

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.
"The Ed Sheeran debacle will be seen as a turning point in pop culture complicity" with Israel, said one Palestinian-American writer, who described it as "a clear 'South Africa moment.'”
Singer Ed Sheeran hoped to sidestep controversy by letting rapper Macklemore be removed from his tour over his pro-Palestine remarks. Instead, he's sparked what one writer said could be a "turning point" for how pop culture engages on the issue of Israel and Palestine.
Sheeran responded to the backlash on Tuesday by claiming he was helpless to stop Macklemore’s ouster, which followed the intervention of the pro-Israel New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft, who rallied other NFL venue owners to bar Sheeran's Loop Tour if the “Thrift Shop” rapper continued to perform.
Pro-Israel groups petitioned for Macklemore to be removed from the tour after a performance earlier this month in which he said, “Free Palestine,” and performed his song “Hind’s Hall." The song refers to anti-Israel protests at Columbia University in 2024 and is dedicated to the 5-year-old Palestinian girl Hind Rajab, who was killed by Israeli forces. She was one of more than 20,000 children who have been killed as part of Israel’s military campaign there, according to a UN commission.
But the other four openers said they would not abide what they viewed as elites' political censorship of an artist speaking out against what human rights groups have described as a genocide in Gaza and an occupation of the West Bank that is considered illegal under international law.
Each one of the artists announced on Tuesday that they would no longer tour with Sheeran.
“Artists must not be silenced when they speak up for the oppressed," said the Grammy-winning singer-songwriter Finneas, who has vocally supported the plight of Palestinians for several years. "I stand with Palestine and its people."
The Irish singer Aaron Rowe likewise withdrew from his upcoming shows with Sheeran, though he acknowledged he did not "take the decision lightly."
"Ed has been a friend to me and has changed my life. I could never thank him enough for this," Rowe wrote on Instagram. "But as Irish people, we know all too well about genocide, forced famine, and violent occupation."
“I cannot stand by and allow billionaires to use their position of power to silence the rightful voices of those who speak up against Israeli genocide and who highlight the savage murder of children,” he continued. “I would lose all respect for myself to carry on as normal.”
The Danish pop band Lukas Graham also dropped from the tour, with frontman Lukas Forchhammer writing that artists "should be able to speak about war, about civilians being killed, about children who deserve to grow up. Wherever they live. Whatever flag flies over them."
Forchhammer addressed Kraft, a multibillionaire, who gloated after the fact about having Macklemore blackballed and denounced his expressions of support for Palestinians as "hate speech."
"Money doesn’t give you the right to own the conversation," Forchhammer wrote. "Nobody’s bank balance should decide who gets to speak or which suffering we’re allowed to acknowledge.”
The Irish folk group Beoga—which helped to found the Irish Artist for Palestine Movement—was even more direct, calling out Kraft’s extensive history of donating to pro-Israel groups, including the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which has spent over $100 million attempting to influence the current election cycle, and supporting efforts to punish those who boycott Israeli products.
"It's important that everyone knows that the real enemy is the Zionist lobby. They have worked tirelessly to silence artists who want to speak freely about a genocide happening before our eyes, for fear of retribution," Beoga wrote. "Research how much Robert Kraft has done to fight the [Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions] (BDS) movement. That will give you a sense of what we've all been up against."
"Up the workers. Free Palestine," the group's message concluded.
The exodus of Sheeran’s openers came as momentum built behind a “boycott” of his music spearheaded by the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel, a group based in Ramallah in the West Bank, that helped to cofound the BDS movement.
The group called on Sheeran to "cancel his now compromised US tour" and said until then, artists, audience, and crew members should "boycott it."
In response to Sheeran's explanation that he prefers not to publicly take sides on controversial political issues despite having opinions, the group noted his estimated net worth of more than $500 million and his massive platform as one of the world's most recognized musicians.
"As South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu famously said, 'If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor,'" the group said. "Sheeran had an opportunity to take a stand in solidarity with Palestinians, like millions of other British and Irish citizens have done, and refuse to cave to the pressure... He has so far failed to meet this ethical duty. But it is not too late to reverse course."
Some Western politicians have joined the backlash and amplified calls for a boycott.
US Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), considered a likely presidential candidate in 2028, told a reporter she'd be changing the radio station if Ed Sheeran's music were to come on.
"When you see what Robert Kraft did to line up all the stadiums to censor speech in that one specific way, it's become clear it's not just about one music artist or two music artists," AOC said. "This is about how just a handful of stadium owners and the elite can prevent an entire massive issue, in this case, the genocide in Gaza."
"But it doesn't stop there," she continued. "It could be speaking out about AI. It could be speaking out about any issue, that you can now just get a handful of stadium owners to ensure that an entire person's career can be jeopardized if they speak out about any issue."
Zarah Sultana, a member of the UK Parliament and co-founder of the left-wing Your Party, added that the artists who left Sheeran's tour are "on the right side of history."
“At this rate, Ed Sheeran is going to end up with Boy George opening for him,” she joked on social media, referring to the singer who released a song this summer in support of Israel's assault on Gaza. “No one deserves to be subjected to that.”
Backlash against Sheeran has expanded across the entertainment industry as well, with performers including the children's entertainer Ms. Rachel and popular musicians Kehlani, Tones and I, Zara Larsson, PinkPantheress, and others rallying in support of Macklemore.
And as the music news site Consequence of Sound reported, even some of Sheeran's hardcore fans are revolting. Three prominent Sheeran fan accounts on X, which boast nearly 50,000 followers put together, spoke in solidarity with Macklemore and encouraged Sheeran to use his platform to take a stand, with some vowing to stop covering his tour until he does.
