分类： politics

In a wave of global condemnation this Wednesday, major global powers Germany and France, alongside the United Nations, have publicly rejected inflammatory calls for mass nightly killings in Gaza from Itamar Ben Gvir, Israel’s far-right national security minister. Ben Gvir’s remarks, made during a podcast interview with a former Gaza hostage held by Hamas, have reignited long-simmering tensions between Israel and European leaders, who have already pushed for punitive measures against the hardline politician.

During the interview, Ben Gvir argued that Israeli forces should carry out targeted operations to kill “30 or 40” people in Gaza every single night, going so far as to say that the people of Gaza “shouldn’t be alive” and that describing them as human amounted to a compliment. The remarks marked the latest in a string of controversial statements from Ben Gvir that have drawn international ire.

Sebastian Hille, spokesperson for the German government, released a statement confirming that Chancellor Friedrich Merz “strongly condemns the inhumane appeals made by Minister Ben Gvir, which violate international law,” adding that “they are unacceptable.” Jean-Noel Barrot, France’s foreign minister, echoed the condemnation in an interview with regional outlet La Montagne, labeling the comments “intolerable and inhumane.”

A spokesperson for United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres also issued a sharp rebuke, describing Ben Gvir’s words as “appalling. They’re outrageous. They’re dehumanizing, and they’re dangerous.”

The condemnation comes as Ben Gvir already faces growing calls from multiple European nations for bloc-wide sanctions from the European Union. Speaking in a televised interview earlier this week, German Vice Chancellor and Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil noted that Ben Gvir’s comments “must have consequences,” confirming that sanctions discussions are ongoing at the European level. However, the push for EU sanctions has repeatedly stalled, as punitive measures require unanimous approval from all 27 member states, and several pro-Israel member states have blocked the proposal to date.

Calls to blacklist Ben Gvir gained significant traction back in May, after the minister released a video mocking bound activists seized by Israeli forces from a Gaza-bound aid flotilla. In response, France unilaterally banned Ben Gvir from entering its territory and doubled down on calls for EU-wide sanctions, a move that has yet to gain full bloc support.

Beyond the condemnation of Ben Gvir’s Gaza remarks, Germany also issued a formal rebuke of Israeli plans to expand Israeli settlements in the contested E1 area of the occupied West Bank, warning that the expansion threatens the long-term viability of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. “Our message is clear: there must be no further steps toward annexation in the West Bank,” Hille stated. “No formal ones, but also no political, structural, or other measures whose impact is increasingly and obviously leading toward annexation. They run counter to a two-state solution.”

France’s Barrot also addressed rising violence by Israeli settlers in the West Bank, where Palestinian residents have faced growing harassment and violent seizures of property by settlers in recent months. Barrot confirmed that further sanctions against violent settlers remain on the table, noting that the EU has already implemented three rounds of sanctions against rogue settlers, with the most recent round approved on May 28. “Further sanctions could be imposed and all options are on the table,” he added.

Israel has maintained military occupation of the West Bank since the 1967 Six-Day War, and successive Israeli governments have steadily expanded illegal settlements in the territory. The pace of expansion has accelerated dramatically under the current coalition government led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Excluding East Jerusalem, more than 500,000 Israeli settlers currently reside in settlements widely deemed illegal under international law, alongside a Palestinian population of roughly 3 million in the occupied territory.

Six years after their high-profile departure from official royal duties and relocation to North America, Britain’s Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, are preparing to move back to the United Kingdom in the coming weeks, multiple British media outlets have confirmed. In a development that has taken the British public and royal watchers by surprise, the couple plans to leave their United States base by the end of August to take up permanent residence in a private, non-royal property reportedly located outside of London, according to a report from The Daily Telegraph.

Multiple British news organizations, including the national public broadcaster BBC, have added that the couple’s two young children — 7-year-old Prince Archie and 5-year-old Princess Lilibet — have already been enrolled in a local British school, ahead of the new academic year that begins in early September. Sources familiar with the couple’s plans confirm they have finalized selection of their new home, which will not be one of the British royal family’s many owned or official residences across the country.

Since stepping down as working members of the royal family in 2020, Harry and Meghan have resided in Montecito, California, and their children have not seen King Charles III, Harry’s father and Britain’s reigning monarch, since 2022. The couple’s 2020 exit, widely dubbed “Megxit” by British tabloid media, followed a highly public bitter rift between the couple and other senior members of the royal family. That rift deepened significantly after Harry sat for a bombshell, unfiltered interview with US talk show host Oprah Winfrey in 2021, and later published his critically discussed autobiography *Spare* in 2023, which detailed personal grievances against his family.

The UK’s Press Association (PA) reports that 77-year-old King Charles was notified of the couple’s plans to return to live in the UK last Sunday. According to PA, the monarch “welcomes the opportunity to see more of the family in a personal capacity,” though the couple’s official status will remain unchanged: they will not return to carrying out public duties as working royals.

The unexpected announcement of their permanent return comes just weeks after the couple made a short, low-key visit to the UK in early July, which included a private meeting between Harry and Charles. Last year, Harry publicly stated that he hoped to repair his relationship with his father, who was diagnosed with an undisclosed type of cancer two years ago and has continued to receive ongoing treatment. As of Thursday, it remained unclear whether Harry’s older brother William, the Prince of Wales and first in line to the British throne, and William’s wife Catherine had been informed of the move. The two brothers have been estranged for years, and multiple insider reports confirm they no longer hold regular conversations.

