Category: 2. World

Gaza has been held under water for 22 months, allowed to gasp for air only when Israeli authorities have succumbed to political pressure from those with more leverage than international law itself. After months of relentless bombardment, forced displacement and deprivation, the impact of Israel’s collective punishment of Gaza’s people has never been more devastating.

I have been part of coordinating humanitarian efforts in Gaza since October 2023. Whatever lifesaving aid has entered since then has been the exception, not the rule. More than a year after the international court of justice (ICJ) ordered Israel to “take all measures within its power” to prevent acts of genocide – and despite all our warnings – we are still witnessing starvation, insufficient access to water, a sanitation crisis and a crumbling health system against a backdrop of ongoing violence that is resulting in scores of Palestinians being killed daily, including children.

Powerless to change this, we humanitarians have resorted to using our voices – alongside those of Palestinian journalists who risk everything – to describe the appalling, inhuman conditions in Gaza. Speaking out, as I’m doing now, in the face of deliberate, preventable suffering is part of our role to promote respect for international law.

But doing so comes at a price. After I held a press briefing in Gaza on 22 June in which I described how starving civilians were being shot while trying to reach food – what I called “conditions created to kill” – the Israeli minister of foreign affairs announced in a post on X that my visa would not been renewed. The Israeli permanent representative to the UN followed up at the security council announcing that I would be expected to leave by 29 July.

This silencing is part of a broader pattern. International NGOs face increasingly restrictive registration requirements, including clauses that prohibit certain criticism of Israel. Palestinian NGOs that, against the odds, continue to save lives daily are cut off from the resources they need to operate. UN agencies are increasingly being issued only six, three or one-month visas based on whether they are considered “good, bad or ugly”. The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (Unwra) has been targeted through legislation, its international staff barred from entry and its operations slowly suffocated.

These reprisals cannot erase the reality we’ve witnessed – day in, day out – not just in Gaza but in the West Bank too. What I have observed there looks different from what is unfolding in Gaza, but there is a unified purpose: severing territorial continuity and forcing Palestinians into ever-shrinking enclaves. Palestinians in the West Bank are daily being coerced and contained: coerced by settler violence and demolitions out of areas where settlements are expanding and contained by a network of movement restrictions into disconnected built-up areas where there are increasing military operations.

Gaza is also being fragmented. Its 2.1 million people are now being crammed into just 12% of the land area of the Strip. I remember receiving the chilling call on 13 October 2023 announcing the forced displacement of the entirety of northern Gaza. Since that brutal opening act, almost all of Gaza has been forcibly displaced – not once but repeatedly – without sufficient shelter, food or safety. I have seen first-hand what appears to be the systematic dismantling of the means to sustain Palestinian life. As part of our role to coordinate humanitarian operations, my colleagues and I have helped carry patients out of dark, cat-infested ICU wards in destroyed hospitals overtaken by Israeli forces where the dead were being buried in the courtyard by the last remaining sleep-deprived staff who had witnessed their colleagues being marched away.

We helped uncover mass graves in other hospital courtyards where families searched through scattered clothes trying to identify loved ones who had been stripped before being killed or disappeared. We have argued with soldiers who were trying to forcibly remove a screaming spinal cord injury patient from an ambulance while being evacuated from a hospital. We have repatriated the bodies of humanitarian workers killed by drone strikes and tank fire while trying to deliver aid, and collected the bodies of family members of NGO workers who were killed in sites acknowledged by Israeli forces as “humanitarian” locations.

We have seen medics in their uniforms killed and buried under ambulances crushed by Israeli forces. Overcrowded shelters for displaced people bombed, with parents clutching their injured or dead children. Countless bodies in the streets being eaten by dogs. People calling from beneath rubble, with help from first responders denied until no one was left breathing. Children wasting away from malnutrition while aid navigates an insurmountable obstacle course of obstructionism.

