German rearmament's genocidal implications, this time via Israel

German rearmament's genocidal implications, this time via Israel

By Hebh Jamal

As Germany deepens arms cooperation with Israel, its professed commitment to human rights & 'concern' for Palestinians rings hollow, writes Hebh Jamal.

The German chancellor Friedrich Merz posted on X a photo of himself with Netanyahu – who is wanted by the ICC for war crimes in Gaza – with a heartfelt message to him and the Israeli people: “I wish for the Israeli people that, after years of terror and war, a better time will dawn. Germany will stand by your side in friendship.”

The post comes after a visit to Jerusalem on Sunday and a joint press conference between Merz and Netanyahu to reaffirm Germany’s commitment to Israel “Germany must stand up for the existence and security of Israel” he said.

A meeting of this nature would assume it was Israel who experienced a full-fledged genocide for the last two years and their people are the ones languishing in makeshift tents after nearly every building in Gaza was obliterated, and not the Palestinian people.

Just some weeks ago, Germany announced it will resume arms exports to Israel after a so-called pause in August due to international human rights violations. Allegedly, Merz was “profoundly concerned about the continued suffering” of the people in the Gaza strip.

However, not all deliveries were halted, and in fact those with existing contracts would not be impacted by the ban. The following month in July, over €2 million in military equipment were reportedly given government approval to be shipped to Israel.

And now, not only had Germany resumed arms exports following a pathetic partial suspension, but it signed a $4.5bn deal for an Israeli-made missile defence shield. The largest arms exports agreements in Israeli history.

How is it that Germany approved its largest arms export agreement just months after professing deep concern for Palestinian safety, especially as Israel continues to violate the ceasefire? Upon observation, there is in fact a consistent pattern that highlights that the German government’s commitment to international law is simply performative.

Germany invokes legal and moral principles rhetorically, even as it deliberately undermines them to preserve its so-called Reason of State.

Germany’s commitment to Israel

The Reason of State or Staatsräson is Germany’s political doctrine declared by former chancellor Angela Merkel to the Israeli Knesset in 2008. There she said that Germany will safeguard Israel’s security and make it a core national interest – similarly to what Merz reaffirmed just last weekend. Time and time again, the German Staatsräson overrides any political or legal considerations and is invoked continuously when referencing Israeli crimes.

Routinely, pro-Palestinian activists are met with harsh criminalisation, police violence, and invasive raids simply for opposing Germany’s complicity in war crimes, despite full awareness of the scale of destruction in Gaza.

Just recently a German scientific institution, the Max Planck Institute, published a study in which researchers analyse the human toll of the genocide and estimated that the real death count in Gaza is over 100,000. They also showed that life expectancy fell by 44% in 2023 and 47% in 2024, equivalent to the loss of 34 and 36 years.

Even with all this knowledge on the extent of Israeli war crimes against the Palestinian people, Germany refuses to end its complicity.

Even Max Planck Institute, the very institution that pushed such studies proving a genocide, has strong deep and longstanding institutional ties with Israel spanning far beyond simple academic exchange. They receive millions from the federal government to fund collaboration programs and there was even a call from researchers within the institute to end its unconditional support for Israel. A call that fell on deaf ears.

Military objections

The occasional criticism from institutions like Max Planck and political actors like Merz must not be mistaken for a real diversion from the Staatsräson. Now more than ever Germany will attempt to strengthen its ties with Israel and will continue to reiterate their commitment to the settler colony.

Germany is now scrambling to strengthen its armed forces after years of struggling to recruit enough soldiers and volunteers. For the first time since conscription was suspended in 2011, the government is preparing a “needs-based conscription” model that the Bundestag could vote on if recruitment targets cannot be met.

After World War II, expressions of German nationalism were heavily discouraged, and the new Federal Republic adopted an anti-militarist political culture: Germany was barred from having an army until 1955, and even after the Bundeswehr was created, it remained tightly constrained in size, mandate, and deployment.

Today, however, as Germany rapidly increases the Bundeswehr’s budget and seeks to rebuild its military capacity, you will see Merz and the German political elite consistently invoke the Staatsräson during this country’s intentional shift to somehow prove they are not returning to militarism and fascism.

