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.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib addressing the House of Representatives on H.Res.326. (Photo: Screenshot)
Any review of the last decade in US foreign policy in Israel and Palestine has to begin with the negatives. Trump has only heightened the bias of the last administration, and made things worse by tearing up the Iran deal and giving a green light to annexation. Israel has continued human rights abuses with brutal impunity. If the decade began with Gaza massacres, those massacres got worse in 2014 and only more grisly after Trump's embassy announcement, and the weekly maimings on the Gaza border that have stirred people of conscience everywhere.
Yet there has been progress over this decade in ways that I only imagined ten years ago. The conflict has finally been politicized inside the United States. Mainstream politicians are talking about BDS and Zionism. A portion of the Democratic Party is firmly committed to Palestinian human rights, because the Democratic base is demanding it.
That seems to me the good news of the last ten years, a discursive change: This is not some faraway conflict over land between two small groups of people. This is an American issue. America has sustained the conflict by supporting one side, and that support is at last being questioned in a concerted, open way in Washington, and in Brooklyn and Chicago and Boston and Virginia too.
I admit I'm a positive person, and also a privileged one. As so many Americans are privileged, especially in comparison to peoples of the Middle East whom our country bombs, or supplies the weapons for those bombings. But this progress seems indisputable to me, and a foundation for more progress in the next decade. They don't call it a struggle for nothing.
Let me point to a few events before I go off and pop corks and pray for the end of the Trump era.
Lately the House of Representatives passed a resolution against annexation of the West Bank. Yes, a lame resolution, a step back from how liberal Zionists began the decade. Yet it is progress for two big reasons. One, the resolution seems to have helped persuade some rightwing Israeli politicians to stop talking about annexation. This is an important lesson. Israeli leaders respond to the hint of US official censure. That's why BDS is so important. Secondly, a handful of elected officials on the left didn't vote for the measure, and cited the meaninglessness of the language about settlements. That's a real bloc. It didn't exist even two years ago. It's growing and led by a formidable politician, Rashida Tlaib.
BDS has made incredible strides in the last decade. It is debated in legislatures and the White House, too, and progressive students are all for it. Many of the kids speak out against Zionism as a form of racial supremacism. These shifts were unimaginable to me when a decade or so back a Palestinian friend shocked me by yelling on Broadway, My goal in life is to end Zionism. Hey, lots of folks say this now. Yes we are losing in official spaces. So what! The opposition to BDS in American politics and the rise of organizations here to fight BDS is great progress imho because it just goes to show, again, the battle is where it should be. We're stripping away the idea that this is just a conflict far away. No it is American as apple pie. A dozen years after Jimmy Carter got pounded by the liberal press and the entire Dem Party for saying "apartheid," Rep. Betty McCollum says so openly as she champions a human rights bill for Palestinian children under detention that has many cosponsors.
The opposition to BDS and Palestinian rights inside the Democratic Party has more addresses than ever. New organizations spring up all the time. Democratic Majority 4 Israel has Anne Lewis and AIPAC types at the helm. Meantime Alan Dershowitz says that he is going to stay a Democrat so as to keep the party on Israel's side. Why is this progress? Again, it shows that the battle is joined; and we are going to win. The idea that the Democratic Party would even tolerate a pantaloon like Alan Dershowitz who is disinvited from the 92d Street Y is a sign of the power of the lobby and the importance of fighting it.
The New York Times is four square against Palestinian human rights. It's declared itself as never before. Opinion editor Bari Weiss is now the lead spokesperson for the centrist Israel lobby. Why is this progress? Again, it is clarifying. The NYT brass are in a turret of the establishment. And they're besieged. We will see the Times in turmoil over this issue in the next decade. Jeffrey Goldberg's own quietism on the issue - I don't write about this anymore, he said, while confessing the most unreconstructed and conservative views on the question - is a sign that intersectionality (which Dershowitz says is just antisemitism masked) has incredible power. Jeffrey Goldberg's job is to be a pillar of the liberal discourse. So that means he has to shut up about Israel. And let's acknowledge that the person who has replaced him, Bari Weiss (who says anti-Zionist Jews are like Jews who reversed circumcision to fit in with the cool crowed) is a gift to the other side, much as Benjamin Netanyahu is.
