Jump to content

Talk:International reactions to the Israel–Hamas war

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 37.252.80.255 (talk) at 18:23, 8 October 2023 (→‎Political parties/figures: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Threeway categorization should be removed

The article is currently divided into "Expressed support for Israel", "Expressed support for Palestine" and urged restraint. This categorization is misleading as many countries fit into more than one category. Secondly, many countries have blamed Israel for the violence, without explicitly expressing solidarity with the Palestinians. We should not try to categorize the reactions.

If we want to divide the reactions into sections, we can do so by region, like Middle East, Europe etc.VR talk 18:23, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

agreed Abo Yemen✉ 18:51, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please, undo that so it will be easy to understand. AhmedAhzaam787 (talk) 12:29, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
i didn't change it btw Abo Yemen✉ 12:35, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Novara Media

Why are we including a small alternative British news publication's opinion on the situation in the section on "Other political/militant entities"? It feels like undue weight to me. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:53, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would say this should be removed unless there are third-party sources to point to notability of it, or unless - and this should not happen in a free society - there is a legal response to it. As of yet, there is neither. Including this would justify including the self-published opinions of all publications or individuals, which is WP:INDISCRIMINATE Unknown Temptation (talk) 19:52, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I previously removed it, but @WeatherWriter reverted my edit with the summary We do when reporters are in support for the attack. All aspects need to be covered for a neutral POV (WP:NPOV). I left a message on their talk page, but they haven't responded yet. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 19:53, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have self-reverted the section. I do not believe it violates UNDUE weight as a reporter, without any bio stating opinions are their own and not the company, but rather a bio stating they report for the media organization, supports the conflict, who is based half-way ‘round the world. That said, it seems my belief is not with the majority, so the info has been removed. That said, as pointed out by Unknown Temptation, if a legal response occurs, I will re-add the information and would be extremely strong to keep it on there as no editor could justify an UNDUE weight with it at that point. Until that hypothetical situation though, it is removed. Cheers y’all! The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 20:13, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Flags, flags everywhere

DO WE REALLY NEED THEM?! 2804:14D:5C32:4673:220:CC5E:2105:CE2B (talk) 20:30, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is a general precedent for including flags in these types of articles. Partofthemachine (talk) 21:35, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, the flags are despised by editors. Remove them. Abductive (reasoning) 05:12, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think we should keep the flags, but please don't just remove them. Turn the lists into tables instead, and leave out the flags. Renerpho (talk) 16:06, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nigeria

This post shows The Ministry of Foreign Affairs / Yusuf Tuggar's statement on the Gaza-Israel conflict that calls for "de-escalation and ceasefire", although it will need a better source. https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=632489302391713 — Preceding unsigned comment added by JaxJaguar2 (talk • contribs) 20:32, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I found a source that mentions the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' response on the conflict. [1] The source I linked to is listed as a "[g]enerally reliable source for Nigeria-related information". Wikipedia:WikiProject_Nigeria/Nigerian_sources JaxJaguar2 (talk) 01:17, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Done, using the leadership.ng reference. Renerpho (talk) 04:57, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 October 2023

Add new Zealand to countries who urged both countries to exercise restrainthttps://twitter.com/NanaiaMahuta/status/1710726458413650075?t=ujmsEoQyLioCkfk336gKzQ&s=19 Fnfp (talk) 21:51, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Renerpho (talk) 04:32, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Moldova

Could someone add Moldova? Sources for president's reaction [2]. Sources for the prime minister's reaction [3] [4]. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 22:29, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Someone who speaks Moldovan has to look at this. I could use Google translate, but I am absolutely not going to cite a computer-generated translation in an article about such a sensitive topic. Renerpho (talk) 04:49, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Here are the president's,[1][2] and prime-minister's[3][4] reactions on Twitter/X in English and the report in Moldovan news. Also FYI Moldovans speak Romanian. WikiEnjoyer123 (talk) 08:53, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Renerpho (talk) 15:38, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I have no access to the second source (the jpost.com article). Renerpho (talk) 05:38, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://twitter.com/sandumaiamd/status/1710565882315915630
  2. ^ https://tv8.md/2023/07/10/sandu-condamna-valul-de-violenta-din-israel-ingrozita-gandurile-mele-alaturi-de-cei-care-se-apara-de-atacurile-nemiloase/241248
  3. ^ https://twitter.com/DorinRecean/status/1710577409752248669
  4. ^ https://tv8.md/2023/07/10/moldova-solidara-cu-israelul-recean-violenta-brutala-impotriva-civililor-nevinovati-trebuie-sa-inceteze/241239