"We hope that Ed can... reflect on everything that happened and understand that, in the face of certain injustices, remaining silent or trying not to choose a side is also a stance," wrote the Brazilian account @EdSheeranBrCom, which has more than 45,000 followers.
Ali Abunimah, the Palestinian-American journalist who co-founded The Electronic Intifada, said in a social media post that he believed that "the Ed Sheeran debacle will be seen as a turning point in pop culture complicity" with Israel, which has seen public support in the US crater since 2023, to the point where Americans, especially younger ones, now say they sympathize more with Palestinians than Israelis.
Likening it to the massive cultural boycott movement against apartheid during the 1980s, Abunimah said the cultural revolt against Sheeran was "a clear 'South Africa moment.'”
The United Kingdom's Labour government is set to announce a ban on trade with illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank.
The United Kingdom on Tuesday is expected to announce a ban on trade with illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank, a plan that prompted a furious response from far-right Israeli and American officials even as British diplomats privately acknowledged that the new sanctions package would be mostly symbolic.
"Expel the British ambassador tonight!" Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich wrote in a social media post ahead of the official announcement. "We will not be a doormat trampled by an antisemitic government, in a country conquered by radical Islam, trying to save itself from economic and social decline by attacking Jews and the State of Israel."
UK Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband, who is Jewish, is set to unveil the trade ban as the Israeli government aggressively accelerates its unlawful land grabs and expulsion of Palestinians in the West Bank, where violent rampages by Israeli settlers have reached unprecedented levels. The trade ban was developed after the Israeli government advanced a plan to build more than 1,200 new settlement homes in the West Bank.
The Guardian reported Monday that "in his statement to MPs, Miliband is expected to use firmer language than his recent predecessors in calling out the humanitarian injustices suffered by Palestinians in Gaza."
"The steps he lays out are likely to fall short of the full set of demands made by Palestinian advocacy groups," the outlet added, "but they will still be seen as a sign that the UK is moving beyond traditional rhetorical support for a two-state solution towards active steps to forestall the expansion of illegal settlements in the West Bank—widely seen as intended to destroy the prospect of a Palestinian state."
New UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham reportedly spoke with US President Donald Trump on Monday about the impending trade ban, which drew condemnation from the US ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee.
Behind the scenes, according to Bloomberg, UK diplomats "privately told the US that the sanctions are largely symbolic and will have no material impact on the UK’s wider relationship with Israel on trade or security, in a bid to soothe the Trump administration’s response."
Francesca Albanese, the United Nations special rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territories, told The Guardian that a ban on trade with Israeli settlements would be an "absolutely important" change in UK government policy.
Nick Dearden, director of the UK-based advocacy group Global Justice Now, wrote on social media that "a settlement ban is welcome but we must go further."
"Hope the government will include services and will announce new bans of weapons sales and military coordination tomorrow," Dearden added. "The comms is an improvement but we need action."
Reuters reported that the impact of the policy move on bilateral trade with Israel is "likely to be minimal, with details unclear of how the UK will differentiate between goods originating in West Bank settlements [and] products made in Israel."
Pushing back against the assault on verifiable reality is a crucial undertaking in the pursuit of justice.
The advent of generative AI has made it even harder to distinguish between what’s real and what isn’t, and also easy to claim what is real is fake. This threatens to undermine the very idea of "evidence," which traditionally has been used to enforce accountability, by fracturing shared, verifiable reality.
For example, in Iran authorities attempted to dismiss protest footage as edited or artificially manufactured after AI was used to enhance long-distance footage of someone confronting the military, effectively turning this doubt into a propaganda weapon. Doubt was also a feature in the aftermath of the recent bombing of a girls' school which killed 168 people—mostly children—in Minab, Iran. And in the midst of an already distorted information ecosystem, methods developed to detect AI fakes are now being weaponized to falsely discredit authentic evidence.
This affirms that the emergence of generative AI is not simply a technological issue, but is creating a visual evidence problem. The consequences are already being felt not only by those chronicling and exposing injustice.
Historically, visual media has been an important tool to document injustice. In South Africa, for instance, a generation of photographers used the camera to challenge the prevailing power structures of apartheid. By exposing the apartheid’s injustices and delegitimizing the system, as well as documenting resistance and everyday life, photographers had a huge impact on the liberation struggle in South Africa. So much so, that the camera would be “seen as an instrument of insurrection” by the apartheid regime, resulting in a ban on foreign journalists and documentary photography.
What would have happened if the apartheid regime had claimed that photographs like Nzima’s were faked or AI generated? Would this have created doubt for the audiences who saw it, impacting international support for South Africa’s liberation struggle?
Although they were not the sole targets of apartheid repression, those photographing or filming were often targeted by the regime. Security forces regularly exposed films, confiscated equipment, conducted raids, and banned publications, as well as people. For example, photographer Sam Nzima was harassed by police and placed under house arrest for months following the publication of his iconic photo of the dying 13-year-old Hector Pieterson who was shot by police during the youth uprising on June 16, 1976. The photo not only fueled the liberation movement within South Africa, but also galvanized stronger international condemnation of apartheid. Apartheid Minister Stoffel Botha even referred to those documenting what was unfolding in the country as "media terrorists."
While there have been attempts to deny or downplay apartheid, including from the now late last apartheid president F. W. de Klerk, systemic denial has not been possible owing to the evidence available. This underscores the role of documentation in defending truth, even if incomplete.
What would have happened if the apartheid regime had claimed that photographs like Nzima’s were faked or AI generated? Would this have created doubt for the audiences who saw it, impacting international support for South Africa’s liberation struggle? Today these questions are not rhetorical, owing to the emergence of generative AI.
