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 Iraqi city of Mosul was largely destroyed during fighting between U.S.-led coalition forces and Islamic State militants in 2017. Thousands of civilians were killed or wounded, many of them by ferocious U.S. and allied aerial bombing. (Photo: Ahmad al-Rubaye/AFP via Getty Images)
In 1965, the Lyndon B. Johnson administration backed a military coup by a right-wing Indonesian general named Suharto -- who like many Javanese used only his given name -- that overthrew Sukarno, hero of his country's freedom struggle against Dutch colonialism and its first post-independence president. Sukarno, an ardent anti-imperialist, had made the fatal errors of protecting Indonesian communists and cozying up to the Soviet Union and China, and was marked for elimination. In service of this, the US Embassy in Jakarta gave Suharto's forces "shooting lists" of known and suspected communists; US officials later admitted checking off names of victims who had been killed or captured.
"It was a really big help to the army," explained former diplomat Robert Martens. "They probably killed a lot of people, and I probably have a lot of blood on my hands, but that's not all bad." Suharto consolidated his power and, with US support, ruled Indonesia by 1967. More than half a million Indonesians died in what the New York Times called "one of the most savage mass slayings of modern political history.
Of Hands and Blood
Fast-forward 55 years to the present, when amid the crescendoing drumbeat of war, this time against Iran, one phrase seems to dominate the rhetoric of warmongering politicians and pundits alike: Qasem Soleimani, the top Iranian general assassinated along with numerous associates in a US drone strike in Baghdad on Thursday, "has the blood of Americans on his hands," we're told. And yes, it's true that hundreds of US troops in Iraq were killed or wounded by Iran-backed fighters. It's also true that those troops were foreign invaders engaged in an illegal war of regime change, occupation and exploitation, and that Soleimani is seen by many as a hero who courageously -- and successfully -- defended his Shia brethren in Iraq and elsewhere from imperialist domination.
In the post-World War II era, (U.S.) has invaded or attacked, in more or less chronological order, North Korea, Puerto Rico, Lebanon, Cuba, North Vietnam, Laos, the Dominican Republic, Cambodia, Libya, Grenada, Nicaragua, Panama, Iraq, Bosnia, Somalia, Haiti, Afghanistan, Sudan, Serbia, Yemen, Pakistan and Syria. That's 22 countries.
We're not here today to debate whether Soleimani was a hero or a villain, for it is possible to be both, to different people. Nor are we here to remind that Iran is a country -- which despite being surrounded by hostile US and allied forces, and despite a long history of sometimes extreme US aggression and meddling -- that hasn't started a foreign war since the early 1700s. Or that the immediate genesis of the current crisis is Trump's unilateral withdrawal from the nuclear deal with which everyone agrees Iran was compliant, a move which many warned could precipitate fallout of a sort very much like what's happening now. Or, for that matter, how President Donald Trump's act of war will further inflame the world's most combustible region.
No, we're here today to discuss bloody hands. America's bloody hands, to be precise. Logic would dictate that the US presumption that having American blood on one's hands marks one for what Trump called "termination" would apply equally to those touched by America's bloody hands, and the US has exponentially more blood on its hands than Iran. In the post-World War II era, it has invaded or attacked, in more or less chronological order, North Korea, Puerto Rico, Lebanon, Cuba, North Vietnam, Laos, the Dominican Republic, Cambodia, Libya, Grenada, Nicaragua, Panama, Iraq, Bosnia, Somalia, Haiti, Afghanistan, Sudan, Serbia, Yemen, Pakistan and Syria. That's 22 countries, some of them subjected to two or more US attacks or invasions.
'Life Is Cheap'
While it is impossible to tell precisely how many people have been killed by a country that infamously "doesn't do body counts," contemporary accounts and historical analyses paint a very bloody picture. After the Korean War, US strategic air commander Gen. Curtis "Bombs Away" LeMay acknowledged that "we killed off 20 percent of the population" of North Korea. That's nearly 1.9 million men, women and children. In comparison, the Nazis killed 17 percent of Poland's pre-World War II population. At least half a million--and perhaps as many as a million--North Korean and Chinese troops also died.
