecocide here is not merely the destruction of nature, but the destruction of life-support systems as a purposeful strategy. It is another word for cultural genocide.
Lebanon and the Gaza template
The Lebanese report and international commentary suggest strong structural parallels between Gaza and southern Lebanon operations:
- Destruction of orchards, especially olive groves (long-lived economic ecosystems)
- Targeting of water infrastructure and rural supply systems
- Repeated airstrikes generating soil and atmospheric contamination
- Displacement of civilian populations from ecologically productive zones, which can be seen as a form of ethnic cleansing
International media reports that Israel is applying a “Gaza playbook” in Lebanon: expulsion orders, infrastructure targeting, and village-level destruction patterns.
Lebanon is now an adjacent theatre where similar operational logics are extended across a different ecological terrain:
- Gaza: dense urban-agricultural mosaic under blockade conditions
- Southern Lebanon: dispersed agro-ecological rural system with forested and orchard economies
In both cases, ecological assets are not collateral but structurally embedded in livelihood and resistance capacity – and that makes them strategic targets under the high-intensity obliteration doctrine.
Consequences beyond Lebanon (and for Israel)
The environmental consequences of such conflict patterns are not geographically contained. Three spillover trajectories are particularly important.
First of all, regional ecological degradation. Soil contamination, wildfire damage, and agricultural collapse are not confined to strike zones. Windborne particulates, water contamination, and long-term soil chemistry changes affect broader cross-border ecosystems.
Second, economic fragility and food-system insecurity. Both Lebanon and Israel depend on regional agricultural stability and water systems. Repeated infrastructure destruction increases food import dependence, rural depopulation and long-term land degradation in border zones.
Third, internal Israeli environmental vulnerability. A less discussed but critical dimension is the simple reality that prolonged warfare conditions can feed back into Israel’s own ecological systems vis-à-vis air quality deterioration from sustained military operations, water system strain under security infrastructure expansion, fire ecology disruption in northern regions. long-term land-use militarization effects.
In this sense, “obliteration” generates mutual ecological degradation across interconnected landscapes. It is an ecological version of MAD – mutually assured destruction.
Diffusion of Doctrine
The key concern is not just localized destruction but doctrinal diffusion. Methods of high-intensity ecological disruption normalize across theaters. And let’s keep in mind that the first test of the obliteration doctrine occurred in Dahiya, the predominantly Shia enclave of Beirut.
US military legacy in Iraq and Syria already includes extensive infrastructure and ecosystem disruption under counterinsurgency and airpower doctrines. These features include water system destruction in Iraq, oil field fires, atmospheric contamination, and urban siege warfare effects in Raqqa and Mosul via coalition partners.
Such precedents create a shared operational vocabulary where environmental damage is treated as secondary to strategic objectives.
In a potential Israel–Iran escalation scenario, ecological infrastructure becomes strategically central through water scarcity systems in Iran’s arid regions, oil and petrochemical infrastructure vulnerability, and agricultural basins dependent on irrigation networks.
Under the obliteration logic, these become dual-use environments—civilian life-support systems that also acquire military significance.
Finally, there is the regional systemic risk. This implies a shift from territorial warfare to ecosystem-targeted coercion, where water, soil, energy, and agriculture become primary pressure points. Meanwhile, environmental degradation is exploited as a form of strategic leverage and recovery cycles extend beyond political timelines into generational horizons.
From Battlefield to Biosphere as a Target
The Lebanese charges, Gaza environmental destruction data, and the doctrine of obliteration converge on a structural transformation in modern conflict.
The object of war is increasingly not just territory or armed forces, but the ecological infrastructure that makes civilian life possible. In this way, destruction of that infrastructure is a prelude to ethnic cleansing and displacement.
For military doctrines, this may be framed as an incidental or operational necessity. But for Lebanon and environmental analysts, this constitutes potential ecocide under international law. In view of the obliteration doctrine, it represents a systemic shift in the practice of warfare itself, from the battlefield to the biosphere as a target.
What happens in Gaza won’t stay in Gaza. What happens in Lebanon won’t stay in Lebanon. The stage is being set for obliteration ecocides wherever they are seen as effective necessities.
Ecological systems are now central to both the conduct and consequences of war.
– The author of The Fall of Israel (2024) and The Obliteration Doctrine (2025), Dr Dan Steinbock is the founder of Difference Group and has served at the India, China and America Institute (US), Shanghai Institute for International Studies (China) and the EU Center (Singapore). For more, see https://www.differencegroup.net/
Ceasefire no longer viable after 200 days of Israeli violations: Hamas
Al Mayadeen | May 2, 2026
One Palestinian was killed in an Israeli drone strike targeting the vicinity of al-Qastal Towers, east of Deir al-Balah in the central Gaza Strip, Al Mayadeen’s correspondent reported on Saturday.
