The Tribe of Abimelech Platform, proudly waving the banner of one of the oldest tribes of ancient Canaan, the Tribe of Hasanat Abu Mau'liq (aka The tribe of the Good Deeds of Abimelech), joins forces with their northern cousins, the Tribe of Brahmiyya and its many branches, drenched in the soil and mud of Palestine, in a mission to unite the children of Canaan. Tired of being cast in the shadow of the "Arab tribes" myth, this platform is rolling up its sleeves to build stronger family ties, discipline the young ones (because who else is going to?), leap over borders like a well-trained Palestinian gazelle, and rally everyone in pursuit of justice. All of this comes with a hefty dose of historical pride and a heartfelt commitment to honoring the covenants of the forefathers, with a deep sense of historical awareness and duties to protect the core covenants of Palestine, and her people with God.

Tribe of Abimelech Platform Report

Report on: Alleged concealment and facilitation of war crimes and crimes against humanity under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court in the State of Palestine.
Issued: 29th October 2025 by the Tribe of Abimelech Platform

Safeguarding our Nation of Palestine and Sovereignty of the Indigenous Tribes

The resilient people of Palestine continue to endure relentless genocide and ethnocide, with a tragic toll of 70,000 lives lost in just two years and 170,000 left with lasting injuries and disabilities. Our families are being killed at a scale never witnessed by humanity, and the loss of our loved ones is tearing our families apart for generations. We were already forced to be scattered and divided once before, and another massive crime like this is unfolding.

Throughout history, the Canaanites as a whole, including the Tribe of Brahmiyya and other inhabitants of Palestine, have preserved Palestine, this holy land, choosing to remain on it and had no ambitions to expand outside it or establish empires. They rather preferred to remain on this land to preserve it and prepare to receive the prophets, messengers and messages. They endured for that through wars and invasions, and their land of Palestine has been subjected, more than any other country in the world, to occupation, destruction, and injustice throughout history.

In an ironic twist of fate, Christian, Muslim, and Jewish collaboration under the US sponsored “Abraham Accords” peace-for-profit framework, from which Palestinians are purposely excluded, we have found ourselves unwilling participants in a global manhunt. In this scenario, South Arabians of the British protectorate Gulf Cooperation Council, North Americans, and Western Europeans work to suppress our narrative, exploit our resources, and scatter us worldwide as if we are unwelcome guests in a world where they claim we do not belong. Palestinians who speak out about the impact on their families face intense backlash, as though they have challenged some fundamental truth. A striking example is Dr. Rahma Adwan in England Mahmoud Khalil in the United States.

Meanwhile, our scientists, professors, journalists, intellectuals, doctors, engineers, and nurses in Palestine are being assassinated by artificial intelligence led weapons, because large Western based and mostly American global corporations have also joined this dystopian global manhunt against the oldest civilization on Earth. Our Indigenous communities that sustained libraries, clinics, universities, and workshops are losing the very people who build and heal. Drones fly above our children’s heads at night like paparazzi, filling the air with loud, terrifying sounds and targeting them "one by one." Over 20,000 of our children and babies have been murdered, many with shots to the head, and many by American mercenaries, in collaboration with Emirati and Qatari translators on the ground. Other lives were taken mid dream, while asleep, using the latest missile and drone technologies with laser precision.

The invader seems utterly torn on whether they want us alive or dead, so they have opted for an all you can eradicate military and armed civilian assault. This is genocide on steroids, where even a tweet reporting the crime puts a target on your back. Professor Refaat Alareer in Gaza was one of the first targets of such attacks, may he rest in eternal peace. Palestinian influencers, celebrities, and athletes have been specifically hunted down and murdered in cold blood, using technologies provided by Microsoft, Google/Alphabet, Oracle, Amazon, Cisco, DJI, Ford Motor Company, General Dynamics, General Electric, General Motors, Hyundai, Lockheed Martin, Mercedes-Benz, Oshkosh Corporation, Palantir, Rolls-Royce Holdings, RTX (formerly Raytheon), and Toyota just to name a few. These global corporations have provided weapons and other military equipment used in its attacks on the children of Canaan across Palestine, Lebanon, and Syria since October 2023.

It is a crime so extraordinary it feels like humanity’s darkest audition for history’s ultimate evil monster. Technology that should protect civilians is used to find, target and assassinate our great people. These corporations have blurred the line between the battlefield and the neighborhood, as their precision tools and software infiltrate our bedrooms and stairwells.

Is it that they refuse to recognize us on the land we have called home for thousands of years, or do they secretly acknowledge us as the indigenous owners and think, “Hey, let’s mark the occasion with 77 years of mayhem and mischief”?

Consider this: they will not let us live on our ancestorial land and clearly do not want us to live in peace anywhere for that matter. It feels like European Nazism 2.0, where modern technology including even phones and social media are weaponized. It is a meticulously engineered atrocity. As we've mentioned before, this is a war on the descendants of Canaan (Bani Canaan – those ancient tribes who’ve been chilling in the Levant for thousands of years, way before the Abrahamic faith or any invasions), spanning from Palestine to Lebanon and Syria. That old saying, “the Arabs agreed to disagree on Palestine,” now seems to imply that the Southern Arabian tribes not only joined the party but brought snacks, potentially supporting this grim genocidal spectacle since the 1920s. To finally banish the so called “children of dogs and Jews” from the Holy Land, as they have so graciously dubbed us since forever.

This briefing lays out unambiguous evidence of such coordination, from Persian Gulf states normalizing ties with the occupier to Mahmoud Abbas and his family's complicity, and Western disinformation and censorship. And on that note, have you ever wondered which tribe this ex-KGB agent Abbas belongs to? The answer is none. His family were opportunists who journeyed to Palestine from Iran via Syria, arriving as immigrants under British occupation. He's about as Palestinian as a Persian rug in a Tel Aviv souvenir shop.

Below, we identify ten mechanisms and actors driving the disinformation, media blackout, and normalization of genocide, ranging from intelligence alliances and propaganda outlets to corporate lobbies and religious networks. We then outline a legal and political framework for accountability, including a strategy to file communications under Article 15 of the Rome Statute with the International Criminal Court (ICC) against those complicit in these crimes.

Readers who care about safety and dignity for all live on every side of any border. The Tribe of Abimelech platform asks those readers to measure claims by evidence, to prioritize the protection of civilians without exception, and to support processes that can hold individuals accountable regardless of rank. That is how communities rebuild trust after catastrophe. The harm crosses borders from Palestine into neighboring Lebanon and Syria and demands a single civilian protection standard for everyone. That is how neighbors eventually meet again without fear.

I. Evidence of State Policy Enabling the Genocide of Palestinians

A. Collusion of the former British protectorate states and their Regional Gatekeepers (Egypt and Jordan)

Western PR firms gave GCC states a makeover, painting them as post-war peacemakers and Gaza’s fairy godmothers. - Bajis Hasanat Abu Mu'ailiq

From the Gulf courts to Cairo and Amman, the British-imposed regional order morphed into a security architecture that insulated the European genocide machine in Palestine. The same capitals that hired Western PR to posture as “peacemakers” preserved normalization pipelines, muted their people on the streets, and tightened borders while Gaza bled from hundreds of massacres. This is a sequence of concrete decisions that reduced the diplomatic price of mass atrocities, throttled aid at strategic chokepoints, and criminalized anti-genocide solidarity with our people. The pattern is coordinated, cumulative, and attributable to named officials who acted after the ICJ’s 26 January 2024 order found a plausible risk of genocide, putting every state on notice.

Public statements of concern from Gulf capitals were not matched by constraining policy. In practice the most powerful Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) courts preserved normalization tracks with Israel, restricted public protest at decisive moments, and advanced security, military and industrial ties that increased Israeli capacity or reduced the diplomatic price of continuing genocide in Gaza.

