ANALYSIS: By Laurens Ikinia in Jakarta

As Indonesia marks the 81st anniversary of its independence on Monday — August 17 —  the republic has much to celebrate.

Over eight decades, Indonesia has transformed itself from a newly independent archipelago into one of the world’s largest democracies and economies, holding together an extraordinarily diverse nation across thousands of islands.

But anniversaries are not only moments for celebration. They are also moments for reflection.

• READ MORE: Indonesia at 81: Whose sovereignty are we celebrating?
• Indonesia’s magnitude 7.7 quake kills at least 51, displaces thousands
• Other Laurens Ikinia articles

From Papua, Indonesia’s easternmost region, one question deserves particular attention:

After 81 years of independence, what do development, equality and “Merdeka” (“freedom”) really mean for Indigenous Papuans?

Recent demographic figures make that question increasingly urgent.

Population data from May–June 2026 puts the population across the land of Papua — Indonesia’s six Papuan provinces — at 5,797,499 people. Of these, 2,283,703 are recorded as Orang Asli Papua (OAP), or Indigenous Papuans, in Indonesia’s centralised Population Administration Information System.

That is roughly 39.4 percent of the total population.

This could mean everyone outside that category is non-Papuan. Administrative records may include Indigenous Papuans whose status has not been properly identified. Better verification is essential.

Still, the figures point to a profound demographic transformation. Indonesia, at 81, needs to talk seriously about what that means.

Independence and Indigenous dignity
Indonesia’s independence was founded on a powerful principle: people should live with dignity and have a meaningful say over their future. That principle matters for Indigenous peoples too.

Around the world, Indigenous rights increasingly mean more than formal equality. They include protecting cultures, languages, customary institutions, and ancestral lands, while ensuring meaningful participation in decisions that affect Indigenous communities. Papua belongs in that conversation.

Indigenous Papuans are not simply another category in a population database. They represent hundreds of communities with distinct languages, customary systems, histories and relationships with ancestral territories.

Papua is among the most culturally and linguistically diverse places on Earth.

Protecting that diversity should not be seen as an obstacle to Indonesian nation-building. It should be one of its achievements.

After 81 years, Indonesia should be confident enough to recognise that national unity and Indigenous rights are not contradictory. A strong nation should be able to protect both.

Papua’s quiet demographic transformation
Papua has changed dramatically in recent decades. Roads now connect communities once accessible mainly by air or on foot. Towns have expanded. New provinces and districts have emerged. Airports, ports, telecommunications, mining, plantations and government institutions have transformed the economic landscape.

Alongside this development has come another powerful force: internal migration from other parts of Indonesia.

Migration itself is not the enemy. Many migrants have lived in Papua for decades. Some were born there. They teach in schools, work in hospitals, operate businesses, serve in government and contribute to local economies. The real issue is not whether non-Papuans should live in Papua.

The question is whether rapid demographic change, combined with unequal access to education, capital and economic networks, could gradually weaken Indigenous Papuans’ ability to shape the economic and social future of their ancestral homeland.

Across Papua’s growing urban centres, economic competition is intensifying. Land values are rising, businesses are expanding, and new opportunities are emerging. But people do not enter that competition from the same starting line.

A young Indigenous entrepreneur from Papua’s highlands may compete with someone raised with better schools, stronger business networks, easier access to banking and greater family capital. Calling that competition “equal” does not make the starting conditions equal.

What has Special Autonomy delivered?
Indonesia has already recognised that Papua requires a distinctive policy approach. That recognition lies at the heart of Special Autonomy, or Otonomi Khusus Papua.

Special Autonomy was intended, among other things, to give Papua greater authority and resources while strengthening the protection and empowerment of Indigenous Papuans.
More than two decades later, however, the important question is no longer simply how much money has been allocated. It is what that money has achieved.

How many Indigenous Papuan doctors, engineers, teachers, academics and entrepreneurs have been produced? How many OAP-owned companies have become competitive businesses? How many Indigenous Papuans hold senior positions in industries operating in their ancestral territories?

And how many children in remote Papuan communities now receive an education comparable to children elsewhere in Indonesia? These should be among the measures defining the next generation of Special Autonomy.

Papua does not simply need more government spending. It needs measurable Indigenous empowerment.

Land is more than an economic asset
Demographic change becomes particularly sensitive when it intersects with Indigenous land. For many Papuan communities, land is not simply property. It is identity. Mountains, forests, rivers and valleys carry genealogical, spiritual and historical relationships stretching across generations.

Modern development, however, also gives land commercial value. A road can turn customary territory into valuable real estate. An administrative centre creates demand for housing. Plantations transform forests into economic assets. Mining can turn mountains into resources worth billions.

In these situations, Indigenous communities may find themselves negotiating with institutions and corporations possessing far greater financial, legal and political resources. That imbalance cannot be ignored.

Indigenous rights should therefore become a central pillar of Papua’s development model, rather than something discussed only after disputes emerge.

Customary communities need stronger legal protection, transparent consultation and meaningful participation in decisions affecting their territories. Development should happen with Indigenous Papuans, not merely around them.

Better data, better policy
The 2026 figures expose another challenge: Indonesia needs more transparent and credible Indigenous demographic data.

The figure of 2.28 million registered OAP should be the beginning of the conversation, not its conclusion. A census is needed.

Indonesia should be able to answer basic questions: How many OAP live in each province and district? What are their education and health outcomes? How many attend university or own businesses? How much customary land remains under Indigenous control? And how is internal migration changing Papua’s demographic landscape?

Without reliable data, policy risks becoming guesswork. Special Autonomy cannot be properly evaluated if the government from the central to regional level cannot measure whether Indigenous Papuans themselves are progressing.

Education is the real battleground
Ultimately, Papua’s future will not be determined by population numbers alone. It will be determined by human capacity.

A population can be numerically smaller yet remain culturally, economically and politically strong when its people are educated, healthy and economically productive. That is why education should become the centrepiece of Indonesia’s next Papua strategy.

Consider a Papuan child born today in Puncak, Intan Jaya, Yahukimo, Nduga or Pegunungan Bintang districts. One day, that child may compete for a university place or professional job with students from Jakarta, Surabaya, Makassar or Yogyakarta.

But that competition begins long before the university entrance examination. It begins with maternal nutrition and early childhood development. It continues through primary education, teacher quality, electricity, internet access, books, laboratories and healthcare.

If those foundations are radically unequal, the final competition cannot reasonably be called equal.

The most powerful affirmative-action policy Indonesia can pursue is therefore not simply reserving positions for Indigenous Papuans. It is preparing Papuans so well that they can compete for those positions with confidence.

Papua does not need permanent dependency. Papua needs capacity.

A new meaning of Merdeka
Every August 17, the word “Merdeka” echoes across Indonesia.

It means freedom. But 81 years after independence, perhaps freedom should also be measured by whether people have the capacity to shape their own future.