In a separate development, Israeli forces carried out a large-scale demolition operation east of Khan Younis in southern Gaza, according to the same correspondent.
In light of the continued Israeli violations, Basem Naim, a member of the political bureau of Hamas, said that after 200 days, it is no longer possible to speak of a ceasefire in Gaza. He stated that the situation is a continuation of a “war of extermination,” despite the Resistance’s adherence to the agreement.
Speaking to Al Mayadeen on Saturday evening, Naim stressed that the future of the Gaza Strip and the broader Palestinian cause remains a solely internal Palestinian matter. He added that the Resistance has fulfilled all obligations requested of it, as confirmed by mediators, while Israeli attacks have continued.
Naim also stated that the Rafah crossing has not been opened in accordance with the agreement, noting that the number of people allowed to pass remains limited. He said mediators had been informed of the need to review the implementation of the first phase of the agreement before moving on to the second.
US providing cover for ‘Israel’ to violate ceasefire
The Hamas official further accused the United States of providing cover for Israeli violations, revealing that a technical committee comprising mediators and relevant parties is being supplied with daily documentation of the breaches.
According to Naim, the negotiating position is based on previous agreements and the rights of the Palestinian people, with insistence on the full implementation of the first phase, including the entry of humanitarian aid and reconstruction materials. He added that the agreement includes a political track aimed at securing Palestinian rights, including the establishment of a state with its capital in al-Quds.
Naim emphasized that armed resistance is a legitimate right and that its weapons are an essential component of that right. He also highlighted unity among Palestinian factions and ongoing coordination between them, while warning that the occupied West Bank is facing a “silent and continuous war,” amid escalating attacks on religious sites.
‘Israel’ working to ‘annex’ West bank as a ‘fait accompli’
In this context, Naim said “Israel” is working to consolidate the “annexation” of the West Bank as a “fait accompli”, while restricting the work of international organizations in Gaza unless they operate under its conditions.
He added that the negotiating delegation remains in Cairo and is serious about continuing talks, while maintaining its demand for the full implementation of the first phase. He stressed that the Resistance is not seeking war and does not oppose political pathways if they lead to ending the occupation, but rejects discussing the issue of its weapons separately from a permanent ceasefire.
Naim also praised international activists expressing solidarity with the Palestinian people and condemned attacks on ships attempting to break the blockade, stressing Gaza’s need for an international humanitarian corridor. He concluded by emphasizing the importance of Palestinian unity and rejecting internal divisions that could serve Israeli interests.
Pirates of Mediterranean: Israel does as it pleases in the Sea of Three Continents
By Lorenzo Maria Pacini | Strategic Culture Foundation | May 1, 2026
How control of the Mediterranean works
On the night of April 29–30, the Zionist entity Israel attacked the 22 ships of the Global Sumud Flotilla 600 kilometers off the Italian coast, from where the group had set sail. All of this took place unhindered, constituting yet another act of bullying, piracy, and barbarism. But how does the Mediterranean work?
The Mediterranean, often referred to as “Mare Nostrum” in European political culture, is one of the most complex maritime theaters in the world: a crossroads of trade routes, a setting for migration crises, regional conflicts, and the strategic interests of major powers. The management of international waters, military control of shipping lanes, and initiatives by civilian vessels such as the Global Sumud Flotilla constitute three facets of the same dynamic: the attempt to regulate and control the use of the sea in the name of state interests, security, and humanitarian solidarity.
The basic legal framework for the management of international waters is the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), adopted in 1982 and in force since 1994, which regulates the mapping, use, and responsibilities of states regarding various maritime zones. In the Mediterranean, which is a nearly enclosed sea, this convention applies in a particular way, because the distance between the coasts is often less than 400 nautical miles—that is, the sum of the maximum EEZs of two opposing states.
The main zones recognized by UNCLOS are: the territorial sea (up to 12 miles from the baseline), where the coastal state has full sovereignty but is obligated to guarantee “innocent passage” to foreign vessels; the contiguous zone (up to 24 miles), with limited control for customs, tax, health, and immigration laws; The exclusive economic zone (up to 200 miles), for the rights to exploit biological and mineral resources, balanced by the freedom of navigation and overflight for other nations. Finally, the so-called High Seas (beyond the EEZs), a space open to all states, governed by the principle of freedom of navigation, fishing, scientific research, and the laying of cables and pipelines, provided this is done peacefully and with respect for environmental protection. In the Mediterranean, the scarcity of “true” high seas makes the delimitation of exclusive economic zones between coastal states—such as Italy–Greece, Greece–Turkey, or Cyprus–Turkey—a delicate matter, often linked to gas and oil resources and political-military disputes.
