This content is for members only. Visit the site and log in/register to read.
In Gaza, everyone is struggling to survive. For disabled people in Gaza, that struggle is multiplied. Rabab Nawfal and Suha Maqat, both wheelchair users, were champion athletes on Palestine’s national teams before Israel’s US-backed genocidal war. Two days before it began, they were playing qualifiers to represent Palestine abroad.
In this TRNN documentary report, they describe living through famine, fleeing bombardment in wheelchairs that no longer work, and asking for help that never comes. With 81% of Gaza’s roads damaged or destroyed and the UN documenting thousands of amputations, Israel is not only making life impossible for disabled Palestinians; it is creating a new generation of them.
Editor’s Note: This documentary report was filmed in Gaza City three weeks before the ceasefire in Gaza was shakily implemented beginning on October 10, 2025. Since the “ceasefire” began, Israeli forces have killed over 1,300 Palestinians, including 301 children, according to the Gaza Ministry of Health.
Credits:
Suha Maqat, Palestinian Athlete:
I’m in a wheelchair—how am I going to escape?
Rabab Nawfal, Palestinian Athlete:
There were days when we ate animal food, bird food.
Suha Maqat, Palestinian Athlete:
I lost my eye. What more do you want?
Rabab Nawfal, Palestinian Athlete:
My dreams have been shattered.
Narrator:
In Gaza, everyone is struggling to survive. But for people with disabilities, that struggle is multiplied. Rabab Nawfal and Suha Maqat – both wheelchair users – were champion athletes before this war.
Rabab Nawfal, Palestinian Athlete:
I’m one of those people who didn’t go to the south. I lived through famine twice. I lived it twice. No one asked after me. There were days when we didn’t eat anything. There were days when we ate animal food, bird food. We ate everything—animals, birds. Even those things were expensive, and then they were cut off. The day they were cut off, we stopped eating anything.
Ramadan came during the famine. We didn’t eat anything. A long day passed, and we didn’t eat anything. We used to crave drinking water. We used to crave a piece of bread. We were hoping that the famine would never come back. But unfortunately, it did—and it’s still coming back.
We’ve suffered a lot in life. I was abandoned. No one took responsibility for me. My mother and father used to take care of me, but they left. These days, my brother takes care of me—and he is injured. My life is ruined. No one is with me. No one cares. And the one person standing by me is injured. He can barely carry his own family.
When we were displaced, he couldn’t help us. He wasn’t able. For people with disabilities like me, it’s been difficult to live through this war. Those who are not disabled can maybe manage their lives. They can move, walk long distances—but I can’t.
Suha Maqat, Palestinian Athlete:
The closest people to me abandoned me—they didn’t stand by me. They left me to fend for myself. I feel like I live in a forest with wolves and monsters. I can’t. I try to make things work,
but I can’t. I’m mentally exhausted. The circumstances of this war are incredibly difficult. Even the word displacement is difficult for the injured and disabled.
When we left, my brother was injured and my sister was in a bad state. Even though he was injured, he was pushing my sister, as I pushed myself along. I got stuck in the sand, and they wanted to bomb the building next to us. It was the most difficult moment. I said to myself, now I’m going to be killed. It was the hardest moment of my life.
I thought—how will I escape? How will I, in my wheelchair, escape? How am I going to get out? My brother was injured and couldn’t carry me. I thought, I’m done; there’s no life for me anymore. That’s it. I’m going to be killed.
Rabab Nawfal, Palestinian Athlete:
The hardest thing I’ve experienced in this war has been displacement. I woke up one day and saw the Israelis in front of us. I was all by myself. I rushed out, but I couldn’t continue. There was a lot of shelling, shooting, bombs. It was a miracle I got out alive. It happened again and again—the same scenario repeated a thousand times.
Narrator:
Both Suha and Rabab rely entirely on their wheelchairs to move. Without them, the most basic tasks become impossible. Israel’s blockade has meant that access to this crucial item has been cut off.
Even with functioning wheelchairs, with 81% of roads in Gaza now damaged or destroyed, access and movement is extremely limited.
Rabab Nawfal, Palestinian Athlete:
There are no wheelchairs in Gaza. And without a wheelchair, I can’t move. The wheelchair takes me to my medicine, my food, my drink—I need it for everything. Right now, my chair is broken. I’ve lost all means of life.