For Indigenous Papuans, Merdeka should mean that a child born in a remote village has a realistic pathway to become a doctor, engineer, professor, entrepreneur or national leader.
It should mean communities can participate in development without losing their ancestral land. It should mean Papuan languages and cultures survive modernisation rather than becoming its casualties.

And it should mean demographic change does not translate into cultural, economic or political marginalisation.

This is not an argument against migration, nor a call to divide Papuans from other Indonesians. It is a call for Indonesia to make the promise of independence meaningful for one of its most distinctive Indigenous populations.

The demographic figures should not create fear. They should create urgency.
Indonesia still has an opportunity to build a model in Papua where economic growth, national integration and Indigenous rights reinforce rather than undermine one another.

That means better demographic data, stronger protection of customary land, investment in education and healthcare, affirmative economic opportunities, accountable Special Autonomy institutions and meaningful OAP participation in decisions affecting Papua.

Ultimately, Indonesia’s Papua policy should be judged by a simple question: Are Indigenous Papuans becoming stronger or weaker in their own homeland?

By Indonesia’s centenary in 2045, Papua will look very different. Its cities will be larger, its infrastructure more extensive and its economy more closely connected to Indonesia and the wider Asia-Pacific.

But infrastructure alone will not define success.

The real test will be whether Indigenous Papuans stand at the centre of that transformation — educated, healthy, economically competitive, culturally confident and capable of shaping their communities’ future.

A nation can build roads, airports, ports and cities. The greater achievement is building a country where development does not require Indigenous peoples to disappear.

Eighty-one years after independence, Indonesia has an opportunity to prove that Papua can modernise without losing Papuans — and that “Merdeka” can mean progress without erasure.

Laurens Ikinia is a Papuan lecturer and researcher at the Institute of Pacific Studies, Indonesian Christian University, Jakarta. He is also an honorary member of the Asia Pacific Media Network (APMN) in Aotearoa New Zealand, and a contributor to Asia Pacific Report.

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/08/16/indonesia-at-81-who-owns-the-land-of-papuas-future/

Keith Rankin, 14 August 2026 – As I see it, the Opportunity Party represents the ‘radical centre’ of politics; distinct from the stale ‘establishment centre’. Indeed the true and original meaning of ‘radical’ was ‘innovative’, and not extreme. Thus the Liberal Party of Balance, Seddon, Reeves and Ward was understood in its time – in the 1890s – as a radical political movement.

In its American adoption – much of it inspired by New Zealand – 1890s’ liberal radicalism became 1900s’ progressivism. The word ‘progressive’, these days has been adopted by the ‘establishment Left’, which is importantly different from the radical centre. So ‘radical centrism’ is the phrase which best fits the new conceptualisation.

Universal Income

The important departure from establishment politics – a departure, embraced by Opportunity, whose time is overdue – is the Universal Income. In embracing this departure, Opportunity have created an unnecessarily fearful response within the halls of establishment politics.

My suggestion is for Opportunity to acknowledge this fear, and to present twenty-first century radicalism in a cautious way. In the mid-1960s, young men wearing long hair created a fearful response in post-war society. By the early 1970s, such hair was normalised, and had become largely non-threatening.

Universal Basic Income

In this regard, Opportunity presents its particular policy for a universal basic income (UBI, or ‘Citizens Income’ as they call it) as an aspiration; as a basis for public discussion and not as a scheme to be imposed on those people who push-back from engagement with the concept.

We may not have many available years for this discussion, because if AI (artificial intelligence) achieves anything like that anticipated by its backers, our liberal economies will collapse under the strain of so much income being redistributed from the owners of labour (the majority; the 75 percenters) to owners of new capital (presently, the minority five percenters already at the steepening apex of the wealth distribution). As with any prospective tsunami, we should at least make an effort to be prepared.

‘We are all Beneficiaries’; the basis for a bottom-line policy

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon – an intellectual barnacle impeding social and economic progress – expresses the fear of the people he represents as ‘Opportunity wants to make us all beneficiaries’.

Opportunity’s approach should be to emphasise that we are already ‘all beneficiaries’; in part by pointing out the obvious, and in part by some judicious, sensible, and inexpensive reframing.

And to note that receiving a benefit is literally a ‘good’ thing, not a bad thing. The essential meaning of the word ‘beneficiary’ is a recipient of financial benefits deriving from ownership of shares or membership of a trust or a Friendly Society or a Building Society, and the like. The use of the word ‘beneficiary’ – over the word ‘pension’ still widely used in Australia – resulted from a deliberate modernisation of thinking in New Zealand in the late 1930s, making social financial benefits a simple extension of private financial benefits.

Almost everybody with an active KiwiSaver account receives an annual benefit of $260 from the government. That’s enough to sustain the claim that ‘we are already all beneficiaries’.

New Zealanders aged over 65 receive a universal basic income as a social financial benefit (New Zealand Superannuation, formerly National Superannuation); from 1940 to 1974, in the time of its predecessor, a basic universal retirement income was known as Universal Superannuation. US, NS, and NZS have been a core part of the centre-right political programme in New Zealand since the first National government in 1949. They are present and longstanding benefits, payable to poor and rich alike; though those rich people who disagree with the idea of universal benefitdom are free to opt out.

A specific ‘bottom-line’ suggestion

Opportunity could propose, as an interim measure pending a wider societal discussion (comparable to the recent discussion about the Treaty of Waitangi), that the government replaces the present 10.5% and 17.5% concessionary tax rates with a ‘personal tax credit’ which for everyone receiving more than $53,500 of annual taxable income would be $150 per week. The tax credit payable for people receiving less than $53,500 of annual taxable income would be less than $150 per week.

The net ‘dollars-in the-pocket’ effect would be a 39 cents per year gain for people receiving more than $53,500 per year, and a zero gain/loss for everybody else. The total annual fiscal cost would be about one million dollars.

Why do it if there is no significant change in after-tax incomes?

The important change is conceptual; and the power of conceptual changes should never be underestimated. The personal tax credit would be fully understood as a ‘benefit’ – in the very best sense of that word – and there would be no doubting the truth that every taxpayer is also a beneficiary. So this policy would lay to rest Luxon’s rhetorical bogey.

Next, this reconceptualisation of what we have at present does two other important things.

First, it would give governments a new policy lever; and we sure are short of policy levers at present. The $150 personal tax credit could be raised (or lowered) in future Budgets. (I heard the statement “there are limited levers that governments can pull” 11 minutes into last night’s TVNZ’s One News.)

Second, the policy would beg the question: Why deny people receiving less than $53,500 the full personal tax credit? Thus Opportunity could offer an interim non-bottom-line policy – interim relative to its Citizens Income policy which depends on the separate matter of new forms of taxation – to extend the $150 personal tax credit from higher-earning adults to all adults, whatever their levels of annual taxable income.