The management of international waters therefore takes place through: bilateral and multilateral delimitation agreements; regional cooperation measures (for example, under the Barcelona Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment and the Protocol on Integrated Coastal Zone Management); and institutions such as the UNCLOS Authority for resources beyond EEZs, which also regulate the use of the seabed “beyond national jurisdiction.” Alongside the law of the sea, the Mediterranean is subject to intense military surveillance that reflects the overlapping interests of major global and regional powers.
The “management” of international waters is therefore not merely a matter of rules, but also of operational capabilities, intelligence infrastructure, and military alliances.
Furthermore, there are various key actors and spheres of influence. First and foremost, NATO and the U.S.: the U.S. Sixth Fleet has its main base in Gaeta (Italy) and projects power throughout the Mediterranean, with particular attention to the routes connecting the Persian Gulf and the Caspian Sea to European economies. The United States uses the Mediterranean as a hub to control energy supply routes and to project power toward the Middle East and North Africa. Then there is Russia, though numerically less present, which has a task force in the Mediterranean, with logistical bases in Syria and a strategic focus on the passages between the eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea. Obviously, the EU and individual member states, such as Italy, France, Greece, and Spain, maintain a strong naval presence, serving both national interests and EU and NATO operations. Then there are Israel and Turkey, which have advanced navies and conduct patrols and maritime traffic control around their coasts—Israel primarily regarding the Gaza Strip, and Turkey in the eastern Mediterranean in relation to energy resources.
These actors effectively define several areas of influence:
- The Western Mediterranean (Gibraltar–Tunisia): a strong EU–NATO presence, with control over migration routes and maritime traffic toward the port of Gibraltar, the sole strategic access point to the Mediterranean.
- The Central Mediterranean (Sicily–Libya): a frontline zone for Italian surveillance, rescue, and migration control operations, with Operation Safe Mediterranean expanding Italy’s naval presence to over 2 million km².
- The Eastern Mediterranean (Greece–Turkey–Cyprus–Israel): a theater of conflict over EEZs and energy sovereignty, with the deployment of military ships and specialized units monitoring natural gas fields.
The operational management of maritime control relies on coastal radar networks, which monitor naval and air traffic hundreds of miles from the coast, command and control systems (such as the MCCIS, Maritime Command and Control Information System) that link radars, ships, and aircraft into a single real-time “maritime picture,” and, of course, international cooperation coordinates maritime surveillance among the navies of some twenty European countries, as well as the information-sharing network with NATO and the southern Mediterranean.
This “situational awareness” apparatus allows for the monitoring not only of commercial traffic but also of migration flows, illicit activities (drug trafficking, arms trafficking, illegal fishing), intelligence operations on undersea cable communications, and, in general, any attempt to cross the Mediterranean without coming to the attention of the states concerned.
The Global Sumud Flotilla challenges the Mediterranean blockade
What happened with the Global Sumud Flotilla is yet another act demonstrating that there is an aggressor and a victim. A civilian flotilla organized by activists, humanitarian organizations, NGOs, and citizens from dozens of countries, with the stated goal of breaking the maritime blockade imposed by Israel on the Gaza Strip and delivering humanitarian aid to the Palestinian population, is attacked and seized—all while the other states operating in the Mediterranean stand by, subjugated to Israel’s authority.
The Sumud Flotilla is not a single vessel, but an international coordination of dozens of ships that set sail from various Mediterranean ports to converge in international waters and head toward the Palestinian coast. Thousands of activists and volunteers board the ships, often under conditions of high risk, yet fully aware of the great symbolic value of their action for the Palestinian people, while the elites continue to profit from their suffering.
The ships of the Sumud Flotilla primarily carry essential humanitarian aid, such as food, medicines, medical supplies, equipment for rebuilding destroyed infrastructure, and medical support—all items that Israel has banned for years, demonstrating the most atrocious barbarity that recent human history has ever witnessed. The presence of a dedicated medical fleet, with more than 1,000 healthcare professionals, has been explicitly linked to the effort to alleviate the crisis in Gaza’s healthcare system, devastated by years of war and blockade.
It is an act of symbolic and perfectly legal nonviolent resistance, where the use of dozens of boats, multiple flags, and symbols of peace, the LGBTQ+ community, anti-fascist movements, and international solidarity aims to create a “visible presence” that makes it more difficult for Israeli naval forces to use force, as coercion against unarmed civilians generates significant media and political backlash. One may or may not agree with the methods and nature of this initiative, but the fact remains that the social impact is extremely high and that, above all, Israel has committed an act of piracy involving numerous countries.