To be sure for most of the world, the saying, “The camera never lies” has never been true. Visual media was vital to the Nazi regime's propaganda efforts. Before that, it played “a critical role in propagating colonialist myths about Africa,” with colonial states using photographic imagery to cement white supremacy. It would also become a tool for apartheid in South Africa, used to not only legitimize and validate itself, but to also attempt to shape global perceptions of what was happening in the country.
But the story did not end there. Visual media would also become a tool for liberation movements in South Africa and beyond, because documentation impacts how the world is perceived, meaning is made, and reality is verified.
For example, Human Rights Watch recently used geolocated images to verify the Israeli military’s unlawful use of white phosphorus, a highly reactive chemical which ignites when exposed to oxygen, in residential areas in Lebanon. This offers a pathway for accountability in the future. Similarly, the Syrian Archive, which tracks and preserves videos of war crimes in Syria, has used documentation to pursue accountability for the deadly use of chemical weapons in the country.
Documentation is critical in the pursuit of justice, as well as the need to preserve the past to confirm reality. Not only for these worthy ideals, but also so that those who are left to pick up the pieces know that their experiences of injustices are documented, even in the face of denial and propaganda aimed at persuading people otherwise.
Of course the risks and harms are heightened in conflict situations, which does not need to be inevitable. For example, Meta’s Oversight Board recently called for new rules on how deceptive AI content is managed by the platform to enable users to distinguish between what is real and fake. This follows Meta’s failure to appropriately designate an AI-generated video that purported to show significant damage caused by Iranian soldiers in Haifa, Israel. While the board’s recommendations are not binding, should Meta fail to urgently implement these, it will be yet another example of a platform knowing how to address harms but failing to do so. This must change.
To this end, pushing back against the assault on verifiable reality is a crucial undertaking. This includes protecting people's ability to safely document and preserve their documentation; accessible and effective detection tools, alongside transparency for AI-generated content; and democratic policies, laws, and regulations that center human rights considerations.
As history has repeatedly shown us, secrecy is a shield that protects injustice and emboldens bad actors. So, bearing witness, exposing truth, and insisting on justice remains as important now as it was for South Africa’s liberation movement and beyond— even in the age of generative AI.
“It seems the criminal apartheid state of Israel has grown impatient with slowly torturing, starving, and beating Palestinian hostages to death,” said one observer.
Israeli lawmakers on Tuesday voted to advance a bill legalizing execution by hanging of Palestinians convicted of "terrorism"-related killings, a move that prompted opponents to warn of mass executions under what one prominent human rights group called "apartheid" legislation.
The Knesset National Security Committee voted to send the bill for its final two readings before the Knesset General Assembly, which are expected to take place next week.
Bill sponsor Limor Son Har-Melech of the far-right Jewish Power Party called the bill's advancement a "moral and necessary step."
“The law sets out a clear and unequivocal message: Those who choose to murder Jews because they are Jews lose their right to live,” added Har-Melech.
The bill passed its first reading at the full Knesset last November, drawing widespread condemnation for provisions including mandatory death sentences without judicial discretion or possibility of pardons, to be carried out within 90 days.
Since then, amendments have been proposed to avoid accusations of discrimination amid the filing of around 2,000 proposed revisions by opposition lawmakers. Language under which Jewish Israelis who kill Palestinians are not subjected to the legislation has been softened; however, critics contend that in practice, the bill would apply predominantly to Palestinian perpetrators.
The bill also retains what critics say is a discriminatory two-track legal regime; one for military courts which have jurisdiction over Palestinians—but not Israeli settlers—in the illegally occupied West Bank, and another for civilian courts inside Israel and East Jerusalem, which, like wider West Bank, has been unlawfully occupied by Israel for nearly 59 years.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had reportedly pushed for the changes, which also include allowing judicial discretion in sentencing and removing a requirement for trials to take place in military courts. Netanyahu—who is wanted by the International Criminal Court for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza—is said to be wary of more global backlash against a country already facing a genocide case at the International Court of Justice.
Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir—who was ordered last week to remove a video promoting the bill, in which he stands by a gallows at a memorial to Jews executed in the 1930s and '40s for resisting British occupation—called Tuesday's vote "a historic moment of justice for the state of Israel."
"No more revolving door of attacks, imprisonments, and releases," he added. "This law restores deterrence, restores justice, and sends a clear and unambiguous message to our enemies: Jewish blood is not cheap. We will continue to lead an uncompromising policy against terror until victory.”
Studies in the United States—the only Western democracy that actively executes people—have repeatedly shown that the death penalty does not deter crime.
Knesset members opposing the legislation—who are believed to be outnumbered by more than 2 to 1—condemned Tuesday's vote.
Rabbi Gilad Kariv, who represents the left-wing Democrats, slammed what he called "an extreme bill that does not exist in any democratic country, with serious moral flaws and profound security recklessness.”
Har-Melech, Ben-Gvir, and other backers of the bill have repeatedly worn noose-shaped lapel pins to show their support for legislation. Ben-Gvir handed out sweets to Knesset colleagues after the bill passed its first reading. Har-Melech recently dressed as an executioner replete with noose and syringe for the Purim holiday, while her husband donned a costume representing what he called the themes of "occupation, expulsion, settlement"—or the conquest, ethnic cleansing, and settler-colonization of Palestine.
"With God's help, on next Purim we will need far more than a single breath to read the names of all the terrorists who were hanged," Har-Melech said in a video message marking the festive holiday. "And to the Jews there was light and joy and gladness."
Palestinians and their defenders warn that, if passed, the bill could open the door to mass executions.
