NADI, FIJI Wednesday 7 October 2026 — Around 80 people including Pacific and Torres Strait community members, Elders and youth activists travelled as part of a colourful flotilla past the Pre-COP venues with a message for leaders: ‘Keep 1.5°C Alive’.
High res footage and images available here
The large flotilla included traditional Fijian voyaging vessel the Uto Ni Yalo, six 6-person outrigger canoes, and Greenpeace campaigning vessel the Oceania which sailed from Sydney to the Pre-COP in Nadi. On board were Elders, climate-vulnerable communities members from across the Pacific and Torres Strait, youth activists and poets, and campaigners and climate experts from across the region.
Messaging on canoes and banners said ‘Hold the Line at 1.5°C’ and ‘Keep 1.5°C Alive’ — a reminder to leaders that the climate limit established under the Paris Agreement is a non-negotiable survival line.
Shiva Gounden, Head of Pacific at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “People from across the Pacific and Australia have come together today to make sure the voices of our communities are heard by leaders meeting here in Nadi for the Pre-COP climate talks. The Taku Pakasoa Declaration adopted here at Pre-COP means ‘Strength in Unity’, and that’s how we’re coming together today.
“Our message is clear: Hold the Line on 1.5°C and centre those most impacted by the climate crisis in your decision-making. Our children’s futures must not be stolen away so that polluting nations can continue down the fossil-fuel path.
“Limiting global heating to 1.5°C is a non-negotiable survival line for Pacific communities and for humanity. Every cyclone, every storm now blows with the deadly force of accumulated emissions and gives a warning of what is to come as we face a dangerous summer of climate-fuelled extreme weather. Do not ignore our voices.”
On board, Aigagalefili Fepulea’i-Tapua’i, Pacific youth climate advocate and poet from Aotearoa Climate Action Network, said: “To hold the line on 1.5C for our Pacific family, New Zealand, as the only country where the connection between environmental protection and indigenous rights is legally validated by our constitutional document, must protect the rights of Māori.”
ENDS
Media contact: Kate O’Callaghan in Nadi on +61 406 231 892 (Whatsapp/Signal)
SYDNEY, Wednesday 7 October 2026 — In response to thelandmark High Court rulingthat climate impacts of fossil fuel projects must be considered by NSW planning authorities, the following lines can be attributed to Joe Rafalowicz, Head of Climate and Energy at Greenpeace Australia Pacific
“The High Court decision today is a victory for communities that bear the brunt of the storms, bushfires and extreme weather fuelled by Australian fossil fuel corporations.
“Coal and gas companies have claimed they are not responsible for their pollution because it happens overseas, but today Australia’s highest court sided with common sense and scientific evidence to find that every new coal and gas approval in this country could put us at risk, no matter where it is sold or burnt.
“As leaders meet at the Pre-COP talks in Fiji this week, Pacific communities are reaffirming the importance of the 1.5C temperature limit as a survival line for humanity, and is a scientific, moral and legal obligation as affirmed by the landmark Pacific-led ICJ Advisory Opinion. The highest court in the world, and now in Australia, have been clear: it is legally imperative that all of the pollution from fossil fuel projects be considered before approving a new project.
“Now is the moment for the Australian Government, as COP31 President of Negotiations, to find the courage, leadership and grit our country is known for to chart a new course away from fossil fuels. This begins with showing leadership at home by ending new coal and gas approvals.”
In response to the UN Human Rights Council’s vote today adopting the resolution that renews the mandate of the Fact-Finding Mission on Venezuela, as well as of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, for another two years, Amnesty International’s Americas director, Ana Piquer, said:
“We welcome this decision to continue the scrutiny over the ongoing human rights crisis in Venezuela. Extending the Mission’s crucial work for the next two years reinforces the international community’s interest in justice and accountability for gross human rights violations in the country, including crimes against humanity. This is a clear sign of recognition that the government’s repressive apparatus is still in place while opacity and impunity remain the norm.”
We welcome this decision to continue the scrutiny over the ongoing human rights crisis in Venezuela. Extending the Mission’s crucial work for the next two years reinforces the international community’s interest in justice and accountability for gross human rights violations in the country, including crimes against humanity. ”
Ana Piquer, Amnesty International’s Americas director.