The Israeli Navy maintains a reinforced naval blockade, with naval patrols, frigates, and underwater vessels operating near Israeli and Gaza territorial waters. In previous missions, the flotilla was intercepted in international waters and the ships were escorted or stopped, on charges of violating security measures imposed by Tel Aviv. The events of the past few hours, unfortunately, are part of an operational practice that the terrorist state of Israel continues to employ.
Certainly, while the Sumud Flotilla relies on the law of the sea (freedom of navigation and the duty to assist human life at sea), it must nonetheless factor in the risk of interception, violence, arrests, or accidents. At the same time, the media and political dimensions of the mission compel states to balance security rigor with concerns over excessive force that could generate further international pressure on Israel.
The story of the Sumud Flotilla also highlights how the management of international waters in the Mediterranean is a realm of unstable conflict. And, above all, how there is no balance: there is a sovereign, Israel, which is free to do as it pleases, and a series of subordinate states that obey in silence, bound by a code of silence. Israel’s action against the Flotilla demands that we take a stand and take decisive action against those who have transformed the Mediterranean—a sea that should symbolize peace among three continents—into a space of raids and unjustifiable violence.
Israel pours $730m into global propaganda machine as reputation collapses
The Cradle | May 1, 2026
Israeli lawmakers last month approved a sharp increase in the 2026 public diplomacy budget, allocating roughly $730 million to the global messaging apparatus, also known as “Hasbara,” according to a report by the Jerusalem Post on 29 April.
Surveys point to a deepening collapse in international support, as Israel’s genocide in Gaza and continued aggression toward its neighboring countries have sent the Tel Aviv’s reputation into freefall on the global stage.
The funding accounts for more than four times the previous year’s allocation, and forms part of a broader push led by Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar, who characterized the effort as a strategic imperative, saying it should be treated “like investing in jets, bombs, and missile interceptors” and calling it “an existential issue.”
The campaign spans large-scale digital outreach and political engagement aimed at bending perceptions and influencing narratives around Israel.
Around $50 million is being funneled into social media advertising, and roughly $40 million is going toward flying in foreign delegations such as politicians, clergy, and influencers as part of the outreach effort.
Officials insist the strategy improves perceptions abroad, with Israel’s consul general in Los Angeles, Israel Bachar, claiming that “Everyone who returns from the country understands better and is more supportive. But you have to fly out a lot of people.”
However, polling data cited in the reports shows a sharp collapse in public opinion towards Israel, particularly in the US.
A Pew Research Center survey found that 60 percent of US respondents now view Israel unfavorably, with declines cutting across political, religious, and demographic groups.
Analysts and researchers dismiss the spending outright, arguing it cannot offset the impact of Israel’s actions on the ground.
Communication scholar Nicholas Cull said, “Our conclusion was, it’s the policy, stupid,” referring to Israel’s policy of genocide and apartheid, and its broader military conduct as a central pillar of its expansionist agenda.
“Yes, you can do a lot with public diplomacy, and there are strategies that could help on the margins. But they’re only going to affect a small percentage, because the bulk of the impressions on issues that people care about are shaped by the actual policies, not how well you sell those policies.”
“The problem is that people don’t believe the state anymore,” said Ilan Manor, another expert cited in the report, warning that increased funding may expand reach but will not restore trust.
That push is reinforced by what Israeli officials describe as a parallel “Eighth Front” – a so-called “Digital Iron Dome” that combines mass reporting campaigns, AI-driven targeting, and coordinated influencer networks to suppress dissenting content and flood platforms with state-approved narratives in real time.
Israel had invested millions in coordinated digital influence campaigns, including a $6-million contract to shape AI outputs, targeted Gen Z messaging, and large-scale ad buys, in an effort to control online narratives and counter declining public support in the US.
The country’s propaganda arm had previously deployed a large network of at least hundreds of fake social media accounts and fabricated news sites to spread unverified claims linking UNRWA to Hamas’s 7 October Operation Al-Aqsa Flood in order to undermine its humanitarian mission in Palestine.
Why don’t UK media mention the Israel lobby?
By Mark Curtis | Declassified UK | April 27, 2026
Britain’s national media fails to recognise the influence – and even the existence – of an Israel lobby, our new media analysis shows.
Declassified researched two years of reporting by seven British media outlets and found only 16 mentions of the phrase Israel lobby without speech marks.
Nearly all those mentions are in comment articles rather than news pieces and none we found expound on what influence such an Israel lobby might have.
The phrase “Israel lobby” – used with speech marks – is slightly more common in these outlets, with 26 mentions in two years, and tends to be used to quote others in a disparaging way or to suggest such a lobby does not exist.
For example, one Guardian article refers to “the trope of the ‘Israel lobby’”. The Daily Mail reported in May 2024 of hecklers at a speech by then foreign secretary secretary David Lammy “accusing the MP of having taken ‘shady money’ from the ‘pro-Israel lobby’ on the grounds that he once lawfully accepted £30,000 from a Zionist lobbyist named Trevor Chinn.”