Thus, the $150 personal tax credit would become a Basic Universal Income (BUI).

If properly understood, such a BUI would not be expensive to implement. For people already receiving Jobseeker Benefits, Assisted Living Benefits, New Zealand Superannuation, Student Allowance, there would be no change in ‘disposable income’; no change in the amount of money in those peoples pockets, wallets, or bank accounts.

There would be a little more disposable income for adults – other than the above-mentioned beneficiaries – on lowannual wages; and for adults (such as many students presently not receiving Allowances) on no annual wages. (Such a BUI would have zero impact on the present Working for Families programme of benefits/credits.)

The extension of the $150 personal tax credit – the present status quo, albeit re-imagined – to a $150 basic universal income would target extra social spending to where it is most needed; to young people and to caregivers.

(The mantra of economic liberalism since 1984 – known as neoconservatism in the United States – is that all benefits should be bureaucratically targeted; indeed Roger Douglas did in the 1980s convert Superannuation into a ‘clawed-back’ benefit called Guaranteed Retirement Income, reversed by Winston Peters as Treasurer in 1997.)

There is one other important favourable consequence of extending the present effective personal tax credit (PTC) to a BUI; that is that, for people who lose some or all of their current incomes, the core payment (currently $150 per week; strictly $149.61 per week) is retained. That money becomes a reliable provision which can at least put food on the table for persons in transition, or in distress arising from a sudden change of circumstances. A basic universal income, while far from generous, serves as an immediate bridging payment receivable as of right, and not granted through a successful application to a government or charitable bureaucracy.

2027

The PTC could be legislated for early in 2027, soon after the next government is formed. (In 2020, acting quickly, the Labour Government removed the entitlement of [mainly] women to gain a superannuation benefit as a ‘non-qualifying spouse’ [ie a partner aged under 65 of a superannuitant aged over 65], in a matter of weeks after the formation of the new government.)

The suggested PTC is just a rebranding of what we already have in 2026. And the BUI as suggested could easily be implemented in the 2027 Budget; it’s a matter of political will and imagination, not at all a fiscal risk to the nation. We are, already, all beneficiaries.

Then, from later in 2027, we could have a sensible discussion about having a universal basic income – and new taxes – in line with or alternative to Opportunity’s present fiscal philosophy.

If there is anything wrong with my suggestions, please tell me.

About the writer:

Keith Rankin (keith at rankin dot nz), trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.

Keith Rankin, 13 July 2026 – I saw and heard this from Stuff reporter Molly Swift on Three News yesterday (12 August 2026):

“History shows that replacing a sitting prime minister in an election year doesn’t end well. The only time it has worked was in 1943 after Michael Joseph Savage died in office, and Peter Fraser took over.”

Michael Joseph Savage actually died in March 1940, not 1943. Peter Fraser – Savage’s deputy – subsequently became Prime Minister. Hardly a coup, though technically there was a contest for the party leadership. Fraser ran against two inconsequential backbenchers. There was never any doubt that Fraser would succeed Savage. Wikipedia, for Savage, simply says: “He was succeeded as head of government by his deputy Peter Fraser”.

Events in more Recent History, unmentioned yesterday

In August 1974 there was an event much like that of 1940. Norman Kirk died in office, New Zealand’s last PM to do so. There was a subsequent contest for the party leadership, and hence to become Prime Minister. Kirk’s deputy was Hugh Watt. There was a contest, however, between Watt and Kirk’s Minister of Finance Bill Rowling. Rowling defeated Watt; thus it could be said that Rowling ousted Watt. Rowling was defeated ignominiously in 1975 (and despite winning the popular vote in 1978 and 1981); but Watt would probably have suffered an even bigger defeat.

We should note that neither this event, nor the Savage-Fraser succession, took place in an election year. In one short sentence, Molly Swift got it thoroughly wrong, by saying both “the only time it has worked” and “in 1943”; and of course in implying that Savage could have remained prime minister despite his having passed away.

Not the “only time”: 1990, Geoff Palmer and Mike Moore

To my great surprise, as the failed coup unfolded yesterday, I did not see, hear or read any reference to the events of 1990. 1990 most certainly was an election year.

In that year sitting (Labour) Prime Minister Geoffrey Palmer (still alive and, I understand, well) was ousted just seven weeks before the election. His replacement was the late Mike Moore (who would only be 77 years-old if still alive).

While Labour was never going to win the 1990 election, the leadership switcheroo was an undoubted success. Before the Moore coup, Labour – crushed by the failure of Rogernomics – was projected to win just 7 electorates out of 97; four of these seats were the Māori electorates. At the time, Labour governed with 57 out of 97 seats, and 43% of the votes.

(In the 1987 election, Labour was unusually popular with people who normally vote National. Left-wing voters had nowhere to go. Subsequently, New Labour broke away from Labour, becoming the core of the Alliance Party in 1993.)

In the end, Labour won 29 seats in 1990; Labour, and their senior MPs, lived to fight another day. Indeed, in 1993, the combined Left vote was a landslide. Mike Moore nearly regained his position as Prime Minister. He might even have become one of our most warmly remembered Prime Ministers, and he certainly would have saved us from Ruth Richardson’s deeply problematic ‘Fiscal Responsibility Act 1994’.

As it was though, after the 1990 election, a group of right-wing Labour MPs broke-away to form the Act Party (Association of Consumers and Taxpayers). And after the 1993 election, another group of rightish MPs (including Peter Dunne) broke-away from Labour, joining some National MPs, to form the United Party. The United Party, in its various forms, went on to become powerbroker in three different Parliaments: 2002 to 2005; 2011 to 2024; 2015-2017.

1957, Sid Holland and Keith Holyoake; and 2017

In 1957, a very unwell Sidney Holland resigned as Prime Minister and National Party leader, just 12 weeks before the election. Holyoake, Holland’s deputy, replaced Holland without fuss. National only just lost the election; with Holland at the helm the defeat would have been much larger. The replacement of the leader, at late notice, boosted National’s vote.

Events which were mentioned yesterday

In 2017, when Jacinda Ardern replaced Andrew Little late in election year (this time while in Opposition), like Holyoake she boosted her party vote compared to what it would otherwise have been. Nevertheless, under a First-past-the-Post election, Ardern’s Labour (29 electorate seats, 38% of vote) was soundly beaten by Bill English’s National (41 electorate seats, 44% of vote). This result, however, was like 1993. The support for anti-National parties was significantly more than the support for pro-National parties; so, under proportional representation, the larger bloc of parties defeated the largest party. Labour proved to be much more popular after 2017 than it was when it ruled unchecked after 2020.

And of course there was 2020, when National replaced their leader twice, though while in Opposition, not in Government. Yes, National was substantially beaten that year. The only possibility of National not having been soundly beaten in Covid Year 2020 would have been if English had stayed on as party leader after his 2017 victory cum defeat. But that damage was done early in 2018, not in election year.

