

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Civilian casualties continue to mount from the US military's secret air war in Somalia, with no justice or reparation for the victims of possible violations of international humanitarian law, Amnesty International warned as it released details of two more deadly air strikes so far this year.
Civilian casualties continue to mount from the US military's secret air war in Somalia, with no justice or reparation for the victims of possible violations of international humanitarian law, Amnesty International warned as it released details of two more deadly air strikes so far this year.
US Africa Command (AFRICOM) has conducted hundreds of air strikes in the decade-long fight against the armed group Al-Shabaab, but has only admitted to killing civilians in a single strike that took place exactly two years ago today. This lone admission was prompted by Amnesty International's research and advocacy.
"The evidence is stacking up and it's pretty damning. Not only does AFRICOM utterly fail at its mission to report civilian casualties in Somalia, but it doesn't seem to care about the fate of the numerous families it has completely torn apart," said Deprose Muchena, Amnesty International's Director for East and Southern Africa.
"We've documented case after case in the USA's escalating air war on Somalia, where the AFRICOM thinks it can simply smear its civilian victims as 'terrorists,' no questions asked. This is unconscionable; the US military must change course and pursue truth and accountability in these cases, in line with its obligations under international humanitarian law (the laws of war)."
Amnesty International unearthed evidence that AFRICOM killed two civilians, and injured three more, in two air strikes in February 2020.
After both strikes, AFRICOM issued press releases claiming it had killed an Al-Shabaab "terrorist," without offering a shred of evidence of the victims' alleged links to the armed group.
By contrast, Amnesty International found no evidence that the individuals killed or injured were members of Al-Shabaab or otherwise directly participating in hostilities. The organization interviewed the victims' relatives, community members and colleagues; analysed satellite images, photo and video evidence from the scene of the strikes; and identified the US munitions used.
On 2 February, at around 8pm, a family of five was sitting down to dinner in the city of Jilib, in Somalia's Middle Juba region, when an air-dropped weapon - likely a US GBU-69/B Small Glide Munition with a 16-kilogramme warhead - struck their home. Nurto Kusow Omar Abukar, an 18-year-old woman, was struck in the head by a heavy metal fragment from the munition and killed instantly. The strike also injured her two younger sisters, Fatuma and Adey, aged 12 and seven, and their grandmother, Khadija Mohamed Gedow, aged around 70.
The girls' father, Kusow Omar Abukar, a 50-year-old farmer who was in the house during the strike, described the attack to Amnesty International: "I never imagined it was going to hit us. I suddenly heard a huge sound. It felt like our house had collapsed. ... The sand and the smoke filled my eyes."
In the middle of the afternoon on 24 February 2020, a Hellfire missile from another US air strike hit the Masalanja farm near the village of Kumbareere, 10 kilometres north of Jilib, killing 53-year-old Mohamud Salad Mohamud. He was a banana farmer and Jilib office manager for Hormuud Telecom, and he left behind a wife and eight children.
A senior Hormuud official expressed disbelief that Mohamud Salad Mohamud had been targeted, since he had previously worked for international humanitarian organizations and had been arrested several times by Al-Shabaab: "When I heard the news of his death, I thought he was killed by Al-Shabaab. I have never imagined he would be killed by [the] US or by the Somali government. This was very strange. I don't know how to explain it."
These two air strikes were among a string of 20 retaliatory attacks US forces carried out in Somalia after an Al-Shabaab assault on a US airbase in Manda Bay, Kenya, in early January. AFRICOM's commander, US General Stephen Townsend, vowed to "relentlessly pursue those responsible" for the attack, which killed a US soldier and two contractors, and destroyed five aircraft, including two rare and valuable spy planes.
"Nothing can excuse flouting the laws of war. Any US or Somalia government response to Al-Shabaab attacks must distinguish between fighters and civilians and take all feasible precautions to avoid harm to civilians," said Abdullahi Hassan, Amnesty International's Somalia Researcher.
The recently bereaved civilian families in Middle Juba region join many more Somali civilians who have lost loved ones to US air strikes but have seen no accountability or reparation to date.
In one key example, on 1 April 2018, a US air strike hit a vehicle driving from El Buur, north of Mogadishu.
