ICYMI or you’d just like to hear Enoch’s very personal Hanukkah message presented at our December meeting in Christchurch, you can watch it here.
Statement from the New Zealand Friends of Israel Association Inc.
We are deeply shocked and saddened by the tragic events at Bondi Beach during the Hanukkah celebration.
Our hearts go out to the Jewish community in Sydney and across Australia, especially the families affected by this senseless attack.
We stand in solidarity with you in grief and resilience, and offer our prayers and support during this painful time. May light and courage prevail over darkness.
A critical review of Anne Irfan’s “A Short History of Gaza”
Anne Irfan’s A Short History of Gaza is a deeply partisan narrative that prioritizes Palestinian grievance over balanced historical analysis.
Anne Irfan, a lecturer at University College London specializing in race, gender, and postcolonial studies, has built her academic career around Palestinian refugee rights and modern Middle Eastern history. Her latest work, A Short History of Gaza, is positioned as a concise historical account of the region, but it reads more like a polemic than a neutral chronicle. Irfan’s sympathies are clear, and while her research is extensive, her selectivity in presenting facts undermines the book’s credibility as a historical text.
The book traces Gaza’s trajectory from 1948 to the present, emphasizing the displacement of Palestinians and the humanitarian crises that followed. However, Irfan omits critical context that complicates the narrative she promotes. She does not acknowledge that Palestinians never ruled the land they claim: it was governed by the Ottomans, then the British, and later administered under a UN mandate. The UN’s 1947 partition plan recognized the historical claims of both Jews and Arabs and offered statehood to each. The Arab leadership rejected this compromise, choosing war over coexistence—a war they lost. The Nakba, often framed as a catastrophe inflicted solely by Israel, is more accurately the result of this rejection and its consequences.
Further omissions weaken Irfan’s account. She fails to mention that approximately 40% of Palestinian refugees hold citizenship in other countries, and that all Palestinian refugees in the West Bank and Gaza already live in territories they claim as their own. Her coverage of the 2023–2025 Gaza War notably excludes the extensive tunnel network—dubbed the “Gaza Metro”—used by Hamas for military operations. Most troubling is her tendency to recount Israeli-inflicted suffering without acknowledging the provocations or strategic decisions by Arab actors that led to such responses. This lack of causality presents Palestinians as passive victims rather than agents within a complex conflict.
Irfan’s disdain for Palestinian leadership—including the PLO, the Palestinian Authority, and Hamas—is evident, but this does not translate into balanced critique. Instead, it reinforces her activist stance. Like Ilan Pappe, who famously declared he was more concerned with what history should say than what it does, Irfan uses history as a vehicle for advocacy. Her book should be read with scepticism, not as a definitive account but as a reflection of a particular ideological lens. For readers seeking a comprehensive understanding of Gaza, this work offers insight—but only into one side of a multifaceted story.
Statement from NZ Friends of Israel Association Inc. on the Israel-Hamas Peace Agreement
The NZ Friends of Israel Association Inc. welcomes the announcement of the peace agreement signed between Israel and Hamas, brokered under the leadership of President Donald Trump and facilitated through intensive negotiations in Sharm El-Sheikh.
This development marks a significant diplomatic achievement, not only for the United States but for the broader international community, including key Middle Eastern nations—some of whom have long-standing differences with one another—who nonetheless united in support of this initiative.
Securing agreement from Hamas, a group historically resistant to compromise, is a feat in itself.
The release of hostages, the partial withdrawal of Israeli forces, and the promise of humanitarian aid represent tangible steps toward de-escalation and relief for civilians on both sides.
We acknowledge the immense suffering endured by Israelis and Palestinians alike over the past two years. The loss of life, the trauma of captivity, and the devastation of communities must never be forgotten. It is our hope that this suffering will serve as a solemn deterrent to future generations against the horrors of war.
Yet, we remain clear-eyed about the risks that persist. While the agreement has been signed, many of its obligations—such as disarmament, transitional governance, and long-term security arrangements—have yet to be fulfilled. Much of the future remains unwritten, and the path ahead will require vigilance, integrity, and continued international engagement.
May the Arab world grasp this opportunity to focus on building a new life of peace and prosperity, rather than pursuing the destruction of Israel. The region’s future depends not on the perpetuation of conflict, but on the courage to choose coexistence, development, and dignity for all peoples.
We commend the courage of those who have worked toward peace and urge all parties to honor their commitments. May this be the beginning of a more stable and humane chapter for the region.