Israeli authorities accuse us of being the problem. They say we are failing to collect goods from the crossings. We aren’t failing, we are being obstructed. Just last week I was on a convoy headed to Kerem Shalom crossing from inside Gaza. We escorted empty trucks through a densely crowded area, an unnecessarily complicated route provided by Israeli forces. When the trucks were lined up at a holding point and the green light to move to the crossing finally came from Israeli forces, thousands of desperate people moved with us, hoping the trucks would return with food. As we crawled forward, people clung to the vehicles until we saw the first dead body on the side of the road, shot in the back from the direction of Israeli forces. At the crossing, the gate was shut. We waited around two hours for a soldier to open it.

That convoy took 15 hours to complete. With other convoys, Israeli forces have delayed returning trucks while crowds gather and killed desperate people who were waiting for the trucks to arrive. Some of our goods have been looted by armed gangs operating under the watch of Israeli forces. During the ceasefire, we ran multiple convoys a day. Now chaos, killing and obstruction are again the norm. Aid is vital, but it will never be a cure for engineered scarcity.

The ICJ has been clear. In its binding provisional measures, it not only ordered Israel to prevent acts prohibited under the genocide convention, it also ordered Israel to enable urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance, including by increasing aid crossings. In a separate advisory opinion, the ICJ left no room for doubt: Israel’s ongoing occupation of Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, is unlawful under international law. Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, are different parts of the same picture.

What is unfolding is not complicated. It is not inevitable. It is the result of deliberate political choices by those who create these conditions and those who enable them. The end of the occupation is long overdue. The credibility of the multilateral system is being weakened by double standards and impunity. International law cannot be a tool of convenience for some if it is to be a viable tool of protection for all.

Gaza is already drowning beneath bombs, starvation and the relentless grip of the blockade on essentials for survival. Every delay in enforcing the most basic rules meant to protect human life is another hand pressing Gaza down as it struggles for breath.

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.

The following is the transcript of an interview with U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer that airs on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on Aug. 3, 2025. This interview was taped on Aug. 1, 2025.

MARGARET BRENNAN: And we’re joined now by United States Trade Representative, Jamieson Greer. Ambassador, good to have you here. 

JAMIESON GREER: Great to be here. Thank you. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: So the President signed this executive order on Thursday, raises tariff rates on about 70 countries. Should we expect those to be negotiated down in the coming days? 

JAMIESON GREER: I don’t, I don’t think they will be in the coming days. I think a lot of these, well I know a lot of these, are set rates pursuant to deals. Some of these deals are announced,  some are not, others depend on the level of the trade deficit or surplus we may have with the country. So, so these, these tariff rates are pretty much set. I expect I do have my phone blowing up. There are trade ministers who, who want to talk more and see how they can work in a different way with the United States, but I think that we have, we’re seeing truly the contours of the President’s tariff plan right now with these rates.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I was reading some interviews you had given, and you said at some point the President’s view is maybe a tariff is better than a deal. Are you saying there are countries that just, they have no shot of avoiding a tariff?

JAMIESON GREER: Well, I would say that, in fact, most countries in the world, they just have a tariff assigned to them, right? Whether it’s– 

MARGARET BRENNAN: It’ll be the 10 percent or 15 percent. 

JAMIESON GREER: 10 or 15 or the higher level tariff. Because, again, when the President is looking at this, he looks at potential deals, and we bring him potential concessions from countries and the things they might want to do. And he compares that to the potential tariff that might be applied to try to get that deficit down. And then talking to his advisors, he makes a call on this. And you know, sometimes a country will come back and make additional concessions that, that make it more appropriate. He’s trying to get at the deficit. He’s trying to reshore manufacturing. And so those are the factors he’s looking at when he’s looking at when he’s determining whether he’s just going to have a tariff or he’ll take a deal. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: Trying to reshore manufacturing, bring manufacturing jobs back to America. But we just saw in this unemployment data that while the level is pretty low overall, it’s pretty steady, good. Manufacturing in particular, we saw it contract for the fifth straight month in July, factory employment dropped to lowest levels in five years. What does that data indicate to you about the impact of your tariffs?