Just over a year later, AFRICOM publicly admitted that the strike had killed a woman and young child. It was its sole admission of civilian casualties in an air war in Somalia that has lasted over a decade. Despite the family of the victims of this strike contacting the US Mission to Somalia in April last year, at the time of writing, neither US diplomatic staff nor AFRICOM had reached out to them to offer reparation.
In the first three months of 2020 alone, US forces have conducted a total of 32 air strikes in Somalia, according to the monitoring group Airwars. This is double the pace of 2019, when AFRICOM conducted a record 63 strikes in the country.
Since Amnesty International's ground-breaking March 2019 report The Hidden US War in Somalia, the organization has carried out in-depth investigations into eight US air strikes that killed civilians in Somalia's Lower Shabelle and Middle Juba regions. Along with the El Buur strike, they killed a total of 21 civilians and wounded 11. In every case AFRICOM has failed to contact the families of the deceased.
"The US military should not be allowed to continue to paint its civilian victims as 'terrorists' while leaving grieving families in the lurch. Much more must be done to reveal the truth and bring justice and accountability for US attacks which killed so many Somali civilians, some of which amount to apparent violations of international humanitarian law," said Abdullahi Hassan.
Amnesty International is a worldwide movement of people who campaign for internationally recognized human rights for all. Our supporters are outraged by human rights abuses but inspired by hope for a better world - so we work to improve human rights through campaigning and international solidarity. We have more than 2.2 million members and subscribers in more than 150 countries and regions and we coordinate this support to act for justice on a wide range of issues.
West Virginia's governor initially announced that both members of his state's National Guard "passed away from their injuries," but he then said that "we are now receiving conflicting reports" about their condition.
This is a developing story… Please check back for updates…
Two National Guard members and one suspect were shot on Wednesday afternoon near the White House in Washington, DC.
Vito Maggiolo, the public information officer for the District of Columbia Fire and Emergency Medical Service Department, confirmed that first responders transported all three people from the scene to the hospital, and unnamed law enforcement officials told multiple media outlets that the Guard members were in critical condition.
West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey wrote on the social media platform X that "it is with great sorrow that we can confirm both members of the West Virginia National Guard who were shot earlier today in Washington, DC have passed away from their injuries." However, he then said that "we are now receiving conflicting reports about the condition of our two Guard members."
Multiple agencies responded to the shooting on 17th Street, between I and H Streets—which briefly grounded flights at Reagan National Airport and put the White House on lockdown. President Donald Trump is in Florida, and Vice President JD Vance is in Texas.
Trump said on his Truth Social platform that "the animal that shot the two National Guardsmen, with both being critically wounded, and now in two separate hospitals, is also severely wounded, but regardless, will pay a very steep price. God bless our Great National Guard, and all of our Military and Law Enforcement. These are truly Great People. I, as President of the United States, and everyone associated with the Office of the Presidency, am with you!"
According to the Washington Post, US Secret Service spokesperson Anthony Guglielmi said the shooting had "no known direction of interest towards the White House other than the location at this time," and agency members at the scene did not fire shots.
ABC News noted that "the National Guard was deployed to the nation's capital as part of President Trump's federal takeover of the city in August. According to the most recent update, there are 2,188 Guard personnel assigned to DC."
US District Judge Jia Cobb, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, ruled last week that the deployment in DC is illegal and must come to an end, but she gave the Trump administration until December 11 to file an appeal.
"I've spoken to dozens of people held inside ICE detention centers in Arizona and this tracks," said Democratic Congresswoman Yassamin Ansari.
The libertarian Cato Institute this week further undermined the Trump administration's claims that it is targeting "the worst of the worst" with its violent immigration operations in communities across the United States by publishing data about the criminal histories—or lack thereof—of immigrants who have been arrested and booked into detention.
David J. Bier, the institute's director of immigration studies, previously reported in June that 65% of people taken by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had no convictions, and 93% had no violent convictions.
Monday evening, Bier shared a new nonpublic dataset leaked to Cato. Of the 44,882 people booked into ICE custody from when the fiscal year began on October 1 through November 15, 73% had no criminal convictions. For that share, around two-thirds also had no pending charges.
