Feed aggregator

Tbilisi, Georgia — Chinese investment in Georgia is set to increase significantly after a Chinese-led consortium was awarded the contract to develop a deep-sea megaport on Georgia’s Black Sea coast, part of Beijing’s envisaged ‘Middle Corridor’ trade route to Europe. But critics say the Georgian government is putting the country’s economy and democracy at risk by turning away from Western partners and toward the east. Anaklia, on Georgia’s Black Sea shoreline, is currently little more than a small coastal resort of some 1,500 people. Under the plans, it is set to become a port capable of handling large volumes of containers and other cargo, to be built and run by Chinese firms. The Georgian government last month awarded a 49% stake in the project to a Chinese-Singaporean consortium, thought to be worth several billion dollars. The exact details of the deal have not been revealed. The remaining 51% stake is held by the Georgian state. The announcement was made a day after the government passed its so-called “foreign agent” law, similar to one in Russia, widely seen as a clampdown on Western-funded non-governmental organizations and independent media. The legislation triggered ongoing anti-government protests amid fears the ruling “Georgian Dream” party is turning away from a Western-aligned future in the European Union. “That also obviously coincides with the very direct and open anti-Western rhetoric that we've been hearing from the government,” said Giga Bedineishvili, a Georgian financier and dean of the business school at Tbilisi Free University.   “So, the speculation — and I think it's a well-founded one — is that the Georgian government is thinking about the possibility of losing Western investment and compensating for it [with] some money from Russia and China,” he told VOA. Georgia’s government denies it is seeking to turn away from the West and says publicly it still aims to join the European Union by 2030.   Georgia maintains EU aspirations   Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze defended the awarding of the Anaklia port contract to the consortium led by the China Communications Construction Company.   “At this time, it is one of the largest Chinese companies, which has extensive experience, including in this type of project. The successful bid by the Chinese company ensures the highest-level implementation of the Anaklia project,” Kobakhidze told reporters May 30. The Anaklia port project has been in the pipeline for several years and was set to be built by a joint American-Georgian consortium in a contract worth $2.5 billon. However, the government canceled that deal in 2020, claiming the group had not met contractual terms. The consortium partners accused the ruling party and its oligarch founder Bidzina Ivanishvili of deliberately sabotaging the project. Why Chinese investment? So, what’s in it for China? The port would lie at the western end of what Beijing calls the ‘Middle Corridor,’ an envisaged trade route to Europe through Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan to Georgia’s Black Sea coast, and beyond to the European Union. Currently, most rail and road freight from China to Europe goes through Russia, but the future of that route is in doubt, with Moscow now heavily sanctioned by the West after its 2022 invasion of Ukraine. Tinatan Khidasheli, a former Georgian defense minister who now chairs the Civic IDEA organization, which analyzes China’s activities in Georgia, fears the project could leave Georgia in a so-called “debt trap.” The big question, Khindasheli said, is where the Georgian government will get its funding for the project.   “They are going to [borrow] the money for fulfilling the obligations they have under this 51%,” he said. “And I'm pretty sure — it's not fact yet — but I'm pretty sure that that money is going to come from China as well. And we will end up in a situation like Sri Lanka ended up, or Philippines, or in Malaysia. They had also similar problems, Tanzania, they had similar problems.” The state-owned Chinese firm that is leading the Anaklia port consortium, the China Communications Construction Company, is subject to U.S. sanctions over its role in building artificial islands in disputed regions of the South China Sea. The firm was also banned from World Bank contracts until 2017 over corruption scandals. China already has a visible presence in Georgia, including the Hualing Tbilisi Sea Plaza, a vast 420-hectare shopping mall, hotel and housing complex on the outskirts of the capital. Chinese companies are also involved in building new highways.   In 2023, Georgia signed a strategic partnership agreement with China, and is part of Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative and Global Security Initiative.   Despite Georgia’s overtures to Beijing, direct Chinese investment in Georgia remains relatively small at just over $47 million in 2023, making it the ninth largest investor — and far smaller than European and American investment in the country. In 2023, Britain was the biggest single direct investor in Georgia at $392 million, according to official statistics.   “When people just drive throughout the country, they see all these Chinese signs from different companies. It creates an image that we have such a huge Chinese investment. Everywhere you go, you have Chinese companies working. In reality, none of that is an investment,” said Tinatan Khidasheli of Civic IDEA. “It's all Georgian [state] budget money, which is granted to the contractors, whomever wins the bid. And the reality of Georgian bidding story is that every single contract that is over $100 million usually is won by a Chinese company,” she said. Georgia’s government says China could become its leading trading partner. Others urge caution.   “China and Russia, they strategize when they do something like that — they want to invest to then have political influence and have an impact on the local situation. And therefore, we need to be careful on that,” said Bedineishvili. A NATO official who spoke on condition of anonymity told Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, or RFE/RL, that the alliance had concerns about China’s development of the port. “It’s well known that China has long sought influence in major overseas infrastructure projects. The Black Sea remains an area of strategic importance to NATO,” RFE/RL reported the NATO official as saying.