“Renewing UN scrutiny and investigations into the situation in Venezuela speaks to the seriousness of the continuing crisis in the country and of the repressive structures and practices still in place. The Mission’s investigation, reporting, and evidence-based recommendations are a key tool for scrutinizing the government’s long-standing policy of repression. Its victim and justice-centred mandate can play a crucial role in finding solutions for accountability and the non-repetition of the suffering that people have endured for long over a decade.”
“We remind the Venezuelan authorities and the international community that victims’ rights to truth, justice, reparations, and guarantees of non-recurrence must be front and centre in all efforts to ensure a future where the rule of law and human rights are fully respected in Venezuela. We also continue calling for the immediate release of all those arbitrarily detained for political reasons, for all repressive laws and regulations to be repealed, for the end to political persecution, and the full dismantling of the state’s policy of repression.”
“Victims’ rights to truth, justice, reparations, and guarantees of non-recurrence must be front and centre in all efforts to ensure a future where the rule of law and human rights are fully respected in Venezuela.”
Ana Piquer, Amnesty International’s Americas director.
Cholera has existed for centuries. We know how to prevent and treat it. Yet in 2024 and 2025, Sudan endured the deadliest cholera outbreak recorded in its modern history.
The disease reached all 18 states for the first time, with more than 124,000 cases and 3,500 deaths, as stated by the World Health Organization.
I have spent much of my medical career working in emergencies. What haunts me about this outbreak is not simply that it happened, but that so many cases and deaths could have been prevented.
Sudan has faced at least 16 cholera outbreaks since the 1960s, including major waves in 2006, from 2016 to 2018, and in 2019. Seasonal rains and weak infrastructure exacerbated those outbreaks.
Over the past two years, war altered the pattern. Since fighting erupted between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces in April 2023, our teams have seen cholera follow the routes of conflict and the poor living conditions in displacement sites. Cases surged in Port Sudan, Al-Gedaref, Khartoum and Kosti during the dry season, months before the rains that usually accelerate transmission.
In February 2025, a strike hit the power station supplying Kosti, in White Nile state. The city’s water treatment plant stopped working, and families had little choice but to collect water from the river and buy water carried by donkey carts. Within days of the attack, hundreds of severely ill people arrived at Kosti Teaching hospital with watery diarrhoea symptoms. By 5 March 2025, less than one month later, more than 3,000 cholera patients had been admitted and over 100 had died.
The same chain of events appeared elsewhere. In Khartoum, attacks on power stations in May cut electricity to pumps supplying safe water. Blackouts also disrupted water treatment and health facilities. Chlorine and other essential supplies were delayed or ran short. Funding gaps forced water-trucking services to stop, leaving families to choose between unsafe water and water they could not afford.
Two years on, we can now speak of what we have learned. These surges followed the rhythms of war rather than the seasons or the weather. The greatest burden fell on people with the least protection: families displaced within Sudan, often living in overcrowded camps or informal settlements without clean water, sanitation services, or healthcare close to home. In some places, outbreaks had begun within days of new arrivals.
Cholera did not spread in a vacuum. Conflict created and deepened the conditions that allowed it to develop: damaged water and power systems, mass displacement, blocked humanitarian access, and a response lacking resources. The disease is preventable. The repeated failure to prevent it in the past reflects political choices to not protect civilians, to target and accept damage to civilian infrastructure, to block fast-track aid, and to cut funds allowing proper preparedness.
Médecins Sans Frontières was far from alone in this past response. Humanitarian organisations worked under extraordinary constraints. Where international teams could not go, Sudan’s volunteer-run Emergency Response Rooms often acted first. They organised water points, alerted health authorities to new cases and kept people alive before larger responses arrived. Much of the response was carried out by the Sudanese health workers and the communities themselves.
This large outbreak was contained by March 2026, but the danger has not ended. A new outbreak was declared in West Kordofan state in June, after acute watery diarrhoea cases had appeared in May, before the rainy season was fully underway. Cases also emerged in North Kordofan state, though numbers have been decreasing. Once again, conflict, lack of clear surveillance data, and inadequate access to safe water created conditions for the disease to appear.
What did we learn? Sudanese responders, health authorities and humanitarian organisations have all worked to prepare, to some extent, for future outbreaks. What is still missing is speed: delay is paid for in lives. Two things must happen now, together.
Dr Micaela Serafini, President of MSF in Switzerland“Where a life can be saved from a disease as preventable as cholera, we must do everything we can.”
