https://ghostarchive.org/search?term=https%3A%2F%2Ftrtworld.com%2Farticle%2Fd8fececcf59d

Germany and Italy have pushed back against calls to suspend the European Union’s cooperation agreement with Israel, exposing deep divisions inside the bloc as pressure mounts over Israel’s war in Lebanon and its actions in the occupied West Bank.

At a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Luxembourg on Tuesday, Spain and Ireland renewed demands to halt the EU-Israel Association Agreement — the framework governing political dialogue and trade ties between the two sides since June 2000.

cross-posted from: https://news.abolish.capital/post/43917

On Monday, April 20, a dozen vessels from the Global Sumud Flotilla’s 2026 mission carried out an action in international waters to divert the route of the cargo ship MSC Maya. It is one of the world’s largest container ships, heading to the Israeli ports of Ashdod and Haifa carrying materials related to the production of heavy artillery.

The sailboats approached the cargo ship and transmitted messages via radio, including: “To the crew aboard the MSC Maya: You are heading toward occupied Palestine, carrying tools of death and destruction. Gaza is under siege and its population is suffering collective punishment. Your cargo will fuel an apartheid regime that is committing genocide. Turn back now. Choose humanity over complicity. Choose justice over occupation. The world is watching. The flotilla stands between you and war crimes.”

This was the first action put forward by civilians, workers, and activists on the high seas in history undertaken to try to disrupt a state’s military operations. It was inspired by similar actions carried out in ports by dockworkers, such as those put forward in various ports against South African apartheid or, more recently, against the shipping of weapons for genocide in several Italian ports.

These workers’ actions today inspire the hundreds of activists on board, among whom are also oil workers, healthcare workers, educators, transport workers, and many others from various sectors. The Global Sumud Flotilla has called for replicating these attempts to break the chain of the war machine in all countries, including truck routes, maritime routes, and production plants.

One of the participants, Leandro Lanfredi, from the Rio de Janeiro oil workers’ union and a member of the Permanent Revolution Current delegation on board, explained just a mile from the freighter how the action was aimed at denouncing a shipping company known for “transporting weapons to the State of Israel and profiting from genocide,” while calling on “workers around the world to rise up and go on strike to break off trade and diplomatic relations with Israel, just as we oil workers are fighting to ensure that not a single drop of oil goes to that genocidal state.”

The shipping company MSC maintains ship-sharing agreements with ZIM, the Israeli state-owned shipping company that operates regular routes departing from or stopping at the port of Barcelona. The latter has been systematically denounced by the Palestinian movement, the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel, and the “No Port for Genocide” campaign.

The organizers of the Global Sumud Flotilla have pointed out that “under the Geneva Convention, the Genocide Convention, and the Arms Trade Treaty, states are obligated to halt arms transfers to Israel.” However, arms trade with the genocidal state has not been interrupted to date.

Not even the Spanish government has spoken in support of Palestinian self determination and passed a decree to this effect following massive social mobilizations. But even this “progressive” government has not banned these ships from transiting its ports or halted the purchase of military supplies crucial to rearmament plans, such as Spike missiles. This hypocrisy has been denounced by Mariona Tasquer, a student at the University of Barcelona and a member of the Revolutionary Current of Spanish State Workers, who has demanded “that the Spanish government put an end once and for all to all commercial and military relations with the genocidal state of Israel.”

This article was first published in Spanish at La Izquierda Diario on April 20.

The post Solidarity with Gaza Makes Headway at Sea: Global Sumud Flotilla Forces a Cargo Ship Carrying Weapons to Change Route appeared first on Left Voice.

From Left Voice via This RSS Feed.

cross-posted from: https://feddit.uk/post/47842441

Celebrated musicians including Massive Attack, Kneecap, Brian Eno, Sigur Rós, Nadine Shah, and many more have signed an open letter calling for a boycott of the upcoming Eurovision Song Contest in protest of Israel’s participation.

Campaign groups No Music For Genocide and the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic & Cultural Boycott of Israel are calling for a boycott of this year’s highly divisive Eurovision Song Contest.