Give us 5 minutes, and we'll give you the world. Around the clock, Voice of America keeps you in touch with the latest news. We bring you reports from our correspondents and interviews with newsmakers from across the world.

Give us 5 minutes, and we'll give you the world. Around the clock, Voice of America keeps you in touch with the latest news. We bring you reports from our correspondents and interviews with newsmakers from across the world.

IN THEIR OWN WORDS: With opportunities for journalists limited since the Taliban’s return to power, Farogh Tarin and her family left Afghanistan in pursuit of a better life. Now in Paris, France, the journalist wants to be a voice for those silenced in her home country.

Give us 5 minutes, and we'll give you the world. Around the clock, Voice of America keeps you in touch with the latest news. We bring you reports from our correspondents and interviews with newsmakers from across the world.

Manila — Chinese coast guard sailors brandished knives, an axe and other weapons in a clash with Philippine naval vessels near a strategic reef in the South China Sea, dramatic new footage released by Manila showed. The clash took place Monday as Philippine forces attempted to resupply marines stationed on a derelict warship that was deliberately grounded atop the disputed Second Thomas Shoal in 1999 to assert Manila's territorial claims. It was the latest in a series of escalating confrontations between Chinese and Philippine ships in recent months as Beijing steps up efforts to push its claims to the disputed area. Philippine military chief General Romeo Brawner said the "outnumbered" Filipino crew had been unarmed and had fought with their "bare hands." A Filipino sailor lost a thumb in the clash, in which the Chinese coast guard confiscated or destroyed Philippine equipment including guns, according to the Philippine military. Fresh footage released by the Philippine military late Wednesday showed small boats crewed by Chinese sailors shouting, waving knives and using sticks to hit an inflatable boat as a siren blares. A voice speaking Tagalog can be heard in one clip saying someone had "lost a finger." Manila's footage of the clash stands in stark contrast to photos released by Beijing's state media on Wednesday, which did not show Chinese forces wielding weapons. 'Violent confrontation' Asked about the videos on Thursday, Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Lin Jian said Manila's comments on the clash were "totally bogus accusations that confuse black with white." He blamed the Philippines for the confrontation, saying they had "escalated tensions" and accused them of ramming Chinese boats. Lin said the Philippine boats had been trying "to sneak in building materials, but also tried to smuggle in military equipment." Beijing has insisted that its coast guard behaved in a "professional and restrained" way and claimed "no direct measures" were taken against Filipino personnel. But in a clip shared by Manila, a Chinese sailor standing on the deck of one of the boats can clearly be seen waving an axe. Another shows a Chinese coast guard sailor striking the inflatable boat with a stick. A second man can also be seen stabbing the boat with a knife. The Philippines military said an axe-wielding sailor had "threatened to injure" a Filipino soldier, while others were "explicitly threatening to harm" Filipino troops. "The [Chinese coast guard] personnel then began hurling rocks and other objects at our personnel," Manila said. "They also slashed the [inflatable boats], rendering them inoperable." The Filipino sailors, wearing brown camouflage with helmets and vests, are not carrying weapons in the clips. "Amidst this violent confrontation, the CCG [Chinese coast guard] also deployed tear gas, intensifying the chaos and confusion, while continuously blaring sirens to further disrupt communication," the caption said. Manila has accused Beijing of an "act of piracy" against its forces. It has also demanded the return of items "looted" by the Chinese side, including seven guns, and reparations for damaged equipment. 'Perilous' situation Analysts say Beijing is escalating confrontations with the Philippines in a bid to push it out of the South China Sea. Jay Batongbacal, director for the Institute for Maritime Affairs and Law of the Sea in Manila, told AFP that China's forces could be poised to seize the grounded Philippine warship, the Sierra Madre. "The deployment of their forces at present around the Sierra Madre and then the many reefs around the Kalayaan island group is indicative that they're ready to do it," he said, referring to Manila-claimed areas in the Spratly Islands. The United States has said that "an armed attack" against Philippine public vessels, aircraft, armed forces and coastguard anywhere in the South China Sea would require it to come to Manila's defense as a treaty ally. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken "emphasized that [China's] actions undermine regional peace and stability" in a call with his Philippine counterpart Enrique A. Manalo on Wednesday, according to the State Department. Blinken said they also "underscored the United States' ironclad commitments to the Philippines under our Mutual Defense Treaty." Another analyst said the clashes "brought us perilously close" to a point where the United States would be required to intervene militarily. "The Philippines will likely need to continue resupply missions to the Sierra Madre, one way or another," said Duan Dang, a Vietnam-based maritime security analyst. "Backing down and accepting Beijing's terms regarding these operations would mean relinquishing sovereign rights within its Exclusive Economic Zone," he said.

