A US-backed mechanism for getting aid into Gaza should take effect soon, Washington’s envoy to Israel said on Friday ahead of President Donald Trump’s visit to the Middle East, without detailing how this would work with no ceasefire in place.

Israel has been enforcing a months-long blockade on aid to Gaza while vowing to expand its military campaign against the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, which has ruled the enclave since 2007. Experts and Israeli officials have long said that Hamas steals much of the aid to fuel its terrorist operations and sells some of the remainder to Gaza’s civilian population at an increased price. Jerusalem has also said that aid distribution cannot be left to international organizations, which it accuses of allowing Hamas to seize supplies intended for the civilian population.

US Ambassador Mike Huckabee said several partners had already committed to taking part in the new aid arrangement, which would be handled by private companies, but declined to name them, saying details would be released in the coming days.

“There has been a good initial response,” the former Republican governor told reporters at the embassy in Jerusalem.

“There are nonprofit organizations that will be a part of the leadership,” he said, adding that other organizations and governments would also need to be involved, though not Israel.

Tikva Forum, a hawkish Israeli group representing some relatives of hostages held in Gaza, criticized the announcement, saying aid deliveries should be conditional on Hamas releasing the 59 captives in Gaza.

Hamas senior official Basem Naim said the plan was close to “the Israeli vision of militarizing aid” and said it would fail, at the same time warning local parties against “becoming tools in the Zionist occupation’s schemes.”

Trump, who seeks a landmark deal that would see Israel and Saudi Arabia establish diplomatic relations, will visit Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates next week.

Trump had teased a major announcement ahead of the trip. It was unclear if that was what Huckabee announced on Friday.

Anticipation has been building about a new aid plan for Gaza, which has been devastated amid the Israel-Hamas war, a conflict that has displaced most of the enclave’s 2.3 million population.

“It will not be perfect, especially in the early days,” Huckabee said. “It is a logistical challenge to make this work.”

European leaders and aid groups have criticized a plan by Israel, which has prevented aid from entering Gaza since resuming military operations in March and ending a two-month ceasefire, for private companies to take over humanitarian distributions in the enclave.

Israel has accused agencies including the United Nations of allowing aid to fall into the hands of Hamas, which it has said is seizing supplies intended for civilians and given them to its own forces or selling them to raise funds. Hamas denies this.

CRITICISM OF AID PLANS

“The Israelis are going to be involved in providing necessary military security because it is a war zone, but they will not be involved in the distribution of the food or even bringing the food into Gaza,” Huckabee told a press conference.

Asked whether the supply of aid hinged on a ceasefire being restored, Huckabee said: “The humanitarian aid will not depend on anything other than our ability to get the food into Gaza.”

The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) on Friday criticized emerging plans to take over distribution of aid in Gaza floated by both Israel and the United States, saying this would increase suffering for children and families.

A proposal is circulating among the aid community for a Gaza Humanitarian Foundation that would distribute food from four “Secure Distribution Sites,” resembling plans announced by Israel earlier this week, but drew criticism that it would effectively worsen displacement among the Gaza population.

Huckabee said there would be an “initial number” of distribution centers that could feed “perhaps over a million people” before being scaled up to ultimately reach two million.

“Private security” would be responsible for the safety of workers getting into the distribution centers and in the distribution of the food itself, Huckabee said, declining to comment on rules of engagement for security personnel.

“Everything would be done in accordance with international law,” he said.

Mediation efforts by the United States, Qatar, and Egypt have not been successful in implementing a second phase of the ceasefire. Israel demands the total disarmament of Hamas, which the Islamist group rejects.

Hamas has said it is willing to free all remaining hostages seized by its terrorists in attacks on communities in southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, and agree to a permanent ceasefire if Israel pulls out completely from Gaza.

Hamas’s attacks on Oct. 7, 2023, killed 1,200 people and 251 were taken hostage back to Gaza. Israel responded with a military campaign aimed at freeing the hostages and destroying Hamas.

The post Israel Won’t Be Involved in New Gaza Aid Plan, Only in Security, US Envoy Says first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

The final votes were still being tallied when the questions started coming from friends and family in Israel and the United States: when are you leaving?