Netanyahu is such an unpleasant figure that he has advanced progress in countless ways, even as he has persecuted Palestinians in ways we didn't imagine possible (Nation State Law). He has helped more than anyone to politicize the issue in the United States. I think Israeli leadership is going to get a lot more subtle in the next decade. But the damage is done. The parties are finally divided here.
Happy new year. Happy 2020's.
Donald Trump’s attacks on democracy, justice, and a free press are escalating — putting everything we stand for at risk. We believe a better world is possible, but we can’t get there without your support. Common Dreams stands apart. We answer only to you — our readers, activists, and changemakers — not to billionaires or corporations. Our independence allows us to cover the vital stories that others won’t, spotlighting movements for peace, equality, and human rights. Right now, our work faces unprecedented challenges. Misinformation is spreading, journalists are under attack, and financial pressures are mounting. As a reader-supported, nonprofit newsroom, your support is crucial to keep this journalism alive. Whatever you can give — $10, $25, or $100 — helps us stay strong and responsive when the world needs us most. Together, we’ll continue to build the independent, courageous journalism our movement relies on. Thank you for being part of this community. |
Any review of the last decade in US foreign policy in Israel and Palestine has to begin with the negatives. Trump has only heightened the bias of the last administration, and made things worse by tearing up the Iran deal and giving a green light to annexation. Israel has continued human rights abuses with brutal impunity. If the decade began with Gaza massacres, those massacres got worse in 2014 and only more grisly after Trump's embassy announcement, and the weekly maimings on the Gaza border that have stirred people of conscience everywhere.
Yet there has been progress over this decade in ways that I only imagined ten years ago. The conflict has finally been politicized inside the United States. Mainstream politicians are talking about BDS and Zionism. A portion of the Democratic Party is firmly committed to Palestinian human rights, because the Democratic base is demanding it.
That seems to me the good news of the last ten years, a discursive change: This is not some faraway conflict over land between two small groups of people. This is an American issue. America has sustained the conflict by supporting one side, and that support is at last being questioned in a concerted, open way in Washington, and in Brooklyn and Chicago and Boston and Virginia too.
I admit I'm a positive person, and also a privileged one. As so many Americans are privileged, especially in comparison to peoples of the Middle East whom our country bombs, or supplies the weapons for those bombings. But this progress seems indisputable to me, and a foundation for more progress in the next decade. They don't call it a struggle for nothing.
Let me point to a few events before I go off and pop corks and pray for the end of the Trump era.
Lately the House of Representatives passed a resolution against annexation of the West Bank. Yes, a lame resolution, a step back from how liberal Zionists began the decade. Yet it is progress for two big reasons. One, the resolution seems to have helped persuade some rightwing Israeli politicians to stop talking about annexation. This is an important lesson. Israeli leaders respond to the hint of US official censure. That's why BDS is so important. Secondly, a handful of elected officials on the left didn't vote for the measure, and cited the meaninglessness of the language about settlements. That's a real bloc. It didn't exist even two years ago. It's growing and led by a formidable politician, Rashida Tlaib.
BDS has made incredible strides in the last decade. It is debated in legislatures and the White House, too, and progressive students are all for it. Many of the kids speak out against Zionism as a form of racial supremacism. These shifts were unimaginable to me when a decade or so back a Palestinian friend shocked me by yelling on Broadway, My goal in life is to end Zionism. Hey, lots of folks say this now. Yes we are losing in official spaces. So what! The opposition to BDS in American politics and the rise of organizations here to fight BDS is great progress imho because it just goes to show, again, the battle is where it should be. We're stripping away the idea that this is just a conflict far away. No it is American as apple pie. A dozen years after Jimmy Carter got pounded by the liberal press and the entire Dem Party for saying "apartheid," Rep. Betty McCollum says so openly as she champions a human rights bill for Palestinian children under detention that has many cosponsors.
The opposition to BDS and Palestinian rights inside the Democratic Party has more addresses than ever. New organizations spring up all the time. Democratic Majority 4 Israel has Anne Lewis and AIPAC types at the helm. Meantime Alan Dershowitz says that he is going to stay a Democrat so as to keep the party on Israel's side. Why is this progress? Again, it shows that the battle is joined; and we are going to win. The idea that the Democratic Party would even tolerate a pantaloon like Alan Dershowitz who is disinvited from the 92d Street Y is a sign of the power of the lobby and the importance of fighting it.