JAMIESON GREER: Yeah, I saw that and my own view is that I think a lot of companies were waiting to see if the tax bill was going to come through with the expensing for capital goods and things like that. And so I think now you know a lot of that data comes pre “One Big Beautiful Bill”. Now that we have “One Big Beautiful Bill”, and we have a better sense of where the taxes are going, I think we’re going to see a much, we’re going to see more investment, all the, all the commitments on investment we’ve seen countries making, that’s going to come through. And like you said, it’s a relatively small number. So I don’t, I don’t read tariff policy into that number. I think that is kind of pre-bill policy.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So you believe the executives are making strategic decisions with hiring, but the President just announced that the head of Labor Statistics is being fired because of the weak jobs report, claiming the data was faked.

JAMIESON GREER: Well, I think you know, and I saw what the president did, and he also talked about the, just the record from BLS, you know, last year– 

MARGARET BRENNAN: Labor Statistics Bureau.

JAMIESON GREER: That’s right, yeah, exactly. You know, even last year during the campaign, there were enormous swings in the jobs numbers and so it sounds to me like the President has real concerns. You know, not just based on today’s but everything we saw last year. You want to be able to have somewhat reliable numbers. There are always revisions, but sometimes you see these revisions go in really extreme ways. And it’s, you know, the President is the President. He can choose who works in the executive branch.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But you were just saying you weren’t really doubting the data.

JAMIESON GREER: No, I wasn’t– You asked me what I thought about the data–

MARGARET BRENNAN:

Right.

JAMIESON GREER:–And was it reflected in the tariff policy? The answer is no. I mean, my view is, to the extent that there’s some kind of, you know, information about manufacturing jobs, you know, I think that we’re going to see a big increase in manufacturing jobs now that we have the “one big, beautiful bill” passed, now that we have the expensing going in. And I think that, you know, our manufacturers know that they have a clear and certain path forward on that now.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Are you confident, though – because you have to deal in legal terms, in details, with facts and data when you are negotiating a legal agreement – do you trust that if you bring hard data to the president, he takes your counsel, even if it’s an inconvenient fact?

JAMIESON GREER: Always, yes. I mean, I’ve spent the- I spend many hours with the president almost every day, and that’s what we’re talking about is data. We’re looking – and I’m on the trade side, of course – and we’re looking at import figures, export figures, investment levels, et cetera. And that’s how we’re making this decision. So I’m very comfortable with that.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So you’ve seen that Apple estimates, for the full year, tariffs are going to cost them more than a billion dollars. For the automakers – GM, Stellantis, Ford – they all came out and said they are going to take a hit from this.

AMBASSADOR GREER: Well, so that’s exactly the issue, right? We have, over decades, we’ve had these large manufacturers, advanced manufacturing, that have gone overseas. They’ve gone to other countries. They’ve taken advantage of unfair trading practices, and the fact that the US has had low tariffs while other countries haven’t, and they’ve taken advantage of that. That’s what businesses do. We’re all capitalists. And so if now they have to pay a tariff or build here, the President is creating incentives to bring them back here. That’s why GM has announced investments here in the United States, and that’s why we have all these companies and countries announcing investment in the US. Because the tariffs create the incentive to do so.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But reductions in profits come at a cost, right? And as CEOs are making decisions, how long do you expect this pain to last for corporate America?

AMBASSADOR GREER: Well, you know, again, when we look at- you know, when we look at the numbers and the data, we’re seeing predictions of more investment here. That’s what we want. The President isn’t doing this so much for the companies. He’s doing it for American workers who have seen their jobs offshored to Mexico, to Vietnam, to China. So when we hear companies having to make hard choices about supply chain changes. We have to do that. I mean the status quo, where we keep making things overseas, because we can do it a little bit cheaper in the short run. That is not preferable to having that investment and employment here in the United States. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: But we haven’t seen that reshoring happen. 