The data also show that most of those recently booked into ICE detention with criminal convictions had faced immigration, traffic, or vice charges. Just 5% had a violent conviction, and 3% had a property conviction.
"Other data sources support the conclusions from the number of ICE book-ins," Bier wrote, citing information on agency arrests from January to late July—or the first six months of President Donald Trump's second term—that the Deportation Data Project acquired via a public records request.
The data show that as of January 1, just before former President Joe Biden left office, 149 immigrants without charges or convictions were arrested by ICE. That number surged by 1,500% under Trump: It peaked at 4,072 in June and ultimately was 2,386 by the end of July—when 67% of all arrestees had no criminal convictions, and 39% had neither convictions nor charges.
Bier also pointed to publicly available data about current detainees on ICE's website, emphasizing that the number of people in detention with no convictions or pending charges “increased a staggering 2,370% since January from fewer than 1,000 to over 21,000."
In addition to publishing an article on Cato's site, Bier detailed the findings on the social media platform X, where various critics of the administration's immigration crackdown weighed in. Among them was Congresswoman Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.), who said: "These are the facts. I've spoken to dozens of people held inside ICE detention centers in Arizona and this tracks."
US Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) declared: "This is the scandal. Trump isn't targeting dangerous people. He's targeting peaceful immigrants. Almost exclusively."
The US Department of Homeland Security, which includes ICE, also jumped in, as did DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin. Responding to Murphy, McLaughlin said in part: "This is so dumb it hurts my soul. This is a made-up pie chart with no legitimate data behind it—just propaganda to undermine the brave work of DHS law enforcement and fool Americans."
Bier and others then took aim at McLaughlin, with the Cato director offering the raw data and challenging her to "just admit you don't care whether the people you're arresting are threats to others or not."
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, said that "DHS's spokeswoman lies AGAIN," calling out her post as "either a knowing lie or an egregious mistake."
"The data David J. Bier published was distributed to multiple congressional staffers and is just a more detailed breakdown of data, which is publicly available on ICE's own website," he stressed.
Journalist Jose Olivares noted that this is "not the first time Tricia McLaughlin has said that ICE's own data is 'propaganda.' Months ago, she slammed me and my colleague at the Guardian on PBS... even though we used ICE's own data for our reporting."
After previous plans by Israel for the mass expulsion of Palestinians, onlookers fear the proposal to house some displaced Palestinians in “compounds” they may not be allowed to leave.
A new Trump administration plan to put Palestinians living in the Israeli-occupied parts of Gaza into "residential compounds" is raising eyebrows among international observers, who fear it could more closely resemble a system of "concentration camps within a mass concentration camp."
Under the current "ceasefire" agreement—which remains technically intact despite hundreds of alleged violations by Israel that have resulted in the deaths of over 300 Palestinians—Israel still occupies the eastern portion of Gaza, an area greater than 50% of the entire strip. The vast majority of the territory's nearly 2 million inhabitants are crammed onto the other side of the yellow line into an area of roughly 60 square miles—around the size of St Louis, Missouri, or Akron, Ohio.
As Ramiz Alakbarov, the United Nations' deputy special coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process, explained Monday at a briefing to the UN Security Council: "Two years of fighting has left almost 80% of Gaza’s 250,000 buildings damaged or destroyed. Over 1.7 million people remain displaced, many in overcrowded shelters without adequate access to water, food, or medical care."
The New York Times reported Tuesday that the new US proposal would seek to resettle some of those Palestinians in what the Trump administration calls “Alternative Safe Communities,”on the Israeli-controlled side of the yellow line.
Based on information from US officials and European diplomats, the Times said these "model compounds" are envisioned as a housing option "more permanent than tent villages, but still made up of structures meant to be temporary. Each could provide housing for as many as 20,000 or 25,000 people alongside medical clinics and schools."
The project is being led by Trump official Aryeh Lightstone, who previously served as an aide to Trump's first envoy to Jerusalem. According to the Times: "His team includes an eclectic, fluctuating group of American diplomats, Israeli magnates and officials from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)—the sweeping Washington cost-cutting effort overseen earlier this year by Elon Musk."