At least one million North Vietnamese soldiers, civilians and allied Viet Cong fighters, along with at least 150,000 Cambodians and a similar number of Laotians were killed by US and allied bombs and bullets during the Vietnam War. Hundreds of millions of bombs were dropped on the peasants of Laos, the most heavily-bombed nation in history, and more than 20,000 Laotians, many of them children, have been killed by unexploded ordnance since the bombing ended in 1973. President Richard Nixon's secret bombing of Cambodia, along with a US-backed coup, ushered in the horrific era of Khmer Rouge rule and an ensuing genocide that claimed another 1.5 to 2 million lives.
Such bloodletting was a secondary concern for Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, who in November 1975 told Thailand's foreign minister to inform the Khmer Rouge that the United States would not oppose its rule. "We will be friends with them," Kissinger said. "They are murderous thugs, but we won't let that stand in our way." A month later, President Gerald Ford and Kissinger were in Jakarta green-lighting another genocidal campaign, this time in East Timor. By the time it was over, 200,000 of the territory's 700,000 people were dead.
"The Oriental doesn't put the same high price on life as does a Westerner," Gen. William C. Westmoreland, commander of US forces in Vietnam, explained in 1974. "Life is cheap in the Orient."
Although not quite Oriental, life was also cheap in Iraq, where US forces killed an estimated 200,000 Iraqi troops and civilians, at a cost of only 292 coalition troops, during the 1991 Gulf War. The United Nations later acknowledged that subsequent sanctions were to blame for the premature deaths of more than half a million Iraqi children. When journalist Lesley Stahl noted that this was "more children than died in Hiroshima," then-US ambassador to the United Nations Madeleine Albright replied, "we think the price is worth it."
The price was even higher for Iraqis the second time around, with a 2015 study concluding at least 1.2 million, and possibly more than 2 million, civilians and combatants in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan have died in the ongoing US-led war on terrorism, now in its 19th year. Thousands more people have died in Syria, Somalia, Yemen and Libya.
A World of Hurt
Those were just the big wars. Thousands of men, women and children have been killed by US bombs and bullets in Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Grenada, Panama and Yugoslavia. Proxy forces have killed at least hundreds of thousands more on every inhabited continent save Australia. In Iran, the US has overthrown the most popular government Iranians have ever known, supported a brutal monarch and trained his forces in torture and repression, shot down a civilian airliner killing hundreds of civilians and trained terrorists who have carried out deadly attacks against Americans and Iranians alike.
Perhaps this sanguinary legacy is why, in survey after international survey, the United States is perennially voted the world's greatest threat to peace in most of the world's nations. After Soleimani's assassination, Trump boasted that "his bloody rampage is forever gone." If only the same were true of Trump, who continues to fulfill his campaign promise to "bomb the shit out of" Islamist militants and "take out their families" as the US wages war in seven countries and kills thousands of civilians and combatants alike. So much more so than Iran's, America's hands are drenched in blood.
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. |
In 1965, the Lyndon B. Johnson administration backed a military coup by a right-wing Indonesian general named Suharto -- who like many Javanese used only his given name -- that overthrew Sukarno, hero of his country's freedom struggle against Dutch colonialism and its first post-independence president. Sukarno, an ardent anti-imperialist, had made the fatal errors of protecting Indonesian communists and cozying up to the Soviet Union and China, and was marked for elimination. In service of this, the US Embassy in Jakarta gave Suharto's forces "shooting lists" of known and suspected communists; US officials later admitted checking off names of victims who had been killed or captured.