Celebrating Protests

In Berlin the attacks where celebrated, im sure that there are more celebration protests around the world, should these be mentioned in the article? https://web.archive.org/web/20231007231849/https://www.tagesspiegel.de/berlin/terror-unterstutzer-feierten-angriff-aus-israel-polizei-lost-propalastinensischen-aufmarsch-in-berlin-neukolln-auf-10588360.html FSbiran (talk) 01:07, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the article should include a section about non-government reactions, including protests, especially where those are in contrast to the official government response. Renerpho (talk) 04:41, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Will make a demonstration chapter. Borgenland (talk) 04:48, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'm sure Berlin is not unique in this, and I hesitate to add it as the single entry. Maybe we can collect here before giving the (almost certainly false) impression that Germany was somehow special in this regard. Renerpho (talk) 05:00, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe good to start with demos in the Middle East that were reported earlier. Borgenland (talk) 05:24, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Borgenland: If you have references for those, that's a good start. I have collected a few reports from Europe and the United States below, and a (hopefully reliable?) link to planned events from around the world. Renerpho (talk) 05:31, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I recall there was mention in the mother article. Will come back to it since I’m out right now. Borgenland (talk) 05:38, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
More from other countries below. Feel free to add to the list... Renerpho (talk) 05:21, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • A list of planned protests as of 7 October, according to the Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network, can be found here: [5] This includes links to the organizers of the individual events. I do not know how reliable this source is, and which of these events actually happen(ed). Renerpho (talk) 05:28, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Berlin/Germany: Pro-Palestinian activists and left-wing groups celebrate attacks on Israel.[6] Renerpho (talk) 05:21, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • London/England: Police increases patrols in London after reports of Israel attack celebrations. Immigration minister Robert Jenrick shares video posted by TV presenter Rachel Riley of people waving Palestinian flags in west London.[7][8] Renerpho (talk) 05:21, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • New York/United States: US pro-Palestinian groups applaud Hamas terror onslaught, plan support rallies. Student groups backed by New York chapter of socialist party organize demonstrations in approval of attack.[9] Renerpho (talk) 05:21, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Paris/France: Demonstrators gathered in Paris to demand that Palestinians be given their human rights and that Western governments end their complicity with the "Tel Aviv regime".[10] Renerpho (talk) 05:21, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There were demonstrations in Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, Turkey and Yemen [11] Abo Yemen✉ 14:20, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have added the protests in London and New York. The link to the protest in Paris above is from a source that's generally considered unreliable, so I haven't added that. Renerpho (talk) 15:34, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kenya

The Principal Secretary for Foreign Affairs Korir Sing’Oei said that “Kenya strongly condemns the despicable terror attack against Israel and regrets the carnage and senseless loss of life”. X, [12] The Standard (Kenya), [13] JaxJaguar2 (talk) 01:34, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Renerpho (talk) 04:24, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I think 'contry' in the first sentence should be corrected to 'country'. JaxJaguar2 (talk) 13:35, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thank you. Renerpho (talk) 15:35, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Twitter as source

The article currently asks for better sources in multiple places where we link to statements made by government officials on Twitter (example). Do we really need different sources though, given that those Twitter accounts clearly have the authority to speak for their respective country, and this article is mainly about those reactions? Renerpho (talk) 04:01, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ideally, yes. Non-Twitter sources are preferable per WP:TWITTERREF. Tomorrow and tomorrow (talk) 04:34, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WP:USERGENERATED Does not really apply here. These are government accounts, and Twitter is merely used as the platform to make (official) statements. Renerpho (talk) 04:46, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
They are still primary sources and need secondary sources for analysis. Primary sources are not suitable for Wikipedia. Abductive (reasoning) 05:13, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. WP:TWITTER-EL also raises the good point that Tweets are easily deleted with no record. Furthermore having news articles demonstrates the notability of the reaction/statement. So ideally, we should not solely rely on Twitter refs. That said, with fast changing current events like this one, we can't always get the 'ideal scenario'. Hence why the status quo is a good balance. Tomorrow and tomorrow (talk) 05:16, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, agreed. Hopefully the tags will encourage the addition of secondary sources, should they exist. Renerpho (talk) 05:24, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with most points raised, but ordinary webpages also regularly get deleted. Fortunately, tweets are easily saved for the future with WP:WAYBACK. Fairly easy to do manually, but I presume one could get a bot to do it too (e.g., this). This is not really all that different from ordinary webpages. RN1970 (talk) 14:20, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@RN1970: https://iabot.wmcloud.org currently times out on this page because there are too many links to archive. Renerpho (talk) 17:35, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mexico

The Mexican Foreign Relations Secretariat issued an statement in its official X account condemning the terrorist attack suffered by Israel and called for an immediate ceasefire.