FLYING A BANNER OVER AUCKLAND DURING THE PALESTINIAN PROTEST
Auckland braced for a major pro-Palestinian protest originally planned to shut down the Harbour Bridge on October 13. Organised under the banner of “March for Humanity,” the event aimed to pressure the New Zealand Government to sanction Israel over its military actions in Gaza. However, due to forecasted high winds reaching unsafe levels, the planned bridge crossing was cancelled the day before, and rerouted through the central business district instead.
While the change in route was framed as a safety precaution, it also spared Aucklanders from what would have been significant traffic disruption and public frustration. The Harbour Bridge closure would have impacted thousands of commuters and freight operators, and the rerouting helped maintain public order and avoid unnecessary ire.
In response to the protest, the NZ Friends of Israel Association Inc., together with a coali-tion of supporters, funded a powerful aerial initiative: a plane flew above the march towing a banner that read, “BRING THEM HOME NOW, FREE THE HOSTAGES.” This mes-sage was a poignant reminder of the hundreds of innocent people still held captive by Hamas since the October 7 attacks—an atrocity that the protest conspicuously failed to acknowledge.
We extend our heartfelt thanks to all our members and other supporters who contribut-ed to this initiative. Your generosity ensured that the voices of compassion, justice, and truth were visibly present above the noise. The banner was not just a statement—it was a call for humanity, for accountability, and for the safe return of those stolen from their families.
It is deeply concerning that the protest ignored the brutal reality of Hamas’ actions: the mas-sacre of civilians on October 7, the ongoing hostage crisis, and the systematic abuse of Gazan civilians. Hamas has executed dissi-dents, hijacked 85% of humanitarian aid, and used civilians as human shields while denying them access to tunnel shelters. These are not acts of resistance—they are crimes against humanity.
The protest also perpetuated a distorted narrative of the Nakba and repeated unfounded accusations of genocide against Israel. Such rhetoric not only misrepresents history but undermines genuine efforts toward peace and reconciliation. It is essential to distinguish between legitimate concern for Palestinian welfare and the dangerous glorification of a terrorist regime.
New Zealanders deserve a discourse grounded in truth, not propaganda. The aerial banner was a symbol of that truth—a reminder that compassion must extend to all victims, includ-ing those held hostage and those oppressed by Hamas itself.
As the region continues to grapple with conflict, we reaffirm our commitment to justice, peace, and the dignity of all people. And we thank every supporter who helped make our message fly.
Joint Statement in Response to Government Declaration on Gaza
We, the undersigned organisations, express grave concern over the recent joint declaration by New Zealand and 24 other nations condemning Israel’s actions in Gaza and accusing it of obstructing humanitarian aid.
This statement is not only misguided, it represents a dangerous inversion of reality, in which:
- Terrorists are excused, and defenders are condemned;
- Hamas’s propaganda is cited as fact, and verified Israeli efforts are ignored;
- The thief is pitied, and those delivering food under fire are vilified.
Blaming the Rescuers, Not the Arsonists
The joint statement accuses Israel of “inhumane” killing and “drip-feeding” aid. Yet it is Hamas (the very group that started this war with a massacre on October 7 2023) that:
- Steals aid, sells it, and redistributes it to fighters;
- Creates disturbances and fires on civilians at aid stations to induce panic and lay blame on Israel;
- Places bounties on aid workers not under its control.
To accuse Israel of causing the humanitarian crisis while ignoring Hamas’s central role is to blame the firefighter for the fire. Israel has worked hard to coordinate necessary aid to the extent that there are currently hundreds of truckloads of food on the Gaza side of the border in need of distribution. Thus, there is no “drip-feeding” by Israel.
Treating Terrorist Casualty Reports as Gospel
The casualty numbers cited (tens of thousands of “civilians” killed) come directly from Hamas’s so-called “Gaza Health Ministry.” This is not a neutral medical authority. It is:
- A Hamas-run information weapon, whose sole aim is to inflate civilian casualties;
- A notoriously unreliable source. Due to inconsistencies the UN has quietly revised its own reporting;
- Completely opaque and unverifiable, with no distinction between combatants and civilians.
When governments like New Zealand cite these figures without context or scrutiny, they lend credibility to terrorists and undermine genuine humanitarian reporting.
Condemning What Works, Ignoring What Fails
While condemning Israel, the joint statement says nothing about the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) — the one aid mechanism that actually works:
- GHF delivers aid using vetted drivers, uses GPS tracking and bypass routes around Hamas.
- It ensures direct civilian access to food and medicine.
- It has faced threats and sabotage from Hamas, and—most shockingly—refusal to cooperate from UN agencies and NGOs.
According to a Times of Israel report (22 July 2025), these agencies have declined GHF’s repeated offers to collaborate, even as they lament “lack of access” and blame Israel. This is not humanitarianism — it is institutional dysfunction.
