World leaders and international aid organisations have voiced fears for the delivery of crucial aid in Gaza after the Israeli parliament’s vote to ban the UN relief and works agency (Unrwa), with secretary general Antonio Guterres saying on Monday night: “There is no alternative to Unrwa.”

Guterres said the UN agency would be prevented from doing UN general assembly-mandated work if Israel implemented the laws, which would ban the agency from conducting “any activity” or providing any service inside Israel, including the areas of annexed East Jerusalem, Gaza and the West Bank.

Guterres called on Israel “to act consistently with its obligations” under the UN Charter and international law, saying: “National legislation cannot alter those obligations.”

MBFC
Archive

    • errer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      They’re getting paid to do it, by us. $18B in funding thus far. And just wait till Bibi strokes Trump’s ego, should Trump win.

      • kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        The funny thing is that Bibi is also an egotistical power hungry maniac, it may not be obvious on the surface but they despise eachother. Trump wants to see Israel continue to do their policy objectives, meanwhile Bibi wants to be seen as more powerful then Trump and America.

    • kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      Thats because international law is fake and nobody with power really cares about the suffering of Palestinians, hell the Saudis would sell out every Palestinian for a few fighter jets.

  • Media Bias Fact Checker@lemmy.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    2 months ago
    The Guardian - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)

    Information for The Guardian:

    Wiki: reliable - There is consensus that The Guardian is generally reliable. The Guardian’s op-eds should be handled with WP:RSOPINION. Some editors believe The Guardian is biased or opinionated for politics. See also: The Guardian blogs.
    Wiki: mixed - Most editors say that The Guardian blogs should be treated as newspaper blogs or opinion pieces due to reduced editorial oversight. Check the bottom of the article for a “blogposts” tag to determine whether the page is a blog post or a non-blog article. See also: The Guardian.


    MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United Kingdom


    Media Bias/Fact Check - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)

    Information for Media Bias/Fact Check:

    Wiki: unreliable - There is consensus that Media Bias/Fact Check is generally unreliable, as it is self-published. Editors have questioned the methodology of the site’s ratings.


    MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Very High - United States of America


    Search topics on Ground.News

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/29/gaza-aid-unrwa-ban-guterres-israel-reaction
    https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-guardian/

    Media Bias Fact Check | bot support