Despite public outrage over the genocide, several GCC states swiftly shifted toward protecting their normalization agendas with Israel. After initial condemnations, these regimes worked behind closed doors to stifle any robust response that would challenge Israel or its allies to stop the genocide on our families. For example, at an emergency Arab-Islamic summit on Gaza in late 2023, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia blocked a proposal that Arab League members with ties to Israel sever those relations or use oil embargoes against Israel’s backers. By nixing this measure, they ensured no meaningful action would be taken to stop the genocide.

This quiet collusion went hand-in-hand with continued normalization efforts. In the midst of the genocide, UAE leaders made clear that the Abraham Accords “are there to stay,” even as we mentioned, that Palestinian are excluded from this American sponsored peace framework, and especially as casualties mounted. The UAE’s president was the first Arab leader to call Israel’s leadership after the war began, and even privately warned other regional actors not to intervene against Israel. Such behavior underscores that Persian Gulf regimes prioritized their strategic alliance with Israel over genocide of our Palestinian family. Indeed, their ultimate goal, shared with Israel and the U.S., was to see our indigenous leadership crushed and the Palestinian issue sidelined on the global stage. Gulf states view grassroots Palestinian movements as ideological threats and thus tacitly welcomed Israel’s campaign of death and destruction. Qatar, attempting to mask its position, initially sought to remain separate, while the other GCC leaders opted for pragmatism over principles. They pursued an end to the genocide only on the condition that Palestinians relinquished their improvised weapons to the occupying military, all while maintaining regional détente.

On the domestic front, GCC governments cracked down on any pro-Palestinian expression. In Saudi Arabia, authorities launched a wave of arrests against citizens for simply posting online in support of Gaza. According to Bloomberg, Saudis have been detained for “anti-Israel” social media posts since October 7, as Riyadh prepared public opinion for a U.S.-brokered normalization with Israel. Even a prominent business executive was jailed for comments about Gaza deemed too incendiary. This repression coincided with intense U.S. pressure to finalize a Saudi-Israeli deal – a convergence not lost on observers, who noted that the crackdown came as Washington and Riyadh edged “very close” to a normalization agreement. In the United Arab Emirates, where public protest is heavily restricted, authorities enforced strict bans on Palestinian symbols and slogans. During the COP28 climate summit in Dubai, activists had to hold up watermelons instead of flags – a subtle nod to Palestine – because Emirati rules prohibited even saying “Gaza,” “Palestine,” in chants. Security officials silenced rallying cries like “Free Palestine,” reflecting an official policy to erase Palestinian visibility on the world stage of COP28. Through such measures, GCC rulers worked in tandem with Israel to deflect attention, contain public anger, and normalize relations even as genocide was unfolding.

Named senior officials, role, time window

The measures below are attributable to named decision makers during October 2023 through October 2025 and are framed in modes of liability recognized by the Rome Statute. Officials acted after widespread documentation of mass casualties and after the International Court of Justice’s order of provisional measures on January 26, 2024 finding a plausible risk of genocide, which placed all states on notice. Aiding and abetting or contributing to crimes by “any other means” under Rome Statute Article 25(3)(c) and 25(3)(d), through political and diplomatic support that had a substantial effect on the commission of crimes. ICC territorial jurisdiction over crimes committed on the territory of the State of Palestine per the 5 February 2021 Pre-Trial Chamber decision. Assistance that has a substantial effect on crimes consummated in that territory can fall within Article 12(2)(a).

United Arab Emirates

1. Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, President of the United Arab Emirates, 2022 to present.
   Aiding and abetting under Article 25(3)(c), or contribution to a group crime under Article 25(3)(d). Crimes consummated on Palestinian territory which is under ICC jurisdiction per Article 12(2)(a). Accessorial conduct outside Palestine that has a substantial effect on crimes inside Palestine can fall within the Situation in Palestine. Public steward of the Abraham Accords portfolio and lead on COP28 protocol and protest conditions. Maintained diplomatic channels with Israel throughout the war period.
   📁 View the Dossier

2. Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan, UAE Foreign Minister, 2006 to present.
   Aiding and abetting under Article 25(3)(c), contribution under Article 25(3)(d). Public steward of the Abraham Accords portfolio and lead on COP28 protocol and protest conditions. Maintained diplomatic channels with Israel throughout the war period. 📁 View the Dossier

3. Tahnoun bin Zayed Al Nahyan, UAE National Security Adviser, 2016 to present. Oversees strategic investment and security technology pipelines that continued to link Emirati entities with Israeli firms after October 2023.

Saudi Arabia

1. Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud, Crown Prince and Prime Minister of Saudi Arabia, 2017 to present. Aiding and abetting under Article 25(3)(c), contribution under Article 25(3)(d). Effects analysis turns on substantial contribution to crimes consummated on Palestinian territory. 📁 View the Dossier

2. Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud, Saudi Foreign Minister, 2019 to present.
   Aiding and abetting under Article 25(3)(c), contribution under Article 25(3)(d). Lead negotiator and public advocate for a US Saudi framework that kept normalization in active play during Gaza hostilities. 📁 View the Dossier

Egypt

1. Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, President of the Arab Republic of Egypt, 2014 to present.
   Aiding and abetting under Article 25(3)(c); contribution under Article 25(3)(d). Effects analysis turns on substantial contribution by acts and omissions that foreseeably sustained siege conditions and suppressed regional pressure while crimes were consummated in Gaza (ICC territorial hook). 📁 View the Dossier

Jordan

1. Abdullah II ibn Al-Hussein, King of Jordan, 1999 to present.
   Aiding and abetting under Article 25(3)(c); contribution under Article 25(3)(d). Effects analysis turns on calibrated security cooperation, protest containment, strategic airdrop optics, and continuity of critical energy interconnects that insulated the perpetrating state while crimes were consummated in Gaza (ICC territorial hook). 📁 View the Dossier

The collusion pattern is documentary not theoretical. From Dubai’s stage-managed COP28 to Cairo’s sealed border and Amman’s cordoned streets, each decision was coordinated and reduced the cost of continuing genocide in Gaza. These are policy choices made after the ICJ’s genocide-risk ruling, with full knowledge of the stakes. Under Rome Statute Articles 25(3)(c) and 25(3)(d), practical assistance, political assurance, and coordinated repression that have a substantial effect on the commission of crimes are chargeable as accessorial liability, no matter where the assistance originated, so long as the crimes were consummated on the territory of Palestine (Article 12(2)(a)). The Tribe of Abimelech Platform names these acts for what they are, coordinated state policies that insulated a genocidal campaign and criminalized the communities who tried to stop it.

B. Mahmoud Abbas and the foreign armed mercenary apparatus that subdues our people

US and EU budgetary assistance to PA institutions is documented in official reports. During the Gaza campaign Abbas's forces conducted arrests and crowd control actions that narrowed civic space. We argue this donor dependent structure produced foreseeable and substantial effects that accumulate to treason by Abbas, his family and inner circle.

The conduct of the Palestinian Authority since October 2023 warrants individualized scrutiny under international criminal law. The PA leadership exercises effective control over security services that used live fire against protesters, maintained and intensified security coordination with Israeli forces during active massacres of our indigenous tribes, and carried out arrest campaigns that narrowed civic space and obstructed documentation. These acts and omissions foreseeably and substantially facilitated the commission of crimes on Palestinian territory, which engages liability as aiding and abetting under Article 25(3)(c), contribution to a group crime under Article 25(3)(d), and command responsibility under Article 28 where superiors knew or should have known and failed to prevent or punish.

Mahmoud Abbas has effectively acted as an enforcer of the colonial status quo, suppressing popular resistance in the "West Bank" and silencing dissent, during the Gaza genocide. When our people took to the streets in October 2023 to protest the slaughter in Gaza, Abbas's security forces attacked with shocking brutality, including live fire that killed a 12-year-old girl, a journalist, and nine others in Jenin alone. Abbas's European and CIA trained militia attacked protesters in multiple cities with tear gas, stun grenades, and bullets, wounding and killing dozens, in an attempt to quash any protest against the genocide. On the streets, Palestinians denounced the Abbas and his forty thieves as “subcontractors for the Israeli occupation”, a sentiment borne out of the Abbas family's actions. Rather than defend the very people this family claims to preside over from Israeli bombs and settler pogroms, Abbas and his sons turned the PA's guns on its own, in truth, to protect the occupier from the anger of the occupied.