"It was a really big help to the army," explained former diplomat Robert Martens. "They probably killed a lot of people, and I probably have a lot of blood on my hands, but that's not all bad." Suharto consolidated his power and, with US support, ruled Indonesia by 1967. More than half a million Indonesians died in what the New York Times called "one of the most savage mass slayings of modern political history.
Of Hands and Blood
Fast-forward 55 years to the present, when amid the crescendoing drumbeat of war, this time against Iran, one phrase seems to dominate the rhetoric of warmongering politicians and pundits alike: Qasem Soleimani, the top Iranian general assassinated along with numerous associates in a US drone strike in Baghdad on Thursday, "has the blood of Americans on his hands," we're told. And yes, it's true that hundreds of US troops in Iraq were killed or wounded by Iran-backed fighters. It's also true that those troops were foreign invaders engaged in an illegal war of regime change, occupation and exploitation, and that Soleimani is seen by many as a hero who courageously -- and successfully -- defended his Shia brethren in Iraq and elsewhere from imperialist domination.
In the post-World War II era, (U.S.) has invaded or attacked, in more or less chronological order, North Korea, Puerto Rico, Lebanon, Cuba, North Vietnam, Laos, the Dominican Republic, Cambodia, Libya, Grenada, Nicaragua, Panama, Iraq, Bosnia, Somalia, Haiti, Afghanistan, Sudan, Serbia, Yemen, Pakistan and Syria. That's 22 countries.
We're not here today to debate whether Soleimani was a hero or a villain, for it is possible to be both, to different people. Nor are we here to remind that Iran is a country -- which despite being surrounded by hostile US and allied forces, and despite a long history of sometimes extreme US aggression and meddling -- that hasn't started a foreign war since the early 1700s. Or that the immediate genesis of the current crisis is Trump's unilateral withdrawal from the nuclear deal with which everyone agrees Iran was compliant, a move which many warned could precipitate fallout of a sort very much like what's happening now. Or, for that matter, how President Donald Trump's act of war will further inflame the world's most combustible region.
No, we're here today to discuss bloody hands. America's bloody hands, to be precise. Logic would dictate that the US presumption that having American blood on one's hands marks one for what Trump called "termination" would apply equally to those touched by America's bloody hands, and the US has exponentially more blood on its hands than Iran. In the post-World War II era, it has invaded or attacked, in more or less chronological order, North Korea, Puerto Rico, Lebanon, Cuba, North Vietnam, Laos, the Dominican Republic, Cambodia, Libya, Grenada, Nicaragua, Panama, Iraq, Bosnia, Somalia, Haiti, Afghanistan, Sudan, Serbia, Yemen, Pakistan and Syria. That's 22 countries, some of them subjected to two or more US attacks or invasions.
'Life Is Cheap'
While it is impossible to tell precisely how many people have been killed by a country that infamously "doesn't do body counts," contemporary accounts and historical analyses paint a very bloody picture. After the Korean War, US strategic air commander Gen. Curtis "Bombs Away" LeMay acknowledged that "we killed off 20 percent of the population" of North Korea. That's nearly 1.9 million men, women and children. In comparison, the Nazis killed 17 percent of Poland's pre-World War II population. At least half a million--and perhaps as many as a million--North Korean and Chinese troops also died.
At least one million North Vietnamese soldiers, civilians and allied Viet Cong fighters, along with at least 150,000 Cambodians and a similar number of Laotians were killed by US and allied bombs and bullets during the Vietnam War. Hundreds of millions of bombs were dropped on the peasants of Laos, the most heavily-bombed nation in history, and more than 20,000 Laotians, many of them children, have been killed by unexploded ordnance since the bombing ended in 1973. President Richard Nixon's secret bombing of Cambodia, along with a US-backed coup, ushered in the horrific era of Khmer Rouge rule and an ensuing genocide that claimed another 1.5 to 2 million lives.
