dataDp/1032.jpeg

Worldnews

How RSF Is Adopting Israels Template For Genocide In Sudan

For years, Israel has used human rights terminology to whitewash killing civilians, now the RSF is doing the same. On April 11, the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) stormed the Zamzam displacement camp in Sudan’s North Darfur, burning huts and shops, executing medics, and firing at fleeing civilians. According to monitors, at least 500 people – men, women, children and the elderly – were killed, and hundreds of thousands were forcibly displaced. The attack provoked global outrage, prompting the RSF to double down on propaganda it had been spreading for months about Zamzam – that it was actually a military barracks. “Zamzam was a military zone … so the RSF decided that we should evacuate civilians,” RSF adviser Ali Musabel told Al Jazeera, without providing evidence for his claim. “We didn’t want civilians to get caught in the crossfire.” By labelling Zamzam a military zone, the RSF was trying to apply the same model Israel uses to justify bombing hospitals and schools in the Gaza Strip, said Rifaat Makawi, a Sudanese human rights lawyer. “This is not a coincidence: it is a deliberate practice aimed at stripping civilians of their legal protection by labelling them as combatants or instruments of war,” he told Al Jazeera. Throughout Sudan’s civil war, the RSF has used human rights jargon and terms from international humanitarian law (IHL) – the legal framework designed to protect civilians in times of war – to carry out atrocities. For years, Israel employed this practice in an attempt to ward off criticism for killing and oppressing Palestinians, according to legal scholars. Since launching its genocidal war on Gaza on October 7, 2023, it has doubled down. It claims hospitals in Gaza are Hamas “control-and-command centres” – trying to justify attacking health facilities, which are protected under IHL. It also claims Hamas hides among civilians to use them as “human shields” to justify disproportionate and intentional attacks against those same civilians. In addition, it has branded its mass expulsions of civilians as “humanitarian” evacuations, giving people hours to pack up their entire lives and get out of the way of Israeli bombs, if they can. Israel stands accused of genocide by rights groups and United Nations experts for its war that has killed at least 52,567 Palestinians. And the RSF is increasingly adopting Israel’s strategy, local monitors and legal experts say. “The fact that the claims made by the RSF in Sudan resemble the claims Israel is making in Gaza … reveals the emergence of a template to commit mass extermination and even genocide,” said Luigi Daniele, a senior lecturer on IHL at Nottingham Law School. The UN accuses both sides in Sudan’s war of committing grave crimes, such as killing and torturing prisoners of war, since a power struggle between the RSF and the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) erupted into an all-out civil war in April 2023. Human rights groups accuse the RSF of perpetrating additional atrocities, including carrying out a possible genocide against the “non-Arab” communities in Darfur. The RSF emerged from the nomadic “Arab” militias in Darfur, which became known as the Janjaweed (devils on horseback in Sudanese Arabic) for the countless atrocities they committed. The army used the Janjaweed to crush a rebellion by sedentary farming “non-Arab” communities that started in 2003. The sedentary communities were protesting against their political and economic marginalisation in Sudan. SAF and RSF were closely aligned until at least 2021, when they came together to overthrow the civilian administration with which they had been sharing power after a popular uprising toppled autocratic President Omar al-Bashir in 2019. Shortly after the coup, the RSF signed a memorandum of understanding with the International Committee for the Red Cross (ICRC) to receive human rights training. Now, the RSF and its political allies are using human rights terminology to try to whitewash their atrocities. On March 8, an RSF-backed political alliance, Tasis (Foundation), tweeted: “We stand in solidarity with Sudanese women in their recent ordeal, where they have faced particularly tragic conditions and been subjected to horrific violations, as a result of the unjust war.” Tasis made no mention of the reports published by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, which accuse the RSF of widespread sexual violence and rape throughout the war. During the raid on Zamzam, the RSF reportedly abducted 25 women and girls and raped others, according to the Strategic Initiative for Women in the Horn of Africa, a local monitor documenting sexual violence in the region. “What I see today in Darfur, and specifically in Zamzam, is not merely a violation of the IHL, but evidence of its distortion and transformation into a cover under which the gravest crimes are committed,” human rights lawyer Makawi told Al Jazeera. The Zamzam camp sprang up in 2003, 15km (9.3 miles) from North Darfur’s capital, el-Fasher, to shelter “non-Arab” Zaghawa and Fur communities, which fled Popular Defence Forces’ violence during the first Darfur war. Both communities suffered genocidal levels of violence and were expelled from their lands by the state-backed Janjaweed. Zamzam soon became a symbol of the atrocities they endured. Some 350,000 people settled in the camp, swelling to more than half a million as the RSF and the army went to war and the paramilitary group captured South, East, West and Central Darfur states in late 2023. In April 2024, the RSF besieged el-Fasher and surrounding towns after the Joint Forces – a coalition of “non-Arab” armed groups formed to fight the government in the past – shed their neutrality and sided with the army. Given the RSF’s track record of enmity towards “non-Arab” ethnic groups, the Joint Forces feared widespread ethnic killings if the RSF captured the entire state. The RSF blocked aid from anyone not aligned with them, leading to famine in Zamzam. As civilians withered away from hunger, the RSF began claiming that Zamzam was a “military base”, revealing its intention to attack. “This claim that there was a military base in Zamzam was never correct … we had some people who acted as a police force, but there were no military leaders in the camp,” said Mosab, a middle-aged man who survived the killing in Zamzam and now languishes in the nearby town of Tawila. Musabel, the RSF adviser, told Al Jazeera that the high civilian death toll was due to the Joint Forces using “human shields”, without providing evidence. The RSF has also mimicked the Israeli tactic of carrying out mass expulsions under a humanitarian guise. Since October 7, 2023, Israel has pushed 2.3 million Palestinians into smaller and smaller pockets of land, which it describes as “safe zones” in Gaza. Israel bombs or invades those areas, claiming they “became military targets” due to the ostensible presence of someone from Hamas there. “What Israel has done in Gaza, in reality, has been issuing mass expulsion orders under threats of extermination, which is a declaration of intent to commit international crimes,” Nottingham Law School’s Daniele said. On April 11, Tasis posted on Facebook, calling for civilians to flee Zamzam through what it called “humanitarian corridors” leading to nearby towns such as Tawila and Korma. Yet on April 27, an RSF commander was seen announcing the detention of a group of unarmed men who fled Zamzam through a supposed humanitarian corridor to Tawila, in a video verified by Al Jazeera’s authentication unit, Sanad. He said the men had sided against their Darfuri brethren and with the traditional elite, represented in the “Arab” Jalaba tribes who live in central and northern Sudan and comprise much of Sudan’s military and political elite. He added that they might kill the detained men to serve as an example to others. The RSF has framed its war against the army as a fight on behalf of peripheral tribes against the central elite, while at the same time committing egregious abuses against the most marginalised tribes in Darfur. The detainees were relief workers, according to local monitors, who fear they were killed. Al Jazeera was unable to confirm their fate. Survivors told Al Jazeera that the RSF had carried out ethnic cleansing, possibly amounting to several war crimes. “Some of us were executed [by the RSF] along [the road out of Zamzam] and others were violently displaced,” said Mohamed Idriss*, who walked for 13 hours before arriving in el-Fasher. “We were exposed to so many violations, [the RSF] committed massacres and ethnic cleansing,” he told Al Jazeera. Follow Al Jazeera English:...