In fact, British businessman Trevor Chinn has funded Keir Starmer and several senior Labour ministers and was awarded the Israeli medal of honour for his “dedication” to and “love” for Israel.
Of the seven media outlets analysed – BBC articles, Express, Guardian, Independent, Mail, Telegraph and Times – the BBC and the Express are the most extreme, and no mentions of the phrase Israel lobby, used without speech marks, could be found at all in their publications.
The BBC is failing to mention the Israel lobby while having regular meetings with it. As Declassified recently revealed, the BBC held nine meetings with Jewish groups strongly sympathetic to Israel in the first year of the Gaza genocide.
The Guardian was found to have made only five mentions of an Israel lobby without speech marks, three of which are in comment pieces by columnist Owen Jones.
By contrast, independent Scottish newspaper The National, which has consistently criticised UK policy towards Israel, has mentioned the Israel lobby 23 times in the two year sample period, never in speech marks.
The Israel lobby in Britain is extensive. Declassified has revealed that a quarter of MPs have been funded by pro-Israel individuals and groups, as have one half of Keir Starmer’s Cabinet.
Neither of these findings have been reported in the mainstream media, as far as Declassified is aware.
British ministers and officials are known to hold off-the-books meetings with pro-Israel lobbyists, and under Keir Starmer’s government, the Foreign Office has held numerous meetings with pro-Israel advocacy groups such as Board of Deputies of British Jews and the European Leadership Network (ELNET).
The UK government’s total proscription of the Lebanese movement Hezbollah in 2019 was the work of pro-Israel lobbyists while lobby group We Believe in Israel has taken credit for the UK government’s proscription of Palestine Action last year.
As long ago as 2009, a landmark Channel Four documentary, Inside Britain’s Israel Lobby, which was presented by journalist Peter Oborne, revealed the close relationship between the Israel lobby and the Conservative and Labour parties, and its attempts to curb criticism of Israel in the media.
The Israel lobby’s influence over UK politics is likely to be greater than any other state except perhaps the US, and certainly far more than Russia which has received decidedly more media attention.
Friends of Israel
The British media’s failure to explicitly acknowledge an Israel lobby comes alongside nearly 300 articles in these seven outlets during the two years mentioning either Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) or Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI), of which dozens of MPs are supporters.
These lobby groups are invariably mentioned in the media without any analysis of their influence or even that they are explicitly part of a lobby that advocates for goals which benefit a foreign country, such as opposing an arms embargo on Israel.
The Independent has mentioned the phrase “influential Labour Friends of Israel” group three times, and the Times once, without mentioning how it is influential.
Yet CFI has been the largest donor of free overseas trips for MPs in recent years, and both CFI and LFI refuse to provide a list of their funders. LFI says its work is funded by “the generosity of members of the Jewish community and those who share our commitment to the State of Israel”. It adds that it “does not receive any money from the Israeli government or the Israeli Embassy”.
The Times has mentioned the phrase Israel lobby, without speech marks, on only four occasions in the two years, but has mentioned Labour Friends of Israel in over 50 articles. That LFI might be a part of a broader Israel lobby has apparently not been spelled out by the Times to its readers.
These omissions might be because the seven media outlets we analysed often function as part of the Israel lobby that they refuse to sufficiently recognise. The most extreme is the Telegraph, which routinely publishes articles supportive of Israel during its genocide in Gaza, illegal war on Iran and brutal attacks on Lebanon.
The paper has recently called to restore UK military ties to Israel, headlined with “Israel condemns ‘hateful and racist’ Greens”, and published an article by pro-Israel writer Jake Wallis Simons headlined “The case for Trump attacking Iran”, among many similar articles.
Some articles in these outlets suggest that recognition of an Israel lobby is anti-semitic. One opinion piece in the Telegraph runs: “Anti-Semitism is a conspiracy theory about how the world works. You think you live in a democracy, it runs, but actually there is this secret invisible system of Jewish power that rules the world through the banking system, the media and the Israel lobby.”
Similarly, the Guardian reported on Labour MP Diane Abbott in May 2024 stating: “She apologised for liking tweets about the influence of the Israel lobby, which she admitted could be interpreted as an antisemitic trope.”
The Guardian has been found to cave in to pro-Israel pressure, to amplify Israeli propaganda, and to be responsible for the same “systemic bias, deliberate distortion and deceptive underreporting” on Israeli crimes as the rest of the British media.
When the vice chair of LFI, Damian Egan, was forced to pull out of a school visit in January this year due to pressure from a pro-Palestinian group, both the Independent and the Times chose to focus on Egan simply being Jewish, headlining: “Jewish MP’s visit to local school cancelled after pro-Palestine campaign”.