AMBASSADOR GREER: Well, we have- we have announced AstraZeneca announced they’re going to have a $50 billion investment in pharmaceuticals. GM has announced $5 billion. Hyundai Steel has said they’re going to do a $21 billion investment in Louisiana. So this is- this is actually happening. These are things from the company saying it right, and they have to say it. And they have, you know, earnings reports, and they have and- they have filings. They can’t just make this stuff up. This is real investment that we’re seeing.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Let me ask you about Canada, which is our second largest- largest trading partner. The president increased tariffs to 35%. It applies, though, to just about 10% of what Canada sells here. Why bother to do this now in the middle of negotiations?

AMBASSADOR GREER: So I would say, first of all, you know, Canada is subject to 50% tariffs on steel, aluminum. 25% tariffs on autos, and again, the 35% tariff on- on goods that don’t follow the rules of USMCA. And, you know, early on, the president posed a 25% tariff on Canada, and that was really about fentanyl and border issues, right? It’s- it’s- it’s a separate regime from the reciprocal tariff. And what did Canada do in response? You know, they talked about helping at the border. And I’m not, you know, I’m not the drug czar or anything. But what I do know, as the trade guy, is that Canada retaliated. The only other country in the world who retaliated on tariffs was the Chinese. And so if the president’s going to take an action and the Canadians retaliate, the United States needs to maintain the integrity of our action, the effectiveness. So we have to go up too. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: So, you’re talking about the things that the former Prime Minister Trudeau put in place, not the  current Prime Minister– 

AMBASSADOR GREER: — And are still in place–   

MARGARET BRENNAN: — That are still in place. But the current prime minister has held off, largely, on retaliation here. That’s the guy you’re negotiating with and his team. So what’s the strategy here? And aren’t you worried that this will hurt the broader free trade deal if you truly do want to renegotiate it next year.

AMBASSADOR GREER: Well- well, the President’s view with with every country, whether it’s Canada or Mexico, and regardless of the kind of trade agreement we have in place, is that the net result of the trading system, whether it’s our WTO agreements or our existing trade agreements, the net result has been that a lot of the manufacturing has gone overseas, and when that’s the net result, you can’t continue with that system. So you know, I’m not concerned that it’s going to complicate things with Canada. Our view is the President is trying to fix the terms of trade with Canada, and if there’s a way to a deal, we’ll find it. And if it’s not, we’ll have the tariff levels that we have. 

MARGARET BRENNAN : So I hear you drawing distinctions when you say I’m the trade guy, I’m not the drug czar. 

AMBASSADOR GREER: Correct. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: I’m the trade guy. I’m not handling these other things. But the President is kind of blending all these things together, because he cited fentanyl once again when it came to tariffs-  to the policy with Canada. He also said on social media, Canada’s decision to back statehood for Palestine is going to make it hard for us to make a trade deal. How does that have anything to do with financial and trade agreements?

AMBASSADOR GREER: So, so- so, first of all, the president United States has his foreign affairs power where he can- he can manage relations under the Constitution with foreign countries. Second of all, you know, Congress delegated to the president the ability to take economic action in response to national emergencies in the International Economic Emergency Powers Act. And for example, the Treasury Department, they have a number of sanctions where they can actually cut off a country’s trade with the United States, prohibit goods, cut them off from our financial system for geopolitical reasons. So the fact that they can do that- almost certainly the President can do something that’s not as expansive and just- and just put a fee on those goods, which is a- which is a tariff. So if you–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –But can and should are different things, right? And- and I’m asking this–

JAMIESON GREER: –But to- to go- but- but listen, if you’re going to sanction somebody and essentially prohibit trade, you almost certainly can do something that’s softer, which is to allow the trade and just put a tariff on it. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: So let me ask you about Brazil, because the U.S. has a trade surplus with Brazil. That means, you know, we sell them more than we buy from them. So it doesn’t seem to be consistent here, when you have the President put 50% tariffs on Brazil, one of the highest of any countries. And at the same time, the President is bringing up things that have nothing to do with trade when he’s justifying them. He sent a letter to the current government complaining about the prosecution of his ally, Bolsonaro, who is- who allegedly staged a coup when he lost the last election. The President called it a witch hunt. This seems politically motivated and not about trade.