For many Jewish Canadians, last week’s federal election presented an opportunity to end the mealy-mouthed equivocation of the governing Liberals on antisemitism at home and Israel’s right to re-establish its security in the wake of the October 7 terrorist attacks.

Instead, they got another Liberal minority government, with Mark Carney as prime minister, but the same cast of characters around him.

Justin Trudeau’s government managed to commit numerous gaffes where the Jewish community was concerned, including feting a Waffen SS veteran in parliament. When a firestorm of antisemitic vandalism, arson and intimidation erupted after October 7, Trudeau usually made sure his outrage came with a side of caution against Islamophobia and all forms of hate.

On Israel, the Liberals displayed a moral equivalence that was a mix of outright credulity and cynical opportunism, most notoriously when multiple members of Trudeau’s cabinet, including the minister of innovation, science and industry, Francois-Phillipe Champagne and foreign affairs minister Melanie Joly parroted a Hamas Ministry of Health claim that the Al-Ahli Arab Hospital was bombed by the Israelis.

When the allegation turned out to be false, the government offered a late night Page Z15 style press release that was notable for how perfunctory it was. Trudeau’s government was also perceived as hostile to Jewish charities, or at least those with ties to Israel. It stripped both the Jewish National Fund and the Ne’eman Foundation of their charitable status.

Carney is not Trudeau. But he sent mixed signals to the Jewish community during the campaign.

On the one hand, he appointed Marco Mendicino, a former member of parliament and strong ally of both Israel and the Toronto Jewish community, as his chief of staff. However, he also retained many of Trudeau’s key lieutenants, including foreign minister Joly.

When Thomas Mulcair, the former leader of the socialist New Democratic Party, accused Joly of taking an anti-Israel position for electoral gain, Joly remarked: “Thomas, have you seen the demographics of my riding?”

On a state visit last year, Joly and fellow Liberal MP Ya’ara Sacks, who is a dual Israeli Canadian citizen, posed for a cringe-worthy photo op in which they held hands with Palestinian dictator Mahmoud Abbas.

Sacks fought a bruising campaign against Roman Baber in a riding in which close to 15% of the population is Jewish. At one point, she distributed a leaflet with a swastika on it, implying that Baber, who is a descendant of Jewish Holocaust victims, had some connection to Nazism due to his opposition to COVID restrictions and support for the Freedom Convoy protests in 2022.

Baber defeated Sacks in the election.

Liberal incumbent Adam van Koeverden was videotaped stumping for votes with the men of a local mosque, while a female Liberal colleague was speaking to the “sisters” downstairs. Van Koeverden pledged his support in ending the “genocide” in Gaza and for “Palestinian sovereignty.”

Somehow the Israeli hostages languishing under horrifying conditions and the recent arson and vandalism attacks on synagogues, Jewish day schools, and Jewish-owned business in Toronto and Montreal must have slipped his mind.

Van Koeverden retained his seat by a handy margin.

Last year, longtime Liberal MP Rob Oliphant was recorded by a constituent complaining about his government’s decision to pause funding to UNRWA over the UN agency’s ties to terrorism. Oliphant was so upset that he considered quitting over the decision. In the end, the Trudeau Liberals reinstated the UNRWA funding and never did miss a payment.

Oliphant retained his seat with more than 60% of the vote.

Although the overwhelming majority of Canada’s arms sales go to the United States and Saudi Arabia, under Trudeau’s leadership, the Liberals imposed an arms embargo on Israel and took the unusual step of cancelling a contract with an American defense contractor because Quebec-made ammunition was going to find its way to Israel.

At a campaign event, a heckler asked Carney about the “genocide” in Gaza, to which he responded: “I’m aware. That’s why we have an arms embargo.”

When called out on the statement, Carney implausibly claimed that he somehow didn’t hear the word “genocide” in the question.

Of the 28 Liberal candidates who signed the “Palestine Pledge” — which called for an arms embargo on Israel and unilateral recognition of a state of Palestine — 18 won re-election. They will now make their case for a more aggressive anti-Israel foreign policy to the other 151 Liberal caucus members.

There was, however, some cause for optimism.