Hamas, which still rules Gaza despite nearly 29 months of Israeli war and siege, called the bill “a dangerous terrorist step that paves the way for carrying out murder and liquidation crimes against our prisoners."
The Palestinian Prisoners Media Office said Wednesday in a statement: "This dangerous development constitutes an unprecedented escalation in the enemy's policies against our prisoners and represents a flagrant violation of all international laws and conventions. It reveals premeditated intentions to commit an organized crime against the prisoner movement."
The bill has sparked widespread condemnation around the world. United Nations experts have implored Israel to withdraw the bill, arguing it “would violate the right to life and discriminate against Palestinians in the occupied Palestinian territory."
The European Union Diplomatic Service said Tuesday that the EU "opposes capital punishment in all cases and under all circumstances."
"Israel has long upheld a de facto moratorium on both executions and capital punishment sentencing, thereby leading by example in the region despite a complex security environment," the agency added. "Approving this bill would represent a grave step backward from this important practice and from positions Israel has itself expressed in the past."
Israel abolished the death penalty for murder in 1954; currently, its only capital offenses are crimes against humanity and treason. The only execution in Israeli history occurred in 1962 when Holocaust architect Adolf Eichmann was hanged for genocide and crimes against humanity.
One senior Amnesty International official called the bill "yet another tool within Israel’s institutionalized system of apartheid against all Palestinians whose rights it controls."
Some critics noted that around 100 Palestinian prisoners have died in Israeli custody since the Hamas-led attack of October 2023, including some who were allegedly tortured or raped to death.
“Israel is already killing Palestinians on a regular basis—in detention facilities, and in the field, where lethal force is widely used by Israeli settlers and by the military with close to zero accountability,” Yuli Novak, executive director of the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem, told The Guardian on Wednesday, adding, "This law is another tool in this toolbox.’’
"This kind of quota system mirrors the kind of policies that white supremacist groups, including the Klan, pushed for 100 years ago."
Not a single refugee who isn't a white South African has been legally resettled in the United States since October, according to the State Department's most recent arrivals report.
The report, published last month, shows that from the start of October 2025 and the end of January 2026, just 1,651 people were admitted under the US Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP), which allows those fearing persecution based on race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or social group to apply for refuge in the United States.
Aside from just three, every single one of them was from South Africa.
Three Afghan refugees were also reported to have been settled in Colorado in November. But since then, their admission has been indefinitely suspended, and those who have entered may be at risk of deportation.
During that same period a year earlier—the final months of the Biden administration—a total of 37,596 refugees arrived in the US, with the greatest numbers coming from the Middle East, South Asia, and Africa.
The Trump administration dramatically curbed refugee admissions during its first year in power. On his first day back in office last January, President Donald Trump suspended USRAP processing, leaving around 600,000 people in the pipeline suddenly stranded, including roughly 10,000 who'd already booked flights.
Around 130,000 of those refugees had already been through the State Department's meticulous and taxing vetting process, and were instead "left to languish in refugee camps around the world after being given the promise of safety and a new life in America,” as a group of Democrats in Congress put it.
The next month, however, Trump carved out an exception to the suspension exclusively for white South Africans, who he has falsely claimed face a "genocide," and severe "discrimination" from land redistribution policies intended to correct extreme apartheid-era inequalities.
After previously discussing a cap of 40,000 refugee admissions for the fiscal year 2026---already a reduction by over two-thirds from the Biden administration---Trump announced on September 30 that he would lower admissions to just 7,500, a historic low.
He announced the change without consultation with Congress, which is required under the 1980 Refugee Act, leading Democrats to accuse him of acting in "open defiance of the law."
But in late February, Reuters reported on an internal State Department document showing that the administration was planning to welcome as many as 4,500 white South Africans to the US per month and detailed plans to install trailers on US Embassy property in the country to expedite more immigrant approvals.
All the while, refugees fleeing war, government oppression, and genocide in countries including Syria, Sudan, Ukraine, Afghanistan, and others have been locked out or face threats of arrest by the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) under a new policy requiring them to be reinspected to determine their ability for “assimilation.”
Many critics have pointed out the dramatic gulf in treatment between white immigrants from South Africa and members of other, largely nonwhite groups of immigrants, whom it has undertaken extreme measures to remove from the country with expediency.
Last month, a Rohingya refugee, who fled genocide in Myanmar and legally entered the US as a refugee, was found dead on the streets of Buffalo, New York, after being detained and then left outdoors in the freezing cold by immigration agents.
The policy was revealed as part of a case in which a federal judge halted a DHS effort to detain thousands of refugees in Minnesota who did not seek green cards after their first year of residency in the United States.
"While the Trump administration is trying to convert warehouses at home into massive prisons to jail and deport immigrants swept up in its racist crackdown, it is also working to build trailers in Pretoria so it can rapidly increase the number of white South Africans," wrote Ja'han Jones in an opinion piece for MS NOW.
Likening it to the 1924 Immigration Act, which created strict ethnic quotas for entry into the US, Jones said: "It’s the kind of immigration policy the Ku Klux Klan dreamed of. Literally. This kind of quota system mirrors the kind of policies that white supremacist groups, including the Klan, pushed for 100 years ago."
A group of Israeli military veterans called his punishment "just a slap on the wrist" and "state-backed impunity for state-backed terror."
Israeli police have released a soldier from custody after he was filmed running his vehicle over a Palestinian man who was praying outside the city of Ramallah in the occupied West Bank.
A silent video of the incident, which both Israeli and Palestinian outlets reported on Thursday, shows an Israeli settler with a rifle slung over his back driving his all-terrain vehicle (ATV) toward a 23-year-old Palestinian man as he knelt in prayer on the roadside.