Calling for Ceasefire While Hostages Rot in Tunnels
The joint statement demands an “immediate, unconditional ceasefire.” But what kind of ceasefire:
- Leaves 50 hostages in captivity?
- Enables Hamas to rearm, reorganise, and repeat the horrors of October 7?
- Forbids Israel from dismantling a terror regime that uses civilians as shields and hospitals as bases?
A ceasefire without the above conditions does not end the war. It guarantees the next one.
When Hamas Applauds You, Something Is Wrong
That Hamas has celebrated the joint statement should alarm every signatory. If your position is being used by a terrorist group as vindication, it is time to re-examine whose reality you are serving.
Why does NZ side with terrorists, when a tiny western style democratic state the size of Northland fights an existential defensive war? Israel did not start this war. She has an obligation to defend her citizens, to do everything possible to free the hostages and to protect her people from future 7 October style massacres.
What Must Happen Now
We urge the New Zealand Government and its partners to:
- Withdraw or amend the joint statement, explicitly naming Hamas as the source of Gaza’s suffering;
- Publicly support the GHF and demand cooperation from UN and NGO agencies obstructing its work;
- Reject the inversion of truth, where democracies are condemned and terror groups are given a free pass;
- Recognise that Israel is fighting an existential war, and that peace is not possible if a genocidal terror regime is left in place;
- Demand the immediate release of all hostages and urge Hamas to accept the ceasefire.
A Final Word: Reality Must Be Respected
This is not a war between equals. It is a fight between a democracy that warns civilians and a death cult that hides behind them. Between those who seek peace and those who glorify death.
Reversing that truth is not diplomacy. It is betrayal.
We call on New Zealand to return to moral clarity — and stop legitimising the lies of Hamas.
Dr David Cumin, Greg Bouwer – Israel Institute NZ
Dr Sheree Trotter – Indigenous Embassy Jerusalem
Nigel Woodley – Coalition of Ministers, Protection of Zion Trust
Derek McDowell – International Christian Embassy Jerusalem
Rob Berg – Kol Israel
Yifat Goddard, Ashley Church – Israel NZ Network
Dennis Mcleod – Christian Friends of Israel
Bryce Turner – Christians for Israel
Tony Kan – NZ Friends of Israel Association
Beth Mather – Bridges for Peace
Ireland admits there is no Genocide
The accusation that Israel is committing genocide has become a prevailing belief. But it’s so wrong. Ireland knows it too and applied for the ICJ to change the definition of Genocide.
The idea that Israel is committing genocide has been given credibility by South Africa’s case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which has been supported by at least 14 other countries.
Yet, one of those supporting countries, Ireland, realising that the case against Israel is weak, applied for the definition of Genocide under the Convention, to be changed.
Ireland argues that the original definition is too narrow.
The current definition of genocide comes from the 1948 Genocide Convention, which defines it as acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group. Changing this definition would require amending a foundational treaty, which is extremely difficult and politically sensitive.
The ICJ has consistently held that genocidal intent must be the only reasonable inference from the acts in question. This makes proving genocide very difficult, especially in armed conflict situations where multiple motives may exist.
Redefining genocide to fit a specific case risks politicizing international law and diminishing the gravity of the term. It could set a precedent where states push for legal reinterpretations to suit political goals.
Countries like Ireland, which joined South Africa’s case, have called for a broader interpretation of genocide. However, this move has been criticized as potentially undermining the ICJ’s legitimacy and the integrity of the Genocide Convention.
Expanding the definition could dilute the term’s association with atrocities like the Holocaust, Rwandan genocide, or Bosnia, potentially offending survivors and communities affected by those events.
In interviews with Medialine, experts, such as Dr Tammy Caner, director of the Law and National Security Program at the Institute for National Security Studies, and Dr Eliav Lieblich, a scholar in public international law at Tel Aviv University, warn that broadening the definition could backfire. It might open the door to more frequent and politically motivated genocide claims, weakening the ICJ’s ability to adjudicate serious cases impartially.
The text of the letter is a double-edged sword for the case since Ireland seems to concede that the accepted interpretation of the crime would not apply in this case and argues that it should be changed. — Dr Eliav Lieblich, Tel Aviv University.
Requesting the ICJ to broaden its interpretation [of the definition of Genocide] explicitly indicates that Israel is not committing genocide. — Dr. Tammy Caner, director of the Law and National Security Program at the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS).
Genocide is an emotionally charged word. Perhaps it was originally used against Israel as hyperbole, an exaggeration to get cut-through in the information overloaded world in which we live.
But now it has morphed from an exaggeration, to a belief. A false belief. Sadly, even international jurists in the most esteemed court of the world, are not immune to the influence of the madding crowd.