Have we finished yet this year with party leadership switcheroos?

Maybe not. There’s still time for a Palmer/Moore scenario, if National’s polls take a dive. And then there’s Labour’s Chris Hipkins. It’s not too late to replace him also, as Andrew Little was replaced, to give his party a boost.

Conclusion and Warning

Going into elections with very new leaders has generally given a positive boost to the Labour or National party. The warning however is Canada in 1993. My sense is that, as Nicola Grigg said, Erica Stanford is not “capable of leading the National Party or being prime minister”. Stanford is a competent micro-manager; but, I sense, that’s it.

In Canada in 1993, the fading Brian Mulroney stepped down in favour of the 46-year-old Kim Campbell. Campbell remains Canada’s only ever female prime minister; surprising in a country with outstanding feminist credentials.

In the previous Canadian election (1988), the Progressive Conservatives won 169 seats with 43% of the vote. In 1993, their vote plummeted to 16% and they only won two seats! (Eventually that party did revive, under Stephen Harper; but, like the Australian Liberal Party, it may now be in another morbidity crisis.)

That’s the ‘political death’ scenario Labour avoided in 1990 by replacing Geoff Palmer with Mike Moore. Under MMP, the death may be less spectacular, but also more fatal as other parties bed-in. My sense is that Erica Stanford would have been a Kim Campbell. The more pertinent question today is whether Christopher Luxon will be a Geoffrey Palmer, either by being replaced or by losing to the extent in the popular vote that Palmer would have lost in 1990. In 1990, New Zealand Labour avoided its Kim Campbell moment.

In the short meantime, our political commentators could do well to learn a bit more of our country’s political history. The deceased Michael Joseph Savage was not ousted by his deputy in the 1943 election year. And 1990 is not ancient history.

About the writer:

Keith Rankin (keith at rankin dot nz), trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.

RNZ News

New Zealand’s spy agency says it is increasingly coming across espionage activity in the Pacific — and has identified individuals connected to an unnamed foreign intelligence service.

The NZSIS reports that individually, Pacific states remain vulnerable to attempts at subversion, both in politically, and in the community.

Security expert Al Gillespie told RNZ’s Midday Report on Friday that China had been singled out as a regional threat like never before.

• READ MORE: NZSIS singles out China for spying in New Zealand ‘at scale’
• China denies espionage, foreign interference in New Zealand
• New Zealand’s Security Threat Environment 2026
• Other Pacific espionage reports

“In previous reports you’ve seen it also making that point about Russia, or about Iran. But they’re not mentioned this time. But China is,” he said

“And it’s mentioned not just with regards to domestic interference but also with influence in the Pacific. And so they’re trying to shine a light on what may be going on.”

The NZSIS said in its Security Threat Environment 2026 report that regionalism and consensus were the best safeguards, which is why foreign actors sought to sow division.

Diaspora groups targeted
Meanwhile, the SIS also said diaspora community groups in New Zealand were being unfairly targeted by foreign states and their proxies seeking to limit their democratic rights and freedoms.

Gillespie said China was unfortunately not the only country that undertook this activity.

He said SIS staff spent a lot of time talking to different communities about how the agency functioned and how it would handle threats so people could feel confident about coming to them with their concerns.

The Chinese Embassy rejected the new NZSIS report, saying that it includes what it says are multiple “false allegations against China”.

In a statement on Friday, the Chinese Embassy in Wellington said the NZSIS report included baseless and fabricated accusations.

This story was first published on

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/08/16/foreign-espionage-increasing-in-pacific-says-nzs-spy-agency/

COMMENTARY: By Tracy-Moana Campbell

A country currently indicted for genocide has no business training our teachers in Aotearoa New Zealand on the topic of genocide. The notion is ludicrous.

Under this National policy Kiwi teachers are going to be trained about genocide by Israelis.

It is intended that some Kiwi teachers will be sent to Israel for indoctrination tours.

• READ MORE: Holocaust education now part of the NZ curriculum
• Israel has no business teaching anyone’s children about the systematic dehumanisation of others — Marilyn Garson
• When truth in protest is under attack, don’t give disinformation a platform

Kiwi teachers will be able to meet happy Palestinians in Israel. That is what South Africa’s apartheid government used to do — come meet the happy Blacks in Johannesburg. Soweto? Where’s that?

Israel is currently indicted for genocide by the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has an arrest warrant out for him issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) — for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The ICJ declared Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory to be unlawful on 19 July 2024.

Any and all Israeli presence in Palestinian territory is unlawful. Notwithstanding that, Israel carries on its slaughter as though the law itself does not exist.

It is beyond belief that a New Zealand government could have come up with a policy so ludicrous and so deeply offensive.

Tracy-Moana Campbell is an employment relations advocate based in Masterton and an activist on Palestinian human rights. She had a commercial orange grove in Lebanon 10km from the Israeli border in 2005-2011. Israel bombed her oranges in 2006. It is a war crime to destroy civilian food sources. This commentary was originally a social media post but has been republished with the author’s permission.

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/08/16/tracy-moana-campbell-genocide-training-for-nz-teachers-by-israel-a-ludicrous-idea/

Asia Pacific Report

Palestine protesters in Aotearoa New Zealand celebrated an unprecedented 150 weeks of continuous rallies in the heart of Auckland today and were told by a human rights advocate they were the “rainbow people — offering hope”.

Kathy Voyles, who describes herself as a global citizen dividing her time between New Zealand and The Netherlands, said Gaza was “standing at a knife’s edge” and sometimes hope seemed far away.

“And then I remember the late, great Susi Newborn, who said, ‘You can’t sink a rainbow.’

• READ MORE: Resident in Israeli-besieged Qusra home in Palestine says food and water running low
• Other Gaza protest reports

“We are that rainbow people. We are that hope.”

She warned that the Israeli leaders would face justice for their horrendous crimes and atrocities, and spoke of a former head of state who had eventually paid a price.

“I will never forget that day in June 2001 when the former Serbian leader, Slobodan Milosevic, who was responsible for so many deaths in the former Yugoslavia who came to The Hague to be put in prison.”

Voyles remembered so many people who had worked at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY).

“The ICC, ICTY and other tribunals have tried 200 people from all around the world. The Serbian government got him to The Hague despite his followers objecting.”

Breached Genocide Convention
Milosevic died of a heart attack in 2006 before the genocide trial could conclude, but the ICC separately found him guilty of breaching the Genocide Convention.

Another former leader, ex-Philippines president Rodrigo Duterte, is currently in The Hague awaiting trial for crimes against humanity or murder and attempted murder over mass killings during the eight-year so-called “war on drugs”.

The ICC also wants Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant on arrest warrants for the alleged war crimes of starvation, and crimes against humanity in Gaza.

“Now we know that Israel and the US are doing their best to close down the ICC — and that must not happen,” said Voyles.

“They are doing that because they are scared.