Such bloodletting was a secondary concern for Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, who in November 1975 told Thailand's foreign minister to inform the Khmer Rouge that the United States would not oppose its rule. "We will be friends with them," Kissinger said. "They are murderous thugs, but we won't let that stand in our way." A month later, President Gerald Ford and Kissinger were in Jakarta green-lighting another genocidal campaign, this time in East Timor. By the time it was over, 200,000 of the territory's 700,000 people were dead.
"The Oriental doesn't put the same high price on life as does a Westerner," Gen. William C. Westmoreland, commander of US forces in Vietnam, explained in 1974. "Life is cheap in the Orient."
Although not quite Oriental, life was also cheap in Iraq, where US forces killed an estimated 200,000 Iraqi troops and civilians, at a cost of only 292 coalition troops, during the 1991 Gulf War. The United Nations later acknowledged that subsequent sanctions were to blame for the premature deaths of more than half a million Iraqi children. When journalist Lesley Stahl noted that this was "more children than died in Hiroshima," then-US ambassador to the United Nations Madeleine Albright replied, "we think the price is worth it."
The price was even higher for Iraqis the second time around, with a 2015 study concluding at least 1.2 million, and possibly more than 2 million, civilians and combatants in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan have died in the ongoing US-led war on terrorism, now in its 19th year. Thousands more people have died in Syria, Somalia, Yemen and Libya.
A World of Hurt
Those were just the big wars. Thousands of men, women and children have been killed by US bombs and bullets in Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Grenada, Panama and Yugoslavia. Proxy forces have killed at least hundreds of thousands more on every inhabited continent save Australia. In Iran, the US has overthrown the most popular government Iranians have ever known, supported a brutal monarch and trained his forces in torture and repression, shot down a civilian airliner killing hundreds of civilians and trained terrorists who have carried out deadly attacks against Americans and Iranians alike.
Perhaps this sanguinary legacy is why, in survey after international survey, the United States is perennially voted the world's greatest threat to peace in most of the world's nations. After Soleimani's assassination, Trump boasted that "his bloody rampage is forever gone." If only the same were true of Trump, who continues to fulfill his campaign promise to "bomb the shit out of" Islamist militants and "take out their families" as the US wages war in seven countries and kills thousands of civilians and combatants alike. So much more so than Iran's, America's hands are drenched in blood.
In 1965, the Lyndon B. Johnson administration backed a military coup by a right-wing Indonesian general named Suharto -- who like many Javanese used only his given name -- that overthrew Sukarno, hero of his country's freedom struggle against Dutch colonialism and its first post-independence president. Sukarno, an ardent anti-imperialist, had made the fatal errors of protecting Indonesian communists and cozying up to the Soviet Union and China, and was marked for elimination. In service of this, the US Embassy in Jakarta gave Suharto's forces "shooting lists" of known and suspected communists; US officials later admitted checking off names of victims who had been killed or captured.
"It was a really big help to the army," explained former diplomat Robert Martens. "They probably killed a lot of people, and I probably have a lot of blood on my hands, but that's not all bad." Suharto consolidated his power and, with US support, ruled Indonesia by 1967. More than half a million Indonesians died in what the New York Times called "one of the most savage mass slayings of modern political history.
Of Hands and Blood
Fast-forward 55 years to the present, when amid the crescendoing drumbeat of war, this time against Iran, one phrase seems to dominate the rhetoric of warmongering politicians and pundits alike: Qasem Soleimani, the top Iranian general assassinated along with numerous associates in a US drone strike in Baghdad on Thursday, "has the blood of Americans on his hands," we're told. And yes, it's true that hundreds of US troops in Iraq were killed or wounded by Iran-backed fighters. It's also true that those troops were foreign invaders engaged in an illegal war of regime change, occupation and exploitation, and that Soleimani is seen by many as a hero who courageously -- and successfully -- defended his Shia brethren in Iraq and elsewhere from imperialist domination.
