Category: 2. World

Khan Younis, Gaza Strip – Eighteen-year-old Hani Hammad never imagined that his daily search for flour would end with him suffocating and being trampled.

On Wednesday morning, he left his tent in the al-Mawasi area of southern Gaza’s Khan Younis, where he’s been displaced from Rafah along with his seven siblings, heading to a food distribution point run by the much-criticised, United States-backed GHF.

“We left at dawn and stood among the thousands gathered. About 5am [02:00 GMT], they [US staff and Israeli army] signalled to open the gate, and people rushed forward,” Hani told Al Jazeera.

“The gate was open, but people were packed into a very narrow corridor leading to it – only about seven metres wide,” he said, struggling to catch his breath after arriving at Nasser Hospital gasping and barely conscious.

“I got in with the crowd with difficulty. Suddenly, American guards started spraying pepper spray and firing gas bombs, and people began stampeding through the corridor,” he added.

‘I collapsed. They trampled my face.’

“I felt like I was dying. I couldn’t move forward or backwards. I collapsed. My face and side were trampled. No one could pull me out. But God gave me a second chance,” Hani said.

He was rushed unconscious to Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis on a tuk-tuk and initially placed beside the bodies of others who had died, some from suffocation, others from bullet wounds.

“I was unconscious, couldn’t see or hear. I drifted in and out. They put me beside the dead. I thought I was one of them.”

Early Wednesday, 21 Palestinians were killed, including 15 by suffocation, while trying to collect food aid.

The incident occurred near a gate managed by the GHF in western Khan Younis. Dozens more were reportedly injured, with some still in intensive care.

Hani is the oldest of eight siblings who live next to their uncle’s tent – their parents remain in Jordan, where they travelled for medical treatment just a month before the war began.

“I feel like I carry a huge burden. We’ve endured the pressures of displacement and war without our parents and without any help from them,” he said.

Though he acknowledges that lining up for aid from the GHF is a major daily risk, he adds: “Our intense hunger pushes me to go every day.”

“There’s no other choice. I have no money to buy the overpriced goods available in the markets. My only option is to try my luck with aid distributions,” says the young man.

“Each time is a near-death experience. There’s gunfire, tanks, drones and attacks. What kind of aid distribution is this? We are exhausted, truly exhausted.”

“We’re shot at like animals”

Mohammed Abedin, 24, now lies in a hospital bed with a leg wound after heading to the same aid centre in Khan Younis early Wednesday.

For the first time, he says, he chose to turn back after sensing the danger of the crowd surge.

The young man, a first-year accounting student, arrived about 3am (00:00 GMT) at the distribution site, but he noticed that things looked different. The same site had been closed for two days before reopening.

“Before, we used to enter from several access points, and the entryway was wide. But this time, we were funnelled through one long, narrow corridor, fenced in with metal,” he says.

“When the gates opened, everyone rushed forward, and people began falling underfoot.”

Mohammed described a terrifying scene of people crushed against the metal barriers, screaming and gasping for help, as pepper spray and gas bombs were fired by American guards and quadcopters above.

“I was standing close to my cousin, watching. We decided not to go in because of the overwhelming numbers. I saw kids screaming, choking, men and youth trapped. No one could move forward or back.”

“The fenced corridor, with gas bombs raining down and people being pushed through, became a death trap,” he says.

Mohammed and his cousin tried to leave, but just as he thought he had made a wise choice, a quadcoptor shot him in the leg. His cousin was also injured.

“There’s always random gunfire from quadcaptors, tanks, or soldiers in the area. This time, I was the unlucky one,” he said. “But thank God, I survived.”

Mohammed reflects on the tragic situation faced by Palestinians, caught between starvation and death, forced to risk their lives for food. He supports his displaced family of nine, originally from Rafah and now sheltering in al-Mawasi.

“We dream daily of eating bread. I go for aid almost every day and usually return empty-handed. But the days I brought home just a few kilos of flour felt like ‘an eid’ [a celebration] for my family.”

Flour is the top priority for Mohammed, especially with Gaza being under siege for four months, the borders sealed, and humanitarian and commercial goods blocked by Israel.

“Bread is what drives me to risk death. There’s no alternative,” he said, awaiting surgery at Nasser Hospital to remove a bullet from his leg. “Has the world failed to provide a safe channel for aid delivery?”

“There’s no system, no organised relief, no police or UN intervention. We’re shot at like animals. If we don’t die of hunger, we die in the chaos and stampedes.”

In late May 2025, the GHF launched its aid distribution efforts in Gaza following an Israeli-imposed near-total blockade, which is still in effect and has prevented the entry of humanitarian supplies.