Commitment to Israel is not some moral predicament for the state. We know they are painfully aware of their complicity in war crimes. Instead, commitment to Israel will be reinforced in order for Germany to fulfil their geopolitical goals and re-enter the world stage as a European power once again. Thus, we will see more attempts to further Israeli collaborations on every institutional and political level, and more and more money and weapons being sent to Israel while paying the occasional lip service to international law and a commitment to the two state solution.

And us, the annoying Palestinians and pro-Palestinian citizens and residents, will face the brunt of state repression. There will continue to be attempts to stop movements and activists infringing on the country’s military objectives. We will continue to be arrested, face fines and court hearings for demanding a free Palestine. And we will undoubtedly be censored from educational institutions for holding convictions that challenge the damned Staatsräson.

Author

Hebh Jamal is a Palestinian American journalist based in Germany.

Disclaimer

Opinions expressed in this article remain those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The New Arab's editorial team or CEMAS Board.

T Hoxha: Is the UK arbitrarily detaining pro-Palestine activists in inhumane conditions?

T Hoxha: Is the UK arbitrarily detaining pro-Palestine activists in inhumane conditions?

By Asim Qurehi, The New Arab, 01 September 2025

A pro-Palestine activist held in a UK private prison for 2 years pre-trial is on a 3-week hunger strike to protest the punitive treatment she's faced.

In November 2024, Teuta Hoxha (also known as T), along with other actionists were arrested by UK police for allegedly being involved in an action to disarm drones and quadcopters made by Elbit Systems. These weapons of war were due to be delivered to the Israeli occupation forces, currently enacting a genocide in Gaza.

The entirety of the actionist group known as the Filton 24 have been remanded in custody, being refused bail over allegations that they pose a threat to public order. What this also means, is they will have been detained in prison for two years before trial.

Initially T Hoxha was taken to HMP Bronzefield women’s prison along with other female actionists that had been arrested. They were able to have limited communication with one another, but what was immediately clear, was the role that the prison authorities desired to play in punishing Hoxha and the others.

HMP Bronzefield is a privately run prison by the company Sodexo Justice Services – so not actually His Majesty’s Prison. The private prison model means that for every prisoner they house, they are paid a fixed fee – amounting to approximately £66,000 per person per year. This means that the fewer resources the prison expends on a prisoner, the more profit they make.

By maximising prisoner occupancy, and minimising expenditure, Sodexo is able to turn the warehousing of human beings into a profitable business.

One would assume that a profit-making business would be less inclined to involve itself politically in the lives of the prisoners it holds – but nothing can be further from the truth. The private prison environment echoes the politics of the world we live in and replicates the over-criminalisation of those in its ‘care’. Thus, the prison environment becomes punitive beyond its role.

Within the first month of her detention, in December 2024 Hoxha was deprived of food. Her diary from the time documented: “I’m very hungry and have taken to eating mayo out of the sachets. Even pepper granules. Asked the screw to check for food, they said “eat from your canteen”. After several attempts, they reluctantly checked: no dinner for me.”

It's political

The refusal to provide her with food at the time is not just about the constant private prison exigency of reducing costs, but also forms as part of the need for the prison system to ‘play its role’ in acting punitively towards prisoners – especially those accused of political crimes.

Earlier this year, Hoxha along with another female prisoner was removed from HMP Bronzefield and placed in another Sodexo private run prison, HMP Peterborough. Again, this act fit the pattern of punitive actions, as Hoxha was denied easy visitation from her London-based loved-ones – now being too far and too expensive for them to visit on a regular basis.

Since then, she has been in a continued battle for her rights within the prison system, as they have sought to malign her for her alleged actions. This all came to a head on 11 August 2025 when she was forced to go on hunger strike based on three demands: That her library job and recreational classes be restored, that she receives all her withheld mail and that censorship of her mail ends.

The authorities only registered her hunger strike on the fourth day, despite continued notification of its start – not providing her with any vitamins or electrolytes to keep her safe. Her first medical check happened on day eight.

I once carried out a solidarity hunger strike with prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. I can tell you that it is no joke. The body begins to cannibalise itself – eating away at you and leaving you a shell of yourself. You lose all ability to concentrate and are frequently dizzy. That was me after a week, and T Hoxha is now into her third week.