AMBASSADOR GREER: Well, two things. First of all, there’s a 10% tariff on Brazil because we have a surplus with them. That’s the reciprocal tariff. And then there’s a 40% tariff that the President has chosen to do under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, like we would do any sanction where we see geopolitical issues. The President has seen in Brazil, like he’s seen in other countries, a misuse of law, a misuse of democracy, what one might call lawfare. It is normal to use these tools for geopolitical issues. I mean, sanctions, we’ve been using them for years with all kinds of countries, including countries we like–

MARGARET BRENNAN: You view tariffs and sanctions as the same?

AMBASSADOR GREER: They’re just different in degree. I mean, tariffs are actually lighter than a sanction- a sanction, you’re cutting off a country from your financial system. You’re prohibiting trade with them. A tariff, you’re allowing trade. You’re just putting a fee on it. It’s a- it’s a lesser

MARGARET BRENNAN: –But now

AMBASSADOR GREER: step than sanctions–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –You- you have moved far away from from dealing with the deficit. Now– 

AMBASSADOR GREER: –Well the deficit has a 10% tariff–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –you are talking about politically motivated trade actions here. I mean, the president sent a letter to President Lula, saying that tariffs are due in part to Brazil’s insidious attacks on free elections. He also, at the same time, sanctioned the Supreme Court justice overseeing Bolsonaro’s trial. Why are you trying to influence a criminal trial of an ally of President Trump? 

AMBASSADOR GREER: So, so, so the president of United States, historically, whether it’s a Democrat or Republican, they have used IEEPA to impose sanctions for all kinds of geopolitical reasons in all kinds of countries. Sometimes it’s countrywide, sometimes it’s specific to certain, you know, individuals and often foreign leaders and foreign officials. So this is not, this is not way outside the market. If anything, the President could have gone farther in the type of sanction that was used. Instead he just used a tariff instead of cutting them off from the financial system altogether. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: So you were fully on board with it. It sounds like.

AMBASSADOR GREER: With the president of the United States? My boss? Of course I am–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –But with intervening in criminal trials–

AMBASSADOR GREER: –when the President–

MARGARET BRENNAN: — through trade policy.  

AMBASSADOR GREER: When the President sees lawfare going on, he’s going to impose a sanction through IEEPA that’s been delegated by Congress. That’s his job as the president. He’s elected to assess the Foreign Affairs situation in the United States and take appropriate action. There’s just no question that it’s both from a legal perspective, it’s completely permissible. And from a policy perspective, that’s what he’s elected to do. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: When it comes to trade, the big deal that is pending out there is how is the president going to deal with China? There’s an August 12 deadline, and if that deadline is not met, you have said tariff levels could snap back to above 80%. Is that deadline going to slide?

AMBASSADOR GREER: So that’s what’s under discussion right now. I would say that our conversations with the Chinese have been very positive. We have discussions at the staff level, at my level, you know, President Xi and President Trump have had conversations. 

MARGARET BRENNAN: They said that it’s sliding. The Chinese said it’s sliding. 

AMBASSADOR GREER: That’s something we’re working toward. That’s what we talked about–

MARGARET BRENNAN: So you’re not there yet. 

AMBASSADOR GREER: And so, so they want to do that. We’re working on some technical issues, and we’re talking to the president about it, you know, I think it’s going in a positive direction. You know, I’m not going to get ahead of the President, but, you know, I don’t think anyone wants to see those tariffs snap back to 84%.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Did you get any commitments in those two days of talks in Stockholm?

AMBASSADOR GREER: So yes, we did. Yes, we talked about, and I won’t go into detail, because they’re, you know, confidential conversations between two, two governments, but they really focused on rare earth magnets and minerals. You’ve probably heard some about that, that China has put a global control on the world, and so for the United States, we’re focused on making sure that the flow of magnets from from China to the United States and the- and the adjacent supply chain can flow as freely as it did before the control, and I’d say we’re about halfway there.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Ambassador Greer, thank you for your time today.

AMBASSADOR GREER: Thank you so much.