The New York Times is four square against Palestinian human rights. It's declared itself as never before. Opinion editor Bari Weiss is now the lead spokesperson for the centrist Israel lobby. Why is this progress? Again, it is clarifying. The NYT brass are in a turret of the establishment. And they're besieged. We will see the Times in turmoil over this issue in the next decade. Jeffrey Goldberg's own quietism on the issue - I don't write about this anymore, he said, while confessing the most unreconstructed and conservative views on the question - is a sign that intersectionality (which Dershowitz says is just antisemitism masked) has incredible power. Jeffrey Goldberg's job is to be a pillar of the liberal discourse. So that means he has to shut up about Israel. And let's acknowledge that the person who has replaced him, Bari Weiss (who says anti-Zionist Jews are like Jews who reversed circumcision to fit in with the cool crowed) is a gift to the other side, much as Benjamin Netanyahu is.
Netanyahu is such an unpleasant figure that he has advanced progress in countless ways, even as he has persecuted Palestinians in ways we didn't imagine possible (Nation State Law). He has helped more than anyone to politicize the issue in the United States. I think Israeli leadership is going to get a lot more subtle in the next decade. But the damage is done. The parties are finally divided here.
Happy new year. Happy 2020's.
Any review of the last decade in US foreign policy in Israel and Palestine has to begin with the negatives. Trump has only heightened the bias of the last administration, and made things worse by tearing up the Iran deal and giving a green light to annexation. Israel has continued human rights abuses with brutal impunity. If the decade began with Gaza massacres, those massacres got worse in 2014 and only more grisly after Trump's embassy announcement, and the weekly maimings on the Gaza border that have stirred people of conscience everywhere.
Yet there has been progress over this decade in ways that I only imagined ten years ago. The conflict has finally been politicized inside the United States. Mainstream politicians are talking about BDS and Zionism. A portion of the Democratic Party is firmly committed to Palestinian human rights, because the Democratic base is demanding it.
That seems to me the good news of the last ten years, a discursive change: This is not some faraway conflict over land between two small groups of people. This is an American issue. America has sustained the conflict by supporting one side, and that support is at last being questioned in a concerted, open way in Washington, and in Brooklyn and Chicago and Boston and Virginia too.
I admit I'm a positive person, and also a privileged one. As so many Americans are privileged, especially in comparison to peoples of the Middle East whom our country bombs, or supplies the weapons for those bombings. But this progress seems indisputable to me, and a foundation for more progress in the next decade. They don't call it a struggle for nothing.
Let me point to a few events before I go off and pop corks and pray for the end of the Trump era.
Lately the House of Representatives passed a resolution against annexation of the West Bank. Yes, a lame resolution, a step back from how liberal Zionists began the decade. Yet it is progress for two big reasons. One, the resolution seems to have helped persuade some rightwing Israeli politicians to stop talking about annexation. This is an important lesson. Israeli leaders respond to the hint of US official censure. That's why BDS is so important. Secondly, a handful of elected officials on the left didn't vote for the measure, and cited the meaninglessness of the language about settlements. That's a real bloc. It didn't exist even two years ago. It's growing and led by a formidable politician, Rashida Tlaib.
BDS has made incredible strides in the last decade. It is debated in legislatures and the White House, too, and progressive students are all for it. Many of the kids speak out against Zionism as a form of racial supremacism. These shifts were unimaginable to me when a decade or so back a Palestinian friend shocked me by yelling on Broadway, My goal in life is to end Zionism. Hey, lots of folks say this now. Yes we are losing in official spaces. So what! The opposition to BDS in American politics and the rise of organizations here to fight BDS is great progress imho because it just goes to show, again, the battle is where it should be. We're stripping away the idea that this is just a conflict far away. No it is American as apple pie. A dozen years after Jimmy Carter got pounded by the liberal press and the entire Dem Party for saying "apartheid," Rep. Betty McCollum says so openly as she champions a human rights bill for Palestinian children under detention that has many cosponsors.
The opposition to BDS and Palestinian rights inside the Democratic Party has more addresses than ever. New organizations spring up all the time. Democratic Majority 4 Israel has Anne Lewis and AIPAC types at the helm. Meantime Alan Dershowitz says that he is going to stay a Democrat so as to keep the party on Israel's side. Why is this progress? Again, it shows that the battle is joined; and we are going to win. The idea that the Democratic Party would even tolerate a pantaloon like Alan Dershowitz who is disinvited from the 92d Street Y is a sign of the power of the lobby and the importance of fighting it.