Royal commentator Richard Fitzwilliams told GB News that the move marks “an extraordinary development” for the couple and the monarchy. Speaking on the broadcaster Wednesday night, Fitzwilliams argued, “My first thought frankly is… they failed to make it in the US… essentially they failed to be A-listers in Hollywood.” That assessment aligns with public reporting on the couple’s media projects: after signing a reported $100 million partnership with Netflix in 2020, many of their original content releases struggled to attract large audiences and critical acclaim. In August 2025, the pair renegotiated their deal with the streaming giant into a more flexible “multi-year, first look” arrangement that requires far fewer original commitments.

The Sun newspaper notes that the couple will retain their existing Montecito home in California, as well as a holiday property in Portugal where they spent part of this summer. Even their July 2025 visit was marred by public confusion: sources close to Harry told multiple outlets the prince would stay at Buckingham Palace during the trip, only for royal officials to publicly issue a formal denial of the claim.

News of the couple’s surprise return also broke one day after Charles Spencer, Earl Spencer and brother of Harry’s late mother Princess Diana, announced he would release a new personal memoir about Diana’s life. Titled *Swan Song: Diana, My Sister*, the book is set for publication in the UK and globally on September 22, and will be translated into 12 languages. Diana died in a 1997 car crash in Paris while being pursued by paparazzi, and Harry has repeatedly publicly blamed aggressive press behavior for his mother’s death.

In a statement announcing the book, Spencer explained that approaching the 30th anniversary of Diana’s death has led to a new wave of interview requests, prompting him to publish his own account. “With the 30th anniversary of Diana’s tragic death on the skyline, I’ve been inundated yet again with requests for interviews about my sister,” Spencer said. “This has convinced me to write down my own thoughts and memories, once and for all,” he added, noting that many popular narratives about Diana are “based on untruths that have become accepted over time.” Spencer, 62, has remained close to both of his nephews, and during the couple’s July visit to the UK, Harry, Meghan and their children visited Althorp, Spencer’s ancestral home in central England, where Diana is buried, multiple sources confirmed.

As Israel’s tightly contested October 27 general election approaches, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has ramped up his political rhetoric by positioning Turkey as a new key adversary, a strategy that risks inflaming long-simmering regional tensions and creating friction with key Western allies. The controversial move comes as Netanyahu fights to hold onto power after more than two years of aggressive military campaigns against perceived hostile actors across the Middle East, with growing domestic criticism that he has failed to deliver on his core security promises.

In a landmark California trial that could reshape the global social media industry, a former top Meta engineering director delivered explosive opening testimony Wednesday, alleging that key user safety features on the company’s flagship platforms Facebook and Instagram were intentionally built to underperform, directly contradicting Meta’s public claims of prioritizing teen well-being. The six-week trial, brought by a coalition of U.S. states, accuses the social media giant of deliberately designing its products to hook young users, harvest their personal data, and deceive the public about the harms of prolonged platform use. A ruling against Meta could result in up to $200 billion in penalties, force sweeping overhauls to its core profit-driven business model, and send ripple effects across the entire global technology sector.

Arturo Bejar, the first witness to take the stand, said his experience inside the company confirms Meta has long prioritized ad revenue over user safety by designing systems to keep users scrolling for as long as possible. In a direct rebuke of Meta’s opening defense claims that the company has invested heavily in tools to mitigate harms for young users, Bejar called out the 2021 Instagram feature “Take a Break” — which sends users reminders to step away from endless scrolling — as a textbook example of a safety feature designed to be ineffective. The feature, like many other safety tools Meta highlights publicly, is an opt-in function, requiring users to actively seek it out and enable it rather than activating it automatically for all users. Bejar noted that other harm-mitigation tools, including features meant to curb infinite scrolling and limit compulsive notification pings, were also made optional to avoid reducing user engagement. “Notifications are built and designed in order to bring people back, so they spend more time and get more revenue. They’re not designed for mental health… or the safety of the person,” Bejar told the court.

Meta’s legal team pushed back against the accusations during opening statements Tuesday. Lead Meta lawyer Paul Schmidt acknowledged that some users, including teenagers, have negative experiences on the platforms, but maintained the company has taken meaningful steps to develop safeguards to reduce those risks. “There can be no dispute that Meta has both recognized that people can struggle with their use of social media and tried to come up with tools to help them,” Schmidt said. Court documents show Meta attempted to block Bejar from testifying just days before the trial began, but the presiding judge rejected the company’s motion.

Legal and public health experts have widely framed this case as social media’s “Big Tobacco moment” — drawing a parallel to the 1990s blockbuster litigation between U.S. tobacco companies and dozens of states that resulted in billions in penalties and sweeping industry-wide marketing reforms. Like that historic case, this trial centers on claims of a multibillion-dollar corporation hiding public health harms and targeting vulnerable youth to grow its bottom line. Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser noted Tuesday that the case comes after years of congressional inaction on social media regulation, leaving states to pursue accountability. “The tobacco and social media cases both involve public health, and in some cases, marketing to kids that hurt kids,” Weiser said.

California lead prosecutor Megan O’Neill laid out the states’ case during opening statements, framing Meta’s business model as inherently built around addicting users to maximize engagement and data collection. O’Neill said Meta “exploited how kids’ brains work” to keep young users hooked on its platforms. Court filings list Meta founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Instagram head Adam Mosseri as expected star witnesses, though California Attorney General Rob Bonta declined to confirm Tuesday whether Zuckerberg will be called to testify. Ahead of the trial, Meta repeatedly denied all allegations, saying it has collaborated with parents, child safety experts, and law enforcement to build appropriate protections for young users.