A ‘dangerous’ moment: Advocates denounce arrest of activist Mahmoud Khalil
Free speech groups point out that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) accused Khalil of leading “activities aligned with Hamas, a designated terrorist organization”.
But analysts note that the department’s allegation falls short of more tangible claims. US law, for instance, prohibits anyone in the country’s jurisdiction from providing “material support” to terrorist organisations.
The rationale provided for Khalil’s arrest, experts argue, was overly broad and could be wielded against any voices critical of Israel and US foreign policy.
“It’s a loophole so big that you could drive a truck through it,” Will Creeley, the legal director of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), a free speech group, told Al Jazeera.
“I think what’s perhaps most dangerous about this moment is that, given the rhetoric coming out of the administration today, folks across the country are going to think twice before they criticise the government, whether it’s the US government or Israeli government, and that chill is a real problem,” he added.
The effort to connect criticism of Israel with support for terrorism also appears to mirror Project 2025, a controversial series of policy proposals for Trump”s second term compiled by the Heritage Foundation, a right-wing think tank.
The document drew alarm for its expansive interpretations of executive power, as well as its views on issues like the pro-Palestinian protest movement.
One Project 2025 proposal states that pro-Palestine protests are part of a “highly organized, global Hamas Support Network (HSN) and therefore effectively a terrorist support network”.
Greer has told media outlets that, when she spoke with ICE agents over the phone, they appeared to have incorrect information about Khalil’s immigration status, informing her they were going to revoke his student visa.
Khalil, a graduate student at Columbia until December, was previously in the US on a student visa but has since obtained a green card, making him a lawful permanent resident of the country.
Greer said that, when she informed ICE agents that he was a permanent resident, they said his green card would be revoked instead.
Nithya Nathan-Pineau, a policy lawyer with the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, told Al Jazeera that green card status can be revoked under some circumstances, such as the discovery of fraudulent information in an immigration application or certain criminal activity.
“I haven’t seen any information about criminal convictions or arrests,” she said.
“It sounds like the ICE agents just unilaterally decided that whatever immigration status he had, it didn’t matter.”
Greer said that she and Khalil’s wife were told he was being held in an immigration detention facility in New Jersey, but when they arrived, he was not there. Khalil has reportedly been moved to a detention centre in Louisiana.
“This is a tactic that ICE loves to use, transferring someone to a facility that is further away from their legal assistance, community and loved ones,” said Nathan-Pineau. “It increases the psychological strain of detention.”
Greer has challenged Khalil’s detention, and a federal court is scheduled to hear the case on March 12.
Source: Apps Support
UNRWA chief warns of ‘deepening hunger’ in Gaza as Israel blocks all food
Philippe Lazzarini, the commissioner-general of the United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees, UNRWA, has warned that the situation in Gaza is “deteriorating very, very quickly”, more than a week after Israel again halted all supplies from entering the Gaza Strip.
“Whatever the intent is, it’s clearly a weaponisation of humanitarian aid into Gaza,” Lazzarini told reporters at UN offices in Geneva on Monday.
“It is critical that humanitarian aid is allowed into Gaza again to maintain the progress made during the first phase of the ceasefire and meet people’s basic needs,” he said, adding that there remains a risk of returning to the “deepening hunger” seen before the recent ceasefire.
Lazzarini heads up UNRWA, which has been mandated by the UN General Assembly to provide assistance to Palestinians, in Palestine and neighbouring countries, since December 1949.
The agency provides schooling and healthcare services, and could only be replaced by “capable Palestinian institutions” within “a Palestinian state”, Lazzarini has repeatedly said, amid his agency being banned by the Israeli government.
Lazzarini told journalists that “a fierce disinformation campaign”, legislation outlawing UNRWA in Israel’s parliament and “the suspension of funding by key donors” have taken a toll on the agency.
He warned that UNRWA cannot be allowed to “implode”.
“Collapse would create a dangerous vacuum in the occupied Palestinian territory and send shockwaves through Jordan, Lebanon and Syria,” Lazzarini said.
“An environment in which children are deprived of education, and people lack access to basic services, is fertile ground for exploitation and extremism,” he said.
“This is a threat to peace and stability in the region and beyond.”
The agency’s financial situation is also “critical and precarious”, Lazzarini added.
Prior to January 26, 2024, the United States was UNRWA’s largest funder.
Following accusations from Israel, the administration of former US President Joe Biden cut its contributions to UNRWA entirely, promising it would continue to provide aid to the Gaza Strip through alternative UN agencies, such as the World Food Programme, and non-government organisations.
However, according to The Times of Israel, US funding for Gaza’s relief efforts may have been caught up in US President Donald Trump’s administration’s sweeping cuts to the US Agency for International Development (USAID).