The New York Times is four square against Palestinian human rights. It's declared itself as never before. Opinion editor Bari Weiss is now the lead spokesperson for the centrist Israel lobby. Why is this progress? Again, it is clarifying. The NYT brass are in a turret of the establishment. And they're besieged. We will see the Times in turmoil over this issue in the next decade. Jeffrey Goldberg's own quietism on the issue - I don't write about this anymore, he said, while confessing the most unreconstructed and conservative views on the question - is a sign that intersectionality (which Dershowitz says is just antisemitism masked) has incredible power. Jeffrey Goldberg's job is to be a pillar of the liberal discourse. So that means he has to shut up about Israel. And let's acknowledge that the person who has replaced him, Bari Weiss (who says anti-Zionist Jews are like Jews who reversed circumcision to fit in with the cool crowed) is a gift to the other side, much as Benjamin Netanyahu is.
Netanyahu is such an unpleasant figure that he has advanced progress in countless ways, even as he has persecuted Palestinians in ways we didn't imagine possible (Nation State Law). He has helped more than anyone to politicize the issue in the United States. I think Israeli leadership is going to get a lot more subtle in the next decade. But the damage is done. The parties are finally divided here.
Happy new year. Happy 2020's.
"President Trump's deal to take a $400 million luxury jet from a foreign government deserves full public scrutiny—not a stiff-arm from the Department of Justice," said the head of one watchdog group.
With preparations to refit a Qatari jet to be used as Air Force One "underway," a press freedom group sued the U.S. Department of Justice in federal court on Monday for failing to release the DOJ memorandum about the legality of President Donald Trump accepting the $400 million "flying palace."
The Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF), represented by nonpartisan watchdog American Oversight, filed the lawsuit seeking the memo, which was reportedly approved by the Office of Legal Counsel and signed by U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, who previously lobbied on behalf of the Qatari government.
FPF had submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the memo on May 15, and the DOJ told the group that fulfilling it would take over 600 days.
"How many flights could Trump have taken on his new plane in the same amount of time it would have taken the DOJ to release this one document?"
"It shouldn't take 620 days to release a single, time-sensitive document," said Lauren Harper, FPF's Daniel Ellsberg chair on government secrecy, in a Monday statement. "How many flights could Trump have taken on his new plane in the same amount of time it would have taken the DOJ to release this one document?"
The complaint—filed in the District of Columbia—notes that the airplane is set to be donated to Trump's private presidential library foundation after his second term. Harper said that "the government's inability to administer FOIA makes it too easy for agencies to keep secrets, and nonexistent disclosure rules around donations to presidential libraries provide easy cover for bad actors and potential corruption."
It's not just FPF sounding the alarm about the aircraft. The complaint points out that "a number of stakeholders, including ethics experts and several GOP lawmakers, have questioned the propriety and legality of the move, including whether acceptance of the plane would violate the U.S. Constitution's foreign emoluments clause... which prohibits a president from receiving gifts or benefits from foreign governments without the consent of Congress."
Some opponents of the "comically corrupt" so-called gift stressed that it came after the Trump Organization, the Saudi partner DarGlobal, and a company owned by the Qatari government reached a deal to build a luxury golf resort in Qatar.
Despite some initial GOP criticism of the president taking the aircraft, just hours after the Trump administration formally accepted the jet in May, U.S. Senate Republicans thwarted an attempt by Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) to pass by unanimous consent legislation intended to prevent a foreign plane from serving as Air Force One.
"Although President Trump characterized the deal as a smart business decision, remarking that it would be 'stupid' not to accept 'a free, very expensive airplane,' experts have noted that it will be costly to retrofit the jet for use as Air Force One, with estimatesranging from less than $400 million to more than $1 billion," the complaint states.
As The New York Times reported Sunday:
Officially, and conveniently, the price tag has been classified. But even by Washington standards, where "black budgets" are often used as an excuse to avoid revealing the cost of outdated spy satellites and lavish end-of-year parties, the techniques being used to hide the cost of Mr. Trump's pet project are inventive.
Which may explain why no one wants to discuss a mysterious, $934 million transfer of funds from one of the Pentagon's most over-budget, out-of-control projects—the modernization of America's aging, ground-based nuclear missiles...