In the post-World War II era, (U.S.) has invaded or attacked, in more or less chronological order, North Korea, Puerto Rico, Lebanon, Cuba, North Vietnam, Laos, the Dominican Republic, Cambodia, Libya, Grenada, Nicaragua, Panama, Iraq, Bosnia, Somalia, Haiti, Afghanistan, Sudan, Serbia, Yemen, Pakistan and Syria. That's 22 countries.
We're not here today to debate whether Soleimani was a hero or a villain, for it is possible to be both, to different people. Nor are we here to remind that Iran is a country -- which despite being surrounded by hostile US and allied forces, and despite a long history of sometimes extreme US aggression and meddling -- that hasn't started a foreign war since the early 1700s. Or that the immediate genesis of the current crisis is Trump's unilateral withdrawal from the nuclear deal with which everyone agrees Iran was compliant, a move which many warned could precipitate fallout of a sort very much like what's happening now. Or, for that matter, how President Donald Trump's act of war will further inflame the world's most combustible region.
No, we're here today to discuss bloody hands. America's bloody hands, to be precise. Logic would dictate that the US presumption that having American blood on one's hands marks one for what Trump called "termination" would apply equally to those touched by America's bloody hands, and the US has exponentially more blood on its hands than Iran. In the post-World War II era, it has invaded or attacked, in more or less chronological order, North Korea, Puerto Rico, Lebanon, Cuba, North Vietnam, Laos, the Dominican Republic, Cambodia, Libya, Grenada, Nicaragua, Panama, Iraq, Bosnia, Somalia, Haiti, Afghanistan, Sudan, Serbia, Yemen, Pakistan and Syria. That's 22 countries, some of them subjected to two or more US attacks or invasions.
'Life Is Cheap'
While it is impossible to tell precisely how many people have been killed by a country that infamously "doesn't do body counts," contemporary accounts and historical analyses paint a very bloody picture. After the Korean War, US strategic air commander Gen. Curtis "Bombs Away" LeMay acknowledged that "we killed off 20 percent of the population" of North Korea. That's nearly 1.9 million men, women and children. In comparison, the Nazis killed 17 percent of Poland's pre-World War II population. At least half a million--and perhaps as many as a million--North Korean and Chinese troops also died.
At least one million North Vietnamese soldiers, civilians and allied Viet Cong fighters, along with at least 150,000 Cambodians and a similar number of Laotians were killed by US and allied bombs and bullets during the Vietnam War. Hundreds of millions of bombs were dropped on the peasants of Laos, the most heavily-bombed nation in history, and more than 20,000 Laotians, many of them children, have been killed by unexploded ordnance since the bombing ended in 1973. President Richard Nixon's secret bombing of Cambodia, along with a US-backed coup, ushered in the horrific era of Khmer Rouge rule and an ensuing genocide that claimed another 1.5 to 2 million lives.
Such bloodletting was a secondary concern for Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, who in November 1975 told Thailand's foreign minister to inform the Khmer Rouge that the United States would not oppose its rule. "We will be friends with them," Kissinger said. "They are murderous thugs, but we won't let that stand in our way." A month later, President Gerald Ford and Kissinger were in Jakarta green-lighting another genocidal campaign, this time in East Timor. By the time it was over, 200,000 of the territory's 700,000 people were dead.
"The Oriental doesn't put the same high price on life as does a Westerner," Gen. William C. Westmoreland, commander of US forces in Vietnam, explained in 1974. "Life is cheap in the Orient."
Although not quite Oriental, life was also cheap in Iraq, where US forces killed an estimated 200,000 Iraqi troops and civilians, at a cost of only 292 coalition troops, during the 1991 Gulf War. The United Nations later acknowledged that subsequent sanctions were to blame for the premature deaths of more than half a million Iraqi children. When journalist Lesley Stahl noted that this was "more children than died in Hiroshima," then-US ambassador to the United Nations Madeleine Albright replied, "we think the price is worth it."