According to United Nations figures, at least 798 Palestinians have been killed since then while trying to reach or receive aid from the organisation’s distribution points.

Widespread criticism has emerged from UN agencies and rights organisations that argue the operation is politicised and endangers civilians. The UN has stated that the GHF’s operations violate humanitarian neutrality and are inherently unsafe, highlighted by the hundreds of deaths at their sites.

“Either we return with flour, or we don’t return at all”

Ziad Masad Mansour, 43, displaced with his wife and six children from central Gaza to al-Mawasi in Khan Younis after their home was destroyed in the war, is another frequent visitor to the aid lines.

“I head there at 10 at night and sleep on the sand like thousands of others. We endure the dust and humiliation,” said Mansour, who was wounded in the head on Wednesday.

“Sometimes I manage to get flour, sometimes a few cans. Other times, I return empty-handed. I even help others carry their bags in exchange for some food.”

“Yesterday, there was horrific crowding: gas bombs, bullets, and we were packed tightly in the narrow corridor. I was trying to escape the crush when I got shot in the head and lost consciousness.”

Mansour is now recovering at Nasser Hospital. “More than 20 people died today – for a bag of flour. What more is there to say?”

Reuters

Reuters

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said his country “deeply regrets that a stray ammunition” hit Gaza’s only Catholic Church, killing three people sheltering there.

“Every innocent life lost is a tragedy. We share the grief of the families and the faithful,” he said in a statement.

The incident happened on Thursday when an Israeli strike hit the Holy Family Church in Gaza City. Several people were also injured, said the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem which oversees the small parish.

Pope Leo XIV said he was “deeply saddened to learn of the loss of life and injury”, renewing his call for a Gaza ceasefire.

In his statement, Netanyahu said Israel was “investigating the incident and remains committed to protecting civilians and holy sites”.

In a statement later on Thursday, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said: “An initial inquiry into reports regarding injured individuals in the Holy Family Church in Gaza City, suggests that fragments from a shell fired during operational activity in the area hit the church mistakenly. The cause of the incident is under review.

“The IDF directs its strikes solely at military targets and makes every feasible effort to mitigate harm to civilians and religious structures, and regrets any unintentional damage caused to them,” the statement added.

Earlier in the day, White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said US President Donald Trump did not have a “positive reaction” to the attack on the church.

Trump called Netanyahu to discuss the incident on Thursday morning. During the call, Netanyahu described the attack as a “mistake”, Leavitt cited him as saying.

The Patriarchate said the parish priest, Father Gabriel Romanelli, was a part of those who had been injured in the attack.

It said that people found a “sanctuary” in the church “hoping that the horrors of war might at least spare their lives after their homes, possessions, and dignity had already been stripped away”.

It added that the “war must come to a complete end”.

White House says Trump’s exam revealed a ‘benign and common condition’, no serious underlying issues found.

United States President Donald Trump has been diagnosed with “chronic venous insufficiency” after he was examined for leg swelling and bruising on his hands, according to the White House.

Speaking to reporters on Thursday, White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt called the malady a “benign and common condition” in which damaged veins prevent blood from flowing properly.

Reading a letter from Trump’s physician, Leavitt added that the condition has higher rates “in individuals over the age of 70”.

The 79-year-old Trump is the oldest person in US history to assume the presidency and made questions over former President Joe Biden’s age a defining issue in the 2024 election.

Biden, who is three years Trump’s senior, later dropped out of the race amid pressure from his own party, handing the Democratic candidacy to former Vice President Kamala Harris, who lost to Trump months later. Nevertheless, the president has continued to attack Biden’s age and mental fitness.

On Thursday, Leavitt said there was “no evidence” of more serious issues like “deep vein thrombosis or arterial disease”.

She said all Trump’s test results “were within normal limits” and he had “normal cardiac structure and function, no signs of heart failure, renal impairment or systemic illness”.

The spokesperson also fielded questions over bruises on Trump’s hand, which had stoked online speculation over his health.

Leavitt said the bruises were “consistent with minor soft tissue irritation from frequent handshaking and the use of aspirin, which is taken as part of a standard cardiovascular prevention regimen”.

While not legally required, it has become common practice for US presidents to release annual physicals and details of their health.

During his 2015 campaign, Trump’s personal doctor, Harold Bornstein, released a letter saying he could “state unequivocally” that Trump “will be the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency”.

Bornstein later told CNN Trump had dictated the hyperbole-laced note.

