Israeli forces entered the Hebron neighbourhood of Ein Deir Baha, ordering residents to pack up and leave following an attack that killed two soldiers nearby.
Some residents reported abuse by Israeli forces as they were asked to leave Hebron. (EPA Images pic)
RAMALLAH: The Palestinian Authority said Sunday that nearly 2,700 people had been displaced by an Israeli military operation in the occupied West Bank city of Hebron launched after two soldiers were killed in an attack nearby.
Following Friday’s attack, Israeli forces entered the Hebron neighbourhood of Ein Deir Baha, where the assailants lived, and ordered residents to pack up and leave after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pledged a major operation in the occupied territory.
“More than 2,670 Palestinians have been forcibly displaced from their homes in Hebron by Israeli occupation forces, the majority of them women, children, and elderly people, according to data from Hebron Municipality,” the Palestinian prime minister’s office said on X.
A convoy of Israeli military and police vehicles accompanied by soldiers was seen in Hebron on Sunday, making its way down a street blocked to civilian traffic by parked cars and motorbikes, AFP images showed.
Local shopkeeper Higazi al-Tamimi, who also plays a leadership role in the evacuated neighbourhood, accused Israeli soldiers of beating him as he attempted to go to his home.
“I remember one or two people starting to strike my legs, chest and shoulders. One of them even hit me on the head,” he said from a hospital bed, with his leg thickly bandaged.
“They then pushed me backwards, and I kept moving until I reached a safe area.”
Analyst Syaza Shukri says Melaka is supposed to be a litmus test for cooperation between the coalition and the Islamic party
BN chairman Ahmad Zahid Hamidi (left) said the coalition would contest 21 of Melaka’s 28 state seats but PAS secretary-general Takiyuddin Hassan said the seat distribution had yet to be finalised.
PETALING JAYA: PAS’s denial that seat negotiations with Barisan Nasional for the Melaka state election have been finalised raises doubts among analysts over the possible cooperation between the two in the 16th general election (GE16).
Syaza Shukri of International Islamic University Malaysia said Melaka was supposed to be a litmus test for cooperation between the coalition and the Islamic party.
Syaza Shukri.
“All is definitely not well. The fact that PAS has publicly said the seat distribution has not been finalised speaks volumes.
“Melaka is supposed to be the ‘experiment’ to gauge if they can work together or not. So this is not a good sign,” she told FMT.
On Wednesday, BN chairman Ahmad Zahid Hamidi said the coalition would contest 21 of Melaka’s 28 state seats, while PAS and its allies would vie for the remaining seven.
However, PAS secretary-general Takiyuddin Hassan said the seat distribution had yet to be finalised, although he maintained that cooperation between the parties was certain.
Syaza said PAS’s decision to publicly challenge the arrangement was significant, particularly as Zahid was unlikely to backtrack.
“BN will not back down, PAS doesn’t seem happy with only seven.”
She said BN and PAS could end up facing off in some seats while maintaining cordial relations and focusing their attacks on Pakatan Harapan, similar to their approach in Johor.
Azmi Hassan.
Similarly, Azmi Hassan of Nusantara Academy said Melaka would be a crucial test for BN-PAS cooperation ahead of GE16, unlike Johor and Negeri Sembilan, where he believed cooperation was easier.
He said the problem in Melaka was not just the number of seats offered to PAS and Wawasan, but their chances of winning them.
Based on Zahid’s remarks, PAS and Wawasan would contest four DAP strongholds – Kota Laksamana, Kesidang, Bandar Hilir and Ayer Keroh.
“Wresting those seats from DAP would be a formidable challenge,” Azmi said.
Of the remaining three seats, Bukit Katil was represented by former chief minister Adly Zahari for two terms while Sungai Udang and Bemban seats were won by Bersatu in the last state election.
Mazlan Ali.
Mazlan Ali of Universiti Teknologi Malaysia believed that forming an alliance for GE16 would be challenging for Umno and PAS based on the current impasse in seat negotiations for the Melaka polls.
He said if PAS and Umno could not compromise in Melaka, it would also be difficult for the two parties to agree on seats in states led by the Islamic party.