The price was even higher for Iraqis the second time around, with a 2015 study concluding at least 1.2 million, and possibly more than 2 million, civilians and combatants in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan have died in the ongoing US-led war on terrorism, now in its 19th year. Thousands more people have died in Syria, Somalia, Yemen and Libya.
A World of Hurt
Those were just the big wars. Thousands of men, women and children have been killed by US bombs and bullets in Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Grenada, Panama and Yugoslavia. Proxy forces have killed at least hundreds of thousands more on every inhabited continent save Australia. In Iran, the US has overthrown the most popular government Iranians have ever known, supported a brutal monarch and trained his forces in torture and repression, shot down a civilian airliner killing hundreds of civilians and trained terrorists who have carried out deadly attacks against Americans and Iranians alike.
Perhaps this sanguinary legacy is why, in survey after international survey, the United States is perennially voted the world's greatest threat to peace in most of the world's nations. After Soleimani's assassination, Trump boasted that "his bloody rampage is forever gone." If only the same were true of Trump, who continues to fulfill his campaign promise to "bomb the shit out of" Islamist militants and "take out their families" as the US wages war in seven countries and kills thousands of civilians and combatants alike. So much more so than Iran's, America's hands are drenched in blood.
"This sends a chilling message that the U.S. is willing to overlook some abuses, signaling that people experiencing human rights violations may be left to fend for themselves," said one Amnesty campaigner.
After leaked drafts exposed the Trump administration's plans to downplay human rights abuses in some allied countries, including Israel, the U.S. Department of State released the final edition of an annual report on Tuesday, sparking fresh condemnation.
"Breaking with precedent, Secretary of State Marco Rubio did not provide a written introduction to the report nor did he make remarks about it," CNN reported. Still, Amanda Klasing, Amnesty International USA's national director of government relations and advocacy, called him out by name in a Tuesday statement.
"With the release of the U.S. State Department's human rights report, it is clear that the Trump administration has engaged in a very selective documentation of human rights abuses in certain countries," Klasing said. "In addition to eliminating entire sections for certain countries—for example discrimination against LGBTQ+ people—there are also arbitrary omissions within existing sections of the report based on the country."
Klasing explained that "we have criticized past reports when warranted, but have never seen reports quite like this. Never before have the reports gone this far in prioritizing an administration's political agenda over a consistent and truthful accounting of human rights violations around the world—softening criticism in some countries while ignoring violations in others. The State Department has said in relation to the reports less is more. However, for the victims and human rights defenders who rely on these reports to shine light on abuses and violations, less is just less."
"Secretary Rubio knows full well from his time in the Senate how vital these reports are in informing policy decisions and shaping diplomatic conversations, yet he has made the dangerous and short-sighted decision to put out a truncated version that doesn't tell the whole story of human rights violations," she continued. "This sends a chilling message that the U.S. is willing to overlook some abuses, signaling that people experiencing human rights violations may be left to fend for themselves."
"Failing to adequately report on human rights violations further damages the credibility of the U.S. on human rights issues," she added. "It's shameful that the Trump administration and Secretary Rubio are putting politics above human lives."
The overarching report—which includes over 100 individual country reports—covers 2024, the last full calendar year of the Biden administration. The appendix says that in March, the report was "streamlined for better utility and accessibility in the field and by partners, and to be more responsive to the underlying legislative mandate and aligned to the administration's executive orders."
As CNN detailed:
The latest report was stripped of many of the specific sections included in past reports, including reporting on alleged abuses based on sexual orientation, violence toward women, corruption in government, systemic racial or ethnic violence, or denial of a fair public trial. Some country reports, including for Afghanistan, do address human rights abuses against women.
"We were asked to edit down the human rights reports to the bare minimum of what was statutorily required," said Michael Honigstein, the former director of African Affairs at the State Department's Bureau of Human Rights, Democracy, and Labor. He and his office helped compile the initial reports.