Over 100,000 people have recently signed a petition calling for a public inquiry into pro-Israel influence on politics and democracy.
Note – our media analysis covered the period 7 April 2024 to 7 April 2026, using the Nexis media database and conducting website searches of the seven media outlets.
Mark Curtis is the co-director of Declassified UK, and the author of five books and many articles on UK foreign policy.
Israeli military ‘failed on all fronts’: Poll
The Cradle | April 28, 2026
A poll published by Israel’s Public Broadcaster (KAN) on 28 April found that a majority of Israelis believe the state has failed to secure victory in any war since October 2023.
According to the survey, 57 percent of respondents said no victory had been achieved, while 28 percent believed success had been reached in at least one arena, and a further 15 percent said they were unsure.
The findings come after more than two years of Israel’s genocide in Gaza – which Israel threatens to reignite – during which Tel Aviv waged multiple offensive military campaigns against Gaza, Lebanon, and Iran, alongside attacks in Yemen and Syria and a campaign of destruction and displacement in the occupied West Bank.
Confidence levels across all the fronts remain low, with only 17 percent viewing operations in Syria as successful and 16 percent saying the same for Gaza and Iran.
Perceptions dropped further on the Lebanese front at 14 percent, followed by Yemen at 12 percent and the occupied West Bank at 11 percent.
The poll also points to persistent security concerns, with a total of 73 percent of respondents saying the continued armed presence of Hamas and Hezbollah poses a direct threat of a repeat of a 7 October-style event.
Only 10 percent dismissed that possibility, while 17 percent remained uncertain.
On the ground, Israel has reportedly begun withdrawing troops from southern Lebanon. Israeli outlet Maariv described the campaign as ending in “failure” and “bitterness,” as forces pull back under continued Hezbollah attacks, including drone strikes that exposed major gaps in Israeli preparedness.
The poll also showed divisions over Netanyahu’s legal status, with a majority – 56 percent – supporting a pardon for his corruption charges, while 26 percent opposed the move and 18 percent remained undecided.
Netanyahu had requested a presidential pardon on 30 November without admitting guilt or stepping down from office, despite Israeli law requiring an admission of guilt for such a measure.
He is currently facing trial in three separate corruption cases involving fraud, bribery, and abuse of power, with court proceedings ongoing since 2020 after charges were filed in 2019.
Netanyahu’s court testimony was delayed once again on 27 April over a “serious” security incident in southern Lebanon, as the prime minister seeks to prolong the wars to keep his corruption trial from moving forward.
At the same time, the International Criminal Court (ICC) has listed Netanyahu as wanted since 2024, issuing arrest warrants for him and former defense minister Yoav Gallant over their direct involvement and orchestration of the genocide in Gaza, as well as war crimes and crimes against humanity, including the use of starvation as a weapon.
US pension fund invests hundreds of millions in weapons firms supplying Israel
The Cradle | April 27, 2026
The Virginia Retirement System (VRS), which manages pension benefits for the US state of Virginia’s public sector workers, holds a staggering $394 million in investments linked to weapons makers and shipping companies supporting Israel’s genocide of Palestinians in Gaza and wars on Lebanon and Iran, according to a 23 April report released by a coalition of Palestinian advocacy groups.
The report was prepared by the VRS Divest from Weapons & War campaign, the Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM), and the People’s Embargo for Palestine. It draws on publicly available financial data and records obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests.
The report presents a detailed accounting of the VRS’s investments in many of the world’s largest weapons makers as part of its $122 billion portfolio.
Lockheed Martin is the VRS’s single largest holding at $94.8 million. The firm produces the F-35 fighter jet and AGM-114 Hellfire missiles. Both have been used extensively by the Israeli military during its more than two-year Genocide of Palestinians in Gaza.
The Virginia pension system is also invested in Boeing, which manufactures precision-guided munitions, known as JDAMs, that are used to kill and maim children in Gaza.
Other investments include General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, Maersk, and Thyssenkrupp, all of which either manufacture or ship weapons for use by the Israeli military in Gaza, Lebanon, and Iran.
“These companies are critical in maintaining the weapons supply to Israel and the resulting massacres of thousands of people across the Middle East,” Bana Husseini, an organizer with the VRS Divest campaign and the Palestinian Youth Movement, told TRT World.
Husseini and other activists are lobbying the VRS to divest from companies supporting Israel’s military and its genocide and wars. A petition calling for divestment has gathered nearly 4,500 signatures.
However, the pension system has continued to express its support for Israel.
“The VRS has responded by dismissing the campaign’s demands, arresting a firefighter for delivering the petition, inviting a notorious war criminal to their yearly retreat, and further collaborating with war profiteers,” Husseini explained.