Give us 5 minutes, and we'll give you the world. Around the clock, Voice of America keeps you in touch with the latest news. We bring you reports from our correspondents and interviews with newsmakers from across the world.

Give us 5 minutes, and we'll give you the world. Around the clock, Voice of America keeps you in touch with the latest news. We bring you reports from our correspondents and interviews with newsmakers from across the world.

SEOUL, South Korea — South Korea’s presidential office condemned an agreement reached by Russia and North Korea that vowed mutual defense assistance in the event of war and says it will reconsider its policy of limiting support to Ukraine of non-lethal supplies. The comments by a senior presidential official on Thursday came after the office issued a statement condemning the agreement reached by Russian President Vladimir Putin and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in their summit in Pyongyang on Wednesday. The office said the agreement posed a threat to South Korea’s security and warned that it will negatively affect Seoul’s relations with Moscow. The presidential official, who spoke on condition of anonymity during a background briefing, according to office rules, said Seoul in response will reconsider the issue of providing arms to Ukraine to help the country fight off Russia’s invasion. South Korea, a growing arms exporter with a well-equipped military backed by the United States, has provided humanitarian aid and other support to Ukraine while joining U.S.-led economic sanctions against Moscow. But it has not directly provided arms to Ukraine, citing a long-standing policy of not supplying weapons to countries actively engaged in conflict. The new agreement between Russia and North Korea reached by their leaders at a Pyongyang summit requires both countries to use all available means to provide immediate military assistance in the event of war, North Korean state media said Thursday. Both North Korea’s Kim Jong Un and Russia’s Vladimir Putin had described the deal reached Wednesday as a major upgrade of bilateral relations, covering security, trade, investment, cultural and humanitarian ties. Outside observers said it could mark the strongest connection between Moscow and Pyongyang since the end of the Cold War. The North’s official Korean Central News Agency on Thursday reported the language of the comprehensive strategic partnership agreement. The agency said Article 4 of the agreement states that if one of the countries gets invaded and is pushed into a state of war, the other must deploy “all means at its disposal without delay” to provide “military and other assistance.” But it also says that such actions must be in accordance with the laws of both countries and Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, which recognizes a U.N. member state’s right to self-defense. The summit between Kim and Putin came as the U.S. and its allies expressed growing concern over a possible arms arrangement in which Pyongyang provides Moscow with badly needed munitions for its war in Ukraine, in exchange for economic assistance and technology transfers that could enhance the threat posed by Kim’s nuclear weapons and missile program. Following their summit, Kim said the two countries had a “fiery friendship,” and that the deal was their “strongest-ever treaty,” putting the relationship at the level of an alliance. He vowed full support for Russia’s war in Ukraine. Putin called it a “breakthrough document” reflecting shared desires to move relations to a higher level. North Korea and the former Soviet Union signed a treaty in 1961, which experts say necessitated Moscow’s military intervention if the North came under attack. The deal was discarded after the collapse of the USSR, replaced by one in 2000 that offered weaker security assurances. A full day after the summit, South Korean officials said they were still interpreting the results, including what Russia’s response might be if the North comes under attack. Analysts were mixed on whether the agreement obligates Russia to an automatic military invention on behalf of the North in war situations or was carefully worded enough to avoid such a commitment. It also wasn’t immediately clear why the article invokes the U.N. charter. “We are currently reviewing the specifics of the treaty signed between Russia and North Korea during President Putin’s visit to North Korea. We will announce our government’s position after we are done,” Lim Soosuk, South Korea’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, said during a briefing. Still, Lim expressed regret that Moscow and Pyongyang signed the agreement while openly talking about military and technology cooperation that would be in violation of U.N. Security Council resolutions. “Based on our close analysis and assessment of the results of [Putin’s] visit, including the comprehensive strategic partnership treaty signed between Russia and North Korea, we will work with the international community, including our allies and friends, to take correspondingly stern and decisive measures to any actions that threaten our security,” Lim said. The deal was made as Putin visited North Korea for the first time in 24 years, a visit that showcased their personal and geopolitical ties with Kim hugging Putin twice at the airport, their motorcade rolling past giant Russian flags and Putin portraits, and a welcoming ceremony at Pyongyang’s main square attended by what appeared to be tens of thousands of spectators. According to KCNA, the agreement also states that Pyongyang and Moscow must not enter into agreements with third parties if they infringe on the “core interests” of another and must not participate in actions that threaten those interests. KCNA said the agreements require the countries to take steps to prepare joint measures for the purpose of strengthening their defense capabilities to prevent war and protect regional and global peace and security. The agency didn’t specify what those steps are, or whether they would include combined military training and other cooperation. The agreement also calls for the countries to actively cooperate in efforts to establish a “just and multipolar new world order,” KCNA said, underscoring how the countries are aligning in face of their separate, escalating confrontations with the United States. Kim in recent months has made Russia his priority as he pushes a foreign policy aimed at expanding relations with countries confronting Washington, embracing the idea of a “new Cold War” and trying to display a united front in Putin’s broader conflicts with the West. Tensions on the Korean Peninsula are at their highest point in years, with the pace of both Kim’s weapons tests and combined military exercises involving the U.S., South Korea and Japan intensifying in a tit-for-tat cycle. The Koreas also have engaged in Cold War-style psychological warfare that involved North Korea dropping tons of trash on the South with balloons, and the South broadcasting anti-North Korean propaganda with its loudspeakers.