The first is the sense of urgency, we must move at the speed this outbreak demands. My message to the donor community, to Sudan’s Federal Ministry of Health, and to other humanitarian organisations is simple: timeliness matters as much as the investment itself. Surveillance must be strengthened to identify cases early.
The response cannot stay centralised; we need decentralised ways of working that strengthen surveillance on the ground and get ahead of transmission. That means investing urgently in preparedness. That includes vaccination plans and water and sanitation services. Where a life can be saved from a disease as preventable as cholera, we must do everything we can.
The second is accountability. Parties to the conflict, and those with influence on them, must respect their obligations under international humanitarian law and the Geneva Conventions to protect civilian infrastructure, such as water and power systems, essential to people’s survival. These are not optional safeguards. When a power station or water treatment plant is attacked, the consequences go far beyond the destruction of infrastructure: it is seen in the next cholera ward, filled with patients, some of whom will die.
The lesson we learned from the past cholera outbreak could not be clearer. The only real question left is whether those involved are finally willing to learn from it, through humanitarian action that funds and fast-tracks preparedness, and political will that protects civilians and infrastructure, before history repeats once more.
French authorities must act upon their human rights obligations and stop the disproportionate police response seen in recent days to student protests, Amnesty International said ahead of tomorrow’s planned nationwide demonstrations.
“As children and young people prepare to take to the streets across France, authorities must ensure their safety and security and protect and facilitate the exercise of their right to demonstrate peacefully. Any policing response must be lawful, necessary and proportionate, and authorities must avoid unnecessary and excessive use of force,” said Anne Savinel-Barras, President of Amnesty International France.
Children and young people peacefully demanding their right to education must be protected rather than being beaten, tear-gassed, or arbitrarily detained
Anne Savinel-Barras, President of Amnesty International France
“Footage and testimonies widely reported over the last week raise alarming concerns about the dangerous use of tear gas, batons and restraint techniques by police. Tear gas grenades have been discharged recklessly, and rubber bullets have been fired causing serious injuries.
“Authorities must ensure that any response to demonstrations is necessary and proportionate, and that children and young people peacefully demanding their right to education are protected rather than being beaten, tear-gassed, or arbitrarily detained. The priority should be the de-escalation of tensions and authorities must take all available precautionary measures to avoid the need to use force.”
Background
Since 21 September, high school students across France have taken to the streets demanding that their right to education is met through an increase in teacher numbers, smaller classes and decent school buildings, among other issues. Protests have been met with unnecessary and disproportionate force by police, including the unlawful use of tear gas grenades and rubber bullets. The Ministry of Interior announced that there have been more than 5,000 arrests of protesters and stated that 85 per cent of those arrested have been children.
On 27 October, the Senate will discuss a government bill that would make people participating in a gathering that results in property damage, financially liable for up to €10,000, even if there is no proof that they personally caused, contributed to, or incited the damage.
Amnesty France issued apress releaseon 2 October 2026 on high school protests.
Protests will be taking place on 6 October in cities including Paris (2pm CEST), Lyon (10am CEST, Marseille 10.30am CEST, Toulouse 11am CEST, Bordeaux 11am CEST
The right to a fair trial heard by an impartial jury is enshrined in the U.S. Constitution and is the bedrock foundation of our justice system. The trial held in Mandan — located in Morton County, North Dakota — where three Greenpeace defendants were found liable for $667 million (later reduced to $345 million) did not meet this standard in multiple respects.
This trial simply should not have been held in a community that was so heavily impacted by the protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL). Indeed, a recent analysis of the case by EarthRights International called it “one of the biggest and most flawed trials in North Dakota’s history” and “an example of a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) — a retaliatory lawsuit to silence free speech — that has spiraled out of control.” Marty Garbus, a prominent civil rights lawyer who monitored the trial, has said: “I think this is one of the worst First Amendment decisions in American history.”
There are many reasons that this case never should have gone to trial to begin with, and that these claims should have been dismissed. Greenpeace USA’s and Greenpeace International’s actions were fully protected by the First Amendment, while Greenpeace Fund had no involvement in the DAPL protests at all. But even if there had been enough evidence to support Energy Transfer’s case, the trial was still fundamentally flawed in multiple ways.
1. Morton County was the wrong place to hold this trial.
No fair or impartial trial could have been held in Morton County.