“One thing that I did learn while working in that field in The Hague is that national governments hate to be shamed and embarrassed, no matter how strong they think they are.

“We have signed up to various [human rights] conventions even though our government is doing its best to forget that.

“So let’s keep reminding them.”

Message of hope
Voyles reminded the protesters of her initial message today of hope.

“So I say there is hope. And for our own mental health we must continue to do what we do.

“Every week until there is a rainbow and hope for the people left in Gaza and the Occupied Territories, for Sudan, for the Congo, for Yemen, for West Papua, for the people of Myanmar and so many others.

“We cannot forget them ever.”

One way of taking action was to get everyone enrolled to vote in New Zealand and “then we change this inept government”.

“Out with Chris Luxon, Winston Peters and David Seymour. We want leaders who are us, not the I.”

Honour to speak
Voyles said it was an honour to speak for the people of Palestine – Gaza and the Occupied Territories. At least 73,000 Palestinians have been killed in the genocide and more than 1200 people since the so-called “ceasefire” declared in October 2025.

She challenged the crowd to keep “endlessly, ceaselessly talking, tweeting and emailing about it.”

The kaikōrero for the rally in Auckland’s Te Komititanga Square, Lamees Elthiny, paid tribute to the crowd for their resilient 150 weeks of protest.

Everyone had been “fighting the battle of Palestine in their own way”, she said.

“Everyone is standing for humanity, but doing it differently. And we decided to keep coming over and over again here to Britomart and our voices will be heard until Palestine is free.”

Adnan Swaid, a Nakba victim, son of Palestinian refugee parents and freedom activist who had lived for 50 years as a stateless human being, spoke of Israel’s ever-growing Zionist crimes.

“Since the establishment of the Zionist idea in the 18th century, the Zionist lying machine was established as well for producing and spreading of Zionist lies,” he said.

Compelling poems
Jacqueline “Jax” Taylor of the Stand With Palestine Waiheke community group recited two compelling poems.

“All the world’s best poets have a little drinkie to help when the words won’t flow,” she said introducing one of her poems that she had compiled in dedication to the ‘150 Weeks’!”

Ihumatao and Rocket Lab protester Brendan Corbett praised a Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa-backed lawsuit that was filed in the High Court at Wellington this week seeking a judicial review of the New Zealand government approval for the launching of BlackRock spy satellites that are alleged to be complicit with the Gaza genocide.

“The lawsuit is charging that our Ministers of Space, Judith Collins, and the latest one, Chris Penk, and now Paul Goldsmith, who is yet to be selected, but he has got the job,” Corbett said.

“These people had signed a launch certificate to allow Rocket Lab to launch BlackSky satellites that have a contract to act with the IDF to target across Israel, across Palestine.

“The research after months and months has resulted in the lawyers being super confident that they can get a conviction — so well done to these lawyers.”

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/08/15/palestine-protesters-told-they-are-rainbow-people-of-hope-after-150-weeks-of-gaza-protest/

By Lucy Xia of RNZ

Thousands have toured the metro City Rail Link’s deepest station — Karanga-a-Hape Station — ahead of its opening next month, and the station and its surrounds have come alive with music, performances and queues of people lining up to order food at St Kevin’s Arcade.

The event today drew in not just Aucklanders, but also visitors from other cities.

Karanga-a-Hape Station has New Zealand’s longest escalator, taking passengers 33 metres beneath Pitt Street.

• READ MORE: Other City Rail Link reports

Other artistic features include a ceiling shaped like three kauri snail shells, in homage to the kauri forests that once covered the Karangahape ridgeline before urbanisation.

Thirteen-year-old Aizu Rive, who has visiting his Auckland grandparents — coming all the way from Tokyo — said he likes the architecture of the station, including the ceiling designs.

The young rail enthusiast said he was excited that New Zealand now had a metro network.

“Feels very nice, because New Zealand is getting bigger too, it’s getting similar with Japan so it feels very nice,” he said.

Train ‘getting bigger’
“The train is getting bigger in New Zealand, and I love trains, so it’s really good for me,” he added.

Mary Thompson, who’s come from Te Aroha in Waikato to visit the station, said opening of Auckland’s City Rail Link will make it easier for her to do day trips to Auckland.

“Coming up to Auckland, it’s always been a pain with parking, this, we just grab one [train] from Pukekohe, come through a day out, a good journey,” she said.

Thompson said she was pleased with the art at the station.

“I just think you only have one chance to make it beautiful, nobody retrofits a building to put art in it, and the spaces are so pretty.

“I’m just happy it’s got brightness and light, and after living overseas, some of the stations are rather dingy and horrid, and this is just lovely,” she said.

Meanwhile, a family of four living on Vincent Street, near the Karanga-a-Hape Station said the CRL’s opening would make a big difference for their school drop offs.

Four bus trips a day
Arrenda Maryzona currently makes four bus trips a day to drop off and pick up her kids from their school in New Lynn.

With the new Karanga-a-Hape Station connected to the Western Line, she can now take the train directly to New Lynn and cut down her travel time by half.

“It will make my life easier, because I can commute easily and I can spend less time than now, I will be so happy,” she said.

The new inner-city rail network has cost $5.5 billion and taken a decade to build.

Auckland Transport says the CRL is expected to double the number of Aucklanders who live within a 30-minute train journey of the city centre.

• City Rail Link opens on September 13.

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/08/15/just-lovely-karanga-a-hape-train-station-delights-locals-and-visitors-on-open-day/

Special Corespondent

Maritime intelligence firm Kpler counted 13 vessels crossing the Strait of Hormuz on Thursday.

The number is small. But the number is not the story.

The story is that nine of those 13 took the Iranian-approved route. The route American warned ships against using.

• READ MORE: Trump says he will declare Hormuz US territory ‘pretty soon’
• Other war on Iran reports

Now the question is: Trump says the strait is “under our control”. So whose instructions are the ships following?

The answer is in the arithmetic. Sixty-nine percent of them ignored the American warning and entered Iran’s lane.

That is not a statement. Not a claim. That is a vote.

And the vote was cast by people with hundreds of millions of dollars floating on that water.

Plain language
CNN put it in plainer language. They wrote that the figure does not reflect Trump’s repeated insistence this week that the strait is “open” and under American control.

But today’s article will not only be about counting ships. Because Iran has done something on paper as well, and it has barely been discussed.

In May, Iran created an institution — the Persian Gulf Strait Authority.

According to a report by the US Congressional Research Service, Iran declared that no vessel may pass through the Strait of Hormuz without a valid passage permit issued by this authority.

Notice what that is. It is not a threat. It is administration.

A threat can stop a ship, but build a permit system and you never need to stop one. The ship comes to you and asks for permission.

And this is where Iran’s strategy becomes visible. Early in the war, Iran attacked vessels. That was a display of strength, but it carried a cost — every attack drained away the world’s sympathy.