Still, Mazlan felt that BN would want to work with PAS in Melaka, even though the coalition could win it on its own.
“BN wants to minimise the impact of split votes in Malay-majority areas.”
At least eight Palestinians have been killed in Israeli attacks across Gaza, including one that targeted a university campus in Gaza City.
Three security guards were killed in an Israeli air strike on the Islamic University campus on Sunday, the second attack that targeted the institution in the space of a few hours.
Reporting from the scene immediately after the attack, Al Jazeera’s Hani Mahmoud said, “The aftermath was massive.”
“The bloodstains, the pieces of flesh of the bodies that were torn apart were on the ground; the smell of the acrid, burning concrete mixed with the flesh and the blood,” he added, saying that the Al Jazeera team had just finished filming on site and greeted the three security guards before the strike killed them.
“We could hear the hissing sound of flying shrapnel everywhere to the point we thought we were going to be hit,” our correspondent said.
In the earlier drone strike on the campus, seven female students were injured by flying shrapnel.
“One of them was seriously injured and was transferred to a nearby field hospital,” Mahmoud said.
Separately, in southern Gaza, the Nasser Medical Complex reported that two people were killed as a result of Israeli shelling in al-Mawasi in Khan Younis. Several people were also wounded, including a child.
A person was also killed in an Israeli drone strike east of Deir el-Balah in central Gaza, and another person was killed, and several others wounded, in an attack on al-Rashid Street, near Hamad Hospital in the northern Gaza Strip, the Palestinian Wafa news agency reported.
Later on Sunday, another man was killed and several others injured in an Israeli attack targeting the Sheikh Nasser neighbourhood, east of Khan Younis.
Attacks on education
The Popular Resistance Committees in Palestine condemned the university attacks, calling on mediators and international guarantors to step in to stop Israeli violations.
According to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, UNESCO, nearly 95 percent of Gaza’s higher education campuses have been destroyed or damaged since Israel’s genocidal war began in October 2023.
Mahmoud noted that the majority of buildings at the Islamic University were already destroyed before Sunday’s attacks. “Only a couple of these buildings are partially standing,” he said.
Mourners react during the funeral of three Palestinians who were killed in an Israeli strike in Gaza City, October 25, 2026 [Dawoud Abu Alkas/Reuters]
The incident is “a reminder that a sense of security is painfully out of reach, even inside the place where students are supposed to be learning without the fear of these attacks”, he added.
The latest figures released by the Palestinian Ministry of Health in Gaza show that at least 1,551 people have been killed since the “ceasefire” began in October 2025, and 5,573 have been injured.
The total death toll from Israel’s genocidal war on the Gaza Strip is 74,544, with at least 175,692 people wounded since October 2023.
Israel also continues to occupy more and more land inside the Strip, with almost two-thirds of Gaza now under Israel’s military control or subject to its restrictions.
Palestinians there are also experiencing an escalating food crisis as a result of ongoing Israeli crossing closures and reduced international funding for assistance.
A supporter of Brazil's President and presidential candidate Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva celebrates after the results of the presidential runoff election in Porto Alegre, Brazil, on October 25, 2026. Lula da Silva pulled off a dramatic comeback on October 25, 2026, as he clinched election victory against right-wing senator Flavio Bolsonaro, who trounced him in the first round. — AFP pic
First Published: Monday, 26 Oct 2026 9:06 AM MYT
RIO DE JANEIRO (Brazil), Oct 26— Brazil’s leftist President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva pulled off a dramatic comeback yesterday as he clinched election victory against right-wing senator Flavio Bolsonaro, who trounced him in the first round.
The leftist icon, who turns 81 on Tuesday, defied all projections to win an unprecedented fourth term at the helm of Latin America’s largest country.
According to official results, he won 51.75 per cent of the votes to 48.25 per cent for Flavio Bolsonaro, son of former far-right president Jair Bolsonaro, who had entered election day confident with his lead in the polls.
With Lula’s victory, Brazil staved off a conservative wave that has seen numerous countries — such as Argentina, Chile, Colombia, and Peru — all shift right, backed by US President Donald Trump.