While it is not clear exactly which USAID programmes are being cut, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio wrote in a post on X on Monday that “after a 6 week review we are officially cancelling 83 percent of the programs at USAID”.
The Trump administration had initially said that the only exceptions to the cuts would be aid programmes in Israel and Egypt.
Rubio is currently in Saudi Arabia, where he discussed Gaza reconstruction efforts with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman on Monday, according to the US State Department.
Saudi Arabia is one of dozens of countries to have voiced support for a $53bn Egypt-led plan to rebuild Gaza as an alternative to Trump’s plan to forcibly displace all Palestinians from the Strip.
The rebuilding Gaza plan is among many factors being considered by negotiators from Israel and Hamas and mediators from Egypt, Qatar and the US at talks aimed at reviving the ceasefire agreement, which has stalled after Israel refused to enter into the second phase of the deal.
Hamas on Monday said that Israel has also failed to live up to its side of the agreement by refusing to withdraw its troops from the border area between Gaza and Egypt, known as the Philadelphi Corridor, and preventing outside aid from reaching Gaza directly.
Source: Al Jazeera
Greenland general election: As Trump eyes island, why the vote matters
Greenland, the world’s largest island, votes on Tuesday to elect its next parliament and government.
The thinly populated Danish territory’s elections usually attract only local attention. However, this vote comes at a time when the island has exploded into geopolitical significance, with United States President Donald Trump openly — and repeatedly — declaring his intent to acquire it.
Greenland, technically a part of North America, is rich in mineral resources, located halfway between Russia and the US, and already hosts a US base.
“I think we’re going to get it. One way or the other, we’re going to get it,” Trump told the US Congress last week in remarks that have received pushback from Greenlandic leaders.
So who is going to vote in the election? Which are the main parties? What are the key issues driving voters? And what is at stake for Greenland?
Who’s voting and how does it work?
About 41,000 citizens out of Greenland’s roughly 56,000 people are eligible to vote to elect 31 members to the Inatsisartut, Greenland’s parliament.
The election follows a proportional representation system, meaning seats are distributed based on the share of votes each party receives.
Polling stations are expected to open at 9am (11:00 GMT) and close at 8pm (22:00 GMT) local time. Despite the country’s large and remote landscape, a high voter turnout is anticipated, approximately 70 to 75 percent, according to experts Al Jazeera spoke to.
Given the relatively small electorate, initial results are typically available within hours after polls close, with confirmed, final results usually announced the following day.
Which are the main parties and what do they stand for?
Several parties are contesting the election. While some have similar views regarding the need for economic development, each party still holds its own vision of what Greenland’s future should entail:
Inuit Ataqatigiit (IA): The left-wing party, led by incumbent Prime Minister Mute Bourup Egede, holds 11 seats in parliament. It supports Greenlandic independence and has suggested that a referendum could take place in the coming years – but not necessarily in this election cycle.
Siumut: A long-established party which has led parliament in the past, Siumut is currently in opposition. While it also supports independence, it favours a more gradual approach, focusing more on economic development.
Naleraq: A strongly pro-independence party that focuses on Greenlandic cultural identity and self-determination, calling for full sovereignty.
Demokraatit: A centre-right party that prioritises economic growth, education and healthcare. It also advocates for independence but, like some other parties, stresses the need for economic stability as a prerequisite.
Atassut: A liberal-conservative party that supports maintaining strong ties with Denmark. It believes the current setup, with Greenland enjoying some autonomy under Denmark, can support the island’s economic growth.
Independence
It remains the most significant and overarching theme in this election, with some parties advocating for greater self-governance, and others calling for a more gradual transition.
Trump has repeatedly called for the island’s acquisition, and last week told US Congress that doing so would improve national and international security.
His comments were quickly refuted by Prime Minister Egede, who proclaimed: “Greenland is ours.”
Some experts believe Trump’s remarks have reignited discussions around independence from Denmark , which pays annual subsidies to the island.
“There remains a spectrum of views on how quickly independence could or should happen,” Jennifer Spence, director of the Arctic Initiative at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, told Al Jazeera.
“But I think, overall, it [Trump’s talk of taking over the island] has galvanised Greenlanders in their desire to communicate to the world that they want and will ultimately achieve full independence,” she said.
Others suggest that the threat of a US takeover has actually reinforced Greenland’s ties with Copenhagen — and their mutual dependence.
Richard Powell, professor of Arctic studies at the University of Cambridge, said while independence was still a “broadly popular long-term goal”, Trump’s latest intervention has “consolidated Greenland’s future within the Kingdom of Denmark, at least for the next couple of decades”.
Ultimately, though, “the Greenland government has the power to call an independence referendum if it wishes”, said Powell. “It isn’t up to Denmark or the US.”
Ebbe Volquardsen, a cultural history professor at the University of Greenland, said a majority of Greenlanders have for years supported full independence.