More than 1,000 artists, including Massive Attack, Kneecap, Brian Eno, Sigur Rós, Nadine Shah, Mogwai and Hot Chip, have signed an open letter calling for a boycott of Eurovision 2026 in protest of Israel’s participation.

The letter calls upon the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) to ban KAN – the Israeli Public Broadcasting Corporation – from the upcoming contest.

“For the third consecutive year,” the letter states, Israel will be “celebrated onstage despite its ongoing genocide in Gaza, while Russia remains banned for its illegal invasion of Ukraine.”

“We refuse to be silent when Israel’s genocidal violence soundtracks and silences Palestinian lives,” the letter reads. “When children in Israeli prisons endure beatings for humming a tune. When all that’s left of nearly every stage, studio, bookshop and university in Gaza is piles of rubble, under which slaughtered bodies still await recovery and proper burial.”

In a statement, a spokesperson for No Music For Genocide said: “People of conscience around the globe are fighting complicity in every industry for a free Palestine and a freer world. While many of us in the industry make light of Eurovision or doubt our own power as cultural producers, genocidal Israel’s leaders speak openly about the contest’s geopolitical value.”

Continue reading HERE

You definitely won't regret outsourcing your tax collection.

cross-posted from: https://feddit.uk/post/47691889

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni is managing the repercussions of a public rebuke from US President Donald Trump this week over the pope, Iran and a defence deal with Israel. It's a rupture that had been building since the outbreak of the US-Israel war with Iran and may ultimately serve her political interests ahead of the 2027 legislative elections.

It was on a government plane somewhere between Verona and Rome that Itay's PM Giorgia Meloni learned that US President Donald Trump had called her "unacceptable". Her aides had flagged an interview the US president had given to Corriere della Sera published on April 14. She read it. Then, according to the Italian daily's account, the far-right PM settled on a line she had already used that afternoon: "Being allies does not mean there are no red lines, and it certainly does not mean being vassals or subjects."

Trump had been blunt. "I'm shocked at her. I thought she had courage, but I was wrong," he said in the Corriere interview. His grievances were twofold: Meloni's refusal to back the US-led war on Iran and her condemnation of his attacks on Pope Leo XIV as "unacceptable". “She is the one who is unacceptable,” Trump added, “because she doesn’t care if Iran has a nuclear weapon and would blow up Italy in two minutes if it had the chance”.

The dispute also comes against the backdrop of Rome’s decision to suspend the renewal of a defence cooperation agreement with Israel, further fuelling tensions.

The exchange sent shockwaves across Italian political life, though not quite in the direction Trump may have intended.....

..... Continue Reading HERE

Microsoft and other US tech companies successfully lobbied the EU to hide the environmental toll of their datacentres, an investigation has found, with demands to block a database of green metrics from public view written almost word for word into EU rules.

The secrecy provision, which the European Commission added to its proposal almost verbatim after industry lobbying in 2024, hinders scrutiny of the pollution that individual datacentres emit. It leaves researchers with just national-level summaries of their energy footprints.

The rise of AI chatbots has spurred a boom in the construction of chip-filled warehouses with a hunger for power that is being met, in part, by burning fossil gas. Legal scholars warn the blanket confidentiality clause may fall foul of EU transparency rules and the Aarhus convention on public access to environmental information.

“In two decades, I cannot recall a comparable case,” said Prof Jerzy Jendrośka, who spent 19 years on the body overseeing the convention and teaches environmental law at the University of Opole in Poland. “This clearly seems not to be in line with the convention.”

Documents obtained by Investigate Europe, an independent journalism cooperative that led the research in collaboration with the Guardian and other media partners, show the rules have already been used to shield datacentres from scrutiny.

In an email citing the secrecy clause last year, a senior commission official reminded national authorities of their obligation to “keep confidential all information and key performance indicators for individual datacentres”.

“It is really important to reiterate this point as the commission has already received various requests for access to documents by the media or the public in relation to the data,” the official said. “All these requests have been so far refused.”

The US and China have led the global AI boom but even in Europe datacentres are being built at breakneck speed. The EU aims to triple its datacentre capacity in the next five to seven years as it seeks to position itself as a global leader in artificial intelligence.

