[MUSIC PLAYING] On April 1, an Israeli drone targeted a convoy of white cars, killing seven World Central Kitchen workers. The group, based in Washington, D.C., had coordinated the convoy’s route with the Israel Defense Forces, or I.D.F. “We were doing the right protocols. We were engaging with the I.D.F. in the way we all should be doing. Like every minute, everybody knew where everybody was.” This process is called deconfliction, a wartime safety system aid groups use around the world to help combatants compile a list of humanitarian locations in order to avoid accidental attacks. – [NON-ENGLISH SPEECH] More than 200 aid workers have been killed in the war in Gaza, according to the United Nations. In the case of the World Central Kitchen, or W.C.K., the I.D.F. called the strike a grave mistake that can happen when fighting an enemy that embeds in the civilian population. “The W.C.K. coordinated everything correctly with the I.D.F. in advance. This operational misidentification and misclassification was the result of internal failures.” But these internal failures were not new. Using visual evidence and internal communications obtained by The Times, we examined strikes on six aid group operations that came under Israeli fire despite using the I.D.F.’s deconfliction system. These humanitarian organizations have a direct line to the Israeli military, and come from Western countries, including Israel’s strongest allies. Some of their operations were clearly marked. “Our flag. We identify it.” Or located in a special area Israel says is safe for civilians. It’s not clear whether the I.D.F. failed to alert their targeting teams about the presence of civilians, or if they decided eliminating a target was more important. But the pattern of attacks shows that in Israel’s battle against Hamas, not even the places with every available avenue of protection are safe from I.D.F. strikes. Israel has said that it has deconflicted thousands of humanitarian convoys successfully. In response to questions from The Times, the I.D.F. said it has been targeting military targets in order to dismantle Hamas, but is committed to all international legal obligations, and has put in place detailed regulations for dealing with sensitive sites. Weeks before the World Central Kitchen strike, a logistics coordinator for another American aid group called ANERA returned home after distributing supplies. Mousa Shawa was still wearing his ANERA vest when an Israeli strike hit the house, killing him; his 6-year-old son, Kareem; and several neighbors. – [NON-ENGLISH SPEECH] Mousa had worked at ANERA for 13 years and felt grateful to have a job that would keep his family safe, his wife, Dua, told The Times. – [NON-ENGLISH SPEECH] ANERA shared emails with The Times showing they’d repeatedly sent the I.D.F. coordinates and photos of their staff shelters, including the two-story residential building where Mousa’s family and others had been living since the war began. Israeli officials confirmed the location was being processed in their system. On March 4, in response to a request from the I.D.F., ANERA sent this email to ensure their warehouses and shelters, including Mousa’s, were still registered in Israel’s deconfliction system. But just four days later, the house was blown apart. Visual evidence shows it was a surgical strike in a dense cluster of houses. All were left essentially untouched, but one, which had only the top floor destroyed. Munitions experts told The Times this kind of targeted damage points to a precision Israeli air-dropped bomb. – [NON-ENGLISH SPEECH] In a statement to The Times, the I.D.F. said it targeted a Hamas terrorist who participated in the October 7 attack, and expects military investigators to examine the strike. ANERA said they’ve received, quote, “No information about who or what may have been targeted, or why,” and want an independent investigation into how a location repeatedly deconflicted with the I.D.F. came under attack. Before the strike on Mousa’s house, Doctors Without Borders said two staff shelters registered with Israel’s deconfliction system came under fire without warning or official explanation. “We’ve seen tracers going towards the sea.” At this shelter on January 8, the aid group said a projectile was fired through the building, killing a 5-year-old girl. – [NON-ENGLISH SPEECH] Photographs show the remnants of an Israeli tank shell lying outside. In February at a different Doctors Without Borders staff shelter, two family members were killed when incoming fire set off an explosion. Seven others, mostly women and children, were injured. Visuals of the aftermath show a large Doctors Without Borders flag clearly marked the building. The entry point of the munition and the damage left behind suggests a medium- to large-caliber weapon, experts said. According to the aid group, it was an Israeli tank shell. The I.D.F. previously told British broadcaster Sky News they fired because they had identified, quote, “Terror activity at the building.” In a statement to The Times, the I.D.F. denied striking the first shelter on January 8 and said the second incident will be reviewed by military investigators. Doctors Without Borders refuted any allegations of terror activity in their facilities, and said the attacks on civilian spaces show that nowhere in Gaza is safe. What went wrong in the deconfliction system is still not clear to the aid group. “This pattern of attacks is either intentional or indicative of reckless incompetence.” The very same questions would be raised in the British Parliament after another strike, which was examined by The Times. On the morning of January 18, this building was rocked by a giant explosion. A bomb landed on the wall around the compound, which was being used to house medical staff from the International Rescue Committee, based in the U.S., and the U.K. group Medical Aid for Palestinians, whose logo is visible on bedding and luggage in the wreckage. Several people were injured. Six medical workers were withdrawn from Gaza. Text messages between aid staff and an I.D.F. official reviewed by The Times show that a month before the attack, the Israeli military was aware of the compound’s location. When the aid worker asks, “So we can bring them to this chalet? It is still safe?” The I.D.F. response is, “Yes.” The compound had two additional layers of protection. British officials, The Times confirmed, used high-level diplomatic channels to ensure the compound was deconflicted. And it was located in the neighborhood that Israel has repeatedly designated as the humanitarian zone, safe for civilians. In a U.N. report reviewed by The Times, investigators indicated the crater and munition debris most likely point to an MK 83, which is a 1,000-pound bomb made in the U.S. “Strikes still took place. So —” British lawmakers demanded answers. “What investigation is being conducted? What has been the response of the I.D.F. to this? Has H.M.G. seen the targeting permissions for that airstrike?” After weeks of high-level pressure — “It was raised by the foreign secretary in his meetings in Israel last week.” Israel provided six different, and often conflicting, explanations, according to the aid groups. Sometimes Israel said they were “not operating in that area.” Other times, they claimed their bomb was attempting to hit a target adjacent to the compound. They also said what struck the compound wasn’t actually a bomb, but a “piece of aircraft fuselage.” The I.D.F. told The Times they did not strike the location at all on January 18. After the strike on the World Central Kitchen convoy, which unleashed global outrage, Israel’s response was much more swift and clear. Israeli officials launched a new humanitarian coordination cell, fired commanders and opened new aid access points. But after months of Israel’s war against Hamas — – [NON-ENGLISH SPEECH] questions remain about to what extent the I.D.F. will hold their fire in places where aid workers or civilians are present.