Over the past week, since the draft country reports leaked to the press, the Trump administration has come under fire for its portrayals of El Salvador, Israel, and Russia.
The report on Israel—and the illegally occupied Palestinian territories, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank—is just nine pages. The brevity even drew the attention of Israeli media. The Times of Israel highlighted that it "is much shorter than last year's edition compiled under the Biden administration and contained no mention of the severe humanitarian crisis in Gaza."
Since the Hamas-led October 7, 2023 attack on Israel, Israeli forces have slaughtered over 60,000 Palestinians in Gaza, according to local officials—though experts warn the true toll is likely far higher. As Israel has restricted humanitarian aid in recent months, over 200 people have starved to death, including 103 children.
The U.S. report on Israel does not mention the genocide case that Israel faces at the International Court of Justice over the assault on Gaza, or the International Criminal Court arrest warrants issued for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity.
The section on war crimes and genocide only says that "terrorist organizations Hamas and Hezbollah continue to engage in the
indiscriminate targeting of Israeli civilians in violation of the law of armed conflict."
As the world mourns the killing of six more Palestinian media professionals in Gaza this week—which prompted calls for the United Nations Security Council to convene an emergency meeting—the report's section on press freedom is also short and makes no mention of the hundreds of journalists killed in Israel's annihilation of the strip:
The law generally provided for freedom of expression, including for members of the press and other media, and the government generally respected this right for most Israelis. NGOs and journalists reported authorities restricted press coverage and limited certain forms of expression, especially in the context of criticism against the war or sympathy for Palestinians in Gaza.
Noting that "the human rights reports have been among the U.S. government's most-read documents," DAWN senior adviser and 32-year State Department official Charles Blaha said the "significant omissions" in this year's report on Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank render it "functionally useless for Congress and the public as nothing more than a pro-Israel document."
Like Klasing at Amnesty, Sarah Leah Whitson, DAWN's executive director, specifically called out the U.S. secretary of state.
"Secretary Rubio has revamped the State Department reports for one principal purpose: to whitewash Israeli crimes, including its horrific genocide and starvation in Gaza. The report shockingly includes not a word about the overwhelming evidence of genocide, mass starvation, and the deliberate bombardment of civilians in Gaza," she said. "Rubio has defied the letter and intent of U.S. laws requiring the State Department to report truthfully and comprehensively about every country's human rights abuses, instead offering up anodyne cover for his murderous friends in Tel Aviv."
The Tuesday release came after a coalition of LGBTQ+ and human rights organizations on Monday filed a lawsuit against the U.S. State Department over its refusal to release the congressionally mandated report.
This article has been updated with comment from DAWN.
"We will not sit idly by while political leaders manipulate voting maps to entrench their power and subvert our democracy," said the head of Common Cause.
As Republicans try to rig congressional maps in several states and Democrats threaten retaliatory measures, a pro-democracy watchdog on Tuesday unveiled new fairness standards underscoring that "independent redistricting commissions remain the gold standard for ending partisan gerrymandering."
Common Cause will hold an online media briefing Wednesday at noon Eastern time "to walk reporters though the six pieces of criteria the organization will use to evaluate any proposed maps."
The Washington, D.C.-based advocacy group said that "it will closely evaluate, but not automatically condemn, countermeasures" to Republican gerrymandering efforts—especially mid-decade redistricting not based on decennial censuses.
Amid the gerrymandering wars, we just launched 6 fairness criteria to hold all actors to the same principled standard: people first—not parties. Read our criteria here: www.commoncause.org/resources/po...
[image or embed]
— Common Cause (@commoncause.org) August 12, 2025 at 12:01 PM
Common Cause's six fairness criteria for mid-decade redistricting are:
"We will not sit idly by while political leaders manipulate voting maps to entrench their power and subvert our democracy," Common Cause president and CEO Virginia Kase Solomón said in a statement. "But neither will we call for unilateral political disarmament in the face of authoritarian tactics that undermine fair representation."