After a campaign marred by scandal and mud-slinging, yesterday’s vote plunged into chaos after a last-minute Supreme Court ruling extending voting by two hours, at the request of Lula who said buses had been pulled from circulation in various cities, barring citizens from voting.
Flavio Bolsonaro also requested an extension in some parts of the country due to heavy rains, but his camp lashed out at the country-wide extension.
“Either we win. Or we win. Consider yourself warned,” pro-Bolsonaro lawmaker Nikolas Ferreira wrote on X as the votes streamed in.
The bitter campaign laid bare the deep divisions in the country of over 200 million people.
“It’s a disgrace. We’ve never had anything like this in Brazil, and now they’ve come up with the idea of extending the election period by two hours,” said Aurelio Junior, 45, a dentist in Brasilia.
Jacqueline Maria Lima de Franca, 34, a business owner in Rio de Janeiro backing Lula said it was “more than fair…everyone should have the right to vote, and that was being neglected.”
Lula rises from the ashes, again
Lula, a defining figure in Brazilian politics over four decades, was blindsided after his first-round defeat to Bolsonaro.
The left swung into action with massive rallies declaring “Never Again Bolsonaro,” where protesters recalled the former president’s chaotic handling of the Covid pandemic, devastation of the Amazon rainforest and cuts to public programs.
Lula also revamped his social media strategy, taking video selfies and even bought his first cellphone, while supporters carried out a feverish campaign to change the minds of family, friends and neighbors, and encourage them to vote after high levels of abstention.
His re-election marks another remarkable comeback for the man who grew up dirt poor in the northeast in a family of illiterate farmers.
Lula, revered for social welfare programs that lifted millions out of poverty, made a dramatic return to office in 2022 elections after a corruption scandal saw him jailed for over 18 months.
The charges, annulled on procedural grounds, have continued to haunt him.
In his third term he has overseen a drop in inflation and unemployment, and lifted millions out of hunger, but voters complain about the cost of living and a sense of insecurity.
Lula’s social policies became a point of tension as he expanded welfare programs during the campaign.
“Brazil needs more time with Lula, primarily because the country is on the verge of falling into the clutches of fascism,” Maria Fernanda Elisbao, a 21-year-old editorial assistant, told AFP.
A tricky term ahead
Lula heads into a fourth term with a country divided, with almost half of the nation voting against him and desperate for change.
“We’re in a deep hole, things are dire. People can barely afford to eat — buying meat is out of the question,” said Tereza Cristina Ramos, a 68-year-old retiree, who voted in Rio de Janeiro.
Already one of the world’s oldest leaders, Lula will be 85 by the end of his new term in 2030.
He will thus have spent 16 years in power, following his first stint as president from 2003 to 2010.
Lula is also facing a hostile Congress dominated by the right.
His options are also constrained by the economic outlook, with growth expected to slow.
He has also come under renewed pressure to confront rampant insecurity in a country plagued by criminal factions that sow terror in working-class neighbourhoods.
The president’s campaign leaned heavily on the theme of sovereignty in the face of commercial and diplomatic pressure from Trump’s United States.
Voters must “choose a country where the flag is respected,” he said, his raspy voice more hoarse than ever after a tireless campaign. He accused his rival of wanting to “govern with the American flag.” — AFP
Palestinian forces have not responded to rising settler violence, but the Netanyahu government has still been stoking tensions with the PA ahead of the Oct. 27 Israeli elections, Mohammed Altaj reports
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the U.N. General Assembly in September. (UN Photo/Loey Felipe)
By Mohammed Altaj in Ramallah, Palestine Special to Consortium News
Israel is threatening “total war” against the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank.
With just days to go before the Israeli general election on Oct. 27, Israel’s prime minister and defense minister have threatened a full-scale attack if an Israel settler or soldier is killed by a member of the Palestinian security forces.
Defense Minister Israel Katz threatened all-out war against the West Bank at a government security meeting on Oct. 6 held to discuss lessons learned from Oct. 7, 2023. He said that the IDF was waiting for PA security personnel and associated groups to “turn their guns” against Israeli settlers and IDF troops in the West Bank.