A legal face
Now Iran attacks less and sells permits instead. Same result, but the face of it is legal.

There is one more line in the CRS report, and it is the foundation of this strategy. Iranian leaders claim it was the June memorandum of understanding that granted them the right to administer shipping through this strait.

Which is Iran saying:”We did not seize this power. You signed it over to us on paper.”

And what Iran’s Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf said on June 23 is now coming true. He said “management of the strait will never return to the way it was before the war”.

But, yes, there is a big “but” here. And it would be unjust not to say it.

That same CRS report notes that Iran’s claim runs counter to geographic reality, because the Strait of Hormuz comprises the territorial waters of both Iran and Oman.

Which means Iran is not legally the sole owner of this strait. On paper, Iran’s claim is weak.

Iran’s lane followed
But paper and water are not the same thing. Whatever the law says, on Thursday nine ships followed Iran’s lane.

Now to America’s answer.

On Friday, the US Treasury issued new sanctions. The targets were Iran’s Shahr Bank, along with individuals, exchange houses and companies spread across several countries, accused of helping Iran move hundreds of millions of dollars clandestinely.

The Treasury said itself that this was its eighth set of sanctions in 2026 against Iran’s alleged shadow-banking system.

Eighth. Eight times in one year.

Now the question is: if seven did not work, why would the eighth?

That is the problem with sanctions. The first one lands a blow. The second raises the pressure. But what does the eighth do?

The eighth only announces that the previous seven did not work.

The new normal
And the strangest thing of all is the oil price. CNN reported that despite no sign of the war ending, and despite traffic through the strait staying low, oil prices are falling.

So you can see for yourselves. The market is no longer listening to war news. The market has decided this is the new normal.

And once something becomes “normal”, the urgency to change it fades.

Meanwhile, on Thursday evening, Abu Dhabi’s state oil company ADNOC said two of its vessels were attacked while transiting Hormuz. No injuries.

Who attacked them? ADNOC did not say. No group claimed responsibility.

Since the war began, 15 ADNOC vessels have been attacked in total. One crew member killed, 20 injured.

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) is an American ally. And the ally’s ships are burning every week.

Now a word on something that touches South Asian countries too.

Floating Iranian oil
Early in this war, America adopted a tactic — temporarily lifting sanctions on roughly 140 million barrels of Iranian oil already floating at sea, so that supply would rise and prices would fall.

America’s Ambassador to the UN, Mike Waltz, told Fox News at the time that this oil had previously gone mainly to China. Now it could go elsewhere. He named the places — such as India, Bangladesh or elsewhere

He added that sanctions on the banks would remain in place, so Iran would not see a cent of that money.

Think about what that means. Iran’s oil gets sold, South Asian countries get to buy it, and Iran does not get the money.

Developing countries are offered cheap oil as bait while Iran’s own asset is released onto the market, and the proceeds stay locked inside the American banking system.

That is not trade. That is imperial accounting.

Here I will not quote anyone else. I will give you my own opinion.

Paper ‘control’ v ships moving
The shape of this war is becoming clear now. Everything Trump is doing is on paper. Sanctions, Truth Social posts, declarations of “total control”.

Everything Iran is doing is on the water. Which route, whose permission, which ship and when.

In March, Trump called on China, France, Japan, South Korea and Britain to send ships, “let us open the strait together”. Nobody answered.

Five months on, America has drawn a route through that same strait, and the ships are avoiding it and choosing Iran’s.

Control written on paper, or ships moving on water — which of the two is real power?

Let me finish with the number I started with.

Thirteen ships. Nine on Iran’s route.

Trump says the strait is ours. The ships’ captains are saying something else.

And at sea, the captain has the last word.

Republished from Iran International under Creative Commons.

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/08/15/strait-of-hormuz-its-not-just-the-numbers-its-the-ships-vote-and-thats-for-iran/

By Iliesa Tora of RNZ Pacific

The Fiji High Court has ruled that the Commission of Inquiry report into the appointment of Barbara Malimali as FICAC Commissioner, in its entirety, is null and void.

Justice Dane Tuiqereqere also found that the COI report was unlawful, and that its adverse findings were irrational and it has been quashed

It has also been found that President Ratu Naiqama Lalabalavu and Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka failed to provide the applicants with natural justice.

• READ MORE: Judge rules COI report is unlawful and null and void, and President, PM and COI breached principles of natural justice
• Other COI reports

Malimali challenged the report with former Attorney-General Graham Leung, and lawyers Wylie Clarke and Laurel Vaurasi.

Local media said the judge has determined that the President, the Prime Minister and the Commission of Inquiry, breached principles of natural justice for not giving the applicants the opportunity to respond to the adverse findings against them.

Fiji Village News said Justice Tuiqereqere ruled that the work of the Commission of Inquiry after 1 February 2025, including the report, is ultra vires or unlawful.

He found that the extension of the Commission of Inquiry beyond 31 January 2025 was ineffective.

As a result, the actions of the Commissioner after that date, including the completion of his report dated 1 May 2025, were unlawful, Fiji Village News stated.

Justice Tuiqereqere has also found that adverse findings and recommendations against the applicants including Malimali, former Attorney-General Graham Leung and lawyers Wylie Clarke and Laurel Vaurasi were unlawful, including those relating to a meeting at the FICAC office on 5 September 2024.

‘Praise God for the win’
The applicants had further challenged the decision by the President, on the advice of the Prime Minister, to release the Commission of Inquiry report publicly.

Malimali and her lawyer Tanya Waqanika are on the island of Kadavu and responded to the ruling in a Facebook post, saying justice had been served.

“Praise God for the win,” Waqanika said in her post.

“It has been a hard battle fighting to clear Barbara Malimali’s name from the COI taxpayer funded $4m (and counting) crocodile hunting failed expedition.

“Barbara Malimali and me are here in my village and we just received the news that we WON our HBJ No 9/26 Judicial Review case against the Fiji Government (well, all the Respondents names are Govt representatives).

The judge also said the COI Chair, David Ashton-Lewis, should have provided a draft of the adverse findings against the applicants to them and an opportunity to respond before compiling the report.

The Commission of Inquiry was the brainchild of Rabuka.

In June, the High Court rejected the Prime Minister’s attempt to stall its ruling that the country’s former anti-corruption chief was illegally sacked.

In February, Justice Dane Tuiqereqere found that the President — on the advice of the Prime Minister — “unlawfully” dismissed Barbara Malimali, the head of FICAC

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/08/14/fiji-court-rules-coi-report-into-malimali-appointment-was-unlawful-null-and-void/

By Rashika Kumar in Suva

Counsel for Fiji-British journalist Charlie Charters has been ordered by High Court judge Justice Pita Bulamainaivalu to serve a motion seeking the return of the 7 electronic devices seized by police on the police chief today.

The motion was filed after police re-seized the devices last Friday under a fresh search warrant, despite an earlier Magistrates Court order for the devices to be returned to Charters’ solicitor, Seforan Fatiaki, by 1pm.