MARGARET BRENNAN: And we’ll be right back.

The New South Wales premier risks going down in history as the most conservative premier of the modern era.

Renowned for his political nous, slick media management, urbane delivery and ability to tamp down controversy, Chris Minns is perennially attuned to the loud voices of the shock jocks on Sydney radio and in the Murdoch media.

But his decision to oppose the march for Palestine across the Sydney Harbour Bridge on Sunday was a critical error of judgment – and the 100,000 or more people who braved torrential rain and wind to walk for those in Gaza told him so.

There were women in hijabs, men in Palestinian scarves, families with children, older couples, unionists and tens of thousands of young people from all parts of Sydney. Muslims, Jews and Christians declared their faith with placards.

The turnout, and its diversity, suggest people have had a gutful of the images of starving children, of desperate people risking their lives in a scramble for food at aid stations, of bombed-out buildings as far as the eye can see.

They’re prepared to put aside their reservations about being associated with one side of the Israel-Palestinian conflict in the interests of humanity.

If it’s not genocide, what’s taking place in Gaza is a mass displacement, because it’s hard to see how anyone, let alone children, can live in what is left of it.

Along with the horror at what’s happening in Gaza, there was also a palpable sense of anger towards Minns and, to a lesser extent, the prime minister, Anthony Albanese, over Australia’s fence-sitting.

“Hey, Chris Minns – whose bridge? Our bridge!” protesters shouted as they marched.

A placard carried on to the bridge also called out the premier: “Hey Minns. Walking on a bridge won’t starve us, but blocking aid starves Palestinians. We will survive, they won’t.”

Another said: “Public safety concerns YES! The Palestinian public are not safe being starved and bombed.”

Chants rippled through the crowd calling for Albanese to act.

The legal right to protest is fundamental to the proper functioning of our democracy. Sometimes the institutions of government lag far behind public opinion – or fail to recognise the need for change.

Just ask the suffragettes, the activists who campaigned for the right of First Nations peoples to vote, for marriage equality for LGBTQ+ people, or the union movement, which fought using protest for the eight-hour workday.

In the face of an unfolding tragedy such as Gaza, people feel understandably powerless. Turning up and marching in a place that can accommodate huge numbers while garnering international attention is a legal and effective option to tell politicians they are tone deaf.

Minns’ overtly pro-Israel stance and his natural reflex toward the conservative on this and other issues, such as pill testing, drug reform and the right to protest, are now rattling his own team.

Among the state Labor MPs who defied the premier and joined the march on Sunday were Penny Sharpe, Jihad Dib, Lynda Voltz and Stephen Lawrence, alongside the federal MPs Ed Husic, Alison Byrne and Tony Sheldon.

Asked why he walked, Lawrence said: “It’s time for the world to act. It’s time for Australia to sanction Israel. The people have spoken today. They want more action from the Australian government to stop the genocide in Palestine.”

Privately, some inside state Labor are querying why Minns didn’t leave it to the police and the courts. The premier instead weighed in against the protest early, egged on by conservative pro-Israel commentators.

The result was a potential shambles. The Metro was closed for maintenance as was the eastern suburbs train line. There had been too little thought given to how 100,000 or more people might return from North Sydney, leading the police to turn around the massive crowd and walk them back to the city using geolocated texts and speakers on low-flying helicopters.

It all went as well as it could, thanks to the goodwill of the crowd, the organisers and NSW police.

But members of the Labor party, with its long heritage of progressive politics, human rights advocacy and embrace of direct action, want a serious rethink.

“It’s time for fundamental change of position in the Labor party on the right to protest, and our approach to this question of Palestinian protests,” Lawrence said.

“The last few days have shown we cannot take away the right of people to protest. Inconvenience occurs. It should be minimised, but public safety is the key thing, and that is a key reason why the right to protest must be protected.”

ROME: Pope Leo XIV presided over a final mass in Rome for over one million young people on Sunday, the culmination of a youth pilgrimage that has drawn Catholics from across the world.