A transitional council tasked with bringing political stability to Haiti was installed Thursday in the capital of this Caribbean country, which is marred by gang violence and soaring hunger and poverty.

The freshly sworn-in council will appoint a new prime minister and Cabinet, and create a road map to eventually hold long-awaited general elections. Its mandate expires Feb. 7, 2026, when a new president would be sworn in.

ARIEL HENRY RESIGNS AS PRIME MINISTER OF HAITI AS COUNTRY CONTINUES TO FACE DEADLY GANG VIOLENCE

The council is made up of eight men and one woman. Seven members have voting powers.

Here’s a glimpse at who they are:

VOTING MEMBERS

Smith Agustin — Former ambassador to the Dominican Republic, legal expert and sociologist. He is tied to the EDE/RED political party. He recently replaced former nominee Dominique Dupuy, a UNESCO ambassador, who resigned following political attacks and death threats.

Dr. Louis Gérald Gilles — The former senator will be the representative of the signatories of the Dec. 21 agreement within the council. That group is associated with outgoing prime minister Ariel Henry. Gilles is linked to the New Orientation United to Free Haiti party.

Fritz Alphonse Jean — Economist and president of INHOPP (Haitian Institute of Public Policies.) He is a former central bank governor and ex-interim prime minister. He has frequently travelled abroad seeking support from Haitian communities. He is affiliated with a civil-society group known as the Montana Accord.

Edgard Leblanc Fils — Former president of Haiti’s Senate from 1995 to 2000. Fils finished second to Jocelerme Privert in the parliamentary indirect presidential election of February 2016. He is general coordinator of the Organization of the Struggling People. He represents the January 30 political group.

Laurent Saint-Cyr — President of the American Chamber of Commerce in Haiti and executive director at Haiti’s Alternative Insurance Company.

Emmanuel Vertilaire — The judge of the Cap-Haïtien court is a specialist in criminology and anti-corruption efforts. He is linked to the Pitit Desalin political party and the National Peasants’ Network.

Leslie Voltaire — Veteran politician who was a member of the administrations of Jean-Bertrand Aristide and René Preval. His influence dates back more than 30 years. He is a former minister of education and of Haitians living abroad. He ran for the presidency himself in 2010, but claimed later the vote was rigged against him. He is linked to the Fanmi Lavalas party.

OBSERVERS

Régine Abraham — Agronomist and Cabinet director at the Ministry of the Environment. She rose to the position after the resignation of René Jean-Jumeau due to his alleged involvement in the squandering of PetroCaribe funds. She has worked for the World Bank and the European Union.