dataDp/3575.jpeg

Futbol

Why Salah Turned Down '500m Saudi Move' For Liverpool Stay

Mohamed Salah is staying at Liverpool, bringing one of the season's key storylines to a conclusion. At times, though, it seemed in doubt. So what happened behind the scenes? Was there a £500m offer from Saudi Arabia and how did the Egypt forward go from being unsure of his future to expressing delight at signing a deal that lasts until he turns 34? Senior football correspondent Sami Mokbel reports… When Salah set the cat among the pigeons about his future in November by saying he was 'more out than in', he wasn't being disingenuous. Yet it was also not misleading to say the Egyptian always wanted to stay at Liverpool. The two stances weren't necessarily mutually exclusive. It has always been Salah's ambition to extend his eight-year stay at Anfield – and news today of his new two-year contract will bring the 32-year-old's tenure at the club to a decade, should he see out the duration of the terms. But the conditions – for both Salah and Liverpool – had to be right. Thankfully for the club's supporters a middle ground was finally reached. Sources close to the situation indicated a breakthrough in talks between Salah, his representative Ramy Abbas Issa and Liverpool sporting director Richard Hughes was reached at the end of March, with the formalities of the deal concluded earlier this week. Indeed, in an interview with BBC Sport, left-back Andy Robertson revealed he only found out about Salah's new contract on Thursday. Salah is not taking a pay cut to stay at Liverpool - and will earn close to £400,000-per-week. The two-year contract offers him a level of security players of his age are not often afforded. Liverpool have pushed the boat out, but haven't done so on a whim. Salah is a special case. Replacing their talismanic attacker, who has made 54 goal contributions already this season, would be vastly difficult and, more pertinently, an expensive task. Identifying a Salah replacement would be hard enough, but finding the sort of money to pull off such a deal would enter a higher plane of difficulty. What appears to be Trent Alexander-Arnold's pending move to Real Madrid, when his contract expires this summer, would have provided Liverpool with greater financial leeway in their efforts to assemble financial packages to keep Salah and Virgil van Dijk, with the Dutchman expected to sign a new deal in the coming days. Yet, while money is always a factor when it comes to contractual negotiations, it wasn't the determining consideration for a footballer at the peak of his powers. If money was Salah's determining consideration, he'd have left Liverpool for the Saudi Pro League who, until as recently as last week, still believed they could attract him to the Middle East. The financial lure of a move to Saudi Arabia was clear. The 'homecoming' of one of the greatest and recognisable Arab footballers - and the synergy, and earning power, for all parties was inescapable. Indeed, sources have told BBC Sport that Salah was in line to earn at least £500m in Saudi – an eye-popping figure, although still short of the 1bn euros (£859m) Real Madrid forward Vinicius Jr was reportedly offered. It was said the option of exploring a Saudi move was first raised with Salah last February - and that door will likely remain open in the future. But, right now, the forward has put sporting ambition ahead of his wallet. Salah's a player at the top of his game - those close to the frontman believe he has at least another three years at the highest level. The evidence suggests as much. His physique is optimum and his levels of professionalism are obsessive. Salah believes he still has more to accomplish in European football too, starting, of course, with winning Liverpool's 20th league title this season. He has ambitions on winning the Ballon d'Or too, with fifth his highest placing in both 2019 and 2022. Salah also wants to win the Champions League again, and ensure Liverpool remain at the pinnacle of English football. Interestingly, it is said another one of the key factors in his decision to re-sign was a desire to compete among the elite to help prepare for Egypt's forthcoming World Cup and Africa Cup of Nations campaigns. It's the sporting challenge that has driven his decision for Salah, although the fact his wife Magi and daughters Makka and Kayan are enjoying life on Merseyside has also been described as a key factor too.

dataDp/1032.jpeg

Worldnews

US Bill To Ban Israel Boycotts Faces Right-wing Backlash Over Free Speech