MOGADISHU, Somalia — Somalia's government is seeking to slow the withdrawal of African peacekeepers and warning of a potential security vacuum, documents seen by   Reuters show, with neighboring countries fretting that resurgent al-Shabaab militants could seize power. The African Union Transition Mission in Somalia (ATMIS), a peacekeeping force, is committed to withdrawing by Dec. 31, when a smaller new force is expected to replace it. However, in a letter last month to the acting chair of the African Union Peace and Security Council the government asked to delay until September the withdrawal of half the 4,000 troops due to leave by the end of June. The letter has not been reported before. The government had previously recommended, in a joint assessment with the AU in March, reviewed by Reuters, that the overall withdrawal timeline be adjusted "based on the actual readiness and capabilities" of Somali forces. The joint assessment, which was mandated by the U.N. Security Council, warned that a "hasty drawdown of ATMIS personnel will contribute to a security vacuum." "I've never been more concerned about the direction of my home country," said Mursal Khalif, an independent member of the defense committee in parliament. The European Union and United States, the top funders of the AU force in Somalia, have sought to reduce the peacekeeping operation due to concerns about long-term financing and sustainability, four diplomatic sources and a senior Ugandan official said. Negotiations about a new force have proven complicated, with the AU initially pushing for a more robust mandate than Somalia wanted, three of the diplomatic sources said. A heated political dispute could lead Ethiopia to pull out some of the most battle-hardened troops. Somalia's presidency and prime minister's office did not respond to requests for comment. Mohamed El-Amine Souef, AU special representative to Somalia and head of ATMIS, said there was no definitive timeline for concluding negotiations but that all parties were committed to an agreement that helps achieve sustainable peace and security. "The AU and Somalia's government have emphasized the importance of a conditions-based drawdown to prevent any security vacuum," he told Reuters. The Peace and Security Council is due to meet on Somalia later on Thursday to discuss the drawdown and follow-up mission. As the drawdown proceeds, with 5,000 of around 18,500 troops leaving last year, the government has projected confidence. It has said the new force should not exceed 10,000 and should be limited to tasks like securing major population centers. The call for a smaller force likely reflects views of nationalists who oppose a heavy foreign presence in Somalia, said Rashid Abdi, an analyst with Sahan Research, a Nairobi-based think-tank focused on the Horn of Africa. Worried neighbors Uganda and Kenya, which contributed troops to the departing mission, are also worried. Henry Okello Oryem, Uganda's state minister of foreign affairs, said that despite intensive training efforts, Somali troops could not sustain a long-term military confrontation. "We do not want to get into a situation where we are fleeing, the kind of thing that we saw in Afghanistan," he told Reuters. Oryem said Kenya accepted the drawdown requested by the U.S. and EU but that the concerns of countries with forces in Somalia should be heard. Kenyan President William Ruto told reporters in Washington last month that a withdrawal that did not account for conditions on the ground would mean "the terrorists will take over Somalia." In response to questions, an EU spokesperson said it was focused on building domestic security capacities and supported in principle a Somali government proposal for a new mission that would have a reduced size and scope. A U.S. State Department spokesperson said the force should be large enough to prevent a security vacuum. Washington has supported all requests submitted by the AU to the U.N. Security Council to modify the drawdown timeline, the spokesperson said. In response to a question about Ethiopian forces, the spokesperson said it was critical to avoid security gaps or unnecessary expenses "incurred by swapping out existing troop contributors." Setbacks Two years ago, an army offensive in central Somalia initially seized large swathes of territory from al-Shabaab. In August, President Hassan Sheikh Mohamed declared his intention to "eliminate" the powerful al-Qaida offshoot within five months. But just a few days later, al-Shabaab counter-attacked, retaking