In fact, 75 current and former medical professionals in the NHS and prison authorities have signed a letter with the warning that Hoxha’s life may be at risk if she’s not given the needed treatment.

She explained that the prison guards attempted to break her – saying that it won’t harm she’ll only harm herself – that the act is insignificant. She replied:

“Insignificant to you maybe, but when the state has taken your house, your job, nearly two years of your life on remand…then the natural disposition is to want to hold on to every little bit of autonomy. Pushing for my library job isn’t just about being in a space which to me feels like a warm drink in cold hands, but it’s about rejecting the attacks on my character that happen with every decision made by the system.”

By 25 August, T Hoxha’s blood sugar level was 2.7 and instead of trying to help her, the nurse attempted to get her to sign a waiver form – alleviating the prison staff from any responsibility for her health care.

Counter-terrorism

Coupled with her difficulties of being a remand prisoner, she has been doubly criminalised by being categorised as an ‘extremist’ and is regularly referred to by staff as a terrorist – designations she regularly challenges.

The amorphous categorisations of extremism play a significant role, as guards and authorities became ‘moral’ arbiters of the detention experience – exercising their authority to act punitively because of what these categorisations do to dehumanise the prisoners.

One obscene example came recently as a well-wisher rang HMP Peterborough to encourage them to take care of T Hoxha – the caller was met with derision by the receptionist – who herself was actually unaware of what Hoxha has been charged with, and superimposed her own ideas of why she should be treated as a criminal.

The call ended abruptly with the callous laughter of the receptionist, which spoke volumes. We know that these private prisons do not simply act as an outsourced facility, but they are extensions of the violence of the state. They ideologically take on the narrative of the state, and abuse their authority to punish political prisoners further.

At this point, it is imperative that more pressure is put on HMP Peterborough for the sake of T Hoxha – if nothing else – it may well save her life. What she is asking for is so small in grand picture of her rights, that seventeen days of refusing these needs can only be interpreted as vindictive.

Through this treatment, the prison has not only exposed their punitive approach to political prisoners but what happens to prisoners behind the scenes who have no protection from public support.

Author

Dr Asim Qureshi is the Research Director of the advocacy group CAGE and has authored a number of books detailing the impact of the global War on Terror.

Disclaimer

Opinions expressed in this article remain those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The New Arab editorial team or those of CEMAS board.

Albanese on Gaza, Western hypocrisy and the rise of global solidarity

UN special rapporteur Francesca Albanese on Gaza, Western hypocrisy and the rise of global solidarity

By Alba Nabulsi

The New Arab Meets: Francesca Albanese to speak more on how hunger is weaponised in Gaza, why solidarity is a political necessity, and the fight for justice.

Francesca Albanese, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories, has become one of the most incisive and vital voices of our time.

Yet in the United States, her words are rarely heard.

Major networks and newspapers either ignore her reports or label them “biased,” while political elites push to discredit her entirely. In Washington, her very name is almost unspeakable.

Across the Global South, however, Albanese’s interventions resonate powerfully. She articulates what many governments and movements from Latin America to Africa have long felt: that a new international order is emerging, one not subordinated to the West but grounded in dignity, solidarity, and justice.

In an interview with The New Arab, Francesca Albanese discusses how Palestine exposes Western hypocrisy and how the Global South is reshaping international solidarity and justice.

The new works of street artist Harrygreb attached to trastevere to support Palestine and Francesca Albanese, who for years criticizes the Israeli occupation in Palestine and denounces the violence and violations of human rights by Israel.

The New Arab: You often speak about an 'ethical pragmatism' emerging from the Global South. What do you mean by this?

Francesca Albanese: Something extraordinary is happening. Countries across Latin America, Africa, and Asia are no longer content with being at the margins of the world order. This is not about abstract ideology but about survival and dignity. What I call “ethical pragmatism” is exactly this: politics rooted in life, rights, and justice.

The Global South is saying: enough with dependency, enough with vassalage to the United States and Europe.

In Bogotá, and later in The Hague, I felt this shift clearly. We are witnessing a new multilateralism that rejects subordination, emancipates itself from Western influence, and brings with it alternative visions — such as African Ubuntu, Colombian magical realism, and indigenous cosmologies.