Joelle Rudney, a retired teacher from Virginia, told TRT World she was upset to learn her pension was invested “in the bombings of hospitals, schools, and houses in Gaza in attacks that have killed nearly 70,000 people, mostly civilians.”
In response, she has helped lobby the VRS Board of Trustees to divest from the companies supporting Israel’s war crimes.
Casey Rosales, a county public servant who has worked in mental health services, was also angered to learn how her pension contributions are being invested.
“It’s difficult to reconcile the fact that while I dedicate my career to supporting and strengthening communities, the money I earn may be contributing to harm elsewhere,” Rosales stated.
A Virginia public utilities employee said she felt betrayed to learn the money she contributes to her retirement fund is supporting genocide.
“It is profoundly sad that while doing work to help men, women, and children with health care services and resources here in Virginia, my tax money goes to buying and owning shares in companies contributing to genocide,” the employee stated.
“I demand the VRS Board of Trustees divest from these companies and commit to never again invest our future into the manufacturing of death,” the employee told TRT World.
Israel’s genocide of Palestinians in Gaza has killed over 72,000 Palestinians, the majority women and children. Tens, if not hundreds, of thousands more will likely die due to the indirect effects of years of Israeli bombing that has destroyed the basic health, electricity, and water infrastructure in the strip and displaced nearly 90 percent of the population.
West Bank is Defenseless – This is Why Israeli Settler Attacks Continue

Israel killed 14-year-old Aws al-Naasan, along with 32-year-old Jihad Abu Naim, who tried to help him. (Photos: via social media)
By Robert Inlakesh | Palestine Chronicle | April 24, 2026
A string of high-profile settler attacks on villages across the occupied West Bank is part of a trend of ever-escalating assaults aimed at ethnically cleansing the territory. These extremists, backed by the Israeli army, are emboldened by the refusal of the Palestinian Authority to act.
Earlier this week, an Israeli settler assault on a school in the village of al-Mughayyer, near Ramallah, resulted in the killing of a 14-year-old school boy, Aws al-Naasan, along with 32-year-old Jihad Abu Naim, who had attempted to come to the aid of the children who had been opened fire upon.
The incident caused an uproar, yet only a day later, another Palestinian man was executed by a settler in the village of Deir Dibwan, after which the Israeli military rounded up dozens of men and placed them under humiliating detention.
These assaults and ongoing series of pogroms, where settlers alongside their army comrades will burn down homes, businesses, and vehicles, are part of a larger effort aimed at ethnic cleansing.
Since October of 2023, at least 75 Palestinian villages and communities have been partially or completely ethnically cleansed, according to the latest statistics published by Israeli rights group B’tselem. Life in general has been greatly impacted throughout the occupied West Bank as a result of the ultra-emboldened settler violence problem.
However, there is a deeper-rooted issue at play here. There is nobody there to help protect or respond to these violent assaults and killing sprees, with the exception of the occasional lone-wolf operations carried out by individuals who grow frustrated with their predicament. Even these kinds of attacks have greatly decreased over the past year or so, however.
There were armed resistance groups that had independently formed in places like Jenin Refugee Camp and Nour al-Shams Refugee Camp, yet they have been largely crushed or driven into hiding for now.
The unescapable fact about how these groups were dismantled was the pernicious role of the corrupt Palestinian Authority, which worked to do Israel’s dirty work for it, even slaughtering Palestinians who dared to pick up arms and fight, including killing innocent bystanders, including children.
Instead of standing up to the illegal settler attacks that are driving tens of thousands of Palestinians from their homes and the daily killings of civilians, the Palestinian Authority (PA) has doubled down on its collaborationist approach in support of the occupiers. Even arresting and then extraditing a 75-year-old Palestinian, Mahmoud Khader Abed Adra, who was accused of attacking a Jewish restaurant in Paris back in 1982.
The priority of this PA is to protect Israeli interests as they enrich themselves, having completely thrown their national project into the dustbin in search of pleasing the West and Arab despots. Yet, some 30% of the West Bank population is employed by the PA, with another 18% finding employment amongst Israeli settlers and Israeli businesses.
If we consider now that up to 35% of the West Bank population is considered to be unemployed and that the Western NGOs have a major influence on the territory, also employing a considerable number of people, then it begins to become more understandable why the situation remains as it is. The majority of employed Palestinians work for the PA or their occupiers directly.
The PA is said to have around 60,000 men as part of their overall security apparatus, trained by the British, Jordanians, US, and others, yet they aren’t there to protect Palestinians; they are there as another layer of occupation. If you stand up to the PA, you will be arrested and tortured, perhaps even brutally killed in front of your family, like the famous dissident Nizar Banat.