The Standing Rock protests brought thousands of protesters to the region for many months; while the protests were motivated by opposition to a dangerous fossil fuel project that faced Indigenous objections, there is no question nearly everyone in the community experienced some disruption. A 2022 survey of people eligible to serve on a jury found that a staggering 97% said they could not be a fair or impartial juror in the case. Among the prospective jurors, a majority “had negative opinions of Greenpeace defendants, organizations that oppose the use of fossil fuels, and/or protests in general.” Although the pipeline passes less than a mile from the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation, because none of the reservation land is inside Morton County, no Standing Rock tribal members living on the reservation were included in the jury pool.
During jury selection, one prospective juror summed it up saying, “I don’t think that there’s anyone that was a resident at that time that couldn’t tell you that there wasn’t complete disruption in our community because of the protests. I think you’ll find a tough time finding people that are completely unbiased on that, because it affected everyone.” When asked who else felt the same way, nearly every potential juror raised their hand. On top of that, every single judge in the region recused themselves from the case due to conflicts of interest, and the trial judge had to be brought in from another part of the state.
The Greenpeace defendants made multiple motions for a change of venue to another county in North Dakota, but all requests were denied.
2. Someone was sending suspicious mailers and texts to influence the jury pool.
Against this backdrop of negative opinion about the protests, print versions of a shady online news outlet were mailed directly to Morton County residents starting in October 2024 and in the months leading up to the start of the trial.
The mailers seemed to be from a “local” paper called the Central ND News, but were actually published by a national organization called Metric Media, which reportedly operates over a thousand so-called “pink slime” media outlets around the country. Past reporting has shown that some Metric Media outlets have engaged in what appear to be “pay-to-play” operations that have attempted to influence recent elections in states all across the country.
The online site published over 30 “On This Date in 2016” stories that dredged up eight-year-old incidents of disturbances and arrests, and seemed designed to reactivate negative emotions about the protests. Needless to say, it is not common practice for a local newspaper to re-run stories from eight years previous. The paper mailers that arrived in Morton County reproduced some of these stories, as well as others praising Energy Transfer’s donations to the community. Other members of the community received unsolicited text messages with links to the articles, which were crafted to raise fears that “the trial could negatively impact their job and the economy.”
The mailers have been described as an “influence operation” targeted at the jury pool. One prospective juror even brought a copy of the mailer to court during jury selection.
Did Energy Transfer have something to do with this? Here’s what we know:
In September 2024, Energy Transfer’s Chair Kelcy Warren donated $5 million to a Super PAC named “Turnout for America,” his only contribution to this entity.
That same month, Turnout for America paid $250,000 to “Northern CB Corp.” for “media services.”
Northern CB Corp.’s president is Brian Timpone, who is also the operator of Metric Media, the publisher of Central ND News.
The physical copies of Central ND News that were mailed to Morton County residents were sent under USPS mailing permit number 1851, which is registered to FMC Printing in Dallas, Texas, where Energy Transfer is headquartered.
To be clear, we do not know for sure who was behind the mailers. But that’s why the Greenpeace defendants requested additional discovery to get to the bottom of who was sending them. Although the Court said it took an “extremely dim view” of “attempts to influence a jury panel before the trial”, the motion was denied.
3. Energy Transfer mounted a public relations push in Morton County.
While we don’t have proof of who was behind the Central ND News, we know that Energy Transfer openly waged a campaign to burnish its image, and the pipeline’s, before and during the trial.
The Energy Transfer donation lauded in the October 2024 mailer was a $5 million gift (made back in January 2019) to the University of Mary to support engineering and workforce development. In June 2019, just months after filing the North Dakota lawsuit, Energy Transfer donated $3 million to the City of Mandan itself to improve the public library and local parks. Energy Transfer also made numerous smaller grants to local organizations and charities in the months leading up to the trial.
Both prior to and during the trial, Energy Transfer ran commercials on local television stations promoting DAPL, which at least seven prospective jurors said they had seen.
4. The Court failed to strike jurors with serious biases.
Perhaps most importantly, the concerns about the jury pool were borne out at trial.
The way jury selection works is that an initial pool is brought into the court, and then some jurors are excused — usually either because sitting on a long trial would be a hardship for them, or because they have some knowledge or association with the case that justifies excusing them for “cause.” Written questionnaires, as well as direct questions from the lawyers and the judge, are used to explore whether jurors have prior knowledge or biases. After this, each side can exercise a few “peremptory strikes” — removing a juror without the need to prove a cause for removal — and at the end, at least nine jurors are needed to hear the case.