After barrelling over the man, the settler shouted something in his direction and backed up, then gestured for him to move.
The settler then turned his ATV around, got off, and shouted something at a Palestinian taxi driver. The injured Palestinian man then stood up, approaching the cab. The settler again shooed him off before hopping back on the ATV and speeding away.
Majdi Abu Mokho, the father of the Palestinian man, said his son now has pain in both legs after he was struck.
Mokho told Agence France-Presse: “The assailant is a known settler. He set up an outpost near the village, and with other settlers he comes to graze his livestock, blocks the road, and provokes the residents."
He also said the settler blinded him with pepper spray after hitting his son, though this is not shown in the video.
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) identified the driver as an Israeli reserve soldier with one of its regional defense units. These battalions have dramatically expanded in recent years with backing from Israel's right-wing government, which contains many officials at the center of the settler movement.
Breaking the Silence, a group of Israeli military veterans critical of the occupation of Palestine, has referred to the regional defense units—which have been responsible for many other attacks on Palestinian civilians in the West Bank—as "no more than settler militias in uniform."
The IDF said the soldier's weapon has been confiscated and that he's been suspended due to the "severity of the incident," which the IDF said it was investigating. The IDF has not released the soldier's name.
An initial probe found that the same settler had opened fire in the village of Deir Jarir, north of Ramallah, earlier that same day, in an incident that resulted in a young Palestinian man being injured by gunfire.
During that altercation, which was also caught on film, a group of masked settlers was seen hurling rocks at the village's entrance. According to Palestinian sources who spoke with the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, the targets of the attack were villagers who were grazing their cattle near their homes.
In another video, a masked man—who the IDF identified as the same reservist responsible for the ATV attack—is seen firing his weapon in the direction of the camera. The IDF said that by opening fire inside the village while in civilian clothes, the soldier had committed a “serious breach of his authority.”
According to the Times of Israel, Israeli police released the settler reservist from custody on Friday. He has been placed under house arrest for five days and is banned from approaching Deir Jarir, where the incident occurred, or from contacting anyone else connected with the case.
The violent incident is the latest in a year that has seen a record number of attacks by Israeli settlers and soldiers against Palestinian villagers.
According to official figures, Israeli forces and illegal settlers have killed at least 1,130 Palestinians in the occupied West Bank, injured nearly 11,000, and detained around 21,000, since October 2023, when Israel launched its two-year genocide in Gaza following Hamas' attack.
On the same day as the ATV attack, Israeli police announced that they had arrested five Israeli settlers over their alleged involvement in an ambush against a Palestinian home, which resulted in “moderate injuries to the face and head” of an eight-month-old Palestinian girl, according to the Palestinian news agency WAFA.
While the IDF says it is investigating the ATV attack along with local police, attacks by Israeli settlers are often treated with leniency.
In January 2025, the Israeli watchdog group Yesh Din reported that across more than 1,700 reports of religious or politically motivated hate crimes committed by Israelis against Palestinians in the West Bank over the past two decades, nearly 94% of them were closed without any indictment being filed, and only 3% resulted in a conviction.
Although there has been a documented rise in killings by Israeli settlers since October 2023, not a single one of those cases has resulted in an indictment, and only about a quarter have resulted in investigations by Israeli authorities.
Critics found the punishment of the reservist to be similarly lackluster and the latest example of settlers' immunity from justice.
"Israeli reserve soldier intentionally runs over Palestinian praying on the side of the road," said Rabbi David Mivasair, an activist with the Canadian group Independent Jewish Voices. "His punishment: his weapon was taken away, and he was suspended from the reserves... nothing more."
Breaking the Silence called the punishment "just a slap on the wrist" and "state-backed impunity for state-backed terror."
Others noted that nearly 8,000 Palestinians are currently being held in Israeli prisons indefinitely without trial, including in Israel's "administrative detention" system, which allows them to be confined based on secret evidence that they and their lawyers cannot see.
Israel has justified it as a measure to prevent terrorism. However, in January, the government banned Israeli settlers from being held under those same administrative detention orders, with Defense Minister Israel Katz saying the goal was “to convey a clear message of strengthening and encouraging the settlements."
Ihab Hassan, a Palestinian human rights activist, said of the ATV attack: "Had the victim been Israeli and the attacker Palestinian, the sentence would be life in prison. That is why it is called apartheid."
Following the attack, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) reiterated its calls for the US Congress to stop sending military aid to the Israeli government.
"This shocking and dehumanizing act is yet another example of the unchecked violence and abuse Palestinians face daily under Israel’s illegal occupation," the group said. "Brazenly running over a man while he prays is enabled by a system that grants near-total impunity to illegal settlers. The Trump administration must end its silence and take concrete steps to hold the Israeli government accountable for these ongoing human rights abuses.”
"The ONLY reason Israel gets away with this naked thievery is US military and political support," said one observer.
Israel's Cabinet on Sunday finalized approval of 19 new Jewish-only settler colonies in the illegally occupied West Bank, a move the apartheid state's far-right finance minister said was aimed at thwarting Palestinian statehood.
Cabinet ministers approved the legalization of the previously unauthorized settler outposts throughout the occupied Palestinian territory, bringing the total number of new settlements in recent years to 69.
The move will bring the overall total number of exclusively or overwhelmingly Jewish settlements—which are illegal under international law—to more than 200, up from around 140 just three years ago.
Included in the new approval are two former settlements—Kadim and Ganim—that were evacuated in compliance with the now effectively repealed 2005 Disengagement Law, under which Israel dismantled all of its colonies in the Gaza Strip and four in the West Bank.