Judge Julia Sebutinde, a Ugandan member of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), dissented from the court’s provisional measures order in the case of South Africa v. Israel concerning the situation in Gaza. She disagreed with the majority decision, arguing that the dispute was primarily political rather than a legal matter suitable for judicial settlement. She also found that South Africa had not provided sufficient evidence of genocidal intent by Israel.
There is a reason why the symbol of justice is blindfolded and carries scales. Justice requires impartiality and evidence that must be weighed.
The ICJ was first established with the moral hope, to create a peaceful and lawful mechanism for resolving disputes between nations. A true and noble goal. But if the court allows itself to become politicized and its credibility is sufficiently damaged, then countries will withdraw from it, as they have done from the International Criminal Court (the ICC), and the original hope will be lost. We need the ICJ to step up.
Independence Day 2025 creates moment of reflection
This week, our President, Tony Kan and Kate MacPherson travelled up to Wellington to attend the reception to mark the 77th Anniversary of the Independence of Israel.
To a packed house, the Ambassador spoke about our common values, and the opportunity to forge a stronger relationship between our countries through trade and fighting intolerance.
Jo McKeagan, the Principal Advisor to the Deputy Secretary (Middle East and Africa) at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, spoke on behalf of the NZ Government. Most notable of all, this year there was no mention of the creation of an independent Palestinian State, a commitment to a two state solution, or a call for Israel to moderate its military conduct.
In stark contrast to last year, the event was not marked by attendees being harassed by shouting over megaphones and blaring sirens from Pro-Palestinian protesters. Apparently they went to the wrong address.
The reception was also cause to reflect on how things have changed over the last 12 months:
- Iran had seen its decades long investment in building proxy enemies, Hamas, Hezbollah and the Assad regime to threaten Israel, have been made combat ineffective. Their senior leadership either dead, in hiding or in exile.
- Decades of economic mismanagement caused by the Mullah’s fixation on imperialism has left Iranian civilians impoverished and desperate: So desperate that advertisements to sell kidneys to make ends meet are a common occurrence, infrastructure such as water supply networks have become unreliable and the Iranian currency is one of the most worthless in the world.
- Israel has demonstrated the effectiveness of its covert forces in identifying their enemies’ leadership, their location and to devise ingenious ways to nullify them.
- Israel now controls the Philadelphia Corridor, preventing Hamas from smuggling in further arms and munitions.
- Israel is implementing its own aid distribution system, which will severely curtail Hamas’ ability to divert aid for its own consumption. This will hamper its ability to continue the war.
- The election of a conservative US Government meant that there was no indecision hampering the supply of arms and munitions.
- Various thinkers, such as Douglas Murray, Melanie Phillips, Tom Holland, and Nigel Biggar are beginning to realize that what makes the West so successful are Judeo-Christian values, precepts and beliefs.
On the other hand, there is a deep sadness and grief over the loss, suffering, and hardship caused by Hamas’ evil, which has taken all around them to doom.
In the immediate, it remains for Israel to end Hamas’ rule in Gaza, place it under administration and begin the slow hard slog to de-radicalize the civilian population. Hamas has used its 20 years to create an Islamo-Fascist state and the culture, unfortunately, now runs deep.
The threat of Iran gaining nuclear weapons is serious and Iran is likely to string out any negotiations reasoning that President Trump has less than four years in power. If the possibility of an agreement that prevents them from developing a nuclear weapon is not possible within this period, then it may be forced to take unilateral action.
Yes, in 12 short months, the balance of power has shifted in the Middle East, and there is much to draw hope from. Churchill said that in war, one must be resolute. But recent events show antisemitism is strong even among some members of NZ society but Israel’s example, should inspire us to show the same robust and resolute response.
The latest newsletter is out!
The latest newsletter is out and it may be downloaded from here: February Newsletter.
We continue to have email deliverability issues to email accountholders from the following services:
- Gmail
- Hotmail
- Yahoo
- Xtra
If you know someone who should be receiving the email and uses one of these email services, feel free to forward the newsletter to them.
Otherwise they may miss out on upcoming events. The next event is on Tuesday, May 20, see page 8.
Thanks again for your support.
Rape as a tool of war
ICYMI…
Bari Weiss interviews Sheryl Sandberg about her documentary about October 7, “Screams Before the Silence.”
“The most stunning thing about sexual violence is that it is the most effective tool of war for two reasons: The first, it’s just effective, you rape women and sometimes their husbands then don’t want to be with them, you tear apart society, they’re carrying babies of their rapists. What happens then? …And its free, it’s free, you don’t have to buy a bomb, a rocket, a gun, it’s free, so you can totally terrorize a nation.”
