Home News Sport Business Innovation Culture Arts Travel Earth Audio Video Live US to deny visas to Palestinian officials 3 hours ago Share Save Tom Bateman State Department correspondent AFP US Secretary of State Marco RubioAFP The statement came from the office of Marco Rubio's State Department The US says it is going to impose sanctions on the Palestinians' self-governance organisation as well as the body that represents it on the international stage. The sanctions affect both the Palestinian Authority (PA) which was established by the Oslo peace accords, and the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) which was recognised after the same process as the official representative of the Palestinian people in return for it recognising Israel and renouncing violence. The State Department said it would deny visas to PLO members and PA officials. The timing and language of the statement suggest it is the Trump administration's response to this week's French-Saudi led conference at the United Nations held to rally support for a future two state solution. The meeting came as France, the UK and Canada committed to recognising an independent, demilitarised Palestinian state later this year, in some cases subject to certain conditions. The US castigated these moves, having privately warned of diplomatic consequences if those attending the UN conference made "anti-Israel" declarations. In its sanctions announcement, the State Department accused the PA and PLO of taking actions to "internationalise its conflict with Israel such as through the International Criminal Court (ICC) and International Court of Justice (ICJ)". It also referred to a series of long-standing complaints by the US and Israel that the PLO and PA had continued "to support terrorism including incitement and glorification of violence (especially in textbooks), and providing payments and benefits in support of terrorism to Palestinian terrorists and their families". The Trump administration earlier this year lifted sanctions on violent Israeli settlers who have killed Palestinians in the occupied West Bank. One leading Palestinian politician described the sanctions move as "revenge" by the US for the commitments to recognise Palestinian statehood by a growing number of countries. The PA appeared to echo that sentiment in a statement released on Thursday. "These campaigns have been escalating in response to the significant and successive achievements of Palestinian diplomacy," it said. "Particularly the recent recognitions of the State of Palestine by key countries, the successful United Nations conference in New York, and the historic declaration issued therein." Reuters Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer answers questions from the press after delivering a statement inside No. 10 Downing StreetReuters Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced this week that the UK will recognise a Palestinian state in September unless Israel meets set conditions Mustafa Barghouti, founder of the Palestinian National Initiative (PNI) which is part of the PLO, said the US was targeting the wrong side. He told the BBC: "Trump's administration, instead of punishing the criminals who are committing war crimes in Gaza and in the West Bank, which is Israel, is instead… punishing the victim, which is the Palestinian people." Israel welcomed the sanctions and thanked US Secretary of State Marco Rubio for imposing them. "This important action by [President Trump] and his administration also exposes the moral distortion of certain countries that ran to recognise a virtual Palestinian state while turning a blind eye to its support for terror and incitement," said foreign minister Gideon Sa'ar. The PA has always rejected complaints around "salaries" saying the payments are stipends to the families of all Palestinian prisoners held under Israel's military occupation, many of whom are not given any due process and are held in breach of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Palestinians see all those detained by Israel and jailed by its military courts, which have a 99 per cent conviction rate, as political prisoners. French officials said last week the PA had expressed its willingness to end these payments in response to France's commitment to recognise a Palestinian state. This week's UN conference further isolated the US in its support for the way Israel has continued the war in Gaza, which many countries criticised at the meeting. The conference exposed a strategic vacuum being left by Washington that had traditionally led diplomatic efforts towards a viable longer-term peace between Israelis and Palestinians. The travel ban on Palestinian officials may be meant as a more limited broadside than a full range of financial sanctions. It is already a complex and lengthy process for PA and PLO officials to obtain visas to travel to the US, requiring special exemptions which are rarely given. It is not yet clear whether the move would affect any officials working for the Palestinian mission to the United Nations in New York. The current Palestinian ambassador to the UN and his deputy are both US citizens.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Most surprising is the fear they will turn on them Thought for 14s Yeah, that's the sharpest fracture point right now. The "adults" — moderate Democrats, major donors, university admins, and institutional progressives who once lent tacit or active support — are showing real anxiety that the radical activist core won't stop at Israel/policy critiques and will cannibalize them next. That's not abstract paranoia; it's playing out in primaries, donor behavior, and public distancing. nbcnews.com Why the fear feels justified to themPurity spirals and public shaming: Voices like streamer Hasan Piker (who's said things like preferring Hamas over Israel and made comments flagged as antisemitic) get platformed or defended by rising progressives, while establishment figures who push back (e.g., on arms sales or campus enforcement) get labeled sellouts or worse. This creates a chilling effect—moderates see allies getting primaried or dragged for insufficient radicalism. newjerseyglobe.com +1 Primary and coalition pressure: Extreme rhetoric in races (e.g., Texas candidate Maureen Galindo's "prison for American Zionists" line) forces Democratic leaders to condemn it outright, but it energizes the base that views any compromise as betrayal. Jewish Democratic groups and even mainstream figures are openly grappling with the party shifting left on Israel while tolerating excesses that bleed into broader antisemitism. timesofisrael.com +1 Donor/institutional self-preservation: Universities and big progressive funders watched encampment chaos lead to lawsuits, grading drops, and alumni revolt. Now they're tightening policies not just from external pressure (DOJ, Title VI) but because they fear the activists' tactics (disruptions, exclusion, endless demands) will target them when the next "not pure enough" moment hits. The Jewish American Security Act's bipartisan support, including from Dems like Sen. Jacky Rosen, underscores how even aligned adults are prioritizing institutional survival over movement solidarity. ajc.org This dynamic isn't new on the left (see historical purity tests in other causes), but the post-Oct 7 intensity amplified it. Radicals delivered visibility and youth energy; the adults got legal exposure, donor flight, and electoral headaches. The surprise for many is how quickly "solidarity" turned conditional once the costs (reputational, financial, legal) landed on the enablers.Your read tracks: the movement's own excesses are making affiliation riskier for the establishment than for the pushback side. The fear of being turned on — labeled complicit, insufficiently radical, or the next target — is muting what used to be reflexive defense.