South Asia remains one of the least integrated regions in the world. While the EU, ASEAN, and even parts of Africa have made real progress in regional cooperation, SAARC has stagnated — largely due to persistent tensions between India and Pakistan. The idea of South Asian unity shouldn’t be abandoned, but it must be reimagined.

It is time for the other South Asian countries, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan, Maldives and Afghanistan, to explore a new, functional alliance, free from bilateral hostilities and political paralysis. This new bloc could be modular, allowing member states to opt in to specific areas of cooperation without being bound by all protocols.

The potential is transformative. Visa-free travel, mutual right to work, a customs union, banking integration without transaction fees and the removal of import restrictions and letters of credit to boost trade, investment and mobility across the region. This compact could also include mutual recognition of professional qualifications, academic degrees, trademarks and court decisions, helping create a truly common space for business, education and justice.

This is not about creating an anti-India bloc. It is about breaking free from inertia. When regional progress is blocked by one member’s veto or absence, the rest must move forward. India may choose to join later when mutual respect and parity become possible. But the people of South Asia cannot afford to wait forever.

Raheem Jamali Advocate

Quetta

The British government says it will introduce legislation to lower the voting age from 18 to 16, as part of a slew of reforms aimed at modernizing U.K. democracy.

Officials announced a number of what they called “seismic changes” on Thursday, which include allowing bank cards to be used as voter ID and tightening rules on political donations.

The most headline-grabbing shift, however, is that 16- and 17-year-olds will be allowed to vote starting in the next general election. It must be held by August 2029, though the prime minister can choose to call one sooner.

“We cannot take our democracy for granted, and by protecting our elections from abuse and boosting participation we will strengthen the foundations of our society for the future,” Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner said in a statement.

The Labour Party campaigned in part on lowering the voting age last year — in an election with just 59.7% turnout, the lowest since 2001. The reforms must pass Parliament to become law, which appears likely since the Labour Party has a majority in the House of Commons, and the House of Lords traditionally does not block bills promised in the governing party’s platform.

Scotland and Wales already allow 16- and 17-year-olds to vote in certain local elections. This newly proposed change will permit some 1.6 million teenagers to vote in all U.K. elections, according to Reuters.

About 90% of countries and territories around the world have a voting age of 18 or higher, according to UNICEF. The U.K. joins a small but growing list of those that have reduced it to 16 and/or 17, including Australia, Brazil, Cuba, Ecuador, Greece and Indonesia.

A third of U.S. states allow 17-year-olds to vote in primary elections if they will be 18 by the time of the general election. And a dozen U.S. cities — most of them in Maryland — allow people as young as 16 to vote, either in school board elections or all local elections, according to the National Youth Rights Association, which advocates for young people.

Alberto Medina, the communications team lead at the Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE), a Tufts University program focused on the political life of young people in the U.S., is encouraged to see Britain expanding young peoples’ voice and participation in the political process.

“It’s exciting to see this happening at a national level,” Medina says. “And I think it’s something definitely worth paying attention to as we think about how to continue improving youth participation here in the U.S.”

What are the pros and cons? 

Lowering the voting age is a divisive issue, both in the U.K. and the U.S.

The general criticism is that 16-year-olds are not mature enough to participate in elections, both in terms of brain development and political knowledge.

It’s also a politically touchy subject because of concerns that younger voters will support liberal parties over conservatives, in line with recent generational trends. Though Medina notes it’s not necessarily that clear cut, especially in the U.S.: While voters under 30 have long been a bastion for Democrats, they swung heavily towards President Trump in 2024.

Advocates for lowering the age say 16-year-olds may be equally or even better informed than other voters because they’re in school, where they can learn about elections, discuss current events and get support for registering.

And they say that if 16-year-olds can drive, work and join the military, they should be able to cast a vote. The Vietnam War, which drafted millions of Americans as young as 18, was a big factor in lowering the voting age from 21 to 18 in 1971, Medina notes.

In the U.K., it is legal for 16-year-olds to join the Army as soldiers (with parental consent) and work full time, meaning some already pay taxes. That’s one of the main arguments in favor of the change.

“I think if you pay in, you should have the opportunity to say what you want your money spent on, which way the government should go,” Prime Minister Keir Starmer said on Thursday.

But critics, including in the Conservative Party, have pointed out that 16-year-olds cannot legally buy a drink or a lottery ticket, get married or run for office in the U.K. And they doubt the change will actually drive more young people to the polls.

A recent poll of 500 16- and 17-year-olds by Merlin Strategy for ITV News found that only 18% said they would definitely vote if there was an election tomorrow. But support for lowering the voting age was more evenly split, with 51% in favor.

What does the data say? 