The week-long event ending Sunday, a highlight of the Jubilee holy year, was an enormous undertaking for the Vatican, with a half a million young pilgrims in Rome for most of the week.

On Saturday night, before a twilight vigil led by the pope, organizers had confirmed the attendance of 800,000 people in the vast, open-air space on Rome’s eastern outskirts, and on Sunday the Vatican said that number had grown to one million people.

Most of those attending slept on the ground in tents, in sleeping bags or or mats, awaiting Sunday’s mass under sunny skies.

To music from a choir, green-robed bishops began filling an enormous stage covered with a golden arch and a massive cross before Leo, who arrived by helicopter, began mass.

The Vatican said 450 bishops and around 700 priests participated in the final event for the youth, who have filled Rome’s streets since Monday.

The festive atmosphere reached its peak Saturday ahead of an evening vigil presided over by Leo, with Italian broadcaster Rai dubbing it a Catholic “Woodstock.”

Hundreds of thousands of youths camped out at the dusty venue, strumming guitars or singing, others snoozing, as music blasted from the stage where a series of religious bands entertained the crowds.

Leo was greeted with deafening screams and applause after his arrival by helicopter Saturday as he toured the grounds in his popemobile, with many people running to catch a better glimpse of the new American pope.

At over 500,000 square meters (125 acres), the grounds were the size of around 70 football fields.

British student Andy Hewellyn had parked himself in front of a huge video screen — a prime spot, as he could not even see the stage far away.

“I’m so happy to be here, even if I’m a bit far from the pope. I knew what to expect!” he told AFP.

“The main thing is that we’re all together.”

The youth pilgrimage came about three months after the start of Leo’s papacy and 25 years after former pope John Paul II organized the last such youth gathering in Rome.

The Church planned a series of events for the young pilgrims over the course of the week, including turning the Circus Maximus – where chariot races were held in ancient Rome – into an open-air confessional.

The nationwide death toll from monsoon rains has risen to 299, up from 234, as the season that began in late June continues to cause widespread devastation, the National Disaster Management Authority said on Sunday, according to state-owned PTV News.

Monsoon rains fall across the region from June to September, offering respite from the summer heat and are crucial to replenishing water supplies. However, heavy downpours also trigger deadly floods, landslides and displacement, particularly in vulnerable, poorly drained, or densely populated areas.

According to earlier NDMA estimates, the death toll stood at 234, while 596 people have been injured since June 26.

According to the latest figures, “at least 299 people have lost their lives in this year’s flash floods and torrential rains, while another 715 people were reported injured. Out of the total death toll — 140 were children, 102 men and 57 women,” the report said.

Out of the 715 injured, 239 were children, 204 were women, while 272 were men, it added.

Detailing the damage to public property sustained during the rains and floods triggered by heavy rain, the report estimated that a total of 1676 houses were damaged, out of which 562 homes were destroyed completely.

Around 428 livestock were lost during the rains, the report said.

Since June 26, NDMA has rescued and evacuated 2,880 people from impacted regions, while relief efforts were also underway. Per the report, the authority distributed 13,466 relief items including 1,999 tents, 61 ration bags, 958 blankets, 569 quilts, 613 mattresses, 1,282 kitchen sets, 1,163 food packs, 350 life jackets, 1,122 Hygiene home kits, 2,170 tarpaulins, and 146 de-watering pumps among other essential supplies.

On Saturday, the Pakistan Meteorological Department (PMD) forecasted more rain, with wind-thundershowers in the upper and central regions of the country over the coming week. PMD prompted provincial disaster management authorities and district administrations to take preventive measures against possible urban flooding.

As per PMD’s latest forecast, rain, wind and thundershowers, with isolated heavy falls, are expected to hit the northern parts of the country, starting from August 4 till August 7.

Rainfall is expected in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Punjab, and Islamabad between these dates, while Gilgit Baltistan will receive rainfall starting from August 5.

Meanwhile, Balochistan is forecast to experience mainly hot and humid weather, al­t­h­ough rain, wind and thundershowers are expec­t­ed in the northeastern and southern parts on Aug 6.