Of the final 20 prospective jurors, the Greenpeace defendants moved to strike 12 of them for cause. This was because, on the juror questionnaire and in response to direct questions, these jurors had reported direct personal experience with the protests, family members who had been impacted, close personal or financial ties to the fossil fuel industry, or stated bias against the Greenpeace defendants.
All of those motions to strike for cause were denied, and as a result, seven of the nine final jurors (plus one of the two alternates) were seated despite evidence of bias.
One empaneled juror was actually employed by a petroleum company that owns a stake in the Dakota Access pipeline itself. Two other jurors reported family members who had worked for DAPL subcontractors or security during the protests. Another juror indicated that they owned mineral rights. Other jurors stated that the Greenpeace defendants started “at a disadvantage” with them or would have to affirmatively prove their innocence. One juror stated that “she would be uncomfortable finding against the pipeline industry and could not be fair.”
None of these seven jurors should have ever been permitted to resolve this case, and a new trial must be granted.
5. The jury was not given a chance to determine how much others contributed to Energy Transfer’s claimed injuries.
And indeed, the plaintiffs did not present any evidence at trial that any Greenpeace defendant actually caused any of their alleged losses. On the contrary, evidence presented in court identified numerous other causes unrelated to the Greenpeace defendants for the alleged damages.
For example, Energy Transfer said that a letter signed by Greenpeace USA and Greenpeace International, which the jury found contained defamatory statements, caused banks to delay financing, costing it millions. (There was no evidence for this.) But over 500 other organizations also signed that letter, which was organized by a different group. Even if the letter did cause this harm, these Greenpeace defendants only had a small part in the letter.
North Dakota law requires juries to assess not just how much the plaintiff was harmed, but who contributed to that harm, and how much. But the Court’s verdict form did not provide a way for jurors to decide how much other actors might have contributed to these harms. “Plaintiffs proposed — and the Court ultimately adopted without entertaining argument from the parties on the Sunday evening before closing arguments — a verdict form that provided the jury no opportunity to apportion or allocate fault between the Greenpeace defendants, the plaintiffs, and third parties.”
In the end, the jury awarded nearly 100% of plaintiffs’ requested compensatory damages without considering whether other actors also contributed to ET’s claimed harm. This failure, in and of itself, warrants a new trial.
6. Greenpeace International should never have been included in the case, because it is not subject to jurisdiction in North Dakota.
Greenpeace International (GPI, a Dutch NGO) did not set foot in North Dakota and was not involved in protest activities there. It has never done business in North Dakota or registered there. The plaintiffs did not meet the standard for establishing that the Court has jurisdiction over GPI.
Indeed, GPI’s only relevant action in this lawsuit was co-signing (along with 500 other groups) “an open letter authored by another non-profit from the Netherlands, BankTrack, calling on certain banks, none of which were based in North Dakota, to adhere to international banking standards.” A federal court had previously determined that this exact evidence was not sufficient for Energy Transfer to sue BankTrack in North Dakota. The same standard should apply to GPI.
The Court only made a preliminary determination of jurisdiction based on Energy Transfer’s allegations, but still has never resolved, based on the evidence submitted, whether it actually has jurisdiction over GPI — despite GPI repeatedly raising the issue.
7. Greenpeace International and Greenpeace Fund were held liable for statements they did not make.
Even if GPI could be sued in North Dakota, it only did one of the many things that Energy Transfer claimed was wrongful: added its name to the BankTrack letter noted above, signed by over 500 other groups. Greenpeace Fund did nothing that it was accused of. GP Fund is only a grantmaking organization; it does not engage in any advocacy or campaigning. Energy Transfer argued, however, that it should be liable for the same letter, because the letter was also signed by Annie Leonard as Executive Director of “Greenpeace USA.” At the time, Leonard was Executive Director of both Greenpeace Inc. (the campaigning organization) and Greenpeace Fund. So Energy Transfer argued that she was signing that letter for both organizations.
And yet GPI and GP Fund were held liable for all nine allegedly defamatory statements. The BankTrack letter contained only two of those nine statements. There was no evidence at all that either GPI or GP Fund had anything to do with any of the other seven statements, but the jury found both entities liable for all nine statements.