Air Force officials privately concede that they are paying for renovations of the Qatari Air Force One with the transfer from another the massively-over-budget, behind-schedule program, called the Sentinel.
Preparations to refit the plane "are underway, and floor plans or schematics have been seen by senior U.S. officials," according to Monday reporting by CBS News. One unnamed budget official who spoke to the outlet also "believes the money to pay for upgrades will come from the Sentinel program."
Chioma Chukwu, executive director of American Oversight, said Monday that "President Trump's deal to take a $400 million luxury jet from a foreign government deserves full public scrutiny—not a stiff-arm from the Department of Justice."
"This is precisely the kind of corrupt arrangement that public records laws are designed to expose," Chukwu added. "The DOJ cannot sit on its hands and expect the American people to wait years for the truth while serious questions about corruption, self-dealing, and foreign influence go unanswered."
The complaint highlights that "Bondi's decision not to recuse herself from this matter, despite her links to the Qatari government, adds to a growing body of questionable ethical practices that have arisen during her short tenure as attorney general."
It also emphasizes that "the Qatari jet is just one in a list of current and prospective extravagant donations to President Trump's presidential library foundation that has raised significant questions about the use of private foundation donations to improperly influence government policy."
"Notably, ABC News and Paramount each agreed to resolve cases President Trump filed against the media entities by paying multimillion-dollar settlements to the Trump presidential library foundation, with Paramount's $16 million agreed payout coming at the same time it sought government approval for a planned merger with Skydance," the filing details. "On July 24, the Federal Communications Commission announced its approval of the $8 billion merger."
"The Trump regime just handed Christian nationalists a loaded weapon: your federal workplace," said one critic.
The Trump administration issued a memo Monday allowing federal employees to proselytize in the workplace, a move welcomed by many conservatives but denounced by proponents of the separation of church and state.
The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) memo "provides clear guidance to ensure federal employees may express their religious beliefs through prayer, personal items, group gatherings, and conversations without fear of discrimination or retaliation."
"Employees must be allowed to engage in private religious expression in work areas to the same extent that they may engage in nonreligious private expression," the memo states.
Federal workers "should be permitted to display and use items used for religious purposes or icons of a religiously significant nature, including but not limited to bibles, artwork, jewelry, posters displaying religious messages, and other indicia of religion (such as crosses, crucifixes, and mezuzahs) on their desks, on their person, and in their assigned workspaces," the document continues.
"Employees may engage in conversations regarding religious topics with fellow employees, including attempting to persuade others of the correctness of their own religious views, provided that such efforts are not harassing in nature," OPM said—without elaborating on what constitutes harassment.
"These shocking changes essentially permit workplace evangelizing."
"Employees may also encourage their coworkers to participate in religious expressions of faith, such as prayer, to the same extent that they would be permitted to encourage coworkers participate in other personal activities," the memo adds.
OPM Director Scott Kupor said in a statement that "federal employees should never have to choose between their faith and their career."
"This guidance ensures the federal workplace is not just compliant with the law but welcoming to Americans of all faiths," Kupor added. "Under President [Donald] Trump's leadership, we are restoring constitutional freedoms and making government a place where people of faith are respected, not sidelined."
The OPM memo was widely applauded by conservative social media users—although some were dismayed that the new rules also apply to Muslims.
Critics, however, blasted what the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) called "a gift to evangelicals and the myth of 'anti-Christian bias.'"
FFRF co-president Laurie Gaylor said that "these shocking changes essentially permit workplace evangelizing, but worse still, allow supervisors to evangelize underlings and federal workers to proselytize the public they serve."
"This is the implementation of Christian nationalism in our federal government," Gaylor added.
The Secular Coalition for America denounced the memo as "another effort to grant privileges to certain religions while ignoring nonreligious people's rights."
Monday's memo follows another issued by Kupor on July 16 that encouraged federal agencies to take a "generous approach" to evaluating government employees who request telework and other flexibilities due to their religious beliefs.
The OPM directives follow the U.S. Supreme Court's 2023 Groff v. DeJoy ruling, in which the court's right-wing majority declared that Article VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 "requires an employer that denies a religious accommodation to show that the burden of granting an accommodation would result in substantial increased costs in relation to the conduct of its particular business."