Charters’ counsel, Juleen Fatiaki, told the High Court that Seforan Fatiaki had called to the police CID about 1pm last Friday, when the fresh search warrant was issued.

• READ MORE: Charters’ lawyers cite constitutional protection for journalistic sources
• Other Fiji media freedom reports

She said when Fatiaki was served with the warrant, they put police on notice that they were invoking Section 1(3) of the Criminal Procedure Act, stating that information on the devices was confidential and privileged.

Justice Bulamainaivalu, who joined the proceedings online from Labasa, questioned whether the magistrate who signed the warrant was aware of the High Court’s stay order on the FICAC proceedings.

Juleen Fatiaki said she was not aware and confirmed that Magistrate Sufia Hamza signed the warrant.

She also said that they had only been able to serve the motion to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions after receiving the files back from court this morning and had not been able to serve it on the Police Commissioner.

A hearing on the return of the devices will be held on Monday.

Meanwhile, DPP counsel Alisha Lal told the court they were appearing only as a friend of the court.

Earlier, Fiji Times journalist Anish Chand reported that Charters’ lawyers would tell the High Court that the confidentiality of journalistic sources was protected by Fiji’s Constitution and common law in their challenge over the re-seizure of his electronic devices.

Charters said the devices contained confidential journalistic material, information capable of identifying sources and communications with his legal advisers.

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/08/14/fiji-judge-orders-motion-seeking-return-of-journalists-devices-seized-by-police/

By Luka Forman of RNZ

Leaders of a church that owns a historic abandoned building in central Auckland have been in talks with Auckland Council about the possibility of demolishing it.

The once-grand, two-storey Carlile House in Auckland’s Grey Lynn was built in 1886 and has had many uses over its long life — including as an Anglican children’s home, and an alternative school.

But in recent decades it has fallen into ruin and the church that owns it do not have the money to restore it to its former glory.

• READ MORE: Auckland MP considers members bill to strengthen protections for historic buildings

RNZ looks at the history and future of the building as part of our Abandoned Auckland series.

Architect and Grey Lynn local Graeme Burgess looks over a barbed wire and corrugated iron fence at the historic Carlile House on Richmond road in Grey Lynn.

“Right now, because of the fence running through here it actually feels so guarded, and it’s like something that nobody can actually appreciate.”

The building was grand in size and stature, but Burgess said after years of neglect it was heart-breaking to see the state it had ended up in.

‘Slowly falling apart’
“[It’s] difficult to watch something so grand and so wonderful slowly falling apart. But there are reasons why it’s in the state that it’s in at present. And those reasons are incredibly complex.”

The United Church of Tonga, which owned the building, did not have the money to do it up.

The church did not want to be interviewed for this story, but said it was working through its options for the building, and would put forward a plan in coming months.

Auckland Council said it had been approached about the possibility of demolishing the building by the church, but as it was a Category 1 Historic Place, that was prohibited.

Graeme Burgess hoped the church and council could find a way to make use of the place.

“I would hope that’s not the discussions they’re having. I hope that the discussions they’re having would be about how the place can be retained to the greatest extent possible.”

Local artist John Reynolds, who has lived opposite Carlile House for decades, was less optimistic — given the roof of the building had partially caved in.

“At the current rate of decay, in 18 months it’ll be collapsing in on itself, if not before.”

No restoration interest
Reynolds believed the church had no interest in restoring the building, and the council had not done enough to help find a resolution.

In 2019, Auckland Council offered to buy the building, but the church declined.

At the time it was estimated re-developing it would cost $10 million to $20 million.

Reynolds would like the large property to be turned into social housing.

“It could be many houses, and it could be housing for people that needs housing. It could be a win for the community, a win for the church, and actually a win for the heritage nuts.”

Local historian Tania Mace said Carlile House was originally built with money bequeathed by early Auckland businessman Edward Costley.

‘A frugal life’
“He lived a very frugal life, he never owned his own home. In the end when he passed away he made a number of bequests and this was one of them. And the people of Auckland were shocked to find he was extremely, extremely, wealthy.”

It was originally a training facility for disadvantaged young boys to learn technical skills.

Later it was an Anglican children’s home, the headquarters of an evangelical outreach mission, an alternative school, and briefly a remand home, before eventually being bought by the United Church of Tonga in the late 1970s.

Auckland Council compliance manager Adrian Wilson said the heritage of the building should be protected by its owners, but the council had no power to compel this.

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/08/13/church-owning-historic-carlile-house-talks-with-auckland-council-about-demolishing-it/

Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre

Today, we mark an extraordinary milestone: 42 years of the Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre (FWCC).

As we reflect on this journey, we are reminded of the countless lives that have intersected with our work since 1984. Over the past four decades, 168,145 survivors have accessed the services of FWCC and its branches throughout Fiji.

These include survivors of domestic violence, rape and sexual assault, sexual harassment, child abuse, and other forms of violence and abuse.

• READ MORE: Other Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre reports

Yet numbers alone can never tell the full story.

Statistics cannot capture the fear of a woman escaping violence in the middle of the night. They cannot describe the courage it takes to disclose rape for the first time.

They cannot measure the resilience of survivors who rebuild their lives after trauma, nor reflect the determination of women who refused to give up despite experiencing violence, discrimination, and inequality.

Every individual who walked through our doors came seeking safety, support, and dignity. Many arrived carrying experiences that no one should ever have to endure. Many came believing they were alone. Our role was, and continues to be, to ensure they know they are not.

Principles of feminism
Throughout our history, FWCC’s work has remained firmly grounded in the principles of feminism, women’s human rights, human rights, dignity, equality, and justice. These principles have guided our response to violence against women and girls, shaped our advocacy, informed our research and training, and strengthened our commitment to building a society where all women and girls can live free from violence, discrimination, and inequality.

While our primary focus has been addressing violence against women and girls, our services have always recognised the diversity of the communities we serve. Over the past 42 years, we have worked with women in all their diversity, including women from rural and urban communities, women with disabilities, young women, older women, women from different ethnic, cultural, and religious backgrounds, and women of different sexual orientations and gender identities.

We have also supported men and boys affected by violence and abuse, as well as members of the LGBTQI+ community who have sought counselling, support, information, and protection.

Looking back, the impact of FWCC extends far beyond the people who directly accessed our services. It can be seen in the women who found safety and rebuilt their lives. It can be seen in the police officers, health workers, teachers, community leaders, faith leaders, and advocates who received training and developed a deeper understanding of violence against women and women’s human rights.

It is reflected in laws, policies, and public conversations that have been influenced by decades of advocacy, research, and evidence-based work. It is reflected in generations of women and girls who now know that they have rights, that violence is never their fault, and that support is available.