It is a process of rewriting international law, not to destroy it, but to transcend it, to give it new life.

How does Palestine fit into this global realignment?

Palestine is the open wound that exposes the hypocrisy of the West. The US and the EU constantly invoke human rights, but when it comes to Israel, every principle is suspended.

For the Global South, standing with Palestine is not an act of charity — it is political emancipation. It means saying: “We refuse to accept rules designed by others to perpetuate inequality.”

That is why Palestine today stands at the centre of a new international realignment.

You have spoken about "healing" as a political category. How does this apply to Palestine?

Every conflict leaves wounds, but the Palestinian trauma was never healed. It has been manipulated and turned into a genocidal project. Israel now advances claims even more extreme than those of the Hutu in Rwanda or the Serbs in Srebrenica.

History always shows the same pattern: there comes an “awakening,” when perpetrators recognise what they have done.

Already, suicides among Israeli soldiers who believed they were “defending their homeland” are alarming. But this awakening comes too late for Palestinians, who continue to endure the cost with resilience and determination.

Starvation has been used as a weapon in Gaza. How do you respond to that?

I cannot even imagine what it means to watch your children die of hunger. I do not have space within me to process such cruelty.

Hunger has become a method: a tool to turn human vulnerability itself into an instrument of annihilation. It is the opposite of healing, the opposite of care.

Many compare Israel today to apartheid South Africa. Is this a fair analogy?

Absolutely. South Africa is among the countries most outspoken in demanding sanctions, arms embargoes, and the isolation of Israel. And they are right. Israel must be treated as apartheid South Africa once was — isolated until change becomes inevitable.

Genocides cannot be stopped through verbal politics that ignore human rights; the response must be concrete. This does not mean cutting ties with critical Israelis, but rather with a state that continues to act with total impunity.

Zionism is not only of Jewish origin; it is a political ideology. Many Jews want nothing to do with it, while many evangelicals strongly support it.

Local governments also have a role to play: they can declare their cities “genocide-free,” refuse products labelled “Made in Israel,” and cut institutional ties that amount to complicity.

At the international level, what is urgently needed is the presence of peacekeepers — a global force, under UN direction, capable of interposition and of protecting civilians from violence.

Such a mission must also address the presence of settlers, who cannot remain in occupied territory if there is to be any just resolution.

Ultimately, if Israel refuses to recognise the Palestinian authority over their own land, the alternative that remains is a single democratic state with equal rights for all.

Some activists insist that "Palestine is a feminist issue." Do you agree?

Entirely. Liberation from colonial violence is also liberation from patriarchy. The two are intertwined. I often use childbirth as a metaphor: immense pain, but also the birth of something new.

That is how I imagine the future: power in the feminine, power that heals and generates. Palestine teaches us this.

You have been censored and attacked personally. How do you live with that?

It is exhausting but revealing. These attacks expose the system's weaknesses. Anyone who defends Palestine today is accused of anti-Semitism, of terrorism, and is personally targeted. It is punishment, plain and simple.

I have become a symbol not by choice, but because everyone who dares to speak is punished. That is why I say we must act collectively, depersonalise the struggle, and become what I call “moral warriors.”

Looking forward, what role can the Global South play?

It is already reshaping the world. While the West clings to obsolete paradigms, the Global South is rewriting the agenda. Not Oslo, not frameworks that have already failed, but solidarity as the foundation of politics.

Twenty years ago, the alter-globalisation movement wanted to “change the world without taking power,” and it was crushed. Today’s generation is more conscious, more interconnected.

This is a historical moment that reminds me of V for Vendetta: people uniting not around leaders, but around values and solidarity. And the Global South is the engine of this transformation.

Ultimately, what message does Palestine convey to the world?

Solidarity is not a luxury, but a political necessity. Genocides are not stopped by rhetoric, but by concrete action. International law must be rewritten, not manipulated. And that from the peripheries of empire — from the South silenced for centuries — comes today the strength to create a different, more just world.

Author

Alba Nabulsi is a Palestinian-Italian journalist, lecturer, and translator based in Padua, Italy.