8. The Verdict is manifestly against the weight of the evidence.
Finally, the motion argues that a new trial is warranted because the Verdict is manifestly against the evidence. There was not evidence to support key elements of each and every one of the offenses for which the Greenpeace defendants were found liable. The Greenpeace defendants have made these arguments repeatedly and in great detail, including across seven motions for summary judgment and in our Trial Analysis.
To give just one particularly glaring example, there was no connection between the evidence about what the Greenpeace defendants did and what damages they were assigned. For example, Energy Transfer claimed that the allegedly defamatory statements had caused both delays in financing by major banks, and a delay in permitting by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. But there was no evidence indicating that the banks made their financing decisions based on the statements at issue. And the Army Corps’ own documents indicated that it refrained from issuing the permit because of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s environmental lawsuit – not because of anything any Greenpeace organization said.
For these, and many other reasons, justice demands a new trial.
The Ebola disease outbreak in North Kivu province, Democratic Republic of Congo, has intensified dramatically since early September, with the province now accounting for nearly 40 per cent of all newly confirmed cases nationwide. This is up from 24 per cent at the end of August.
With new hotspots emerging every week, treatment capacities remain largely insufficient and inadequate. This situation places current patients and entire communities at even greater risk.
“It is like fighting a megafire,” says Stéphanie Hoffmann, coordinator of the Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) Ebola treatment centre in Butembo. “Multiple outbreaks are developing at the same time, with varying intensity and in different locations. As long as new hotspots continue to emerge while the virus spreads across northern North Kivu, containing the epidemic will remain extremely difficult.”
“Although Butembo has reported a slight decline in confirmed cases in recent days, neighbouring Beni has seen infections rise,” she says. “This does not mean that case numbers will not rise again in Butembo, or other locations later. The outbreak remains highly unpredictable, with transmission patterns changing from week to week.”
North Kivu is bearing an increasing share of the country’s Ebola burden at a time when access to specialised care remains insufficient. As of 28 September, 34 per cent of confirmed Ebola patients were still being treated in non-specialised health facilities because of limited bed capacity in dedicated treatment centres and delays in diagnosis.
Many of these facilities lack the resources and expertise required for Ebola case management, raising the risk of further transmission among patients and healthcare workers.
“For weeks, treatment capacity has stretched to its limit,” says Hoffmann. “Because there are not enough beds available, we are sometimes forced to refer confirmed Ebola patients elsewhere, despite the significant risk this poses to the wider community. In addition, standards of care in some peripheral facilities do not always meet the requirements for Ebola treatment. This is extremely concerning.”
Until recently, Butembo health zone, home to an estimated two million people, had only two Ebola treatment centres. Two additional treatment centres have recently opened, but substantial investments are still needed to ensure adequate quality of care.
A view of a section of the transit centre in the Musienene health zone, which has five beds intended for suspected Ebola cases. Democratic Republic of Congo, September 2026.Augustin Mudiayi/MSF
As part of our support to health authorities in the Ebola response, MSF works with three healthcare facilities in the area: the Kitatumba Ebola treatment centre, with a capacity of 29 beds for suspected and confirmed cases; the Catholic University of Graben transit centre, with 16 beds for suspected cases awaiting diagnosis; and the Musienene health zone transit centre, which has five beds, also intended for suspected cases.
Community trust remains essential
“Having transit and treatment centres is essential, but it is only part of the response and is not enough to contain the outbreak,” says Hoffmann. “More than 60 per cent of Ebola-related deaths continue to occur in the community.”
“Building trust between local communities and response teams is just as important as expanding treatment capacity,” she says. “Patients must be willing to seek care early and accept isolation measures. Without that trust, we risk seeing more deaths and further spread of the disease into neighbouring areas.”
To strengthen community engagement, MSF works with community leaders, healthcare providers, and youth organisations to encourage awareness and acceptance of Ebola response measures.
Given the scale of the needs, MSF cannot respond to the crisis alone. We are calling for an urgent mobilisation of all stakeholders to immediately increase treatment capacity and guarantee access to quality healthcare in Butembo and throughout North Kivu province.
Israel is continuing its genocide in Gaza, Palestine, where the space in which people can live is shrinking and the conditions for survival are being systematically destroyed.
Governments must act now to ensure that Israel stops the destruction and killing, and prevents ethnic cleansing, in Palestine.