Centre’s leadership
No reflection on the journey of the Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre would be complete without acknowledging the leadership of our coordinator, Shamima Ali. For more than four decades, she has been the most influential voice for women’s human rights in Fiji and the Pacific. Her unwavering commitment to ending violence against women and girls, advancing gender equality, and holding institutions accountable has helped shape not only the direction of FWCC but also the national conversation on women’s rights and human rights.

Under her leadership, FWCC has grown from a small feminist organisation into a nationally and internationally respected centre for crisis intervention, advocacy, research, training, and feminist leadership. Through times of political uncertainty, social resistance, and changing public attitudes, she has remained steadfast in speaking out against injustice and ensuring that survivors’ voices and experiences remain at the centre of our work.

Some people witness history and others help shape it. Shamima Ali has done both. Thank you, Sham.

We also acknowledge with gratitude the staff, counsellors, trainers, volunteers, trustees, supporters, allies, donors, partners, and communities who have stood with us over the last four decades. Your dedication, commitment, and belief in this work have made these achievements possible.

We also extend our sincere appreciation to the Australian government through the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), and the New Zealand government through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT), for their longstanding partnership and support. Their contributions have strengthened efforts to advance women’s human rights and respond to violence against women and girls in Fiji and across the Pacific.

As we reflect on 42 years, we are also mindful of those whose experiences remain unseen and unheard. Their stories remind us that violence against women remains one of the most urgent human rights challenges facing our nation.

That is why our work remains as important today as it was in 1984.

We do not mark anniversaries simply to celebrate longevity. We mark them to honour feminist persistence and resilience.

Our dream has always been to work ourselves out of business. Until that day comes, the work continues.

Republished from the Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre website, 13 August 2026.

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/08/13/fiji-womens-crisis-centre-turns-42-reflections-on-a-milestone/

RNZ Pacific reporters

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/08/13/samoa-opposition-leader-arrested-over-comments-about-pm/

The New Zealand government faces legal action over allegations its space technology may have supported Israel’s military operations during the Gaza genocide, reports The New Arab.

By Ibrahim Othman

New Zealand’s government is facing a historic lawsuit before the High Court at Wellington, with activists and lawyers seeking to overturn judicial reviews and licences granted by the Ministry of Space to US geospatial intelligence company BlackSky, alleging that its technologies have been used by the Israeli military during its genocidal war on the Gaza Strip.

The lawsuit, which was filed yesterday, has three plaintiffs: Palestinian-New Zealand engineer Yasser Abdel Aal, information technology expert Maher Nazzal, and Māori-Tongan doctor Timoti Te Moki.

According to the statement of claim, a copy of which was obtained by The New Arab, the lawsuit is based on the plaintiffs’ direct harm from Israel’s genocidal war.

• READ MORE: Palestinian Kiwis, Māori doctor file claim against NZ govt over Gaza spy satellites
• Justice For Palestine welcomes legal challenge to govt approval of BlackSky spy satellite launches from NZ
• Other Rocket Lab reports

Abdel Aal lost more than 85 members of his extended family due to Israeli airstrikes on the Gaza Strip. His two sisters and their families are currently living in tents lacking the most basic humanitarian necessities in the Al-Mawasi area of the Strip.

Maher Nazzal, head of the Palestine Forum of New Zealand and one of the plaintiffs, told TNA that he was taking part in the case because he believed that “New Zealand bears a moral and legal responsibility for what is happening, and it is not acceptable to ignore the possibility that technology launched from our territory is being used to support military operations that lead to more suffering and killing of Palestinians”.

“I have seen the suffering of Palestinians myself, including members of my family who were displaced during the 1967 Naksa. What is happening today in Gaza and the West Bank is not something we can stand by and do nothing about,” he said.

“This case is not about opposing the space or technology sector but about holding the government accountable for its decisions and its duty to ensure that what is launched from New Zealand is not used to provide information or capabilities that could help target Palestinians.

“We are not asking our government to do the impossible. We are asking it to assume its responsibility, act in accordance with New Zealand’s obligations under international law, and put the protection of human rights above commercial or political interests.

“I am proud to be part of this legal action, and I hope this case will lead to greater transparency and accountability and send a clear message that New Zealand will not turn a blind eye when there is a possibility that its capabilities or territory could be used to support serious violations against the Palestinian people,” he said.

“Silence is not a neutral position when people’s lives and rights are at stake.”

Allegations of ‘deliberate disregard’
The legal action is supported by the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA), which had formally raised its concerns with former Space Minister Judith Collins in November 2024 over Israel’s use of data from these satellites.

The network’s spokeswoman, Rinad Tamimi, described the ministry’s position as “deliberate disregard”, stressing that the minister and officials at the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) raised no questions about whether Israel was an end user of the services when the permits were granted in December 2023.

“All the minister had to do was pick up the phone and ask whether the Israelis were part of the deal, but they feared getting an answer they did not want,” Tamimi added in a statement.

These concerns are supported by reports published by French magazine Intelligence Online in July 2024, which revealed the existence of a secret $150 million contract under which Israel was the “main foreign client” of BlackSky, providing it with high-resolution and frequently updated images and analysis of the Gaza Strip.

International obligations, national interest
On the legal side, Sam Vincent, one of the lawyers representing the plaintiffs, said in a statement on Tuesday that the case against the former minister and the government centred on the failure to consider New Zealand’s obligations under the Genocide Convention and international human rights law when approving the launch of those space payloads through Rocket Lab from the New Zealand launch site at Mahia.

“It is no secret that Israel systematically relies on geospatial intelligence to identify its military targets, and there is a strong possibility that it has used and continues to use these satellites for this purpose,” he added.

Lawyer Ruby Hazin, for her part, cited reports by the independent UN Commission of Inquiry and international organisations such as Amnesty International, all of which concluded that Israel had committed genocide in Gaza.

“Since January 2024, the International Court of Justice has formally notified all states of their duty to act to prevent genocide, and New Zealand is legally bound to meet this obligation,” she added.

Pattern ‘unravelling’
Groups supporting the case linked the legal action to a recent ruling by the Federal Court of Australia that ordered the Australian defence minister to disclose information on arms exports and F35 aircraft spare parts to Israel.

Commenting on the linking, Rinad Tamimi said, “There is a general pattern of secrecy surrounding Western arms exports and military services to Israel, but this pattern is now unravelling; complicity has been exposed, and our government is unfortunately part of this systematic deception“.

Through the case, the plaintiffs are seeking a historic court ruling that would reshape the standards for granting space licences in New Zealand and force authorities to review and scrutinise the end-user lists of technology companies to ensure that New Zealand territory is not used as a launch point to facilitate the commission of international war crimes.

This article was first published by The New Arab and is translated from Arabic by Afrah Almatwari.

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/08/13/new-zealand-faces-lawsuit-over-technology-use-during-gaza-war/

By Tiana Haxton of RNZ Pacific

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/08/13/cook-islands-election-preliminary-results-starting-to-come-in/