Allies of US President Donald Trump voice opposition to a bipartisan proposal that would expand a law that punishes boycotting Israel. Washington, DC – A bill in the United States Congress that aims to further penalise the boycotting of countries friendly to the US is facing opposition from allies of President Donald Trump over free speech concerns, putting its passage in jeopardy. According to Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, a vote in the House of Representatives on the proposal, previously scheduled for Monday, has been cancelled. Although Trump’s Republican Party has been leading legislative efforts to crack down on boycotts of Israel, over the past days, several conservatives close to the US president voiced opposition to the bill, dubbed the International Governmental Organization (IGO) Anti-Boycott Act. “It is my job to defend American’s [sic] rights to buy or boycott whomever they choose without the government harshly fining them or imprisoning them,” Greene said in a social media post on Monday. “But what I don’t understand is why we are voting on a bill on behalf of other countries and not the President’s executive orders that are FOR OUR COUNTRY???” Charlie Kirk, a prominent right-wing activist and commentator, also said that the bill should not pass. “In America you are allowed to hold differing views. You are allowed to disagree and protest,” Kirk wrote on X on Sunday. “We’ve allowed far too many people who hate America move here from abroad, but the right to speak freely is the birthright of all Americans.” Steve Bannon, a former Trump adviser and influential right-wing media personality, backed the comments of Kirk and Greene, writing on the social media platform Gettr, “Fact check: True” and “Agreed” in response to their statements, respectively. The proposed legislation was introduced by pro-Israel hawks in the US Congress, Republican Mike Lawler and Democrat Josh Gottheimer, in January, and has been co-sponsored by 22 other lawmakers from both major parties. The bill would expand a 2018 law that bans coercive boycotts imposed by foreign governments to include international governmental organisations (IGOs). The original legislation prohibits boycotting a country friendly to the US based on an “agreement with, a requirement of, or a request from or on behalf” of another nation. It imposes penalties of up to $1m and 20 years in prison for violations. Expanding the legislation to include IGOs risks penalising individuals and companies in the US that boycott firms listed by the United Nations as doing business in illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank. While the bill itself does not explicitly mention Israel, its drafters have said that it targets the UN and the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) Movement, which calls for economic pressure on the Israeli government to end its abuses against Palestinians. “This change targets harmful and inherently anti-Semitic BDS efforts at IGOs, such as the UN, by extending protections already in place for boycotts instigated by foreign countries,” Lawler’s office said in January. States and the federal government have been passing anti-BDS laws for years, raising the alarm about the violation of free speech rights, which are guaranteed by the First Amendment of the US Constitution. Numerous legal cases have challenged these laws, and some judges have ruled that they are unconstitutional, while others have upheld them. Rights groups and Palestinian rights advocates have argued that anti-boycott laws aim to shut down the debate about Israel and criminalise peaceful resistance against its violations of international law. Over the years, leading UN agencies and rights groups, including Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, have accused Israel of war crimes and crimes against humanity, including imposing apartheid on Palestinians. But supporters of anti-BDS laws say the measures are designed to combat discrimination against Israel and regulate trade, not speech. Such laws have mainly faced opposition from progressive Democrats, but the IGO Anti-Boycott Act has generated anger from right-wing politicians, too. “Americans have the right to boycott, and penalizing this risks free speech. I reject and vehemently condemn antisemitism but I cannot violate the first amendment,” Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna, a Florida Republican, wrote on X. I agree with @RepMTG .
I’ll be voting No on this bill as well. https://t.co/YOPga59Xyc — Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) May 4, 2025 The right-wing rejection of the Lawler-Gottheimer bill comes as the Trump administration continues with its push to target criticism of and protests against Israel, especially on college campuses. Since Trump took office, the US government has revoked the visas of hundreds of students for activism against Israel’s war on Gaza. Several students, including legal permanent residents, have been jailed over allegations of anti-Semitism and “spreading Hamas propaganda”. Rumeysa Ozturk, a Turkish graduate student at Tufts University, has been detained since March, and the only known allegation against her is co-authoring an op-ed calling on her college to honour the student senate’s call for divesting from Israeli companies. Trump has also frozen and threatened to freeze federal funding for several universities, including Harvard, over pro-Palestine protests. Follow Al Jazeera English:...