In a move to increase transparency, the commission updated its energy efficiency directive in 2023 to oblige datacentre operators to report data on key performance indicators. In further guidance, it proposed publishing “aggregated” environmental metrics.

But during public consultations in January 2024, tech companies pushed to classify all individual information on datacentres as confidential, citing commercial interests. The demand means the data cannot even be accessed through freedom of information requests.

The final text of the article, which differs by just a couple of words from industry demands, states “the commission and member states concerned shall keep confidential all information and key performance indicators for individual datacentres that are communicated to the database … Such information shall be considered confidential information affecting the commercial interests of operators and owners of datacentres.”

Industry submissions during the public consultation show the groups who lobbied for the change are Microsoft; DigitalEurope, an industry organisation whose members include Microsoft, Google, Amazon and Meta; and Video Games Europe, whose members include Microsoft and Netflix.

Ben Youriev, a researcher at InfluenceMap, a not-for-profit organisation that tracks corporate lobbying, said it was an example of how the tech sector was reckoning with a shift towards using more energy.

He said: “Where the industry was previously outspoken in its support for clean energy and emissions reductions, many firms have since fallen silent. Instead, they appear to be prioritising the rapid build-out of datacentre infrastructure globally over supporting clean energy and rapid emissions reductions.”

DigitalEurope did not respond to a request for comment. The commission and Video Games Europe declined to comment.

Microsoft said it supports greater transparency around datacenters as sustainability disclosures can help drive better outcomes and build public trust. A spokesperson said: “We are taking further steps to increase openness, while protecting confidential business information.”

The EU executive considers the regulation a first step to creating a common EU rating scheme for datacentres. In a second phase, for which public consultation on the legislation ends this month, it plans to publish sustainability scores from the database to “make it easier to compare different datacentres in a same region and promote new designs or appropriate efficiency in datacentres”. Under the current proposals the majority of what operators report would remain confidential.

The commission’s internal position, according to sources close to the matter, is that making each datacentre’s information public might lead operators to stop reporting their sustainability metrics. However, EU data shows that only 36% of eligible datacentres have complied with the existing reporting requirements.

The industry has “a real interest in keeping the numbers hidden”, said Alex de Vries-Gao, a researcher at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, who has mostly had to rely on aggregated data when seeking to quantify the environmental footprint of AI.

“Public information is extremely limited. You typically have to bend over backward to come up with any numbers,” he said.

The EU is obliged under the Aarhus convention to ensure that environmental information is systematically made available by the authorities to the public.

Luc Lavrysen, the former president of the Belgian constitutional court and emeritus professor of environmental law at Ghent University, said the confidentiality clause “is clearly in violation” of EU transparency rules and the Aarhus convention.

Kristina Irion, an associate professor in information law at the University of Amsterdam, reached the same conclusion. She said the “sweeping presumption of confidentiality” incorrectly benefits corporate interests over public access to at least some of the data.

“What deserves protection as confidential information affecting the commercial interests of datacentre companies should be determined on a case-by-case basis,” she said.

cross-posted from: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/11317382

France is on the eve of voting one of the most shameful laws in its history: it would effectively outlaw criticism of Israel and criminalize any speech seen as even remotely sympathetic to whoever the French government chooses to designate a "terrorist group."

In effect this law would turn France's foreign policy into unchallengeable dogma backed by prison time. You could literally be sent for 5 years in prison if you, for instance, call what France says are "terrorists" a "resistance group."

Think for instance Nelson Mandela during the apartheid (the ANC was on every Western terrorist list) or, heck, France's own Résistance against Nazi Germany - designated as "terrorists" by the Vichy regime and the Nazi occupation.

It's frankly absolutely insane.

The new law is called "loi Yadan" after its author Caroline Yadan, a MP who represents French expatriates living in Israel. The U.S. has congressmen paid by AIPAC: France has cut out the middleman entirely, we have MPs whose constituency is literally in Israel.

The law has already passed committee and heads to a full parliamentary vote on April 16th - 3 days from now - under a very unusual fast-track procedure. Seven of eleven parliamentary groups have said they'll vote yes and the law is expected to pass.