Suha Maqat, Palestinian Athlete:
As you can see, my chair is broken. I push myself in it, I fall off all the time, I cut and bruise my legs. If someone kind is around, then I can move. Otherwise, I can’t.
We requested wheelchairs, but it was no use. We asked and asked, and they said no. Rabab Nawfal, Palestinian Athlete:
My life before the war was very beautiful. I was a champion of Palestine’s disabled national team for strength games—basketball, tennis. I used to do all kinds of sports that suited my disability. I was a success story. I was a hero. These days, I feel worthless. Nothing in life. I can’t even get from here to there. I can’t move from here to there in a wheelchair. My life is
gone. There is no life.
These days, we only dream of having the most basic things: flour, water. The simplest things—we can’t get. Drinking water—we can’t get it.
Suha Maqat, Palestinian Athlete:
Suha before is different from Suha today. I used to be a champion of Palestine. Today, I’m nothing. Today, just a daughter who needs her mother—who needs her mother to help her.
Rabab Nawfal, Palestinian Athlete:
Two days before the war, we were playing qualifiers to represent Palestine internationally. But we didn’t manage it. On the day of the championship, the war erupted. So our dreams are gone. All our dreams are gone. My dreams have been shattered.
I wanted to raise my son. I wanted to raise him well and teach him. Before the war, I wanted to enroll him in karate. I wanted him to become something. I couldn’t. I wanted him to be into sports like me—to become a doctor. I wanted him to grow up and help me in the future. But my dreams were shattered. I couldn’t do any of it. I can’t do anything.
Narrator:
According to the UN 4,800 amputations of limbs had been documented since the beginning of the war. Ten children were losing one or both legs every day. Gaza had become home to the largest group of child amputees in modern history. Not only is Israel making the lives of existing disabled people impossible, it is also creating an entirely new generation of people with disabilities.
Suha Maqat, Palestinian Athlete:
Gaza has become a city of ghosts. There is no life in Gaza. As you can see—look at how people are living. On sand! How can people live on sand? How can they occupy Gaza? How?
We want peace of mind. We don’t want to lose any more loved ones. We’ve lost enough. Is it not enough that I lost my eye? What’s left? What more do you want? I lost my eye—what more do you want? What else should I lose? Nothing’s left. There’s nothing left in this world that I can lose. My family has left. I wish I could see my mother. See my father.
Rabab Nawfal, Palestinian Athlete:
Life has become unbearable. No matter how much I talk, I can’t describe what I am feeling or the life we are living. I used to be someone. Now I am nothing.
This content is for members only. Visit the site and log in/register to read.
Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor find themselves at the center of a political clash involving the Israeli Prime Minister, two government ministers, and top intelligence officials. The catalyst is *Naza*, the documentary they presented at the 83rd Venice International Film Festival—a film that, in just a few days, transformed them from acclaimed filmmakers into targets of accusations of treason.
After declaring he would seek to revoke their Israeli citizenship, Israeli Culture Minister Miki Zohar made a fresh appeal to Shin Bet chief David Zini, urging him to investigate how various materials were obtained. The film features testimony from 24 anonymous Israeli intelligence soldiers denouncing the techniques used by the Israeli military to kill civilians in Gaza.
Israel has rejected the film’s content, reiterating that it makes every effort to avoid civilian casualties despite many previous UN reports on war crimes and genoicide.
DEVIL NETANYAHU’s HOLOCAUST. Explosive UN findings: “Israel DELIBERATELY TARGETED Gaza CHILDREN”
In a letter to Zini, Zohar asks the agency to investigate whether there was any illegal use of sensitive or classified information.
“When anonymous sources are used to spread serious, false accusations against the State of Israel and the IDF during wartime, it is imperative to establish who is behind these allegations,” Zohar stated. “I have asked the head of the Shin Bet to investigate the source of the material, who provided it, and whether hostile elements were involved,” the minister added.
Following the political controversy, various Zionist extremists gathered in a threatening manner outside the filmmaker’s parents’ home.
Immediately after the documentary film was presented in Venice, Culture Minister Miki Zohar called the film “vile” and announced plans to “act immediately” to revoke the Israeli citizenship of Abraham and Szor.