the town of Cowsweyne. They killed scores of soldiers and beheaded several civilians accused of supporting the army, according to a soldier, an allied militiaman and a local resident. "This broke the hearts of Somalis but gave courage to al-Shabaab,"  Ahmed Abdulle, the militiaman, from a clan in central Somalia, said in an interview in April. The Somali government has never publicly provided a death toll for the Cowsweyne battle and didn't respond to a request for a toll for this story. "There were enough troops in Cowsweyne, over a battalion, but they were not organized well," said a soldier named Issa, who fought in the battle there last August. Issa said car bombs had blasted through the gates of Cowsweyne army camp on the day of the attack, citing a shortage of defensive outposts to protect bases from such attacks. Ten soldiers, militiamen from local clans and residents in areas targeted by the military campaign reported no army operations in the past two months following additional battlefield setbacks. Reuters could not independently establish the extent of the territorial losses to al-Shabaab. Somalia's national security adviser said on the social media platform X (formerly Twitter) this week that the army had held most of its gains. The peacekeepers' withdrawal could make it more difficult to hold territory. While analysts estimate Somalia's army at around 32,000 soldiers, the government acknowledged, in the assessment with the AU, a shortage of some 11,000 trained personnel due to "high operational tempo" and "attrition." The government has said its soldiers are capable of confronting al-Shabaab with limited external support. Somalia has defied gloomy predictions before and has expanded its security forces in recent years. Residents of the seaside capital Mogadishu – whose ubiquitous blast walls testify to the threat of Shabaab suicide bombers and mortars - say security has improved. Once quiet streets bustle with traffic, and upscale restaurants and supermarkets are opening. An assessment published in April by the Combating Terrorism Center at the United States Military Academy said an Afghanistan-like collapse was unlikely, helped by ongoing external support. The United States, for instance, has about 450 troops in Somalia to train and advise local forces, and conducts regular drone attacks against suspected militants. But the assessment's author, Paul D. Williams, a professor of international affairs at George Washington University, said the militants' estimated 7,000-12,000 fighters would nevertheless be "slightly militarily stronger" than Somali forces because of superior cohesion and force employment. International support Somalia's security has been underwritten by foreign resources since Ethiopia invaded in 2006, toppling an Islamist-led administration but galvanizing an insurgency that has since killed tens of thousands of people. The U.S. has spent more than $2.5 billion on counterterrorism assistance since 2007, according to a study last year by Brown University. That number does not include undisclosed military and intelligence spending on activities like drone strikes and deployments of American ground troops. The EU says it has provided about $2.8 billion to ATMIS and its predecessor since 2007. Turkey, Qatar and other Middle Eastern countries also provide security assistance. But resources are under strain. The EU, which pays for most of ATMIS's roughly $100 million annual budget, is shifting toward bilateral support with an eye toward reducing its overall contributions in the medium-term, four diplomatic sources said. Two diplomats interviewed by Reuters, who spoke on condition of anonymity to describe private negotiations, said the U.S. and EU want to scale back peacekeeping operations because of competing spending priorities including Ukraine and Gaza and a sense Somalia should take responsibility for its own security. Some European countries would like to see the new mission financed through assessed contributions of United Nations member states, which would increase the financial burden on the United States and China, the four diplomatic sources said. The State Department spokesperson said the U.S. did not believe such a system can be implemented by next year but said there was strong international consensus to support the follow-on mission. The EU didn't address questions about the financing of the replacement mission. Financing for the new mission can only be formally addressed once Somalia and the AU agree on a proposed size and mandate.