The source of funding for the project remains unclear, though the cost of just one compound is estimated to run into the tens of millions. Meanwhile, the newspaper noted that even if ten of these compounds were constructed, it would be just a fraction of what is needed to provide safety and shelter to all of Gaza's displaced people. It's unlikely that the first structures would be complete for months.
While the Times said that "the plan could offer relief for thousands of Palestinians who have endured two years of war," it also pointed to criticisms that it "could entrench a de facto partition of Gaza into Israeli- and Hamas-controlled zones." Others raised concerns about whether the people of Gaza will even want to move from their homes after years or decades of resisting Israel's occupation.
But digging deeper into the report, critics have noted troubling language. For one thing, Israeli officials have the final say over which Palestinians are allowed to enter the "compounds" and will heavily scrutinize the backgrounds of applicants, likely leading many to be blacklisted.
In one section, titled "Freedom of Movement," the Times report noted that "some Israeli officials have argued that, for security reasons, Palestinians should only be able to move into the new compounds, not to leave them, according to officials."
This language harkens back to a proposal earlier this year by Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz, who called for the creation of a massive "humanitarian city" built on the ruins of Rafah that would be used as part of an "emigration plan" for hundreds of thousands of displaced Palestinians in Gaza.
Under that plan, Palestinians would have been given "security screenings" and once inside would not be allowed to leave. Humanitarian organizations, including those inside Israel, roundly condemned the plan as essentially a "concentration camp."
Prior to that, Trump called for the people of Gaza—“all of them”—to be permanently expelled and for the US to "take over" the strip, demolish the remaining buildings, and construct what he described as the "Riviera of the Middle East." That plan was widely described as one of ethnic cleansing.
The new plan to move Palestinians to "compounds" is raising similar concerns.
"What is it called when a military force concentrates an ethnic or religious group into compounds without the ability to leave?" asked Assal Rad, a PhD in Middle Eastern history and a fellow at the Arab Center in Washington, DC.
Sana Saeed, a senior producer for AJ+, put it more plainly: "concentration camps within a mass concentration camp."
The Times added that "supporters insist that this would be a short-term arrangement until Hamas is disarmed and Gaza comes under one unified government." Lightstone has said that reconstruction of the other parts of Gaza, where the vast majority of the population still lives, will not happen unless Hamas, the militant group that currently governs the strip, is removed from power.
But while Hamas has indicated a potential willingness to step down from ruling Gaza, it has rejected the proposal that it unilaterally disarm and make way for an "International Stabilization Force" to govern the strip, instead insisting that post-war governance should be left to Palestinians. That plan, however, was authorized last week by the UN Security Council.
In addition to raising concerns that "those moving in would never be allowed to leave," the Beirut-based independent journalist Séamus Malekafzali pointed to other ideas Lightstone and his group want to implement. According to the Times, "It has kicked around ideas ranging from a new Gaza cryptocurrency to how to rebuild the territory in such a way that it has no traffic."
Malekafzali said, "Former DOGE personnel are attempting to make Gaza into yet another dumb tech experiment."
Like Katz's plan months ago, the new Trump proposal calls for a large compound to be built in Rafah, which Egyptian officials warned, in comments to the Wall Street Journal, could be a prelude to a renewed effort to push Palestinians across the border into the Sinai Peninsula.
But even if not, Jonathan Whittall, the former head of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs in Palestine, said it hardly serves the humanitarian role the Trump administration and its Israeli co-administrators seek to portray.
"If plans for these 'safe communities' proceed, they would cement a deadly fragmentation of Gaza," he wrote in Al Jazeera. "The purpose of creating these camps is not to provide humanitarian relief but to create zones of managed dispossession where Palestinians would be screened and vetted to enter in order to receive basic services, but would be explicitly barred from returning to the off-limits and blockaded 'red zone.'"
He noted that there is a conspicuous lack of any clear plan for what happens to those Palestinians who continue to live outside the safe communities, warning that Israel's security clearances could serve as a way of marking them as fair targets for even more escalated military attacks.
"Those who remain outside of the alternative communities, in the 'red zone,'" he said, "risk being labelled 'Hamas supporters' and therefore ineligible for protection under Israel’s warped interpretation of international law and subject to ongoing military operations, as already seen in past days."