Katz said:
“In such a case, war will be declared against the Palestinian Authority, and the IDF will launch a comprehensive offensive in accordance with an organized plan that was formulated and approved by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and by me, according to the principles outlined for the IDF.”
Katz added:
“The campaign will be short and powerful, and will include the use of ground and air forces, and the use of special means, the targeting and expulsion of senior officials, the destruction of weapons and military equipment, and the extensive evacuation of residents and destruction of terrorist infrastructure inside the cities and in all refugee camps in Judea and Samaria[West Bank] , in accordance with the Gaza and Lebanon model, alongside reinforcing forces and defending the Israeli communities.”
Katz, on left, at the Pentagon in 2025. (DoD/Noel Diaz)
During a visit to a West Bank security barrier on Oct.13, Netanyahu also warned of all out war against Ramallah. “Our enemies are thinking of testing us in these days leading up to the elections. I warn them that we are prepared for every scenario, including what is known as ‘turning the guns around,’” he said.
Netanyahu said the IDF had given him and Katz
“a powerful, robust plan. … In such a scenario, I wouldn’t advise our enemies to test us. You will encounter a level of force here that you never imagined.”
Netanyahu first raised the possibility of the Palestinians turning their guns against Israel at an Aug. 24 meeting at IDF Central Command headquarters.
Ynetnews reported: “The Palestinian security services legally possess thousands of firearms in the West Bank, with Israel’s approval. Under the scenario discussed by Netanyahu, those weapons would instead be directed against Israeli targets.”
Israeli intelligence, however, says there’s no indication of a threat to Israelis. The Jerusalem Post reported:
“IDF sources said the military had no concrete intelligence pointing to a planned rebellion by PA security forces or Fatah-affiliated Tanzim elements. They acknowledged, however, that the IDF must routinely prepare for every scenario, including highly unlikely ones.”
Non-Existent Threat
Israeli soldiers in Jenin, the occupied West Bank, in January 2025. (IDF Spokesperson’s Unit, Wikimedia Commons/CC BY-SA 3.0)
But that has not stopped Netanyahu and Katz from raising tensions further by speaking of a threat that does not exist.
In fact, during the recent upsurge in settler violence against Palestinians, there has not been a single incident recorded of PA security forces firing on settlers or the IDF to protect Palestinians and their property.
“The Palestinian Authority said it does not respond to settlers attacks, citing the potential for political repercussions if the Palestinian authorities were to get into a confrontations with the settlers or the Israeli army,” reported The New York Times in May.
The IDF, on the other hand, has fired on and killed PA security forces. For instance, earlier this month, PA National Security Forces officer Ali al-Bazari, 44, was killed near Nablus by settlers and the IDF.
If Netanyahu wants to start yet another major war to help him win the election — or to complicate the transition if he loses — he will need a significant casus belli. That would appear to be PA forces killing Israel settlers or soldiers.
With the IDF repeatedly firing on PA personnel it would only take one of them to return fire and kill an Israeli for Netanyahu to respond. So far the PA is resisting falling into that trap, even though Palestinians criticize their security forces for failing to protect them from Israeli soldiers and settlers.
A full-scale Israeli war against the Palestinians on the West Bank would be a continuation of the war of ethnic cleansing against Palestinians in Gaza, a key goal of the more than 80-year old plan to establish Greater Israel. Seizing all of historic Palestine from the Arabs is an objective set down by Israel’s first prime minister, David Ben Gurion.
Ending Oslo
Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, U.S. President Bill Clinton and the PLO’s Yasser Arafat at Oslo Accords signing ceremony, Sept. 13, 1993. (Vince Musi, White House, Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain)
In this political climate, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich has openly called for ending the Oslo agreements and dismantling the PA.
He has challenged Palestinian jurisdiction over Areas A and B, advocated forcibly disarming Palestinians in the West Bank and supported a military campaign modeled on Israel’s war in Gaza, just what Netanyahu and Katz are threatening.