dataDp/1032.jpeg

Worldnews

Israel Bombs Yemens Hodeidah Port After Attack Near Tel Aviv

Air strikes come a day after the Iran-aligned Houthis fired a missile that struck near Israel’s main airport. Israel strikes target Yemen’s Hodeidah a day after Houthi missile attack on Ben Gurion Airport The Israeli military says it has carried out air strikes on Yemen’s Hodeidah port and a cement factory, claiming the sites were used to support Houthi operations against Israel. The strikes on Monday injured at least 21 people, the Houthi-run health ministry spokesman Anees al-Asbahi said. According to the Israeli army, fighter jets struck infrastructure linked to the Houthis, including a cement factory east of Hodeidah that it described as “an important economic resource” used in building tunnels and military infrastructure. “The Hodeidah seaport serves as a hub for the transfer of Iranian weapons and equipment for military needs,” the Israeli army said in a statement. The claim could not be independently verified. Houthi-run Al Masirah TV reported that six Israeli strikes hit Hodeidah’s port and blamed both Israel and the United States. Axios journalist Barak Ravid quoted a senior US official who said the air raids were coordinated between Israel and the US. A US defence source told Al Jazeera that “US forces did not participate in the Israeli strikes on Yemen today” but did not deny nonlethal support may have been provided. The attack was carried out after a ballistic missile fired from Yemen on Sunday struck close to Ben Gurion International Airport outside Tel Aviv. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had pledged retaliation for the Houthi attack, the first known missile to avoid interception since the Yemeni group began targeting Israel in November 2023. Al Jazeera correspondent Ali Hashem reported that about 30 Israeli warplanes took part in Monday’s operation, which was overseen by Netanyahu and Defence Minister Israel Katz from a command centre in Tel Aviv. Hashem said the strikes mark a “new phase” in Israeli attacks on Yemen. Since US President Donald Trump returned to power in January, the US has embarked on a more aggressive assault on Yemen “which is related directly to Israeli interests”, Hashem added. This is not the first time Israel has bombed targets in Yemen. In December, air raids struck the Ras Isa oil terminal and other sites in Hodeidah province, killing at least nine people. While most Houthi-launched projectiles have been intercepted, Sunday’s attack was the “most significant strike”, Hashem said, since the group launched its campaign in November 2023, which it said is in response to Israel’s war on Gaza and to show solidarity with Palestinians. A drone had previously hit a building in Tel Aviv last year. Since November 2023, the Houthis, also known as Ansar Allah, have launched more than 100 drone and missile attacks targeting vessels they said are linked to Israel in the Red Sea. Although the Houthis paused attacks during a ceasefire in Gaza this year, they resumed their operations in March after Israel cut off humanitarian aid to Gaza and resumed its offensive. Follow Al Jazeera English:...