Uncategorized
Israel’s home demolitions after terrorist attacks, explained
(JTA) – Less than a hour after a terror attack in eastern Jerusalem on Friday killed three people, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivered a succinct message: Destroy the Palestinian attacker’s home.
“Prime Minister Netanyahu has decided to take immediate action to seal and demolish the home of the terrorist,” said the statement from Netanyahu’s office.
Home demolition orders have almost become a matter of course following Palestinian attacks. They don’t usually make headlines, nor do they tend to spark public outcry. For decades, Israel has used the tactic as a routine instrument of punishment, claiming that the effect of tearing down the homes of terrorists deters future attacks.
But critics question that claim, and say that home demolitions constitute collective punishment that violates international law. At a moment of deep political strife in Israel, the home demolition practice, like many others related to security, generates little political opposition. And while the Israeli Supreme Court, whose power Israel’s right-wing government hopes to limit, can delay home demolitions, it almost always ultimately permits them to go forward.
Here’s how the practice of Israeli home demolition began, how it’s viewed in Israel and abroad, and how it may be changing under Israel’s new government.
Why does Israel destroy the homes of terrorists?
Israel began demolishing homes of Palestinian attackers after it captured the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem, along with other territories, in the 1967 Six Day War. Since then, according to a 2019 assessment by the Israel Democracy Institute, Israel has demolished some 2,000 homes due to terrorism. The demolitions have taken place in the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem, not within Israel’s internationally recognized borders.
Israel claims that demolishing the homes of terrorists acts as a deterrent, a rationale cited last month in a bill introduced by lawmaker Eliahu Revivo, a member of Netanyahu’s Likud Party who also wants to deter attacks by deporting the families of terrorists.
“The national security establishment and the Israeli army have conducted research over the years into dozens of suicide attackers, and it emerged that the one deterrent for suicide attackers is what the consequences for their families will be after the attack,” the text of the bill said.
Home demolitions were largely suspended in 2005 after the Israel Defense Forces found that the practice had no discernible deterrent effect. The demolitions were sporadically reinstituted a few years later and fully brought back by Netanyahu in November 2014 during a wave of Palestinian attacks.
A 2010 research paper by political scientists at Northwestern University and Hebrew University suggested that home demolition works as a deterrent. The authors of the study based their findings on an examination of home demolitions in the five years prior to the army’s 2005 suspension, a period that coincided with the second intifada.
“We show that punitive house demolitions (those targeting Palestinian suicide terrorists and terror operatives) cause an immediate, significant decrease in the number of suicide attacks,” the paper said. “The effect dissipates over time and by geographic distance.”
This year, Netanyahu’s new government, the most right-wing in Israeli history, has indicated it will accelerate and expand the demolition of the homes of terrorists. It recently ordered the closing-off of an apartment belonging to the family of a 13-year-old who shot and wounded two Israelis near Jerusalem’s Old City. The move was unusual because Israel had previously reserved home demolition for attackers who killed people.
Does Israel demolish the homes of Jewish terrorists?
No. The Palestinian family of a boy murdered by a Jewish terrorist sued to have his killer’s home destroyed. The High Court in 2017 rejected the lawsuit, saying too much time had passed since the 2014 murder. The government argued that deterrence was not necessary in the case of Jewish terrorism, because, in the words of Judge Neal Hendel, Jewish terrorists are “a minority of a minority of a minority.” The Israeli government counted a total of 16 Jewish attacks of terrorism in 2015, according to the Jerusalem Post. Israeli Arab politicians, including Knesset member Ahmed Tibi, had called on the government to demolish the Jewish terrorist’s house as a matter of fair treatment.
Is demolishing terrorists’ homes legal?
Yes, according to Israel. No, according to experts in international law.
Israel bases its argument on a regulation from 1945, when Britain controlled what is now Israel, that was carried over into Israeli law when the state was established in 1948. It is known as “Defense regulation (emergency) 1945, regulation 119.”
The regulation is broadly written, allowing a “A Military Commander” to destroy the home of “anyone who offended, or attempted an offense, or assisted offenders or abetted offenders after the fact,” as determined by a military court.
Multiple international law experts say that home demolition is illegal under international law because it is a form of collective punishment, which is banned by the Geneva Conventions. Israel has long argued that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to its presence in territories it has captured, because the land in question was not the internationally recognized territory of any state prior to 1967.
The Biden administration also considers home demolitions to be collective punishment. “We attach a good deal of priority to this, knowing that the home of an entire family shouldn’t be demolished for the action of one individual,” State Department spokesman Ned Price said in 2021.
Israeli human rights groups, including B’tselem and the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, agree with international scholars that the practice violates international law. B’tselem cites both the Fourth Geneva Convention and a verse in Deuteronomy that reads, “Parents shall not be put to death for children, nor children be put to death for parents: they shall each be put to death only for their own crime.”
Who owns the land once a home is demolished?
Under the 1945 regulation, military authorities maintain control of the land, and it reverts to the original owners — if they are present — once military authorities leave.
How long does it take for a home demolition to take place? What happens to the family?