"We have established a fairness criteria that we will use to evaluate all countermeasures so we can respond to the most urgent threats to fair representation while holding all actors to the same principled standard: people—not parties—first," she added.
Common Cause's fairness criteria come amid the ongoing standoff between Republicans trying to gerrymander Texas' congressional map and Democratic lawmakers who fled the state in a bid to stymie a vote on the measure. Texas state senators on Tuesday approved the proposed map despite a walkout by most of their Democratic colleagues.
Leaders of several Democrat-controlled states, most notably California, have threatened retaliatory redistricting.
"This moment is about more than responding to a single threat—it's about building the movement for lasting reform," Kase Solomón asserted. "This is not an isolated political tactic; it is part of a broader march toward authoritarianism, dismantling people-powered democracy, and stripping away the people's ability to have a political voice and say in how they are governed."
"Texas law is clear: A pregnant person cannot be arrested and prosecuted for getting an abortion. No one is above the law, including officials entrusted with enforcing it," said an ACLU attorney.
When officials in Starr County, Texas arrested Lizelle Gonzalez in 2022 and charged her with murder for having a medication abortion—despite state law clearly prohibiting the prosecution of women for abortion care—she spent three days in jail, away from her children, and the highly publicized arrest was "deeply traumatizing."
Now, said her lawyers at the ACLU in court filings on Tuesday, officials in the county sheriff's and district attorney's offices must be held accountable for knowingly subjecting Gonzalez to wrongful prosecution.
Starr County District Attorney Gocha Ramirez ultimately dismissed the charge against Gonzalez, said the ACLU, but the Texas bar's investigation into Ramirez—which found multiple instances of misconduct related to Gonzalez's homicide charge—resulted in only minor punishment. Ramirez had to pay a small fine of $1,250 and was given one year of probated suspension.
"Without real accountability, Starr County's district attorney—and any other law enforcement actor—will not be deterred from abusing their power to unlawfully target people because of their personal beliefs, rather than the law," said the ACLU.
The state bar found that Ramirez allowed Gonzalez's indictment to go forward despite the fact that her homicide charge was "known not to be supported by probable cause."
Ramirez had denied that he was briefed on the facts of the case before it was prosecuted by his office, but the state bar "determined he was consulted by a prosecutor in his office beforehand and permitted it to go forward."
"Without real accountability, Starr County's district attorney—and any other law enforcement actor—will not be deterred from abusing their power to unlawfully target people because of their personal beliefs, rather than the law."
Sarah Corning, an attorney at the ACLU of Texas, said the prosecutors and law enforcement officers "ignored Texas law when they wrongfully arrested Lizelle Gonzalez for ending her pregnancy."
"They shattered her life in South Texas, violated her rights, and abused the power they swore to uphold," said Corning. "Texas law is clear: A pregnant person cannot be arrested and prosecuted for getting an abortion. No one is above the law, including officials entrusted with enforcing it."
The district attorney's office sought to have the ACLU's case dismissed in July 2024, raising claims of legal immunity.
A court denied Ramirez's motion, and the ACLU's discovery process that followed revealed "a coordinated effort between the Starr County sheriff's office and district attorney's office to violate Ms. Gonzalez's rights."
The officials' "wanton disregard for the rule of law and erroneous belief of their own invincibility is a frightening deviation from the offices' purposes: to seek justice," said Cecilia Garza, a partner at the law firm Garza Martinez, who is joining the ACLU in representing Gonzalez. "I am proud to represent Ms. Gonzalez in her fight for justice and redemption, and our team will not allow these abuses to continue in Starr County or any other county in the state of Texas."
Gonzalez's fight for justice comes as a wrongful death case in Texas—filed by an "anti-abortion legal terrorist" on behalf of a man whose girlfriend use medication from another state to end her pregnancy—moves forward, potentially jeopardizing access to abortion pills across the country.