Understanding this is key to comprehending why the territory’s people have been left so incredibly defenseless and why an Intifada has not yet occurred. If such an uprising is to begin, it will mean that it will be totally organic and completely outside the fold of the PA, perhaps even collapsing its corrupt system altogether.
Even on the international level, the Palestinian cause has only been used to drive the selfish interests of a small group of Palestinian elites, while completely abandoning the people’s project. Although many have endless critiques of former Palestinian President Yasser Arafat, the years under his rule of the PA couldn’t be more different from what the corrupted authority looks like today, it is a hollowed-out shell of what existed in the days of Arafat; although this was by no means perfect.
Unfortunately, the PA is now the main obstacle to Palestinians resisting the ethnic cleansing of the West Bank. It may be so that Gaza’s destruction was quicker and more brutal because it chose to fight, but if the West Bank had risen up, the Israelis would have been in a very tough position.
Unlike Gaza, the West Bank is saturated with Israeli settlers, and the price that they would pay in the event that a real resistance would emerge would be much more painful, which is precisely why the Israelis have gone to great lengths to strengthen their positions and prevent freedom of movement there to such an extent since October 2023.
To the Israelis, they see the West Bank as ‘Judea and Samaria’ – the Israeli biblical heartland – while the Gaza Strip is an afterthought. The senior Israeli leadership, from its PM Benjamin Netanyahu to the opposition leader Yair Lapid, is all in agreement on developing a “Greater Israel” that is currently attempting to expand further into Lebanon and Syria.
As for the fate of the West Bank, left completely defenseless, with a PA that is actively working for its occupier, it appears to be grim. These settler attacks are only going to accelerate and grow more violent. The only way that this will ever be forced to change is in the event of a mass uprising, because individual acts alone are not going to alter the current predicament.
Attempting to predict the future is a difficult task; however, with the ever-growing unemployment rate, alongside the overall decline in living standards and constant settler/occupation army violence against the civilian population, an uprising is only a matter of time away.
– Robert Inlakesh is a journalist, writer, and documentary filmmaker. He focuses on the Middle East, specializing in Palestine.
Systematic Israeli targeting of Gaza police seen as deliberate prelude to chaos
Palestinian Information Center – April 24, 2026
GAZA – The Gaza Center for Human Rights has strongly condemned the escalating targeting of police and security personnel in the Gaza Strip by Israeli forces, describing it as part of a recurring pattern aimed at weakening the structure of public order and creating conditions conducive to chaos and lawlessness. This, the Center warned, facilitates the movement of collaborators and armed gangs at the expense of civilian safety and security.
According to documentation by the center’s field teams, an Israeli drone strike on Friday, April 24, 2026, killed two police officers and injured others after targeting a police patrol near Sheikh Radwan police station in northwest Gaza City. The attack occurred in a densely populated area, placing civilians at direct risk.
In a related incident, on the evening of Thursday, April 23, 2026, a drone strike targeted a group of young men at a security checkpoint in the al-Maslakh area, southwest of Khan Yunis, killing one of them, identified as Yahya Marwan Youssef Abu Shalhoub, 22, and injuring others.
Shortly after midnight on Tuesday, April 21, 2026, an Israeli airstrike hit a security post north of the Al-Amal neighborhood in western Khan Yunis, killing three people. Medical sources later confirmed a fourth death from injuries sustained in the attack.
On April 20, 2026, an Israeli drone targeted a gathering of security personnel near Joudeh roundabout in the Bureij refugee camp, killing one officer and injuring another.
Since the ceasefire in October 2025, the Gaza Center for Human Rights has recorded an increase in Israeli attacks on security posts, police checkpoints, and officers performing civilian duties related to maintaining order and protecting public and private property. The Center stated that this reflects a clear policy aimed at undermining law enforcement authority and deliberately creating a security vacuum.
The situation has enabled groups of collaborators and militias to enter displacement areas and commit serious violations, including kidnapping civilians and attacking property, as well as facilitating the looting of humanitarian aid amid the absence of effective protection.
The Center stressed that targeting police and security personnel carrying out purely civilian functions in maintaining public order, as well as targeting civilian gatherings in densely populated areas with displaced persons, constitutes a grave violation of international humanitarian law, particularly the principles of distinction and necessity. Such acts may amount to war crimes under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Furthermore, the deliberate undermining of public order and the spread of chaos constitute internationally prohibited collective punishment policies.
The Center warned that the continuation of this pattern of attacks threatens not only individual lives but also undermines the societal foundations of governance and erodes the population’s right to personal security and legal protection.
Accordingly, the Center called on the international community to take urgent action to halt the targeting of civilian law enforcement bodies, ensure effective protection for civilians, and open independent international investigations into these crimes, with a view to holding those responsible accountable and ending impunity.