National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir has demanded the disarmament of Palestinian security forces and harsher measures against the Authority. He has also promoted policies intended to encourage Palestinians to leave the West Bank and Gaza.
Opposition politician Avigdor Liberman has proposed dismantling the PA, cancelling Oslo and maintaining Israeli security control over the West Bank while preventing the establishment of a Palestinian state.
They may disagree over what should replace the Authority, but they share a fundamental assumption: that Israel has the right to decide whether Palestinian institutions should exist and what powers they may exercise.
In the West Bank, Israeli troops enter Palestinian cities and towns whenever they choose. They raid homes, arrest residents and conduct military operations even in Area A, where the Palestinian Authority is supposed to exercise internal security authority.
Armed settlers attack farmers and families, destroy property and restrict access to land, while Palestinian security personnel often remain inside their headquarters.
The division of the West Bank into Areas A, B and C under the Oslo agreements has long ceased to offer Palestinians meaningful protection. Israeli forces raid Jenin, Nablus, Tulkarm and Ramallah whenever they choose. Settlers enter communities under Palestinian administration, attack residents and prevent farmers from reaching their land.
In February 2025, Israel’s Channel 12 reported that a settlement security official stopped a Palestinian police patrol near Ramallah and confiscated its weapons.
A settlement security official could disarm Palestinian police officers in territory supposedly under Palestinian security jurisdiction.
Yet Netanyahu presents those same security forces as a danger serious enough to justify preparing for war that he may well try to provoke.
***
If there is no more war, Satanyahu may have to go to jail
Reports of preparations for renewed strikes on Iran, days before Israel votes, should set off red flags for voters.
A report in the Financial Times should set off all the red flags in Israel’s defence establishment and among the public. According to the report, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had instructed the military to plan a major new offensive against Iran for early October but was blocked due to the opposition of US President Donald Trump.
It is hard to ignore the possibility that Netanyahu wishes to resume the war before next Tuesday’s election, or immediately after it, in a manner that may affect the results or enable him to form a unity government even if his Likud party has a poor outcome in the election.
This must be stated clearly: according to publicly available information and the repeated claims of defence officials, there is no evidence of a development in Iran’s nuclear weapons or missile programs that would necessitate an immediate Israeli attack. Iran continues to build up its forces and constitutes a significant threat, but this does not mean that any timing is suitable for launching a new offensive, certainly not during the most sensitive weeks of Israel’s democratic process.
Furthermore, following two wars with Iran, it should be asked what a third one might accomplish that its predecessors did not. Even if Israel manages to inflict heavy damage on Iran’s infrastructure, that will not guarantee that it can achieve its strategic goals.
On the other hand, the cost could be high: harm to the home front, the disruption of economic activity in Israel, an extensive mobilisation of reservists and damage to infrastructure. Even if Israel is planning a short campaign, Iran will have a decisive influence on how it unfolds, and there is no way to guarantee when and how it ends.
IDF Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir, the heads of the defence establishment, the attorney general and everyone who is involved in the decision-making process have a special responsibility. Their role is not only to present operational plans, but to demand a well-grounded, security-based justification for their execution, to examine alternatives and to clarify the costs and risks of any operation.
Obviously, in the event of a clear and present danger that must be confronted immediately, Israel must defend itself. But in the absence of such a threat, there is no justification for jeopardising the democratic process and the security of Israelis with a military operation of dubious strategic value.
An election is not a security obstacle that must be bypassed; it is a key element of Israel’s security and resilience. Launching an offensive at this time, without a clear military need, will cast a heavy shadow on the decision-making process and raise concerns about a conflation of political interests and professional considerations. Israel cannot afford another war without knowing whether it is necessary, what it is supposed to achieve and how it can be ended.
The independent public inquiry into AUKUS will report on 4 November after examining the project’s implications for Australia’s security, economy, sovereignty and international standing.
Five years on from the announcement of AUKUS, a project founded on subterfuge and evasion, the public inquiry into AUKUS will launch its report at the National Press Club in Canberra on 4 November. This inquiry has gone where both the Coalition and the ALP have failed to go. It has revealed the depth and breadth of this project for Australia’s national security, economy and international credibility.