Sindh is likely to see hot and humid conditions in most parts, with cloudy weather and light rain expected in coastal areas.

CAIRO, Aug 3 (Reuters) – Egypt’s state-affiliated Al Qahera News TV said on Sunday that two fuel trucks carrying 107 tons of diesel were set to enter Gaza, months after Israel restricted the entry of goods and aid into the Palestinian enclave.

Gaza’s health ministry has said fuel shortages were hindering the operation of hospitals, adding that doctors had to prioritise services at some of their facilities. There was no immediate confirmation whether the trucks had entered Gaza.

Fuel entry has been rare since March, when Israel restricted the flow of aid and goods into the enclave in what it said was pressure on Hamas to release the remaining hostages it took in its October 2023 assault on Israel.

Dozens have died of malnutrition in Gaza in recent weeks, according to Gaza’s health ministry. It said on Saturday that it had recorded seven more fatalities, including a child, since Friday.

Israel blames Hamas for the suffering in Gaza and says it is taking steps for more aid to reach its population, including pausing fighting for part of the day in some areas, air drops and announcing protected routes for aid convoys.

U.N. agencies have said that airdrops of food are insufficient and that Israel must let in far more aid by land and quickly ease the access to it.

COGAT, the Israeli military agency that coordinates aid, said 35 trucks have entered Gaza since June, nearly all of them in July.

More than 700 trucks of fuel entered the enclave in January and February during the ceasefire, before Israel resumed its major offensive in March.

The Gaza war began when Hamas killed more than 1,200 people and took 251 hostage in an attack on southern Israel on October 7, 2023, according to Israeli figures. Israel’s offensive has since killed more than 60,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza health officials.

According to Israeli officials, 50 hostages now remain in Gaza, only 20 of whom are believed to be alive.

(Reporting by Jaidaa Taha, Nidal Al-Mughrabi. Additional reporting by Menna Alaa El-Din and Maayan Lubell; Editing by William Mallard and Toby Chopra)

🔊 Listen with AI



Cancel Voice

Published On: Sun, 03 Aug 2025

14:54:28 PKT

(AFP) – The Palestine Red Crescent Society (PRCS) said on Sunday that an Israeli strike on its headquarters in Khan Younis, Gaza, killed at least one staff member and wounded three others.

“One Palestine Red Crescent Society (PRCS) staff member was killed and three others injured after Israeli forces targeted the Society’s headquarters in Khan Younis, igniting a fire on the building’s first floor,” the aid organisation said in a post on X.

A video, which the PRCS said “captures the initial moments” of the attack, shows fires burning in a building, with the floors covered in rubble.

It comes two days after US envoy Steve Witkoff visited a US-backed aid station in Gaza to inspect efforts to get food into the devastated Palestinian territory.

Nearly two years after the war began, UN agencies have warned that time was running out and that Gaza was “on the brink of a full-scale famine”.

Eight staff members from the Red Crescent, six from the Gaza civil defence agency and one employee of the UN agency for Palestinian refugees were killed in an attack by Israeli forces in southern Gaza in March, according to the UN humanitarian office OCHA.

Hamas’s October 2023 attack on Israel, which triggered the war, resulted in the deaths of 1,219 people, mostly civilians, according to a tally based on official Israeli figures.

Israel’s campaign in Gaza has killed at least 60,332 people, mostly civilians, according to figures from the Hamas-run territory’s health ministry, deemed reliable by the UN. 

Field Marshal Asim Munir, Pakistan’s army chief, could hardly have wished for more. For almost two years, he had been under fire at home over his meddling in politics. Wracked by debt and insurgent violence, his country had been sidelined in geopolitics as America and other rich countries courted India, Pakistan’s arch-rival. And yet there he was, enjoying a private lunch with Donald Trump in the White House on June 18th, just over a month after Pakistan’s brief conflict with India. Then, at the end of July, came further snubs for India: branding it a “dead economy”, Mr Trump imposed tariffs of 25% while hailing a new trade deal with Pakistan.