Generally, the military consults with Israel’s intelligence services before ordering a home demolition.In the case of high-profile attacks, however, the order may come down immediately, as it did on Friday. Families have 48 hours to appeal a demolition to the military commander or another relevant authority.
However, Israel’s Supreme Court has reserved the right to review demolition orders. This may delay demolition for months or years, but B’Tselem reports that in the majority of cases, the court ultimately upholds the demolition. In one notable case in 2018, the court stopped the demolition after the family presented evidence showing that the assailant suffered from a mental illness.
Homes may be demolished by bulldozers. Apartments or rooms are generally filled with cement, rendering them unlivable. Families sometimes split up among relatives, at least in the near term, according to a United Nations report.
According to the Jerusalem Post, the army commission that recommended ending the practice in 2005 reported that families of the terrorists often rebuild their homes with compensation funds from the Palestinian Authority and other sources. The Palestinian Authority pays monthly stipends to the families of Palestinians imprisoned by Israel or killed while committing violent attacks. Israel and its advocates decry the payments as an incentive for terrorism.
How many home demolitions have taken place? Are homes demolished for reasons other than deterrence?
According to the Israel Democracy Institute, more than 50 homes “have been either fully or partially demolished” between 2014 and 2019 as a deterrent to terrorism. Hamoked, an Israeli human rights group, placed the total since 2014 at 75, according to Haaretz.
Israel has demolished a far greater number of Palestinian buildings due to lack of a building permit. Palestinian groups and Israeli human rights organizations argue that Palestinians face discrimination in obtaining such permits. Israel also has a policy of demolishing Palestinian dwellings for being built in a closed military zone.
The same academic paper that concluded demolishing the homes of suicide attackers was an effective deterrent also found that home demolitions for other reasons — including as a preventative measure — spurred an increase in terror attacks.
—
The post Israel’s home demolitions after terrorist attacks, explained appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Somalia’s South West State Says It Has Severed Ties With the Federal Government
FILE PHOTO: Somalia’s presidential candidate of South West state Abdiaziz Hassan Mohamed speaks inside the Somali Parliament house in Mogadishu, Somalia April 30, 2018. Photo: REUTERS/Feisal Omar/File Photo
Somalia’s South West state said on Tuesday it was suspending all cooperation and relations with the government in Mogadishu, the latest sign of strain in the Horn of Africa country’s fragile federal system.
At a press conference, South West officials accused the federal government of arming militias and trying to unseat the state’s president, Abdiaziz Hassan Mohamed Laftagareen. Somalia’s defense and information ministers did not respond to Reuters’ requests for comment.
Disputes over constitutional changes, elections and the balance of power between Mogadishu and regional administrations repeatedly open up political fault lines in Somalia. The South West administration says relations with Mogadishu worsened after the federal government pushed through constitutional amendments opposed by some state leaders.
Travel agencies told Reuters on Tuesday that commercial flights between Mogadishu and Baidoa, the administrative capital of South West state, had been halted. Humanitarian flights, including for United Nations operations, were continuing. Baidoa, which lies about 245 km (150 miles) northwest of Mogadishu, is a politically and militarily sensitive city because it hosts federal troops, regional security forces and international humanitarian operations in a zone affected by drought, conflict and displacement.
The Mogadishu government’s relations with other states have also been fraught. Somaliland declared independence in 1991 and has long been outside Mogadishu’s control. The administration of semi-autonomous Puntland said in March 2024 it would no longer recognize the federal government until disputed constitutional amendments were approved in a nationwide referendum.
Semi-autonomous Jubbaland suspended ties with Mogadishu in November 2024 in a dispute over regional elections.
Uncategorized
Report: Iran Sees Control of Strait of Hormuz as Victory Over US, Israel
An LPG gas tanker at anchor as traffic is down in the Strait of Hormuz, amid the U.S.-Israeli conflict with Iran, in Shinas, Oman, March 11, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Benoit Tessier/File Photo
i24 News – Iran is showing no indication it is ready to end the war with the United States and Israel, as officials say Tehran is relying on its control over the Strait of Hormuz to increase global economic pressure and strengthen its position.
According to regional officials cited by The Washington Post, Iran is rejecting diplomatic efforts to identify an off-ramp and instead escalating attacks on neighboring countries. An Iranian diplomat said the strategy is to “make this aggression super expensive for the aggressors,” as Tehran faces sustained military pressure.
The Strait of Hormuz remains central to Iran’s calculations. The waterway carries roughly one-fifth of global fuel shipments, and its partial closure has disrupted energy markets. US President Donald Trump issued a 48-hour deadline for Iran to reopen the route, warning of further escalation if it does not comply.
Iranian officials and diplomats said the leadership views its ability to maintain pressure through the strait as a short-term success, even as infrastructure damage mounts. “They don’t feel any pressure to negotiate,” one European diplomat based in the Gulf said, adding that Iran sees its influence over oil markets as a form of leverage.