What does the law say? Let me quote from it directly (full text here: https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/17/textes/l17b2358_texte-adopte-commission):

1. Article 1 introduces the concept of "implicit" provocation to terrorism and punishes it with five years imprisonment and a fine of €75,000

That's the one I was speaking about. Under this provision, describing anyone France designates as terrorist as a "resistance movement" - the way France describes its own Résistance against Nazi occupation - could effectively become a crime.

The key concept is what does "implicit provocation to terrorism" mean? Nobody knows. And that's the point. It means whatever a prosecutor wants it to mean: a perfectly good case could be made that, for instance, quoting international law on the right of occupied peoples to resist with respect to Hamas is, in fact, "implicit provocation to terrorism."

France's most famous anti-terrorism judge, Marc Trévidic, says he has never seen anything like it in his entire career (https://xcancel.com/CharliesIngalls/status/2043333726541619459?s=20): "Implicit provocation to terrorism: do you realize what that means? Becoming a censor of other people's thoughts, trying to guess what a person really meant."

2. The same article also expands the terrorism apology offense to include "minimizing or trivializing acts of terrorism in an outrageous manner."

This is even crazier: until now, "apology of terrorism" meant actually expressing a favorable judgment of "terrorist acts" (which is already insane because, as we all know, one person's terrorist is another's freedom fighter).

Well, under this new provision, a judge could decide that providing context, explaining root causes, or insufficiently condemning an act amounts to "trivializing" terrorism - and that would now be punishable with 5 years in prison.

So, for instance, a history teacher explaining the origins of Hamas or Hezbollah is providing context - but a prosecutor could argue that contextualization is trivialization. The same reasoning could apply to a journalist, a researcher, or anyone on social media who says "yes, it was terrible, but here's why it happened." The "but" becomes a crime, as it is trivialization.

3. Article 4 expands Holocaust denial law

Under current French law, denying the Holocaust is already a crime. This provision extends that crime by specifying that contestation of crimes against humanity now includes, "whatever its formulation, a negation, minimization, or outrageous trivialization" of those crimes.

Again with "outrageous trivialization"! In this instance the very authors of the text - Caroline Yadan and her colleagues - explain their reasoning explicitly in the law's preamble (https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/17/textes/l17b0575_proposition-loi): "Comparing the State of Israel to the Nazi regime would thereby be punishable as an outrageous trivialization of the Shoah."

So while the provision is written in general terms, its architects are openly saying what it's for: making it a crime to draw any parallel between Israel's actions and those of the Nazis.

4. Article 2 creates a brand new crime: calling for the destruction of a state.

The law adds to an existing 1881 press law a provision punishing anyone who "publicly, in disregard of the right of peoples to self-determination and the purposes and principles of the UN Charter, calls for the destruction of a state recognized by the French Republic." Five years imprisonment, €75,000 fine.

The qualifiers about self-determination and the UN Charter are meant to sound reassuring. But what does "destruction" mean? In practice, if you advocate for a one-state solution where Israelis and Palestinians live as equals, you are de-facto calling for the "destruction" of the state of Israel. Well, that would now be punishable by 5 years in prison 🤷

There you go. Absolutely insane: if this new law passes, and it unfortunately very much looks like it will, France - the country that gave the world the Declaration of the Rights of Man, the country whose national identity is built on the Résistance - will have made it illegal to use the word 'resistance' about anyone the government doesn't like. Jean Moulin would be prosecuted. De Gaulle would be prosecuted.

The only people who wouldn't be prosecuted are those who stay silent. Which, of course, is the whole point.

text of the law in French => https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/17/textes/l17b2358_texte-adopte-commission

source => https://xcancel.com/RnaudBertrand/status/2043516049153491323#m

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/45772217

According to the European Commission, the State of Israel is responsible for an unprecedented level of killing and injury of civilians, a large-scale displacement of population and the systematic destruction of hospitals and medical facilities in Gaza. [1] Israel also implemented a blockade of humanitarian aid that could amount to starvation as a method of war. Israel is in breach of multiple rules and obligations under international law and fails to prevent the crime of genocide as ordered by the International Court of Justice.[2]

Yet the European Union has still not suspended its association agreement with Israel, which is the cornerstone of EU-Israel bilateral trade, economic, and political cooperation.