Evidence has since emerged of high-level coordination among Abbas, Netanyahu, and Trump to eliminate Palestinian resistance to the criminal military occupation. In late 2024, Abbas ordered his militia to launch a large-scale campaign against Palestinian refugees in Jenin and Nablus, simply to prove his usefulness to Israel and the U.S. As noted by observers, Abbas's actions against Palestinians appear to be a strategic move, aiming to win favor with those accused of committing genocide, specifically the U.S. and Israel, in hopes of securing to rape our people in Gaza post-war, much like he has done in the "West Bank" over the past two decades. In other words, Abbas sought to secure his family's fiefdom by acting as a mercenary for foreign powers, crushing the Palestinian people, and hoping his family and his minority Kurdish-Palestinian led circle to be rewarded with control over Gaza. This campaign, tellingly named “Operation Protect the Homeland” by Abbas, unfolded in close collaboration with Israeli forces and under direct American CIA supervision. U.S. military officials, including the Security Coordinator Gen. Fenzel, met with Abbas's militias to guide the operation. The term "treason" barely captures the severity of this internal atrocity carried out by the Abbas family and their close associates.

At Washington’s urging, Israel even approved urgent deliveries of U.S.-supplied ammunition, armored vehicles, and other materiel to bolster the Abbas in Jenin. In essence, he became the tip of the spear for a joint US-Israeli effort to stamp out any apposition in the "West Bank" against the genocide being inflicted upon their families in Gaza. Abbas's officials openly acknowledged their motives: to show Israel and the U.S. that they can “restore order” and thereby deserve a role in a post-war arrangement. Abbas's longstanding security coordination with Israel has thus crossed into outright collusion, as his militia raid refugee camps on Israel’s behalf when the Israeli army finds it difficult to do so.

This betrayal reaches beyond opposition groups to anyone voicing dissent against genocide or opposition to this family's rule. His U.S. supplied intelligence has detained activists, curtailed media, and censored criticism of the crimes he has committed against our people. The result is a minority led leadership in Ramallah that has deflected blame from Israel, reinforced the narrative that resistance to military occupation is “terrorism,” and sought to shut down grassroots mobilization. By jailing those protesting the Gaza massacres. Abbas’s regime effectively helped Israel contain the fallout of its atrocities. The human cost of this complicity is evident in our people’s fury: chants of “Abbas, step down!” rang out in "West Bank" demonstrations. Having lost all legitimacy, Abbas and family mafia today survives as a proxy militia, barracked behind walls – one that Israel and its allies use to fragment our national cause and stifle our collective resistance against oppression and military occupation.

Named senior officials, role, time window

The analysis below attributes responsibility by role and time window, states the concrete conduct, links that conduct to its effect on the crimes, identifies knowledge indicators, and specifies the jurisdictional basis.

Mahmoud Abbas

President of the Palestinian Authority, 2005 to present. Aiding and abetting under Rome Statute Article 25(3)(c), contribution to a group crime under Article 25(3)(d), command responsibility under Article 28. Crimes consummated on the territory of the State of Palestine, which is under ICC jurisdiction under Article 12(2)(a). 📁 View the Dossier

Majed Faraj

Director of the PA General Intelligence Service, 2009 to present. Aiding and abetting under Article 25(3)(c), contribution under Article 25(3)(d), command responsibility under Article 28. State of Palestine territory under Article 12(2)(a). 📁 View the Dossier

Hussein al-Sheikh

Secretary General of the PLO Executive Committee and PA Civil Affairs Minister, 2022 to present. Aiding and abetting under Article 25(3)(c), contribution under Article 25(3)(d). State of Palestine territory under Article 12(2)(a). Maintained civil coordination channels with Israel during the Gaza war period and publicly defended that stance, which sustained permit systems and deconfliction that undercut leverage to constrain operations, with Reuters interviews and PLO statements on file. Publicly positioned the PA as the partner for post war governance arrangements while repression of West Bank dissent continued, which signaled continuity rather than conditionality to external actors. 📁 View the Dossier

Ziad Hab al-Rih

Interior Minister and head of Preventive Security, 2013 to present. Aiding and abetting under Article 25(3)(c), command responsibility under Article 28. State of Palestine territory under Article 12(2)(a). Directed Preventive Security and police operations that broke up protests and detained organizers in October 2023 and afterward, which suppressed anti genocide assembly and expression. 📁 View the Dossier

Mohammad Mustafa

Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority, March 2024 to present. Contribution to a group crime under Article 25(3)(d) through policy and resourcing choices, possible aiding and abetting where state resources substantially facilitate the crimes. State of Palestine territory under Article 12(2)(a). Accepted a mandate that prioritized internal security and reconstruction frameworks while protests were curtailed, a combination that preserved coercive capacity during Gaza hostilities. Retained security coordination architecture during cabinet transition according to donor and diplomatic readouts, which continued to remove a potential restraint on Israeli operations. 📁 View the Dossier

The documented record since October 2023 shows a pattern of conduct by the Palestinian Authority that meets the core elements of accessorial liability. PA security services used live fire to disperse West Bank protests, including the killing of a twelve year old girl in Jenin, and carried out violent dispersals in multiple cities. The leadership maintained and intensified security coordination with Israeli forces while seeking United States backing for expanded law and order operations in Jenin and Nablus in 2024. In parallel the PA oversaw the continued use of the Cybercrime Law against online critics through 2024 despite domestic and international objections. These measures suppressed mobilization against mass atrocities, disrupted documentation and aid networks, and facilitated arrests and raids in refugee camps, which together eased the execution of the broader campaign in Gaza and the West Bank.

These acts and omissions occurred while global reporting made the civilian death toll unmistakable and after the International Court of Justice issued provisional measures on 26 January 2024 finding a plausible risk of genocide in Gaza. From that date forward, senior officials were on notice that their choices would have a foreseeable and substantial effect on the commission of international crimes. The failure to suspend coordination, to protect demonstrators, and to curb abuses by subordinate units engages command responsibility where superiors knew or should have known and failed to prevent or punish.

On this record the appropriate modes of liability to assert are aiding and abetting under Article 25(3)(c) for providing practical assistance with knowledge of the consequences, contribution to a group crime under Article 25(3)(d) for conduct that had a substantial effect on the commission, and command responsibility under Article 28 for superiors whose omissions enabled continued violations. Palestine is a State Party to the Rome Statute and the conduct and resulting harms took place on Palestinian territory, which squarely engages ICC jurisdiction under Article 12(2)(a). This section will therefore be transmitted as part of our Article 15 communications, with named officials identified by role and time window for the Office of the Prosecutor to investigate.

C. The coordinated enablement of ongoing atrocities by U.N. member states.

Beyond the region, a set of powerful governments and supranational officials adopted parallel policies that shielded Israel diplomatically, sustained its material capacity, and narrowed space for public accountability. The pattern is consistent across capitals. Officials acted after January 26, 2024 when the International Court of Justice found a plausible risk of genocide and ordered provisional measures. They did so with contemporaneous knowledge of mass civilian harm. In legal terms this conduct fits aiding and abetting under Article 25 paragraph 3 subparagraph c of the Rome Statute, and for some officials a contribution to a common plan under Article 25 paragraph 3 subparagraph d, with state responsibility for aid or assistance under Articles 16 to 18 of the ILC Articles on State Responsibility as the parallel public law frame. The jurisdictional hook is ICC territorial jurisdiction over crimes committed in Palestine because assistance supplied abroad had a substantial effect on crimes consummated on the territory of a State Party.