Frinel Joseph — The evangelical pastor became prominent as treasurer of Haiti’s electoral council, representing the country’s religions. Four years later, in 2020, the Conference of Haitian Pastors accused him of being too focused on his personal political objectives at the council. He and another seven members of the council resigned due to local pressure. The pastor is also famous at home for his lectures on spirituality.

Manfred Weber – European People’s Party (EPP)

Asked to recall the mandate’s biggest success, the chairman of the centre-right EPP group harked back to the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic.

“The biggest achievement for sure was to restart the European economic engine after the corona crisis. The Recovery Resilience Fund was for sure the most important decision in this mandate,” he explained, recalling the EU’s record-smashing €723.8 billion temporary recovery instrument.

Weber also named measures taken to curb climate change among his biggest highlights, despite his EPP party coming under fire for a recent backlash against the Green Deal, the bloc’s landmark set of laws to curb rising global temperatures.

Unsurprisingly, the Parliament’s biggest failure according to Weber was its decision not to uphold the so-called Spitzenkandidaten process, whereby each party fields a lead candidate to bid for the Commission presidency. Weber himself was pushed aside by EU leaders in his bid to preside over the EU’s powerful executive arm back in 2019, which led to Ursula von der Leyen being parachuted into the role despite not officially running.

“We (the parliament) did a big mistake not supporting the Spitzenkandidaten idea, the idea to have a democratic Europe where people know before they go to the elections who the candidate will be,” he explained, censuring his coalition partners for not backing the idea.

Iratxe García Pérez – Socialists and Democrats (S&D)

For the socialists’ president, the term is too full of successes to select one: “It’s been a very intense, exceptional and extraordinary legislature,” she said, listing Brexit, the post-pandemic recovery and the EU response to the war in Ukraine as major achievements.

“We’ve been able to answer all those challenges while maintaining (focus on) Europe’s priorities: spurring on the green agenda, the rule of law and all the policies needed to maintain the European social pillar.”

She also hailed the first EU law to combat violence against women, approved on Wednesday, as a momentous achievement, despite its failure to include any provisions on rape after pushback from member states.

When asked about the mandate’s low points, García Pérez denounced the bloc’s failure to conclude the embattled Nature Restoration Law, the EU’s plan to reverse biodiversity loss in at least 20% of the EU’s land and sea by the end of the decade. The bill is currently on the brink of collapse as member states withdraw support.

Philippe Lamberts – The Greens

The Greens group’s co-president, who bid an emotional farewell to the hemicycle on Wednesday after 15 years as an MEP, told Euronews he was most proud of the parliament’s achievements in shaping the Green Deal, which he said were “the first steps only in the transition of the EU in trying to meet (…) our share in meeting the planetary boundaries.”

“It’s far from complete, despite what many say,” he added, in a clear nod to the right-leaning groups in the parliament.

The first of two failures from Lamberts’ point of view were the new fiscal rules, designed to return to tighter fiscal controls following laxer rules post-pandemic, which were rubber-stamped this week. He described the new norms as a “fiscal straitjacket” that will make the Green Deal and supporting Ukraine “financially impossible.”

He also spurned the asylum and migration pact, the sweeping overhaul of the EU’s migration and asylum policy, which he believes “will not solve anything” and is “just making a joke of the European values.”

Nicola Procaccini – European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR)

The co-president of the right-wing conservative ECR group hailed the parliament’s response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as one of the mandate’s biggest successes.

“At that moment, the European Union understood the danger,” he explained, hailing the 13 package of sanctions against Russia and the bloc’s unprecedented donations of economic and military aid.

He added that had the EU not unwaveringly backed the people of Ukraine, the bloc would have risked triggering a chain of events that could have “set fire to the whole of Europe.”

For Procaccini, developing the Green Deal “without interacting with the people” it impacts was the parliament’s greatest error. In their manifesto agreed Tuesday, his ECR group vowed to turn the Green Deal “on its head.”

Marco Zanni – Identity and Democracy (ID)

For the parliament’s far-right group, the biggest win of the mandate was having brought its priorities to the agenda of the parliament, despite being a “minority group,” its president told Euronews.

ADVERTISEMENT

Zanni named immigration, the “protection” of farmers and a more “pragmatic approach” to the Green Deal as some of the issues it had brought to the table.

“In short, we have managed to modify the agenda of the parliament,” he claimed.

He said that there were “many issues and failures” in the parliament’s work, but named the chamber’s long-standing “cordon sanitaire,” the firewall designed to ward off the far-right from wielding much influence, as its biggest downfall.

“It is a pity that there are still some here who believe that some (parties) should be excluded just because they have different ideas,” Zanni said.