EU citizens cannot tolerate that the EU maintains an agreement that contributes to legitimize and finance a State that commits crimes against humanity and war crimes.

Therefore, we call on the Commission to put forward the proposal to the Council for the full suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement.

[1] European External Action Service, note of the Office of the EU Special Representative on Human Rights, 20 June 2025 https://euobserver.com/eu-and-the-world/ar0246a0da

[2] International Court of Justice, Order of 26 January 2024 https://www.icj-cij.org/node/203447

Annex In 1995, the EU has concluded an Association agreement with the State of Israel, aiming at facilitating and increasing trade, providing a framework for bilateral political dialogue, and fostering scientific, technologic and cultural cooperation.

With more than 34% of Israel's imports originating from the EU, and 28.8% of Israeli exports flowing to the EU, the EU is Israel’s first trade partner. Total trade in goods between the EU and Israel in 2024 amounted to €42.6 billion.[3]

In 2021, Israel joined Horizon Europe, the EU’s main funding programme for research and innovation.1.11 billion euros from the EU’s Horizon Europe fund goes to Israeli companies, universities and public bodies. Among the 921 projects with 231 Israeli recipients are companies that are closely involved with the Israeli military.[4]

Article 2 of the EU-Israel association agreement provides that “Relations between the Parties, as well as all the provisions of the Agreement itself, shall be based on respect for human rights and democratic principles, which guides their internal and international policy and constitutes an essential element of this Agreement”

A breach of Article 2 gives the right to the other Party to unilaterally suspend the Agreement. Several international institutions have given evidence that Israel is in breach of Article 2 :

The European External Action Service (EEAS) report, [5] communicated to the Council on 20 June 2025 gives a detailed account of the rules and obligations of international law breached by the State of Israel in the Gaza Strip and in the West bank; particularly with regard to the blockade of humanitarian aid, indiscriminate attacks on civilians, the systematic targeting of hospitals and medical facilities, and forced displacement of populations.

In its Order of 26 January 2024,[6] the International Court of Justice (ICJ) orders the State of Israel to do all in its power to prevent genocide against Palestinians in Gaza.

ICJ Order of 28 March2024 [7] orders the State of Israel to “Take all necessary and effective measures to ensure, without delay, in full co-operation with the United Nations, the unhindered provision at scale by all concerned of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance, including food, water, electricity, fuel, shelter, clothing, hygiene and sanitation requirements, as well as medical supplies and medical care to Palestinians throughout Gaza [...].

By the ICJ Order of May 2024 [8] “The Court considers that, in conformity with its obligations under the Genocide Convention, Israel must immediately halt its military offensive, and any other action in the Rafah Governorate, which may inflict on the Palestinian group in Gaza conditions of life that could bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part”.

ICJ Advisory Opinion of 22 October 2025 provides that Israel must “ensure that the population of the Occupied Palestinian Territory has the essential supplies of daily life, including food, water, clothing, bedding, shelter, fuel, medical supplies and services” and “facilitate by all means at its disposal relief schemes on behalf of the population of the Occupied Palestinian Territory so long as that population is inadequately supplied, as has been the case in the Gaza Strip”.[9]

Despite the evidence of multiple violations of human rights and international law brought up by the abovementioned institutions, the European Union has still to this date not taken any meaningful action to condemn or to sanction the State of Israel, like, for instance, the suspension of its association agreement with Israel.

Such failure to act is not in line with the EU Treaties themselves : it is clear from the Treaties that all actions and policies of the EU, including international agreements, must contribute to and ensure respect of human rights and international law.

According to Article 3 (5) of the Treaty on the European Union (TEU), “In its relations with the wider world, the Union shall uphold and promote its values” [...] and “shall contribute to peace, security, the sustainable development of the Earth, solidarity and mutual respect among peoples [....] and the protection of human rights, in particular the rights of the child, as well as to the strict observance and the development of international law, including respect for the principles of the United Nations Charter.”