Foremost the United States and the European Union – have coordinated political and media strategies to deflect attention from genocide and undermine our Palestinian people. Diplomatically, the U.S. shielded Israel at every turn, wielding its UN Security Council veto to block ceasefire resolutions and ensure no international intervention to stop genocide. European governments, too, largely fell in line, issuing tepid calls for “protection of civilians” while continuing arms sales and military aid to Israel. Both the U.S. and the U.K. have been active players in the chaos, with the U.S. sending mercenaries to stir up trouble on the ground and the U.K. flying around daily, playing spy games and gathering intel for Israel's targeting missions. The political cover was buttressed by a campaign to control the narrative and suppress anti-genocide expression worldwide.

In the Western media sphere, and especially but not limited to the U.S., the U.K. and Germany, mainstream news outlets overwhelmingly adopted the oppressor's framing, effectively normalizing the mass slaughter and genocide of our Palestinian family through biased coverage. Studies of U.S. media revealed a significant imbalance: major newspapers mentioned "Israel/Israeli" much more frequently than "Palestinian." In most cases, the word Palestinian was replaced with "terrorists." Terms like "massacre" or "slaughter" were often used almost exclusively for Israeli victims, even though Palestinians have neither committed a single massacre nor possess the ability or desire to carry out such acts of terror. Palestinian deaths, including those of thousands of children, were minimized or described with euphemisms like "complex clashes," despite the fact that the attacks were largely carried out by air, and most of our victims lost their lives in their own homes.

Meanwhile, American television networks gave extensive airtime to Israeli officials and spokespeople, while silencing the Palestinian perspectives. Children were misrepresented as adults, young girls as women, and boys as men. In the first month of the war, CNN, Fox, and MSNBC interviewed the Israeli military spokesman alone 44 times on these channels. U.S. government officials (such as the Secretary of State and White House spokespeople) dominated talk shows, reinforcing a pro-genocide narrative. American politicians like Nikki Haley and Lindsey Graham were interviewed, urging Israel to "finish them" and suggesting that dropping a nuclear bomb on Palestinians could be justified. This concerted media bias, influenced by political lobbying, effectively turned Western press into an echo chamber for genocide propaganda, leaving the true scale of Gaza’s destruction obscured to the wider public.

At the same time, Christian-majority nations like Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, along with Islamic states in the GCC, as well as Morocco, Jordan, and Egypt, took steps to criminalize and censor anti-genocide sentiment under the pretext of combating extremism. In Europe, France set a disturbing precedent by banning all anti-genocide demonstrations in October 2023. The French interior minister declared such protests a threat to public order, and police forcibly dispersed peaceful rallies with tear gas and water cannons. Simply waving a Palestinian flag or chanting against Israel became grounds for arrest in Paris. Germany and the UK took similar hardline stances, surveilling activists and in some cases outlawing the public display of the Palestinian flag.

The idea of equating anti-genocide solidarity with "terrorism" or "anti-Semitism" seems like a strategic move by Israel's allies to scare people away from reporting and prosecuting atrocity crimes of the Zionist movement and the State of Israel. Atrocity crimes are considered the worst crimes committed against humankind, and refer to crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes under international law.

Even across the Atlantic, the United States saw a wave of intimidation against Palestine activists, from university suppressions to FBI harassment, all aiming to silence voices speaking about Gaza’s genocide. In effect, a transatlantic climate of fear was created to push our Palestinian people out of acceptable discourse.

Perhaps the most insidious external interference has been in the digital domain. Social media platforms and tech companies – many under pressure from Western and Israeli officials – engaged in systematic censorship of Palestinian content. Activists and digital rights groups have documented how, during the Gaza war, posts about Palestinian suffering were algorithmically hidden or removed on American owned platforms like Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Twitter (X), and TikTok. Palestinian journalists found their accounts suspended after posting footage of Israeli strikes; even hashtags like #GazaGenocide were periodically suppressed. This “digital repression,” described by some as a form of digital apartheid, shut down one of the few avenues Palestinians have to narrate their own story. In previous episodes, Facebook admitted to curbing content after Israeli government complaints, and Meta’s Oversight Board slammed the unjustified removal of posts about Al-Aqsa. During the 2023 war, these practices intensified under the radar. In the absence of mainstream media truth-telling, silencing social media amplified the information blackout around Gaza’s annihilation.

Crucially, Israel itself, with tacit external support deliberately engineered a media blackout in Gaza. From day one of the war, Israeli forces targeted the flow of information as a strategic objective. They bombed Palestinian media offices, killed and injured dozens of local journalists, cut off electricity and internet across Gaza, and barred foreign reporters from entering. In one year alone, more than 130 Palestinian journalists were killed covering the war, at least 32 of them assassinated in the line of work. Press facilities were systematically destroyed and telecom networks repeatedly disabled – a methodical campaign to “stifle journalism” and prevent the world from seeing the reality in Gaza. The few international journalists allowed in were tightly escorted by the Israeli military, their movement and reporting censored. As Reporters Without Borders observed, Israeli forces “did everything in their power to prevent coverage” of what was happening in Gaza, even as they intensified the atrocities. This blackout strategy could not succeed without external complicity: Western governments largely ignored Israel’s attacks on the press. International outrage was muted; instead of sanctioning Israel, the U.S. and others continued to justify its actions in the name of “security.” The result is impunity, a year into the war, not a single Israeli official has been held accountable for targeting journalists, despite ICC complaints filed by press freedom groups. This silence from powerful states amounts to endorsement of Israel’s information war, allowing genocide to proceed in darkness.

The evidence is overwhelming that a coalition of regional and global actors coordinated through both overt policy and covert influence to suppress our people during the genocide. Gulf states normalized and muted responses; Abbas policed and pacified our nation's indigenous tribes and families; Western powers censored protest and flooded media with propaganda. Each, for their own interests, helped deflect attention, diffuse outrage, and deny justice to our Palestinian families at the very moment of our deepest suffering. This coordinated suppression is not a matter of theory but of record – documented in public arrests, leaked summit dealings, media content analyses, and the blood of journalists and protesters. Understanding this network of collusion is crucial for us, the Tribe of Abimelech Platform, as we mobilize our response. It lays bare why the world failed to stop a genocide in real time and who must be held to account.

Named senior officials, role, time window

United States

Under President Joseph R. Biden Jr. in 2023 and 2024, the United States repeatedly vetoed Security Council draft resolutions that called for a ceasefire, notably on December 8, 2023 and on February 20, 2024. These vetoes blocked mandatory measures that could have constrained operations and protected civilians. In the same period Washington accelerated transfers of munitions and air defense items, including emergency procedures to bypass ordinary congressional review in December 2023. After May 2024 the administration paused only a narrow category of two thousand pound bombs related to Rafah, then resumed other flows. These decisions were taken after the ICJ order and after formal UN expert warnings that transfers risked facilitating serious violations. The effect of these acts was to maintain operational tempo and degrade international leverage for restraint. In 2025 President Donald J. Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio publicly committed to expedite deliveries and affirmed continued support, which reinforced the same enabling effect.

1. Joseph R. Biden Jr. — President, 2021–2025
   Cast U.S. vetoes on Gaza ceasefire resolutions on 8 Dec 2023 and 20 Feb 2024, and paused only certain 2,000-lb bombs in May 2024 while broader transfers continued.

2. Donald J. Trump — President, 2025–present
   Administration resumed heavy bomb shipments, including 2,000-lb munitions, in June 2025 after the prior pause.

3. Marco Rubio — Secretary of State, 2025–present
   Confirmed as Secretary of State in January 2025 and defended the administration’s support posture, including at the UN, while emphasizing humanitarian access.

4. Antony J. Blinken — Secretary of State, 2021–2025
   Backed “humanitarian pauses” rather than a binding ceasefire and defended U.S. vetoes in early UN rounds.

5. Lloyd Austin — Secretary of Defense, 2021–2025
   Oversaw U.S. weapons pipeline and announced the narrow May 2024 pause on certain bombs linked to operations in Rafah.