"This is righting a historic injustice of expulsion from 20 years ago," Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich—who is a settler—said on Sunday. "We are putting the brakes on the rise of a Palestinian terror state."
"We will continue to develop, build, and settle the inherited land of our ancestors, with faith in the righteousness of our path," Smotrich added.
Following an earlier round of approval for the new settlements last week, Palestinian presidential spokesperson Nabil Abu Rudeineh said, “All Israeli settlement activity is illegal and constitutes a violation of international law and international legitimacy resolutions."
United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres earlier this month denounced Israel's "relentless" settlement expansion.
Such colonization, said Guterres, "continues to fuel tensions, impede access by Palestinians to their land, and threaten the viability of a fully independent, democratic, contiguous, and sovereign Palestinian state."
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli officials—some of whom, including Smotrich, deny the very existence of the Palestinian people—have vowed that such a state will not be established.
While Netanyahu—who is wanted by the International Criminal Court for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza—is under pressure from right-wing and far-right government officials, settlers, and others to annex all of the West Bank, US President Donald Trump recently said that "Israel would lose all of its support from the United States if that happened."
Some doubted Trump's threat, with Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN) executive director Sarah Leah Whitson reacting to the new settlements' approval by posting on X that "the ONLY reason Israel gets away with this naked thievery is US military and political support."
Israel seized and occupied the West Bank including East Jerusalem along with Gaza in 1967, ethnically cleansing around 300,000 Palestinians. Many of these forcibly displaced people were survivors of the Nakba, the Jewish terror and ethnic cleansing campaign that saw more than 750,000 Palestinians flee or be forced from Palestine during the foundation of the modern state of Israel.
Since 1967, Israel has steadily seized more and more Palestinian land in the West Bank while building and expanding colonies there. Settlement population has increased exponentially from around 1,500 colonists in 1970 to roughly 140,000 at the time of the Oslo Accords in 1993—under which Israel agreed to halt new settlement activity—to around 770,000 today.
Settlers often attack Palestinians and their property, including in deadly pogroms, in order to terrorize them into leaving so their land can be stolen. Israeli colonists have also attacked Israel Defense Forces soldiers they view as standing in the way of their expansion.
In July 2024, the International Court of Justice—where Israel is currently facing a genocide case related to the Gaza war—found the occupation of Palestine to be an illegal form of apartheid that must be ended as soon as possible. The ICJ also ruled that Israeli settler colonization of the West Bank amounts to annexation, also a crime under international law. Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention states that an “occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.”
As the world's attention focused on Gaza during the past two years, Israeli soldiers and settlers have killed at least 1,039 Palestinians—at least 225 of them children—in the West Bank. This year, at least 233 Palestinians, including at least 52 children, have been killed so far, according to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East.
On Saturday, Israeli occupation forces shot and killed two Palestinians in the northern West Bank, including a 16-year-old boy, Rayan Abu Muallah, who the Israel Defense Forces said was shot after he threw an object at its troops.
A leader at the human rights group called the proposal "a dangerous and dramatic step backwards and a product of ongoing impunity for Israel’s system of apartheid and its genocide in Gaza."
As Israel continues its "silent genocide" in the Gaza Strip one month into a supposed ceasefire with Hamas and Israeli settler attacks on Palestinians in the illegally occupied West Bank hit a record high, Amnesty International on Tuesday ripped the advancement of a death penalty bill championed by far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir.
Israel's 120-member Knesset "on Monday evening voted 39-16 in favor of the first reading of a controversial government-backed bill sponsored by Otzma Yehudit MK Limor Son Har-Melech," the Times of Israel reported. "Two other death penalty bills, sponsored by Likud MK Nissim Vaturi and Yisrael Beytenu MK Oded Forer, also passed their first readings 36-15 and 37-14."
Son Har-Melech's bill—which must pass two more readings to become law—would require courts to impose the death penalty on "a person who caused the death of an Israeli citizen deliberately or through indifference, from a motive of racism or hostility against a population, and with the aim of harming the state of Israel and the national revival of the Jewish people in its land."
Both Hamas—which Israel considers a terrorist organization—and the Palestine Liberation Organization slammed the bill, with Palestinian National Council Speaker Rawhi Fattouh calling it "a political, legal, and humanitarian crime," according to Reuters.
Amnesty International's senior director for research, advocacy, policy, and campaigns, Erika Guevara Rosas, said in a statement that "there is no sugarcoating this; a majority of 39 Israeli Knesset members approved in a first reading a bill that effectively mandates courts to impose the death penalty exclusively against Palestinians."
Amnesty opposes the death penalty under all circumstances and tracks such killings annually. The international human rights group has also forcefully spoken out against Israeli abuse of Palestinians, including the genocide in Gaza that has killed over 69,182 people as of Tuesday—the official tally from local health officials that experts warn is likely a significant undercount.
"The international community must exert maximum pressure on the Israeli government to immediately scrap this bill and dismantle all laws and practices that contribute to the system of apartheid against Palestinians."
“Knesset members should be working to abolish the death penalty, not broadening its application," Guevara Rosas argued. "The death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhuman, and degrading punishment, and an irreversible denial of the right to life. It should not be imposed in any circumstances, let alone weaponized as a blatantly discriminatory tool of state-sanctioned killing, domination, and oppression. Its mandatory imposition and retroactive application would violate clear prohibitions set out under international human rights law and standards on the use of this punishment."
"The shift towards requiring courts to impose the death penalty against Palestinians is a dangerous and dramatic step backwards and a product of ongoing impunity for Israel's system of apartheid and its genocide in Gaza," she continued. "It did not occur in a vacuum. It comes in the context of a drastic increase in the number of unlawful killings of Palestinians, including acts that amount to extrajudicial executions, over the last decade, and a horrific rise of deaths in custody of Palestinians since October 2023."