I am proud to have been part of the Inquiry Secretariat providing support to our eminent and talented team of inquiry commissioners. In my view it is now clear that AUKUS is about militarising Australia in the interests of the US, ensuring the grifters in defence and the arms industry are well fed. It is an act of self-harm and madness on the part of the Australian government.
The secrecy that lies at the heart of this $368 billion fiasco was maintained by federal or state governments that refused to appear before the public inquiry to make the case for the biggest transfer of sovereign wealth in Australia’s history. That is some kind of contempt for the Australian community.
To recap, if this project goes well it will result in the cost of $368 billion, plus over $120 billion to manage the weapons-grade nuclear waste. It will put at least four Australian cities in the cross-hairs in the event of a conflict between the US – now an international wrecking ball – and our largest trading partner, China.
That’s if these nuclear submarines ever materialise. AUKUS is looking increasingly like a distraction from the main game, which is about turning Australia into a compliant base for the US military.
Meanwhile the Australian government continues to dodge any accountability and simply responds to criticisms by muttering about protecting sea lanes and our alliance with the US. Meanwhile AUKUS critics have been variously accused of communism, appeasement and failing to understand ‘changed circumstances’.
The government’s determination to avoid any scrutiny reached absurd proportions when delegates to the ALP National Conference were denied the opportunity to debate AUKUS (and Palestine) at the national conference.
So, I was shocked to see that while federal and state governments are unwilling to have an honest conversation with the people funding this project, us, they were very forthcoming in the submissions the federal and South Australian governments gave to the UK Parliament through the UK defence committee inquiry.
Forelock tugging to the ‘mother country’ while denying Australians the right to government accountability on AUKUS is reprehensible, undemocratic and politically dumb.
Despite these submissions putting an unjustified gloss on AUKUS, and our almost pleading submissions, the UK defence committee has given our parliamentarians a masterclass in scrutiny, honesty and accountability.
Among the findings of this UK inquiry are that the alliances that have underpinned global security for decades can no longer be taken for granted; that even the UK public has little confidence in the project; that the investment pipeline is already faltering; and that the development of new SSN facilities in Adelaide and Perth could pose a risk to workforce retention at the UK’s equivalent facilities in Barrow-in-Furness and Plymouth.
The town critical to the delivery of the SSN-AUKUS, Barrow-in-Furness, is in dire need of total regeneration, with major issues of poverty, crime, alcohol and drug abuse and unemployment. Convincing the highly skilled workforce to move there is considered a huge challenge to the project. The report found this will require additional funding from central government to provide the investment in housing, healthcare, transport and education which the town urgently needs.
The AUKUS deal demands the UK increase port visits and later rotate an Astute-class submarine out of Australia to maintain credibility within AUKUS. But the UK report notes that the arrival of HMS Anson in Western Australia, while welcome, pushed the Astute class beyond its limits.
Nor did Pillar 2 escape criticism, with the report finding that progress to date has been disappointing and inadequate. It now faces an uphill battle to restore credibility. In the short term, the UK government must press for swift agreement within the trilateral on priority projects which provide tangible benefit to the “war fighter”, and their subsequent delivery at pace. It concludes the UK’s approach to Pillar 2 has so far been disjointed.
This was a report on the UK’s side of the agreement. This is the country we have committed over $4.5 billion to, and they are still struggling with almost every element of the project.
The scale of the problems in the UK further demonstrates that AUKUS is a defence, economic and social disaster for Australia. It is driven by naïve politicians, lobbyists, arms industry think tanks and a revolving door of retired politicians, public servants and military personnel.
Jargon such as “progressive patriotism”, “steady progress, all on track, historic opportunities, creating jobs”, beggars belief when compared with the faltering UK and US submarine industries that are destined to fail to deliver.
It is time for the Australian community to tell the Albanese government to stop treating all of us as mugs; enough is enough with this madness.
The views expressed in this article may or may not reflect those of Pearls and Irritations.
Doug Cameron
Doug Cameron, Former Federal Senator for New South Wales
Syaza Shukri.
Azmi Hassan.
Mazlan Ali.