Give us 5 minutes, and we'll give you the world. Around the clock, Voice of America keeps you in touch with the latest news. We bring you reports from our correspondents and interviews with newsmakers from across the world.

Nairobi, Kenya — Kenyan protesters were due to stage fresh protests across the country on Thursday against contentious tax hikes that many fear will worsen a cost-of-living crisis. The cash-strapped government of President William Ruto agreed to make some concessions on Tuesday after hundreds of mostly young protesters clashed with the police in the capital Nairobi. But the government will still go ahead with some tax increases and has defended the proposed hikes as necessary for filling its coffers and cutting reliance on external borrowing. Protesters have vowed to take to the streets across the country, including in the Indian Ocean city of Mombasa and the lakeside city of Kisumu, both opposition bastions. "They need to reject the bill, not edit it," Sarah Njoroge, 21, told AFP. "It appears that they think we are vocal on social media and will get tired." The authorities have blocked several roads near parliament in Nairobi and deployed a heavy police presence, with lawmakers beginning debate on the bill on Wednesday. Protesters in Nairobi said they would march to parliament, which must pass the final version of the bill before June 30. A parliament source told AFP that a vote on the proposals was expected on June 27. The taxes were projected to raise $2.7 billion, equivalent to 1.9 percent of GDP, and reduce the budget deficit from 5.7 percent to 3.3 percent of GDP. The presidency on Tuesday announced the removal of proposed levies on bread purchases, car ownership as well as financial and mobile services, prompting a warning from the treasury of a 200-billion-shilling shortfall as a result of the budget cuts. The government has now targeted an increase in fuel prices and export taxes to fill the void left by the changes, a move critics say will make life more expensive in a country already battling high inflation. Tuesday's protest was largely peaceful with black-clad protesters forced into cat-and-mouse chases with police who fired volleys of teargas.   At least 335 people were arrested, according to a consortium of lobby groups including the human rights commission KNCHR and Amnesty Kenya. "We have changed tack. Today we will be in colorful and defiant clothing to avoid a repeat of them arresting everyone in black," said an organizer of the march, who requested anonymity fearing reprisals. Kenya is one of the most dynamic economies in East Africa but a third of its 51.5 million people live in poverty.