United Kingdom

The United Kingdom provided real time aerial reconnaissance over Gaza beginning in December 2023, with RAF surveillance flights launched from Cyprus. London stated the flights supported hostage location, yet UK officials also said de-identified intelligence was shared with Israel as needed. The UK later suspended some arms export licences to Israel on September 2, 2024, citing legal risk, while maintaining other licences and security cooperation. The combined effect was to give operational intelligence support in the early phase and to avoid a full embargo later, which preserved capability and political cover during the bulk of the hostilities.

1. Rishi Sunak — Prime Minister, Oct 2022–Jul 2024
   Approved RAF surveillance flights over Gaza airspace beginning Dec 2023 to support hostage-location efforts and kept export policy under review.

2. Keir Starmer — Prime Minister, Jul 2024–present
   Government suspended about thirty Israel-related licences in Sep 2024 but kept the F-35 parts carve-out, a position later tested in High Court proceedings in 2025.

3. David Cameron — Foreign Secretary, Nov 2023–Jul 2024
   Advanced a “humanitarian pauses” line and maintained the UK’s licensing approach pending legal advice during his tenure.

4. David Lammy — Foreign Secretary, Jul 2024–present
   Announced suspension of around thirty licences on 2 Sep 2024 on legal risk grounds and characterized the move as a legal rather than policy decision.

5. Grant Shapps, UK Defence Secretary, Aug 2023–July 2024.
   Authorised RAF surveillance missions over Gaza and the Eastern Mediterranean from December 2023 that produced intelligence shared with Israel under a hostage-recovery rationale, sustaining operational capacity while civilian harm was widely documented.

6. John Healey, UK Defence Secretary, July 2024–present.
   Ended the surveillance flight program around September 2025 after roughly five hundred sorties, indicating continuing ministerial knowledge of the program’s scope and effects during the war period.

Germany

Germany’s political leadership stood up early for continued support, while authorizing large volumes of defence exports. Defence Minister Boris Pistorius and Chancellor Olaf Scholz traveled to Israel in October 2023 to underline military-political backing. In 2023 Germany approved a sharp increase in arms export licences to Israel. Berlin later faced litigation over export legality and public pressure, and by August 2025 it moved to halt new licences amid coalition divisions and a pending change in chancellors. Throughout 2024 and most of 2025, export practice and public positioning sustained Israel’s military capacity and reduced the credibility of European calls for restraint, even as EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said publicly that starvation had been used as a weapon and that famine conditions existed in Gaza.

1. Olaf Scholz — Chancellor, Dec 2021–Aug 2025
   Oversaw a surge in German arms exports to Israel in 2023 and defended Germany’s position when Nicaragua sought emergency measures at the ICJ in 2024.

2. Friedrich Merz — Chancellor, Aug 2025–present
   New government stated continued political support for Israel in mid-Aug 2025 and then halted most arms exports later in Aug 2025 after a legal reassessment.

France

Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin ordered a nationwide ban on pro-Palestinian demonstrations in October 2023, which criminalized core political expression at the very time public mobilization could have raised the cost of continued operations. President Emmanuel Macron criticized humanitarian conditions and at intervals called for a ceasefire, yet Paris maintained bilateral defence and intelligence ties and did not impose a comprehensive embargo. The immediate effect of the protest ban was to chill assembly and reduce visible pressure for civilian protection inside a major EU capital, while national policy signaled continuity of security cooperation.

1. Emmanuel Macron, President of France, 2017–present.
   Visited Tel Aviv on 24 October 2023 and publicly framed support for Israel’s self-defence while proposing a coalition against Hamas, then on 10 November 2023 called for a ceasefire, showing contemporaneous knowledge of mass civilian harm and the legal stakes.

2. Gérald Darmanin, Interior Minister, 2018–present.
   Ordered a nationwide ban on pro-Palestinian demonstrations in Oct 2023 and directed police dispersals under public-order justifications.

European Union

Commission President Ursula von der Leyen took a prominently pro-Israel line in October 2023, including a high-profile visit and statements that dozens of EU staff publicly criticized as “unconditional.” Her stance conveyed political backing while member states were still debating a common line on protection of civilians. By contrast, EU High Representative Josep Borrell repeatedly stated that starvation had been used as a weapon and that famine conditions existed, and urged the use of EU leverage. The split messaging diluted pressure, and the Commission’s early solidarity visits and rhetoric gave cover for continued operations while arms originating in EU member states continued to reach Israel.

1. Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, 2019–present.
   Flew to Israel on 13 October 2023 and delivered strong solidarity messages that several EU capitals criticised as unbalanced, which signalled early political cover from the Commission presidency during the peak of civilian harm.

2. Josep Borrell, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs, 2019–present.
   Publicly warned that starvation was being used as a weapon of war and pressed for an immediate ceasefire, placing EU knowledge of atrocity risks on record and tightening the foreseeability of consequences for arms-exporting member states.

Taken together, these acts and omissions sustained operational capacity, reduced diplomatic and economic costs, and chilled public oversight during the period when mass civilian harm in Gaza was widely reported and formally recognized as plausibly genocidal by the ICJ on January 26, 2024. This pattern is best framed not as a declared crusade or a formal war by external powers, but as a transnational enabling policy that meets the elements of aiding and abetting, and in some instances contribution to a group crime, because it provided practical assistance with knowledge of the consequences and had a substantial effect on the commission of crimes on the territory of a State Party. The public international law corollary is state responsibility for aid or assistance to an internationally wrongful act. This framing is precise, legally grounded, and suitable for Article 15 communications as well as for parallel state responsibility pleadings.

II. Ten Coordination Mechanisms Normalizing the Genocide of our People

In light of the above, we have identified ten key mechanisms and actors likely working in concert to manage disinformation, enforce silence, and normalize the genocide of our people. These overlapping channels form a nexus of coordination among states, institutions, corporations, and interest groups. Exposing them is the first step to dismantling their influence. We present each mechanism with supporting evidence:

1. Intelligence Alliances and Security Pacts: Behind closed doors, intelligence agencies from Israel, allied Arab states, and Western powers share information and strategies to control the narrative under the guise of “security cooperation.” This shadowy coordination shapes propaganda and suppresses inconvenient truths. For example: In the wake of the Abraham Accords, Israel’s Mossad began open security collaboration with Gulf counterparts – Mossad’s chief visited the UAE to forge “cooperation in the fields of security” just days after the UAE-Israel normalization, a move Palestinians rightly condemned as a betrayal. The CIA and other Western intel services have similarly coordinated with regional governments (including Abbas's security forces) to label Palestinian resistance as “terrorism” and quash it accordingly. These intelligence alliances facilitate not only the exchange of surveillance data (used to target activists and journalists) but also the alignment of talking points – ensuring that from Washington to Riyadh, officials speak in one voice about “combating terror” while erasing the context of occupation and genocide.

2. State-Controlled Media and Propaganda Outlets: Many media channels in the Middle East and beyond act as mouthpieces for their sponsoring regimes, propagating a narrative that deflects sympathy away from Palestinians and toward state interests. For instance, Saudi Arabia’s Al-Arabiya and the UAE’s Sky News Arabia have consistently echoed their governments’ pro-normalization stance – emphasizing reports of militant threats while downplaying the suffering in Gaza and the "West Bank." During the 2023 war, several Arab state media networks amplified Israel’s justifications and gave minimal coverage to Palestinian civilian victims, mirroring the bias of Western outlets. Evidence of editorial collusion to shape language has emerged: internal memos at some news organizations instructed staff not to use the word “Palestine” or to focus discussions narrowly on Palestinian makeshift rockets, thereby erasing Palestinian national identity in coverage. This systematic framing portrays the genocide as a “complex conflict” at best, and at worst as a justified response to “terrorism,” priming domestic audiences to accept or even support the suppression of the Palestinians. Propaganda outlets – whether state-owned or corporate – thus serve as a critical coordination mechanism, manufacturing public consent for the normalization of atrocity.