The new memo also comes on the heels of three religion-based executive orders issued by Trump during his second term. One order established a White House Faith Office tasked with ensuring religious organizations have a voice in the federal government. Another seeks to "eradicate" what Trump claims is the "anti-Christian weaponization of government." Yet another created a Religious Liberty Commission meant to promote and protect religious freedom.
Awda Hathaleen was described as "a teacher and an activist who struggled courageously for his people."
A Palestinian peace activist has been fatally shot by a notorious Israeli settler who was once the subject of sanctions that were lifted this year by U.S. President Donald Trump.
In June, Awda Hathaleen—an English teacher, activist, and former soccer player from the occupied West Bank—was detained alongside his cousin Eid at the airport in San Francisco, where they were about to embark on an interfaith speaking tour organized by the California-based Kehilla Community Synagogue.
Ben Linder, co-chair of the Silicon Valley chapter of J Street and the organizer of Eid and Awda's first scheduled speaking engagement told Middle East Eye that he'd known the two cousins for 10 years, describing them as "true nonviolent peace activists" who "came here on an interfaith peace-promoting mission."
Without explanation from U.S. authorities, they were deported and returned to their village of Umm al-Khair in the South Hebron Hills.
On Monday afternoon, the activist group Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) reported on social media that Awda Hathaleen had been killed after Israeli settlers attacked his village and that a relative of his was also severely injured:
Activists working with Awda report that Israeli settlers invaded Umm al-Kheir with a bulldozer to destroy what little remains of the Palestinian village. As Awda and his family tried to defend their homes and land, a settler opened fire—both aiming directly and shooting indiscriminately. Awda was shot in the chest and later died from his injuries after being taken by an Israeli ambulance. His death was the result of brutal settler violence.
Later, when Awda's relative Ahmad al-Hathaleen tried to block the bulldozer, the settler driving it ran him over. Ahmad is now being treated in a nearby hospital.
The Israeli newspaper Haaretz later confirmed these events, adding:
An eyewitness reported that the entry of Israeli settlers into Palestinian private lands, riding an excavator, caused a commotion, and the vehicle subsequently struck a resident named Ahmad Hathaleen. "People lost their minds, and the children threw stones," he said.
A friend and fellow activist, Mohammad Hureini, posted the video of the attack online. The settler who fired the gun has been identified by Haaretz as Yinon Levi, who has previously been hit—along with other settlers—with sanctions by former U.S. President Joe Biden's administration and other governments over his past harassment of Palestinians in the West Bank.
As the Biden State Department wrote at the time:
Levi consistently leads a group of settlers who attack Palestinians, set fire to their fields, destroy their property, and threaten them with further harm if they do not leave their homes.
The sanctions were later lifted by U.S. President Donald Trump. However, they'd already been rendered virtually ineffective after the intervention of far-right Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who has expressed a desire to ethnically cleanse Gaza and the West Bank of Palestinians to make way for Jewish settlements.
Brooklyn-based journalist Jasper Nathaniel, who has covered other cases of settler violence for Zeteo described Levi as "a known terrorist who's been protected by the Israeli government for years," adding that, "One of the only good things Biden did for Palestine was sanction him."
Violence by Israeli settlers in the illegally-occupied West Bank has risen sharply since the October 7, 2023 attack by Hamas and the subsequent 21-month military campaign by Israel in Gaza.
Nearly 1,000 Palestinians have been killed by settlers during that time. More than 6,400 have been forcibly displaced following the demolition of their homes by Israel, according to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA).
The killing of Awda Hathaleen—who had a wife and three young children—has been met with outpourings of grief and anger from his fellow peace activists in the United States, Israel, and Palestine.
Issa Amro, the Hebron-based co-founder of the grassroots group Youth Against Settlements, described Awda as a "beloved hero."
"Awda stood with dignity and courage against oppression," Amro said. "His loss is a deep wound to our hearts and our struggle for justice."
Israeli journalist and filmmaker Yuval Abraham, who last year directed the Oscar-winning documentary No Other Land about the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, described Awda Hathaleen as "a remarkable activist," and thanked him for helping his team shoot the film in Masafer Yatta.
"To know Awda Hathaleen is to love him," said the post from JVP announcing his death. "Awda has always been a pillar amongst his family, his village and the wider international community of activists who had the pleasure to meet Awda."
Israeli-American peace activist Mattan Berner-Kadish wrote: "May his memory be a revolution. I will remember him smiling, laughing, dreaming of a better future for his children. We must make it so."