Former Green Party MP Jenica Atwin, who the Liberals welcomed to their party in 2021 after her attacks on her former party’s leader Annamie Paul, a Black Jewish woman who refused to demonize Israel, didn’t run for re-election.

And Majid Jowhari, who was alleged to be an agent of the Iranian regime (claims he denied), lost his seat.

Party discipline is strictly imposed in Canada’s parliamentary system. But even assuming Carney does intend to be more supportive of Canadian Jews and respectful of the security needs of a democratic Israeli ally than his predecessor ever was, like Trudeau, he has a parliamentary minority.

The Conservatives are his only serious competition, and their leader, Pierre Poilievre, has been an unapologetic supporter of Israel and Canada’s Jewish community. Poilievre lost his seat and will be out of parliament in the near term, but he will run in a by-election in a friendlier riding.

It’s possible Carney will make common cause with the Conservatives on Israel and the Jews, but given the views of many members of his caucus and the need to distinguish himself from his main rival, it’s more likely that he’ll continue to rely on the support of the NDP, with whom Trudeau held power for two years via a supply and confidence agreement. The other alternative is to look to the separatist Bloc Quebecois.

Neither of the two is a reliable friend of Canadian Jews, but the NDP, who were reduced to seven seats (out of a total of 343 in parliament), is particularly awful.  Their relationship with the Jewish community has deteriorated to the point that, when B’nai Brith sent out questions to each party in advance of the election, the NDP didn’t bother to respond.

The October 7 attacks made emigration a frequent topic of conversation among Canadian Jews. It remains to be seen whether last week’s election result will stop that conversation or accelerate it.

The post What’s Next for Canadian Jews After the Recent Election first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

More than a year and a half after the Hamas-led atrocities of October 7, 2023, 59% of Palestinians polled in the “West Bank” still think that Hamas’ made the “correct decision” to torture, rape, burn alive, murder, and kidnap hundreds of hostages — even including children — according to the most respected Palestinian polling agency.

The new poll by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research asks: “In your view, was Hamas’ decision to launch its offensive against Israel on 7 October a correct or incorrect one?”

The polling shows a continuation of the pattern of decreasing support since December 2023, when the first poll was taken after the October 7 atrocities. It found that 82% of “West Bank” Palestinians thought October 7 was a “correct decision.” In March and June 2024, just over 70% of Palestinians there supported it. In September 2024, support dropped to 64%. And now, 59% still say it was a “correct decision.”

The slow but continuous decline in support directly correlates with the worsening military defeat in Gaza. Although the overwhelming majority of Palestinians supported and still support the atrocities, as the cost goes up, fewer think it was the correct decision.

This is the current Palestinian Authority (PA) message to its people as well. While the PA’s initial response to the Nazi-like pogrom was immediate, spontaneous celebration, it has now changed its message, arguing that while the October 7 atrocities were “legitimate resistance,” the suffering it caused Palestinians in Gaza has made them unjustified. Abbas’ advisor Mahmoud Al-Habbash expressed this explicitly when he stressed five times that October 7 was “legitimate resistance” before saying that “what Hamas carried out in terms of its consequences is illegitimate because it led to catastrophic consequences.”

As the poll shows, support is even lower among Gazans, who are the ones suffering directly from the war. Those there who see the decision as “correct” is now at 37%, having dropped from a high of 71%.

Interestingly, a total of 78% of Gazans blame Israel or the US for “the current suffering of Gazans” while only 12% blame Hamas. Coupled with that is the finding that 77% of Palestinians overall (and 85% of Palestinians in the PA-controlled “West Bank”) “oppose the disarmament of Hamas in the Gaza Strip in order to stop the war on Gaza.”

The element that has certainly remained steady is that any Palestinian opposition to October 7 is not rooted in moral rejection of the atrocities, but in dissatisfaction with its fallout. It is not the massacre that many Palestinians regret but the cost.

Ephraim D. Tepler is a contributor to Palestinian Media Watch (PMW). Itamar Marcus is the Founder and Director of PMW, where a version of this article first appeared. 

The post Nearly 60% of Palestinians Under the Palestinian Authority: October 7 Was ‘Correct Decision’ first appeared on Algemeiner.com.