3. Big Tech Censorship and Digital Surveillance: In the digital arena, social media companies and tech firms have colluded with states to censor pro-Palestinian content and monitor activists, reinforcing the information blackout. Under pressure from powerful governments and lobby groups, platforms like Facebook, Twitter (X), and YouTube removed or hid posts documenting Israeli war crimes, often under vague “hate speech” or “terrorism” policies. As one analysis noted: “social media platforms…have been involved in the censorship and silencing of Palestinian voices,” contributing to a “digital apartheid” that blocks Palestinians from telling their story. This is not accidental but coordinated – Israel and Abbas's cyber units and Western intelligence reportedly flag accounts for takedown, while pro-Israel bot networks flood the platforms with disinformation. Moreover, advanced spyware from Israeli firms has been sold to regional governments (like NSO Group’s Pegasus, used by the UAE, Saudi, and others) and deployed against Palestinian human rights defenders and journalists. Such surveillance technology – a product of intelligence alliances – allows regimes to pre-empt and neutralize online mobilization. By controlling both the content and the users in digital spaces, this mechanism chokes off grassroots organizing and truth-telling in the one domain that Palestinians had used effectively to reach global civil society.

4. The Pro-Israel Lobby and Policy Influence Networks: A well-funded, transnational network of lobbying organizations, think tanks, and political donors works in unison to steer government policies and public opinion in favor of Israel – even if that means whitewashing genocide. In the United States in particular, the Israel lobby wields outsized influence over Congress and the executive. Groups like AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) and JINSA (Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs), allied with Christian Zionist organizations, have effectively made unconditional support for Israel a bipartisan norm. Through campaign donations and advocacy, they ensured that 96% of AIPAC-endorsed candidates won office in recent elections, and over 60% of U.S. lawmakers receive funding from defense contractors that profit off military aid to Israel. This lobbying juggernaut coordinates messaging (framing Israel’s actions as “self-defense”), drafts pro-Israel legislation, and pressures officials to toe the line. A striking example of their success: even as the world decried Gaza’s humanitarian catastrophe, the U.S. Congress rushed to approve additional arms packages for Israel, with virtually no debate, mirroring talking points circulated by AIPAC and others. In Europe, similar though less formalized lobbies (and historical guilt politics) keep governments aligned with Israel. Corporate-funded think tanks churn out analyses justifying Israel’s tactics, and media pundits from these institutes proliferate on news channels. All these efforts are synchronized to neutralize calls for accountability, to frame any ICC or UN investigation as an “anti-Israel bias,” and to maintain diplomatic impunity for the genocide. The lobby network thus orchestrates political cover, ensuring governments actively normalize relations with Israel instead of sanctioning it.

5. Military-Industrial Complex and Corporate Profiteering: The military and economic interests of powerful states are a major driver of coordinated silence. Arms manufacturers, defense contractors, and other corporations stand to gain massively from unwavering support for Israel’s genocidal wars, and they use their clout to influence policy. As part of the U.S.-Israel “special relationship,” a guaranteed $3.8 billion in U.S. military aid flows to Israel annually – 80% of which is spent back on American-made weapons. Giants like Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Northrop Grumman see their stock prices surge with each bombardment of our people in Gaza and the "West Bank." These companies bankroll lobbyists and think tanks to keep aid flowing and to portray Israel’s military campaigns as necessary and righteous. Their boards are stacked with former generals and officials who rotate through the halls of power (a classic “revolving door”), ensuring that war profits outweigh human rights in policy. Furthermore, the Abraham Accords themselves included lucrative arms deals to Gulf states – reportedly, pro-Israel lobby groups dropped objections to selling F-35 jets to the UAE as part of the normalization quid pro quo. This indicates a joint corporate-state interest in integrating Israel into a regional security framework for profit. Energy corporations also play a role: Gulf oil states and Western oil companies prefer regional stability (i.e. business with Israel and Saudi) over disruptive pro-Palestinian action. Thus, whether it’s arms or oil, corporate lobbies push for “normal business” even amidst genocide, lobbying governments to prioritize economic ties over human rights. This convergence of profit and policy is a mechanism whereby calls for boycott or embargo (like the proposed oil embargo at the Arab summit) are swiftly killed. In essence, the corporate lobby normalizes genocide by treating it as an acceptable cost of doing business in the region.

6. Intergovernmental Security Forums (NATO and others): On a geopolitical level, alliances such as NATO and ad-hoc coalitions treat Israel as a de facto member, aligning strategies against common “threats” and sidelining Palestine. High-level security dialogues – often behind closed doors – have focused on an anti-Iran consensus that unites the U.S., Israel, and Sunni Arab regimes, effectively making the Palestinian question a nuisance to be managed rather than a cause to be championed. Intelligence-sharing agreements (like the Five Eyes partnership, which reportedly shares raw signals intel with Israel in some cases) and joint military drills create a fraternity of security elites who adopt each other’s perspectives. This has tangible effects: when Israeli officials label Palestinian resistance as ISIS-like terrorism, Western security forums amplify that comparison. Furthermore, the U.S. has leveraged institutions like CENTCOM (Central Command) to integrate Israel with Arab militaries, meaning narratives and tactics are shared. These forums acted like a lazy referee at a chaotic soccer match, turning a blind eye as Israel unleashed its Gaza onslaught and continued the "West Bank" pogroms. Instead of intervening, they framed it as Israel “mopping up terrorists,” even when a Jewish extremist turned into a home-invading caveman, clubbing an elderly Palestinian woman on the head. The result is a coordinated stance where security alliances collectively dismiss allegations of genocide (or leave them to toothless “investigations” down the road) so as not to fracture the coalition. In sum, these intergovernmental mechanisms ensure diplomatic inertia: no emergency NATO session on Gaza’s civilians, no responsibility to protect invoked – because the priority was on shoring up Israel and containing regional fallout in line with alliance interests.

7. Religious and Ideological Networks: Powerful ideological currents and religious networks also help normalize our oppression through coordinated messaging. On one side, Christian Zionist movements in the United States and Europe – comprising millions of evangelical fundamentalists – preach unwavering support for Israel as a religious mandate. They lobby their governments and influence voters, providing a grassroots base that aligns with the pro-Israel agenda regardless of human cost of our people and their ancestorial lands we've lived on for thousands of years. Many in this network celebrated the Palestinian genocide as a fulfillment of prophecy, actively distributing disinformation (for example, falsely claiming Palestinians beheaded 40 babies) to justify Israeli actions. This religio-ideological alliance effectively gave Western leaders domestic cover: a significant constituency framing any criticism of Israel as going against God’s will. Conversely, within the Muslim world, certain state-controlled religious authorities have been co-opted to undermine our people. For instance, some government-aligned clerics in Gulf states, Egypt and Jordan have urged the populace to avoid “fitna” (discord) and not protest, implicitly telling the faithful that obedience to rulers takes precedence over death, destruction, and disrespect for Palestinians, as if we are not human. Saudi state imams, for example, offered only muted prayers for Palestine while emphasizing stability and warning against “sedition” – echoing their state leadership's stance. Additionally, countries like Egypt and Jordan (with U.S. backing) invoke the fear of Islamist extremism to justify siding against Palestinians, thus using ideology to rationalize their complicity in the siege (Egypt’s blockade of Rafah, Jordan’s arrests of activists against genocide, etc.). These religious and ideological networks work across borders to shape hearts and minds, making it morally or culturally palatable for communities to accept the suppression of our people. By painting the seventy-seven yearlong genocide and ethnocide as a battle against infidels or terrorists (depending on the lens), they drain empathy for Palestinian victims and portray support for Palestine as support for extremism – a pernicious narrative that has been actively coordinated through sermons, conferences, and faith-based media globally.

The coordination also influences how news is distributed, both locally through the Abbas family's monopoly on media in the West Bank and internationally, shaping its global circulation.