Here's the link to the post: https://twitter.com/SRE_mx/status/1710683465224475089?t=vSyyLe1um4ja9WleU1Vi-Q&s=19 2806:109F:10:9E6E:FD35:B055:7DD5:EE66 (talk) 06:41, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the translation:
"The SRE condemns the attacks suffered by the people of Israel with the unfortunate loss of human lives. Mexico sends its condolences to the victims' families.
At the same time, it makes a call to the ending of this meaningless violence, with the purpose of avoiding an escalation that causes bigger damage and suffering to the civilian population.
Mexico considers necessary to retake the procedure of direct negotiations in good faith between both parts, leading to a fair, plentiful, and definite peace agreement. The previous statement must be between within the two-state solution, recognizing the right of Israel and Palestine yo coexist in peace, inside safe borders agreed mutually and internationally recognized, in congruence with the resolutions adopted by the United Nations" 2806:109F:10:9E6E:FD35:B055:7DD5:EE66 (talk) 07:10, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Third party source provided. Looks like we can add Mexico to "Expressed solidarity with Israel, but called for peace negotiations". --ManhattanChase (talk) 17:57, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

South Korea

South Korea, a U.S. ally, issued a statement strongly condemning what it called "indiscriminate" attacks on Israel from Gaza. "The government expresses its deep concern over the large number of civilian casualties caused by these attacks," the statement added.

<https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-relations/Israel-crisis-sparks-worry-in-Asia-from-India-to-Thailand>

On the 7th, the government criticized Hamas, the armed political faction that governs the Gaza Strip in Palestine, for carrying out an airstrike against Israel.

"We strongly condemn the indiscriminate attacks against Israel from the Gaza Strip, including rocket attacks" the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a spokesperson statement, and urge them to stop immediately.

<https://www.yna.co.kr/amp/view/AKR20231007059800504> 220.126.160.216 (talk) 12:23, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Montenegro

President condemns the Hamas attack and expressed condolences to the Israeli victims https://rtcg.me/vijesti/drustvo/475512/milatovic-osudio-napad-hamasa-na-izrael-.html 79.140.150.50 (talk) 07:31, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Malaysia reaction

Malaysia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs responded by a tweet of a press release, stating their deep concern over the latest escalation of violence in the Middle East. They call for the further loss of life, suffering, and destruction to be stopped and both parties should exercise utmost restraint and de-escalate.

The MFA states that Palestine has the right to live in a state of peace within its own internationally recognized borders, based on the pre-1967 border, with East Jerusalem as its capital. They also criticize the disproportionate treatment and flagrant hypocrisy in dealing with any regime that practices apartheid and blatantly violates human rights and international law, other than stating that Palestine has been subjected to prolonged illegal occupation, blockade and sufferings, the desecration of the Al-Aqsa, as well as the political of dispossession at the hands of Israel as the occupier.

Official tweet usable as a citation: https://twitter.com/MalaysiaMFA/status/1710912526454788251

Malaysia's Prime Minister, Anwar Ibrahim, states that the international response is biased when it comes to the violence and oppression against the Palestinians. He also mentions Israel's illegal occupation of Palestinian land and the consequences of it which leads to the conflict. He also states that Malaysia will keep its solidarity with the Palestinians.