“This is not a new development,” Volquardsen told Al Jazeera. “What is new, however, is the growing international attention on Greenland” since Trump began to show interest in bringing the island under US control.
With the island’s geopolitical value now “undeniably clear”, Greenland’s negotiating position has been strengthened in its dialogue with Denmark for gaining greater autonomy, said Volquardsen.
The debate is not so much about whether Greenland should eventually declare independence, but rather about “how and when this goal can be achieved”, he added.
Economic development:
Greenland’s economy is largely dependent on its fishing industry and on Danish financial support.
Some parties argue that expanding industries like mining, tourism and resource extraction could help Greenland become more independent financially.
Greenland’s rich deposits of rare earth minerals and other natural resources have drawn attention from global powers. Powell said “there are estimates that 25 percent of the world’s remaining rare earth elements and critical minerals are in Greenland”, making it a potential player in global supply chains.
But making minerals and mining a central element of Greenland’s economic future will not be easy. Only a handful of companies have invested in its mining sector so far – and extractive industries are opposed by Greenland’s Indigenous population.
“There are also substantial questions about the economic viability of extracting these resources because of the high costs and difficult conditions of mining in Greenland,” said Spence. “There are questions about the environmental risks and consequences of attempting to access these minerals for Greenland and the health, social and cultural risks for Greenlanders.”
However, according to Volquardsen, Greenland is in a “unique moment of opportunity”, which many on the island perceive as a chance to redefine its ties with Denmark and build new international partnerships.
“As global awareness of Greenland’s geopolitical significance grows, so does interest in investment — particularly in the mining sector, which is crucial for the country’s economic future,” he said.
How will the election affect Greenland’s foreign relations?
The election could play a key role in reshaping Greenland’s approach to international partnerships.
Powell said Greenland will likely continue strengthening its ties with Denmark while also expanding economic ties with the US, Iceland, and Canada.
“The election will reinforce the principle internationally that this is Greenland’s choice. An election is how people make their democratic voice heard,” he said.
Spence believes the outcome will provide the world with “a sense of the pace at which Greenlanders want to seek full independence from the Kingdom of Denmark”, as well as what approach it will use to respond to the US interest in the island.
It will also highlight who it will cooperate with to advance its interests and policy priorities, she said.
How much does Denmark control Greenland?
Greenland is now an autonomous Danish territory and has been gradually increasing its autonomy from Denmark over the years.
It was granted limited self-rule in 1979, followed by broader self-rule in 2009, which includes the right to declare independence from Denmark through a referendum.
Today, Greenland manages most of its domestic affairs, including policing and resource management, but Denmark still oversees foreign policy and defence matters.
Denmark’s financial assistance also remains critical for Greenland, Powell pointed out.
Copenhagen gives Greenland an annual block grant that amounts to about $570m, which is more than half of Greenland’s total budget and is 20 percent of the island’s gross domestic product (GDP).
With strong voter engagement expected, the election results are widely anticipated to provide insight into Greenland’s political path.
But according to Volquardsen, “radical changes are not to be expected”.
The competing political parties agree on many key issues, he said, and a complete change of government is unlikely.
A dialogue between Greenland and Denmark is also expected to resume following the election, Volquardsen said.
“The goal”, he said, is to grant Greenland greater authority and to diversify its position within a broader network of trade partners. “Strengthening cooperation with its western neighbours – particularly the United States and Canada – is a natural step in this direction.”
Why is Trump so interested in Greenland?
Greenland’s strategic location and resource potential have attracted Trump’s attention.
In 2019, Trump first expressed interest in buying Greenland during his first presidential term, citing its strategic importance and resource wealth. This interest has persisted.
Greenland offers the shortest route from North America to Europe, giving the US a strategic upper hand for its military and ballistic missile early-warning system.
The US also maintains an airbase in Greenland and has expressed interest in expanding its military presence there by placing radars in the waters connecting Greenland, Iceland and the United Kingdom.
These waters are a gateway for Russian and Chinese vessels, which Washington seeks to monitor. The US also wants to prevent China from gaining dominance over the island and the Arctic region more generally.
In recent years, Russia has expanded its naval presence, deployed missile systems, and ramped up weapons testing in the area.
Currently, all five parties in parliament have said they do not want Greenland to become part of the US.
An opinion poll published last month also showed that 85 percent of Greenlanders are opposed to the idea, with nearly half saying they see Trump’s interest as a threat.
Volquardsen said one of the most contentious issues in the campaign has been whether and when Greenland should proactively engage with the US.
“Some political figures advocate for early discussions to clarify US intentions and explore potential negotiations that could benefit both parties,” he said. “Others see this as too risky … and argue that Greenland should instead strengthen its existing partnerships with Denmark and Europe.”
Source: Apps Support