Guevara Rosas noted that "not only have such acts been greeted with near-total impunity but with legitimacy and support and, at times, glorification. It also comes amidst a climate of incitement to violence against Palestinians as evidenced by the surge in state-backed settler attacks in the occupied West Bank."
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu launched the devastating assault on Gaza in response to the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel on October 7, 2023. Since then, Israeli soldiers and settlers have also killed more than 1,000 Palestinians in the West Bank, according to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.
Netanyahu is now wanted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes and crimes against humanity, and Israel faces an ongoing genocide case at the International Court of Justice. The ICJ separately said last year that Israel's occupation of Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, is unlawful and must end; the Israeli government has shown no sign of accepting that.
The Amnesty campaigner said Tuesday that "it is additionally concerning that the law authorizes military courts to impose death sentences on civilians, that cannot be commuted, particularly given the unfair nature of the trials held by these courts, which have a conviction rate of over 99% for Palestinian defendants."
As CNN reported Monday:
The UN has previously condemned Israel's military courts in the occupied West Bank, saying that "Palestinians' right to due process guarantees have been violated" for decades, and denounced "the lack of fair trial in the occupied West Bank."
UN experts said last year that, "in the occupied West Bank, the functions of police, investigator, prosecutor, and judge are vested in the same hierarchical institution—the Israeli military."
Pointing to the hanging of Nazi official and Holocaust architect Adolf Eichmann, Guevara Rosas highlighted that "on paper, Israeli law has traditionally restricted the use of the death penalty for exceptional crimes, like genocide and crimes against humanity, and the last court-ordered execution was carried out in 1962."
"The bill's stipulation that courts should impose the death penalty on individuals convicted of nationally motivated murder with the intent of 'harming the state of Israel or the rebirth of the Jewish people' is yet another blatant manifestation of Israel's institutionalized discrimination against Palestinians, a key pillar of Israel’s apartheid system, in law and in practice," she asserted.
"The international community must exert maximum pressure on the Israeli government to immediately scrap this bill and dismantle all laws and practices that contribute to the system of apartheid against Palestinians," she added. "Israeli authorities must ensure Palestinian prisoners and detainees are treated in line with international law, including the prohibition against torture and other ill-treatment, and are provided with fair trial guarantees. They must also take concrete steps towards abolishing the death penalty for all crimes and all people."
"Let's call this what it is—white supremacy disguised as refugee policy," said the head of the Haitian Bridge Alliance.
After months of reporting, President Donald Trump's administration on Thursday officially announced that it is restricting the number of refugees for this fiscal year to 7,500, with most spots going to white South Africans—a policy swiftly denounced by human rights advocates and Democrats in Congress.
"This decision doesn't just lower the refugee admissions ceiling. It lowers our moral standing," said Krish O'Mara Vignarajah, president and CEO of Global Refuge. "For more than four decades, the US refugee program has been a lifeline for families fleeing war, persecution, and repression. At a time of crisis in countries ranging from Afghanistan to Venezuela to Sudan and beyond, concentrating the vast majority of admissions on one group undermines the program's purpose as well as its credibility."
The Trump administration's notice in the Federal Register doesn't mention any groups besides Afrikaners, white descendants of Europeans who subjected South Africa's majority Black population to a system of apartheid for decades. Multiple rich Trump backers—including Tesla CEO Elon Musk, venture capitalist David Sacks, and Palantir founder Peter Thiel—spent time in the country during those years.
The 7,500 cap, initially reported earlier this month, is a significant drop from both the 40,000 limit that was previously reported as under consideration by the Republican administration, and the more than 100,000 allowed under former Democratic President Joe Biden.
Four congressional Democrats who serve as ranking members on related committees—Reps. Jamie Raskin (Md.) and Pramila Jayapal (Wash.), along with Sens. Dick Durbin (Ill.) and Alex Padilla (Calif.)—issued a joint statement condemning the new cap, which they noted is "an astonishing 94% cut over last year and the lowest level in our nation's history."
"To add insult to injury, the administration is skipping over the tens of thousands of refugees who have been waiting in line for years in dire circumstances to come to the United States, and it is instead prioritizing a single privileged racial group—white South African Afrikaners—for these severely limited slots," they said. "This bizarre presidential determination is not only morally indefensible, it is illegal and invalid."
The four lawmakers continued:
The administration has brazenly ignored the statutory requirement to consult with the House and Senate Judiciary Committees before setting the annual refugee admissions ceiling. That process exists to ensure that decisions of such great consequence reflect our nation's values, our humanitarian commitments, and the rule of law, not the racial preferences or political whims of any one president.
The reason for this evasion is evident: The administration knows it cannot defend its egregious policy before Congress or the American people. While nearly 130,000 vetted, approved refugees—men, women, and children fleeing persecution and violence—wait in limbo after being promised a chance at safety, Donald Trump is looking to turn refugee admissions into another political giveaway for his pet projects and infatuations.
We reject this announcement as both unlawful and contrary to America's longstanding commitment to offer refuge to the persecuted. To twist our refugee policy into a partisan straightjacket is to betray both our legal obligations and our moral identity as a nation.
"Let's call this what it is—white supremacy disguised as refugee policy," declared Guerline Jozef, executive director of Haitian Bridge Alliance. "At a time when Black refugees from Haiti, Sudan, the Congo, and Cameroon are drowning at sea, languishing in detention, or being deported to death, the US government has decided to open its arms to those who already enjoy global privilege. This is not just immoral—it's anti-Blackness codified into federal policy."