8. Global Media Conglomerates and Newswire Management: The coordination extends to how news itself (both locally through the Abbas family's monopoly on media in the West Bank and internationally) circulates worldwide. A handful of global news agencies (Reuters, AP, AFP) and mega-corporations (Disney/ABC, Comcast/NBC, Murdoch’s News Corp, etc.) dominate international news flow. These gatekeepers set guidelines that all but erase Palestinian perspectives and dignity. During the Gaza war, Reuters and AP’s style guidelines mirrored U.S. State Department language: Palestinians defending their land from a criminal occupier were “terrorists,” Gaza health ministry data was “unverified,” Israeli statements were taken as fact. We know that at some major outlets, top editors intervened to remove emotive terms for Palestinians, and even fired journalists seen as “too sympathetic.” This kind of top-down media management is not random; it is influenced by mostly American and European corporate owners’ political ties and by active campaigns from lobby groups. The result is a coordinated editorial stance across dozens of ostensibly independent outlets: the New York Times, BBC, CNN, and others largely stayed within a narrow frame, sanitizing the reality of genocide. Even photo agencies faced pressure – we saw fewer images of dead children and more of Israeli speakers, which was aimed at skewing public perception. Thus, a coordinated media complex ensured a de facto blackout or distortion of genocide, especially in the global North. The few courageous journalists who broke ranks (or the smaller outlets that tried to report truth) were drowned out by the chorus, or even censored (as when Israel and Abbas banned Al Jazeera and seized AP cameras to stop live feeds from Gaza). In essence, an elite media cartel, guided by both state and corporate influences, managed what information the world saw – and not by accident, but through concerted action.

9. Coordinated Diplomatic Narratives and UN Deadlock: Another mechanism is the intentional paralysis of international institutions and the promotion of toothless processes to delay action. Key states coordinated their diplomatic talking points at the UN, G20, and other forums to prevent any concrete intervention in Gaza. The U.S., UK, and Germany systematically watered down statements, using almost identical language about “Israel’s right to defend itself” against the stateless and mostly refugee population of Palestine, and the need to prevent “regional escalation,” while omitting the word “ceasefire” for months. Leaked communications showed U.S. diplomats lobbying others to oppose resolutions that criticized Israel. Meanwhile, Arab regimes in league with Israel (notably the UAE, Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia) ensured that bodies like the Arab League and OIC produced only symbolic condemnations. We saw how the joint Arab/OIC summit in Riyadh was stage-managed: it gave a platform to vent rhetoric, but due to the behind-the-scenes veto by Gulf states, it led to no binding resolution beyond general appeals. Instead of action to protect ru people from state terrorism, such as sanctions or peacekeeping forces – these diplomats steered the conversation toward “post-war reconstruction” and reviving a moribund peace process, effectively deflecting urgency of the catastrophe on the ground. Additionally, powerful countries in this alliance pushed the narrative that accountability should wait for after the war, preferring long-term “investigations” (which they can later stymie) over immediate measures. By collectively agreeing to delay and dilute responses, these actors normalized the ongoing killing as something that could be handled by future negotiations or tribunals. This coordinated diplomatic inertia allowed the genocide to continue unabated under a veneer of concern.

10. Psychological Operations and Misinformation Campaigns: Finally, there is the realm of psyops, covert or overt campaigns to spread false or misleading information that justify the genocide or cloud the truth. Locally, this initiative is handled by the Abbas family's monopoly on media outlets. Throughout the genocide, we witnessed a flood of rumors and fabricated narratives that appear to have been propagated by interested parties. For example, in October 2023, Israeli officials initially claimed that Palestinian freedom fighters had beheaded infants – a horrific story that dominated headlines but was later unsubstantiated, originating from a single Israeli soldier’s account. Nevertheless, that claim went viral, fueling public outrage in the West against Palestinians and providing cover for Israel's actions. Both the former and current American presidents Joseph Robinette Biden (Genocide Joe) and Donald John Trump, with the former openly pledging allegiance to Zionism and identifying as a Zionist, continued to promote this false narrative to the world. Such incidents suggest organized disinformation efforts, coordinated between Israeli military PR units and allied propagandists, to demonize Palestinians. There were also fake or mis contextualized images circulated on social media (e.g. old videos falsely presented as Gazans faking injuries, etc.) to cast doubt on our suffering. Many of these items were traced back to pro-Israel social media clusters and inauthentic accounts. On the other side, legitimate evidence from Gaza was dismissed as “Palestinian propaganda” by Israel’s global network of spokespeople. We have also seen targeted psychological warfare; Israeli trolls sending gruesome images to Palestinian social media users, or text messages in Gaza threatening people to evacuate, all intended to terrorize and confuse. The sheer scale and synchronization of these misinformation bursts indicate an underlying undeniable coordination. Whether it’s through hired PR firms, cyber warfare units, or ideological volunteers, the effect is the same: the truth of genocide is obscured by a fog of manufactured fake narratives. This mechanism sows doubt among the international public (“what is real?”) and can even fracture solidarity movements (by forcing them to constantly debunk lies). It is a force multiplier for all the above mechanisms, reinforcing the media bias, the diplomatic spin, and the repressive measures by making it harder for the facts to gain unequivocal recognition globally.

In summary, these ten mechanisms the platform has identified spanning security, media, tech, lobbies, ideology, and diplomacy, operate as a coordinated system of control. They did not emerge spontaneously; they reflect the convergence of interests among those who prefer a silenced and subjugated Palestine. Recognizing each part of this nexus empowers us to target them in our strategy. We must be prepared to counter the intelligence lies with truth-telling, to route around social media censorship, to outmaneuver lobby influence with public advocacy, and to confront diplomatic paralysis with people’s diplomacy.

III. Legal and Political Framework for Accountability

Facing this vast machinery of suppression, we turn to international law and justice mechanisms as weapons of truth and accountability. Central to our strategy is leveraging the International Criminal Court and other legal avenues to expose and prosecute those responsible for genocide and its cover-up. Article 15 of the Rome Statute (the ICC’s founding treaty) provides a key entry point for action: it allows “any individual, group, or organization” to send information to the ICC Prosecutor about potential crimes (see coalitionfortheicc.org). We, as the platform for the Bedouin tribe of Abimelech, Hasanat Abu Mau'liq, can utilize this provision to submit meticulously documented communications (dossiers of evidence) urging the ICC to investigate and prosecute crimes committed against our people, by any actors complicit in the commission or concealment of these atrocities.

Our course of action under Article 15 is to prepare formal communications to the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) detailing:

• The crime of genocide against our people on the ground and persecution abroad, including evidence of genocidal intent. To incorporate the extensive documentation already compiled by human rights organizations and legal experts, such as the communication submitted by Palestinian rights groups in November 2023 alleging genocide and apartheid. This includes statements by officials openly calling for wiping out towns and calls for “no mercy” "finish them" "drop a nuclear bomb them," facts that even the International Court of Justice found make a case of genocide in Palestine. Your communication is to make clear that the widespread killing of civilians, deliberate infliction of conditions of life to destroy more of our towns and villages (siege, starvation), and violent incitement by leaders all meet the legal definition of genocide (Article 6 of the Rome Statute).

• The crime of crimes against humanity, including persecution and apartheid. You are to present evidence of systematic attacks on civilians, forcible displacement, and the institutionalized military and settler regime of oppression being imposed on our families, recognized by major human rights NGOs as apartheid. Importantly, you are to highlight how external actors aided or abetted these crimes (for instance, companies supplying white phosphorus munitions used on civilian areas, or Microsoft using its technology for spying on our families, or states knowingly providing weapons used to target hospitals and schools.

• Incitement to genocide and hate propaganda, citing individuals who publicly deemed starving Palestinians “justified and moral” – an “explicit admission” of genocidal policy. We note that others already have urged for arrest warrants for war criminals, and you are to reinforce that call with our own family voice, and specifically against those that enable the criminals and justify their crime. Likewise, media figures or clergy who encouraged violence might be included if evidence permits (similar to how Rwandan media figures were prosecuted for incitement).