Tweet to cite with: https://twitter.com/anwaribrahim/status/1710973713699733893

BlueHelvetical (talk) 08:43, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

bahrain response

should add the bahraini's forwign ministry response, taken from their website:

The Kingdom of Bahrain is closely following the developments taking place between Palestinian groups and Israeli forces, leading to an increase in violence and armed attacks that claimed the lives of a number of people and injured others. It stresses the need for de-escalation among all parties to preserve the lives of people. 213.137.73.11 (talk) 11:47, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

please provide sources Abo Yemen✉ 14:21, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Islamist organizations"

I'm not sure why we have a section on Islamist organizations[14], and is that even accurate? For example, Al-Azhar is listed under that category, but is it really Islamist? I would change that to "Muslim organizations". But that seems imbalanced as we have nothing for Jewish and Christian organizations which have also reacted.VR talk 12:30, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think Islamic is a better term. Borgenland (talk) 13:11, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Calling some of these "Islamic organizations" seems at least as inaccurate. I have removed the entry on Al-Azhar, as the least inaccurate option (in my opinion). I think the intention of the section was not to single out Islam, but to specifically talk about Islamists. If we decide to change the title to "Islamic", we should indeed include relevant reactions by Jewish and Christian organisations, as VR has suggested. Renerpho (talk) 16:02, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Just for clarity, Borgenland has just split the section, listing Al-Azhar under "Religious organizations", together with entries about pope Francis and others. I think I can support this solution. Renerpho (talk) 16:17, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 8 October 2023

International reactions to the October 2023 Gaza–Israel conflict → Reactions to the October 2023 Gaza–Israel conflict – Move makes room for a more inclusive article, in which Palestinian and Israeli "local" reactions can be added, or create a new separate article for the same purpose. I am in favor of either. Makeandtoss (talk) 13:51, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - local reactions are a part of the main article Abo Yemen✉ 14:21, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It won’t be too long where it’ll become too long and needs forking. Makeandtoss (talk) 15:01, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - That would allow a flood of numerous non-significant opinions from media personalities. Ergzay (talk) 14:32, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So? Reactions to the Russian invasion of Ukraine Makeandtoss (talk) 15:00, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If they are non-significant then they can be removed as not notable. In cases where they are significant, the article currently doesn't offer an easy way to add them. Renerpho (talk) 16:14, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. No need to have this article be moved; domestic reactions to the conflict are probably best handled in the main article at this moment. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 15:01, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, but support in case the main article is forked. Renerpho (talk) 16:08, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And please don't take that as an invitation to fork it. I don't think that is necessary at this point. There is some chance that this changes by the time this RM closes, in which case my vote should be counted as "support". Renerpho (talk) 16:09, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

South Africa's reaction

South Africa has called "for the immediate cessation of violence, restraint, and peace between Israel and Palestine" and " expresses its grave concern over the recent devastating escalation in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The new conflagration has arisen from the continued illegal occupation of Palestine land, continued settlement expansion, desecration of the Al Aqsa Mosque and Christian holy sites, and ongoing oppression of the Palestinian people. The region is in desperate need of a credible peace process that delivers on the calls of a plethora of previous UN resolutions for a two-state solution and a just and comprehensive peace between Israel and Palestine." so the reaction of South Africa should be added (source: https://www.dirco.gov.za/) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:4802:41F:2F60:91D4:3928:AE60:628B (talk) 14:55, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Update on this: the ANC has publicly expressed their support for Palestine.
<https://www.news24.com/news24/politics/political-parties/anc-backs-palestine-actions-in-israel-that-have-left-hundreds-dead-thousands-wounded-20231008> Seven Train (talk) 15:13, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Renerpho (talk) 15:49, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Map of the international community's stances

I think that map is useful, but is there a way to clarify that these are official positions? Representing nations as monolithic blocks can be misleading. Renerpho (talk) 16:23, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Other countries' reactions

Cuba, Panama, Venezuela, Peru, Bolivia, Guatemala, Ecuador, and Mexico, I hope someone can add them to the list Horizon Sunset (talk) 16:35, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Armenia

The context of the war last month would be worth noting as "having recently faced...". armenia is also not blue on the map. Condemn the violence and de-escalate.37.252.80.255 (talk) 18:13, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

saudi

the saudi's are clearly more condemning of israel. Which is VERY pertinent in talk of setting up relations (which is likely off now).37.252.80.255 (talk) 18:17, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Political parties/figures

Hezbollah are part of the ruling coalition in lebanon and ansarullah are partly ruling in yemen, as well as trump being a candidate in the election (even if opposition). The three should be under their countries' colors (with Lebanon actually being IN government). Not sure about the status of the Iraqi group. If not in govt, it can be opposition or religious or even just stay there.37.252.80.255 (talk) 18:23, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:International_reactions_to_the_Israel–Hamas_war&oldid=1179222231"