In the U.K., a study looking at the 2021 Welsh Parliament election — the first in which 16- and 17-year-olds were allowed to vote — characterized it as a “false start,” arguing the timing of the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted both the education system and the election process.

But a 2023 study from the University of Edinburgh found that younger first-time voters in Scotland “retain a habit” of voting in elections once they start, and participate in greater numbers than older first-time voters.

While data about the impact of younger voting is relatively limited — because it’s so rare — Medina says “the field has known for a very long time that voting is habit-forming.”

“The younger you start, the more likely you are to continue doing it throughout your life,” he says. “And we have evidence that when young people get involved in this process earlier, especially while they’re still in school … It increases participation. It increases turnout.”

That’s also backed up by studies out of Denmark and Austria. And in the U.S., six of the seven states with the highest youth voter turnout in the 2024 election allow voter pre-registration at age 16, according to CIRCLE’s analysis.

“There is a little bit of data out there that shows that when young people, 16- or 17-year-olds are given the chance to do this, that they step up and they participate at least at the same or even higher levels than older adults in the community,” Medina says.

What’s the state of play in the U.S.?

The U.S. doesn’t seem poised to follow in the U.K.’s footsteps anytime soon.

“If you look at the national political landscape, it’s harder to see a change of this magnitude succeeding,” Medina says.

Public opinion polling — while scarce — shows considerable opposition to lowering the voting age. A 2019 Hill-HarrisX survey finding that 75% of registered voters opposed enfranchising 17-year-olds (and even more opposed 16-year-olds being able to vote).

Democratic lawmakers have repeatedly introduced legislation that would lower the U.S. voting age from 18 to 16 in recent years, without success.

And expanding ballot access may be even harder under the Trump administration and a Republican-controlled Congress, which have come under fire for passing laws that voting rights’ groups say will do the opposite.

But change is happening on the local level, with cities in California to New Jersey among the latest to embrace lower age limits.

That’s a win for advocates, who say young voters should be able to weigh in on the issues that are closest to home, from school funding to community safety. The local focus is more than just a political feasibility, Medina says.

“It’s a way to give young people a voice in our democracy and to acknowledge the fact that they are already impacted by policies,” he says.

The government has set out plans to lower the voting age across the UK to 16 by the next general election.

Ministers argue the move will boost engagement in democracy and give young people a say in their future.

But critics claim it could benefit Labour as young people are more likely to vote for left-wing parties.

The government has rejected the idea this is the motivation behind the change, with Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner saying it is about strengthening democracy rather than “trying to rig votes for a particular party”.

While it’s true polls suggest Labour is the most popular party among younger age groups, how this could translate to a real election is not straightforward.

YouGov’s latest voting intention poll puts Labour in the lead amongst 18 to 24-year-olds at 28%, followed by the Greens on 26% and the Liberal Democrats on 20%.

In contrast, the Conservatives were on 9% and Reform UK on 8%.

Some pollsters say that while there’s no reason to think 16 and 17-year-olds would break away from the pattern of young people leaning to the left, there isn’t enough polling of this age group to say with confidence how they would vote.

Anthony Wells, head of European political and social research at YouGov, also points out we don’t yet know if voting tendencies could change if Labour are an unpopular incumbent at the next election – which is likely to be four years away.

Meanwhile, politics is fracturing and Labour’s vote is at risk of being chipped away by smaller parties.

Although Reform UK opposes lowering the voting age and did better amongst older voters at last year’s general election, it is reaching increasing numbers of young people on social media.

Leader Nigel Farage has a big presence on TikTok, with more than one million followers.

It’s not clear if this would translate into votes but the party is polling reasonably well amongst young men, although it performs poorly with young women.

On the left, a new party led by Jeremy Corbyn, who energised young people during his election campaigns as Labour leader, could potentially pick up votes from newly enfranchised teenagers, along with the Greens and the Liberal Democrats.

In the few countries where the voting age has already been lowered to 16, research suggests there has been no impact on the overall result.

In the UK, 16 and 17-year-olds make up only around 2.8% of the population aged 16 or above, so researchers say the impact on party vote share is likely to be negligible.

Turnout for elections also tends to be lower for younger age groups and if this is also true for 16 and 17-year-olds they would be an even smaller proportion of the electorate.

Luke Tryl, UK director of political research group More in Common, says he would not expect this age group to have “an outsized impact”.

However, he adds: “Then again we are in an era where small shares of the vote can deliver you lots of seats in multi-party politics.”

The greatest impact would be more likely to be felt in those individual constituencies where the MP has a small majority and a few hundred – or thousand – additional voters on the electoral roll could make the difference.