• Critically, the role of complicit state actors and organizations. While the ICC’s jurisdiction is primarily over individuals, you can name officials from other states or entities who facilitated war crimes. For example, you may present information on Egypt’s role in the Gaza blockade, as aiding and abetting the crime of persecution. Or on U.S. officials’ provision of weapons with knowledge they would be used unlawfully against our families in Gaza and the "West Bank" to engage their responsibility. The platform for the tribe recognizes limitations, many such actors are from states not party to the ICC (like the U.S. + State of Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia). However, since the crimes occurred on the territory of Palestine (which is a State Party to the ICC), the ICC can in principle exercise jurisdiction over any individual regardless of nationality, who perpetrated or contributed to crimes on our ancestorial tribal territory. This is a critical point; complicity is punishable under international criminal law. You are to invoke Article 25(3)(c) of the Rome Statute, which makes aiding and abetting a crime equivalent to perpetration.

Your communications under Article 15 will therefore name and document those “in the corridors of power” who enabled genocide, whether it’s by direct supply of bombs and technology; by deliberately shielding the perpetrators from accountability; or by materially contributing to the destruction and death. The goal is twofold: to pressure the ICC Prosecutor to broaden the ongoing Palestine investigation to include recent genocide and to include all responsible parties, and to build a legal record that can be used in other forums too (universal jurisdiction cases in national courts, UN inquiries, etc.).

It’s important to understand that an ICC Article 15 communication is not a futile exercise. Historically, civil society communications have prompted preliminary examinations and even full investigations. Any group can send such information to the ICC, and the Prosecutor must consider it. Recently, we saw six States Parties (led by South Africa) formally refer the situation in Palestine to the ICC, increasing pressure on the Prosecutor. In December 2023 and January 2024, legal organizations (like Law for Palestine) submitted comprehensive dossiers characterizing Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocidal. You are to align our effort with these, reinforcing them with the Tribe’s unique historical and personal testimonies. Each communication we file will become part of the evidence pool the ICC examines. Even if political hurdles delay justice, these filings signal that the world is watching and that we are marshaling the law against the lies.

Beyond the ICC, your framework must use all legal avenues available:

• UN Mechanisms: Support and supply evidence to the UN Commission of Inquiry on Palestine (established by the Human Rights Council), which can make findings on third-party complicity. Urge friendly states to invoke the Genocide Convention and demand the International Court of Justice adjudicate on states’ duties to prevent and punish genocide (a path already taken with a pending ICJ case initiated by Gambia/South Africa). Notably, the Genocide Convention obligates states to punish not just perpetrators but those complicit in genocide (Article III) – an avenue for holding complicit regimes accountable under international law.

• Universal Jurisdiction Cases: In countries that allow it, we will push for arrest warrants against individuals like polticians, ministers or heads of state for war crimes – this has precedent (some have been issued in the past by courts in Spain, the UK, etc.). Also look at filing suits against officials of allied states under civil tort laws (for instance, against a company executive who supplied banned weaponry, or a foreign official who conspired in a cover-up), these cases raise public awareness even if convictions are rare.

• Corporate Accountability: Many corporations that aided crimes on our people can be legally challenged. Work with human rights lawyers to file OECD complaints against companies, lawsuits where possible, and to pressure states to impose Magnitsky-style sanctions on individuals and entities involved in the atrocity or its denial.

• International Criminal Liability for Disinformation: While novel, the platform will argue that intentional propaganda that seeks to cover up or justify mass atrocities can itself be part of the criminal plan. Just as Nazi propagandists were charged after WWII, today’s inciters and cover-up artists should fear repercussions. If an opportunity arises (e.g. an ICC indictment that includes charges of incitement to genocide), the platform will be ready help you by contributing evidence on how certain media or lobby actors contributed to the crime.

In framing all these legal actions, we draw on a powerful principle: the world has codified “Never Again” into law, and those laws are on our side. Genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes are supreme crimes under international law in 2025 and beyond, subject to universal jurisdiction. There can be no immunity for heads of state or officials (the ICC statute confirms that), and no statute of limitations. Our communications under Article 15 will serve as formal notices to the ICC that if it fails to act, it risks abdicating its duty, as legal scholars have warned. Indeed, voices within the ICC are already under pressure for inaction; the platform will amplify that pressure by rallying global civil society behind your submissions.

It is worth noting that in January 2024, the ICJ (World Court) explicitly found a reasonable basis to believe genocide is occurring – a rare and damning statement. This gives further weight for the ICC to act. Our task is to ensure the Prosecutor, Karim Khan and others in the future, cannot ignore these cries. If needed, we will seek direct meetings with the OTP to hand over evidence and will coordinate with other indigenous tribes and diaspora groups and international NGOs to send a flood of Article 15 communications, a show of unity and resolve.

Parallel to ICC efforts, the platform urges members and families of the tribe to also draft a political framework to pursue accountability through the ICC’s Assembly of States Parties and friendly governments. To lobby countries that are supportive (in South America, Africa, Asia) to raise the issue of Palestine at ICC forums, to demand quicker action from the Prosecutor. If the ICC for political reasons drags its feet, explore pushing for an ad hoc international tribunal or supporting the exercise of universal jurisdiction by specific countries’ courts (for example, we note that South Africa and Namibia have strongly condemned the Gaza genocide; their legal systems might be open to cases if criminals or other officials set foot on their soil).

In summary, the legal-political framework the tribe adopts is one of relentless pursuit of justice on all fronts: using Article 15 communications to officially put complicit actors on notice, invoking international conventions and courts to affirm our indigenous Bedouin claims, and building an international coalition of lawyers, human rights defenders, and supportive states to carry these cases forward. We will footnote every assertion with evidence, as in this very document, to meet the highest standard of proof. The Tribe of Abimelech Platform's aim is to break the cycle of impunity that enables genocidal policies on the ground. The law may be slow, but it has a long reach. Make it reach those who thought they could get away with murdering women and children of the tribe and silencing our indigenous voice.

In conclusion

They thought the world would look away again. Not this time. As our women and children are killed in cold blood, and call on our families to turn grief into power: organize, fight in the courts and the public square, to care for our own, and hold accomplices to account.

These calls to action should be seen as part of a blueprint for the tribe's survival and triumph, declaring that we refuse to be passive victims of state terrorism, terrorism that is supported, funded, and armed by foreign actors and states and actively committing mass atrocities on our indigenous families and tribes. Together, we will shape history. By organizing internally and reaching out externally, by fighting in courts and in the streets of public opinion, by caring for our own and holding traitors to account, we reclaim our agency. This strategic briefing is not meant to sit on a shelf; it is a living document, a plan to adapt and implement together, starting now.

Public statement to all indigenous Palestinian tribes

To every indigenous Palestinian tribe member reading this: your role is crucial. If you are a student, form a campus group to disseminate these truths and push your university to divest. If you are a parent, teach your children our real history, history of the Canaan tribes present with us today, and involve them in solidarity events. If you are a professional, leverage your network to amplify our message in your field. If you are in a refugee camp or under occupation, know that the world will hear your voice through us, and do what you can locally to hold on until relief comes. We especially call on our youth: your energy and creativity will drive this movement; take ownership of it, innovate, and use social media savviness to outmaneuver the censors.

We close with a message of unity and resilience: We are the Tribe of Abimelech. We survived ancient invaders; we survived the catastrophe after catastrophe; we survived genocide. Now, in our unity and action, we will transform our plight into power. Our ancestors’ blood cries out from the soil of Canaan for justice and we shall deliver it. Our children look to us for a future of dignity, and we shall secure it.

Let this strategic briefing be our guide and our promise: We will organize, we will demand, we will campaign and we will achieve justice, recognition, and a free autonomous future for our tribe and all of Palestine.

With unwavering resolve, in solidarity and faith, we move forward together.

Powered by wisp