Amman / Jerusalem – Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) warns that Israel is progressively asphyxiating Gaza, Palestine, and continuing its genocide: the space in which people can live is vanishing, while the conditions people need to survive are being systematically destroyed through continued violence, the deliberate blockade of essential supplies, and the destruction of healthcare and vital infrastructure.
In the past year, the physical trapping of people in Gaza has been made increasingly definitive by the establishment of Israel’s Yellow Line. Originally presented as a temporary, first-phase military withdrawal position and a key part of maintaining the so-called ceasefire – it is now reinforced by military positions, berms and ongoing demolitions and has continued to move west, squeezing people into a smaller and smaller area. Israeli forces now occupy approximately 65 per cent of Gaza, using the line to draw a clear border around this area.
As the Yellow Line moves, the threat to people living nearby becomes increasingly immediate, compounded by the uncertainty of approaching a line that is not clearly or consistently demarcated. People risk being shot by Israeli forces when they approach it, and MSF teams continue to treat people with gunshot wounds sustained nearby. Its encroachment is also disrupting the delivery of essential assistance: MSF water trucking has had to stop when shooting occurs near communities living close to the Yellow Line.
“The Yellow Line cannot be treated simply as a line on a map,” says Amande Bazerolle, MSF head of emergency response in Gaza. “It has become a mechanism of encirclement and ethnic cleansing, while cutting communities off from the infrastructure, healthcare, water and other essentials they need to survive.”
Violence is not confined to the areas around the Yellow Line. In June and July alone, despite a so-called ceasefire, MSF teams treated more than 1,200* cases of violent trauma across Gaza, including blast injuries, burns, gunshot wounds and injuries resulting from physical assault.
Over the past three years, our teams have treated more than 200,000 trauma cases*, including injuries resulting from intentional physical violence, while Israel’s military offensive has killed more than 74,000 people, including more than 20,000 children.
As Israel confines Palestinians into increasingly limited areas, families are being pushed into overcrowded and unlivable conditions, without sufficient access to clean water, sanitation services, shelter, or healthcare. These conditions are contributing to the spread of disease.
MSF teams have treated more than 11,000 cases of skin diseases, such as scabies, this year alone, while seeing more than 1,500 cases of chickenpox in June and July. MSF distributed around 2.1 million litres of drinking water per day in August, yet the scale of need remains far beyond what can be met under these restrictions.
“Most people have less than six litres of domestic-use water per day and limited access to basic hygiene items such as soap and detergent,” says Dr Murad Asaliyya, medical activities manager in Gaza. “We are treating gastroenteritis, acute respiratory infections, a lot of skin conditions, hepatitis, bacterial skin infections, scabies and lice.”
“At the same time, we are facing severe shortages in terms of medical supplies,” says Dr Asaliyya. “Even the cream we need to treat scabies has been restricted by the Israeli authorities.”
Over the past three years, access to healthcare has deteriorated dramatically, with hospitals increasingly running out of basic supplies and patients unable to access essential medicines and treatment. Restrictions on essential supplies, such as engine oil and spare parts, are also crippling the infrastructure needed to keep hospitals, ambulances and water systems running, with generators already breaking down and water-trucking operations reduced.
The destruction of Gaza’s healthcare system and damage to more than 80 per cent of all structures in the Strip, alongside the lifelong physical and mental health impacts of repeated violence and displacement, will extend far beyond the present and prevent any meaningful recovery for years to come.
Nor is this crisis limited to Gaza. Since 2023, violent settler attacks, military operations and raids on homes, displacement camps and agricultural land, illegal settlement expansion, displacement, home demolitions and movement restrictions have rapidly escalated across the West Bank and East Jerusalem, particularly this year. Patients at MSF clinics tell teams about homes being demolished by Israeli forces, attacks by settlers, and livestock being stolen. The policies of violence, harassment and forced displacement affecting Palestinians extend beyond Gaza, causing further fragmentation of Palestine.
“It will take generations to recover from the harm that has already been done over the past three years, and in the preceding decades, while the excruciating consequences of Israel’s ongoing genocide are still being felt every day,” says Bazerolle.
“Destruction, displacement and deprivation have become normalised — practices Israel is carrying out with impunity,” says Bazerolle. “Governments must act now to ensure Israel stops the destruction and killing, prevents ethnic cleansing, and stops denying Palestinians the means of survival.”
*This refers to cases not patients, including new or follow-up consultations.