CAIRO — Israeli forces pounded areas in the central Gaza Strip overnight, killing three people and wounding dozens of others, according to medics, while tanks deepened their invasion into Rafah in the south, residents said. Israeli planes struck a house in Al-Nuseirat camp, killing two people and wounding 12 others, while tanks shelled areas in Al-Maghazi and Al-Bureij camps, wounding many other people, health officials said. Nuseirat, Maghazi, and Bureij are three of Gaza's eight historic refugee camps. In Deir al-Balah, a city packed with displaced people in the central Gaza Strip, an Israeli airstrike killed one Palestinian and wounded several others on Thursday, medics said. The Israeli military said on Wednesday forces were continuing their operations across the enclave targeting militants and military infrastructure in what it described as "precise, intelligence-based" activities. More than eight months into the war in Gaza, Israel's advance is now focused on the two last areas its forces had yet to storm: Rafah on Gaza's southern edge and the area surrounding Deir al-Balah in the center. The operations have forced more than a million people to flee since May, the vast majority already displaced from other parts of the enclave. In Rafah, near the border with Egypt, Israeli tanks stationed deep in the western and central areas of the city stepped up bombardment, forcing more families living in the far coastal areas to flee northward. Some residents said the pace of the raid has been accelerated in the past two days. "The tanks took control of most of the areas in Rafah. People living by the beach have also started to leave toward Khan Younis and central areas in fear because of the continued bombardment," said Abu Wasim, a resident from Rafah's Al-Shaboura neighborhood, who quit his home over a week ago before tanks rolled in reaching the heart of the city. Rafah housed over half of Gaza's 2.3 million people until May 7, when Israeli forces began the ground offensive into the city. Fewer than 100,000 are now believed to be left behind. There has been no sign of let-up in the fighting as efforts by international mediators, backed by the United States, have failed to persuade Israel and Hamas to agree to a cease-fire. The armed wings of Hamas and Islamic Jihad said fighters battled Israeli forces with anti-tank rockets and mortar bombs, and have in some areas detonated pre-planted explosive devices against army units. On Thursday, Israeli authorities freed 33 Palestinians who had been detained during the past months by Israeli forces in different areas of the enclave. The freed detainees were admitted into Al-Aqsa Hospital in Deir Al-Balah in the central Gaza Strip after they complained of torture and mistreatment by Israeli jailers. Israel denies mistreatment of Palestinian detainees. Palestinian and international human rights groups have criticized what they say is Israel's ill-treatment of Gaza detainees and repeatedly demanded it disclose their whereabouts and information about their well-being. Israel's ground and air campaign was triggered when Hamas-led militants stormed into southern Israel on Oct. 7, killing around 1,200 people and seizing more than 250 hostages, according to Israeli tallies. The offensive has left Gaza in ruins, killed more than 37,400 people, according to Gaza’s Hamas-controlled health ministry, and left nearly the entire population homeless and destitute. Since a weeklong truce in November, repeated attempts to arrange a cease-fire have failed, with Hamas insisting on an end to the war and full Israeli withdrawal from Gaza. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says he will agree only to temporary pauses and will not end the war until Hamas is eradicated and the hostages are freed.

Give us 5 minutes, and we'll give you the world. Around the clock, Voice of America keeps you in touch with the latest news. We bring you reports from our correspondents and interviews with newsmakers from across the world.

Mumbai, India — A batch of toxic illegal alcohol in India has killed at least 34 people with more than 100 others rushed to hospital, Tamil Nadu state officials told reporters Thursday. The deadly mix of locally brewed arrack drink was laced with poisonous methanol, chief minister M.K. Stalin said, the Press Trust of India news agency reported. Stalin said arrests have been made over the deaths and warned such crimes "ruin society and will be suppressed with an iron fist," according to a statement from his office. Hundreds of people die every year in India from cheap alcohol made in backstreet distilleries. In order to increase its potency the liquor is often spiked with methanol which can cause blindness, liver damage and death. In the Tamil Nadu case, more than 100 people were hospitalized according to M.S. Prasanth, top government official in the state's Kallakurichi district, quoted by Indian media. State governor R.N. Ravi was "deeply shocked" at the deaths, adding that "many more victims are in serious condition battling for (their) lives," writing on social media platform X. Tamil Nadu is not a dry state, but liquor traded on the black market comes at a lower price than alcohol sold legally. Selling and consuming liquor is prohibited in several other parts of India, further driving the thriving black market for potent and sometimes lethal backstreet moonshine. Last year, poisonous alcohol killed at least 27 people in one sitting in the eastern Indian state of Bihar, while in 2022, at least 42 people died in Gujarat.

Give us 5 minutes, and we'll give you the world. Around the clock, Voice of America keeps you in touch with the latest news. We bring you reports from our correspondents and interviews with newsmakers from across the world.