In addition, article 21 TEU states that “The Union's action on the international scene shall be guided by the principles which have inspired its own creation, development and enlargement, and which it seeks to advance in the wider world: democracy, the rule of law, the universality and indivisibility of human rights and fundamental freedoms, respect for human dignity, the principles of equality and solidarity, and respect for the principles of the United Nations Charter and international law.”

Article 205 TFEU states that “The Union's action on the international scene, pursuant to this Part, shall be guided by the principles, pursue the objectives and be conducted in accordance with” the provisions laid down in article 21 TEU mentioned above.

Lastly, article 207 TFEU provides that “The common commercial policy shall be conducted in the context of the principles and objectives of the Union's external action”

The EU’s obligation to act does not stem only from its founding treaties but also from UN treaties and customary international law and the International Court of Justice Orders.

The EU must immediately utilise all available legal, diplomatic and economic means - among which the suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement - to force the Israeli government to cease its human rights violations, uphold international law and to alleviate the suffering of Palestinians.

[3] https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/eu-trade-relationships-country-and-region/countries-and-regions/israel_en

[4] https://www.ftm.eu/newsletters/bureau-brussels-eu-funds-israel-defense-sector

[5] European External Action Service, note of the Office of the EU Special Representative on Human Rights, 20 June 2025 https://euobserver.com/eu-and-the-world/ar0246a0da

[6] International Court of Justice, Order of 26 January 2024 https://www.icj-cij.org/node/203447

[7] International Court of Justice, Order of 28 March 2024 https://www.icj-cij.org/node/203847

[8] International Court of Justice, Summary of the Order of 24 may 2024 https://www.icj-cij.org/node/204100#%3A%7E%3Atext=The+Court+considers+that%2C+in%2Cits+physical+destr uction%20in%20whole

[9] ICJ Advisory Opinion– Obligations of Israel in relation to the Presence and Activities of the United Nations, Other International Organizations and Third States in and in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory, 22 October 2025 https://www.un.org/unispal/document/icj-advisory-opinion-22oct2025/

cross-posted from: https://news.abolish.capital/post/40809

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez on Wednesday welcomed news of a two-week ceasefire in Iran as a step back from the brink of catastrophe, but said the war's aggressors—the US and Israel—deserved no praise for the temporary reprieve.

"Ceasefires are always good news. Especially if they lead to a just and lasting peace," Sánchez wrote on social media. "But this momentary relief cannot make us forget the chaos, the destruction, and the lives lost. The government of Spain will not applaud those who set the world on fire just because they show up with a bucket."

"What’s needed now: diplomacy, international legality, and PEACE," the prime minister added.

Drawing US President Donald Trump's ire, Spain's government has opposed the US-Israeli war on Iran from the start, calling it a "cruel, absurd, and illegal" assault and closing off Spain's military bases and airspace to American forces involved in the attack.

"Remaining silent in the face of an unjust war is an act of cowardice and complicity," Sánchez said last month.

Spain's foreign minister, José Manuel Albares, said Wednesday that the government supports "the crucial work of the mediators," including Pakistan, in preventing further escalation of the conflict that the US and Israel launched in late February.

"Diplomacy, negotiation, and international law are the only path to the lasting peace that the citizens of the Middle East deserve," said Albares. "All parties must show responsibility and commitment to ceasing attacks and de-escalating, which Spain will continue to support."

The foreign minister went on to stress that the ceasefire "must extend to Lebanon," which Israel has invaded and bombed relentlessly in recent weeks, displacing 20% of the country's population, devastating its healthcare system, and killing more than 1,500 people. On Wednesday, the Israeli's unleashed a massive bombing blitz of Beirut, the nation's capital and largest city.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said following Trump's announcement of the two-week ceasefire deal with Iran that the agreement "does not include Lebanon."

"Spain will not spare any efforts in supporting the Pakistani mediation efforts in the war in the Middle East and in paving the way for diplomacy," Albares said Wednesday. "Today is a day of hope that we hope will culminate in a definitive peace that must include Lebanon."

From Common Dreams via This RSS Feed.

The polls have fidesz up to 8 points behind Tisza, tho I wonder if that will be enough to overcome the gerrymandering and clientelism

https://archive.ph/IH7Lo