At the same time, efforts to mediate a ceasefire have so far failed. Officials from Qatar and Oman approached Iran last week, but Tehran said it would only engage if US and Israeli strikes stopped first. An Iranian diplomat said the country would not accept a “premature ceasefire” and is seeking guarantees, including compensation and commitments to prevent future attacks.
The war has already caused significant damage. The Pentagon says more than 15,000 targets have been struck across Iran, while Iranian authorities report over 1,200 civilian deaths. The conflict has also expanded regionally, with Iranian strikes targeting energy infrastructure in Gulf states following attacks on its own facilities.
Despite mounting losses, analysts say Iran’s leadership believes prolonging the conflict could shift pressure onto Washington and its allies through rising energy prices and regional instability. “We’re still on an escalatory path,” said Alan Eyre, a former US official, adding that Tehran is attempting to “up the costs” rather than move toward negotiations.
Uncategorized
Persistent Iran War, Energy Price Surge Set to Sway Wavering Stocks
Stock ticker. Photo: Ahmad Ardity/Wikimedia Commons.
A Middle East crisis that has convulsed markets should remain the focal point for Wall Street in the near term, as investors stay glued to developments in Iran and the fallout from surging energy prices.
As the US-Israeli war on Iran stretches to three weeks, an over 40% jump in oil prices is driving worries about higher inflation and stagnating economic growth.
Inflationary concerns on Friday were prompting markets to rule out any equity-friendly interest rate cuts this year, which investors previously had been counting on, with futures trading instead suggesting modest chances of hikes in 2026. Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell expressed deep uncertainty at the US central bank’s meeting on Wednesday about how the crisis would factor into the economy, muddying its ability to forecast conditions ahead.
US stocks suffered sharp declines to end the week. The benchmark S&P 500 stock index posted its fourth straight weekly decline and hit a six-month low, while the Nasdaq Composite ended down nearly 10% below its October all-time high.
Middle East tensions escalated this week. Iran attacked energy facilities across the region following Israel’s strike on its gas field, while officials told Reuters on Friday that the US military is deploying thousands of Marines to the Middle East.
“This is a situation that’s so fluid,” said Chris Fasciano, chief market strategist at Commonwealth Financial Network. “We could have a resolution in the next week or it could go on for some time. And the longer it goes on, you start to think about the impacts it could have on the US economy.”
WATCHING OIL, STOCKS’ ‘ORDERLY’ REACTION
Swings in crude prices have rippled through asset classes. US crude settled around $98 a barrel on Friday, while Brent ended around $112. In addition to the attacks on energy infrastructure, traffic has stalled in the Strait of Hormuz, through which around a fifth of the world’s crude oil and liquefied natural gas normally passes.
The 20-day correlation between the S&P 500 and US crude stood at -0.89 late on Friday, according to LSEG data, a strong inverse relationship that showed they have tended to move in opposite directions.
“If you’re a trader, you watch oil prices because I do think that that’s generally giving the leading indicator as to how the financial markets are viewing the outlook for the conflict,” said Eric Kuby, chief investment officer at North Star Investment Management Corp.
The S&P 500 energy sector, which includes shares of oil companies, has gained since crude prices began to spike in late February, but the group accounts for less than a 4% weight in the benchmark index.
The latest declines left the S&P 500 down 6.8% from its record closing high set in late January. The pullback has mostly lacked the chaotic quality of the abrupt equity slide last April following President Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariff announcement that set off broad economic worries, Fasciano said.
“This has been fairly orderly, which I think is an encouraging sign,” Fasciano said. “And I think it’s because the underlying fundamentals for corporate America are still fairly robust and are offering some support.”
TREASURY YIELDS, MARKET TECHNICALS ALSO IN FOCUS
Fast-climbing Treasury yields, driven higher by the energy price spike and caution from global central banks, were looming as a risk factor for stocks. The benchmark 10-year Treasury yield was last at 4.38% on Friday, its highest level since last summer.
Keith Lerner, chief investment officer at Truist Advisory Services, said he was watching whether the 10-year Treasury yield sustainably rises above 4.3%, which could increase pressure on stocks, while he was also eyeing 4.5% as a key level.
“Rates going higher means borrowing costs are somewhat higher. And then that could actually slow the economy,” Lerner said. “At some point, if they keep going higher, then the relative attractiveness of (bond) yields becomes more attractive relative to equities.”
Stocks were also around key technical levels. The S&P 500 on Thursday closed below its 200-day moving average — a closely watched long-term trendline — for the first time since May. With another decline on Friday, the index ended at its lowest point since September and fell below November lows that strategists had also identified as worrisome levels.
Reports on manufacturing, services activity and consumer sentiment highlight a relatively light week ahead for US economic data. A major energy conference in Houston that will feature top global industry executives could draw Wall Street’s attention.
Events in Iran were likely to loom largest. In a note on Thursday morning, analysts at UBS Global Wealth Management said the latest developments were “pushing markets to price in a higher risk of prolonged conflict, deeper infrastructure damage and higher-for-longer crude prices.”
“While a less damaging outcome in the Strait of Hormuz remains possible, recent events have narrowed that path and heightened the risk of continued volatility,” the UBS analysts said.