This week alone, Hurricane Melissa killed more than 20 people in Haiti, and health officials said that the Rapid Support Forces, which are fighting against Sudan's government, killed over 1,500 people—including more than 460 systematically slaughtered at a maternity hospital—in the city of el-Fasher.
"We reject the idea that whiteness equates to worthiness," Jozef said of Trump's new refugee plan. She also took aim at the president's broader anti-immigrant policy, which has included deporting hundreds of people to El Salvador's so-called Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT).
"From Del Rio to Lampedusa, Black migrants and other immigrants of color have been criminalized, beaten, caged, and disappeared in CECOT camp in El Salvador—while their humanity is debated like a policy variable," she said. "This moment demands our humanity, our resistance, not silence."
Amy Fischer, Amnesty International USA's director for refugee and migrant rights, also tied Thursday's announcement to the broader agenda of the president—who, during his first term, faced global condemnation for policies including the forcible separation of families at the southern border.
"Setting this cap at such an absurdly low number and prioritizing white Afrikaners is a racist move that will turn the US's back on tens of thousands of people around the world who are fleeing persecution, violence, and human rights abuses," said Fischer. "Refugees have a human right to protection, and the international community—including the United States—has a responsibility to uphold that right."
"This announcement is yet another attack by the Trump administration on refugees and immigrants, showing disregard for international systems meant to protect human rights," she added. "The Trump administration must reverse course and ensure a fair, humane, and rights-based refugee admissions determination."
The announcement came just days after Trump's nominee to be ambassador to South Africa, far-right media critic Brent Bozell, faced intense criticism for refusing to say whether he would support or oppose repealing laws allowing Black Americans to vote during his Senate confirmation hearing.
While the president spreads false claims about a "genocide" against white people in South Africa, "more than 100,000 refugees from Afghanistan, Sudan, Ukraine, etc." are stranded in refugee camps.
Reports of the Trump administration's plan to slash refugee admissions to an even lower number than previously stated—with the majority of spots given to white South Africans descended from French and Dutch colonists who arrived in the country in the 17th century—represents "a moral failure and a dark hour for our country," according to one refugee policy expert.
As The New York Times reported late Friday, a presidential determination dated September 30 and signed by President Donald Trump showed that the president aims to cap refugee admissions at 7,500 in 2026—a significant decrease from the 40,000 that he previously discussed with officials, and from the 125,000 cap set by the Biden administration last year.
A White House official told the Times that the refugee limit would be final only after the administration consults with Congress, as it's required to do under the Refugee Act. They added that consultation with the House and Senate Judiciary committees will be possible only after Democrats and Republicans reach a deal to fund the government and end the shutdown that began October 1.
But advocates and Democrats have pointed out in recent days that the White House's deadline for consulting with lawmakers on refugee limits for next year was September 30, before the shutdown began.
As the deadline passed this week, Democratic leaders said that "in open defiance of the law, the Trump administration has failed to schedule the legally required consultation."
“Despite repeated outreach from Democratic and Republican committee staff, the Trump administration has completely discarded its legal obligation, leaving Congress in the dark and refugees in limbo," said Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee; Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), ranking member of the Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement; Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee; and Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), ranking member for the Subcommittee on Border Security and Immigration.
The president effectively suspended the US State Department's 40-year-old refugee resettlement program on his first day in office. The program requires refugees fleeing conflict, famine, and persecution to pass background checks and medical exams before entering the country, and often involves yearslong waits in refugee camps before they are resettled in the US.
"What began as a so-called ‘suspension’ has now stretched into an eight-month shutdown, betraying the nation’s promise as a refuge for the oppressed," said the Democrats. "Nearly 130,000 people facing persecution abroad who have already passed the rigorous vetting requirements of our refugee program have been abandoned by this administration, left to languish in refugee camps around the world after being given the promise of safety and a new life in America."
But for white South African farmers, also known as Afrikaners, Trump carved out an exception earlier this year that will reportedly be extended into 2026—allowing them "to skip the line and rigorous vetting as countless others are shut out of the US," said the Democrats.
Trump and his billionaire megadonor, South Africa-born Elon Musk, have helped spread false claims that the country's democratically elected Black government has systematically oppressed white Afrikaners, who enforced a racist apartheid system until 1994, and has allowed white farmers to be murdered—saying white people in the country face a "genocide."
White South Africans hold 20 times the wealth of Black people in the country despite making up just 7% of the population, and control the vast majority of land.
"Poor Black citizens of South Africa are far more likely to be victims of violent crime and murder than white people," wrote Joe Walsh at Current Affairs last year, noting that during one period, "when there were 49 murders on farms across the entire country, one of Cape Town’s predominantly Black townships called Khayelitsha recorded 179 murders, at a rate of approximately 116 per 100,000 people."
While Trump plans to open the door to thousands of white South Africans, said Danilo Zak, director of policy at Church World Service, "more than 100,000 refugees from Afghanistan, Sudan, Ukraine, etc., who have been through years of vetting, approved, [are] now left stranded."
With Trump's determination on refugee numbers "already signed and dated," said Zak, it's impossible for Trump to have completed an "appropriate consultation" with Congress to approve the abandonment of refugees across the world.
Trump previously set a record low number for refugee admissions during his first term, imposing a cap of 15,000 slots for resettlement.
The new plan was reported as the US Supreme Court ruled for the second time in four months in favor of allowing the president to revoke Temporary Protected Status for 300,000 Venezuelans, putting them at risk for deportation—despite an earlier ruling by a federal judge who found Trump had acted illegally when he moved to revoke TPS.
"This decision threatens not only the lives of hundreds of thousands of people who will lose legal status and face deportation,"
said Todd Schulte, president of FWD.us, "but also a basic sense of fairness."