He accused them of “treason against the State” and of a “self-loathing” that drives them to harm their own homeland in order to garner applause from “antisemites around the world.” Zohar stated that he had contacted senior officials at the Ministry of the Interior and the Population Authority to evaluate revoking their citizenship on the grounds of a breach of loyalty to the country.
Joining the chorus of accusations were Army Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir—who claimed the film relied on “blood libels and deliberate distortions of reality”—and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, who called on the pair to leave the country.
Finally, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu linked the case to broader “antisemitic incitement” and lashed out at opposition political forces.
The Israeli military largely rejected the documentary’s content, maintaining that it could not verify the identities or military roles of the anonymous sources and reiterating that it does everything possible to avoid civilian casualties.
IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir on Monday instructed the military’s top legal official to examine legal action against the film “NAZA” and those involved in it, saying it defamed the military, and separately ordered an investigation into the leaking of classified material used in its production.
His comments came shortly after IDF Spokesperson Brig. Gen. Effie Defrin issued a statement inviting the documentary’s filmmakers to allow military officials to view the film in full so that the IDF could respond in a “substantive manner.” So far, the military has only reacted to clips of the movie posted online, and has not yet seen the full documentary.
The 80-minute film by Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor — whose title is a Hebrew acronym meaning collateral damage — claims to explore AI-powered strikes by Israel in the Gaza Strip it alleges have led to civilian deaths, including testimonies from 24 purported Israeli intelligence soldiers.
In the days following the award, Yuval Abraham recounted deleting his social media profiles after being inundated with offensive photomontages targeting both him and his mother; he openly admitted his fear: “Israel is my home… but now, obviously, I am afraid I won’t be able to return.” Abraham had also rejected the idea of positioning himself as a voice of moral superiority, explaining that, as Israelis, they all feel—to some extent—co-responsible for what occurred in Gaza.
The process of stripping Abraham and Szor of their Israeli citizenship—which they hold by birth—is neither swift nor within the sole authority of the Minister of Culture, who lacks the legal power to order it.
Under Israeli law, citizenship can only be revoked in limited cases involving a proven “breach of loyalty” to the State—as established by a 2022 Supreme Court ruling. The procedure requires the Minister of the Interior to submit a request to the Minister of Justice, followed by final approval from a panel of judges. It is, therefore, a lengthy and uncertain process—one that has never before been applied to a case involving journalism or filmmaking.
A more immediate prospect, at least from an investigative standpoint, is Zohar’s request for the Shin Bet to investigate the origins of the material used in the film.
Such an inquiry could lead to investigations into potential offenses related to the disclosure of classified information, carrying criminal consequences not only for the filmmakers but also for the military sources who collaborated anonymously.
Compounding this is the immediate concern for the two creators’ personal safety—a fear fueled by past incidents, such as the assault on Hamdan Ballal following the Oscar win for *No Other Land*.
RELATED POSTS
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, while condemning the Israeli government’s plans to advance settlement construction in the E1 area of the West Bank (Judea and Samaria), stopped short of proposing a ban on trade with the Israeli communities in the area, in contrast with an initiative pushed by some EU member states and EU’s foreign policy Kaja Kallas, writes European Jewish Press, Yossi Lempkowicz.
She spoke on Wednesday (16 September) during her annual State of Union address to the European Parliament in Strasbourg.
Von der Leyen received a round of applause for condemning the Israeli government’s plans to advance construction in the E1 area, a strategi area between Jerusalem and Maale Adumim. ”The Israeli government’s decision to advance the illegal E1 settlement projects is unacceptable,” she said, after deploring the ”deep suffering in Gaza and unchecked settler violence in the West Bank” which, she said, ”have deeply affected Europeans.”
”It is painful for many Europeans that member states have been unable to build the necessary majorities for a unified response,” she added, noting that ”some member states have been unable to build the necessary majorities for a unified response. Some member states have moved ahezd. Others are considering doing so.”
A group of over 100 MEPs, mainly from S&D, The Left, the Greens and Renew groups, had written a letter to the President of the European Commission to make an “urgent appeal for a Commission legislative proposal to ban EU trade with illegal Israeli settlements”.
Until now, EU member states are divided about the proposal to ban trade from Judea and Samaria.. Countries like Slovenia and Czechia, but also Germany and Italy, have blocked such sanctions.
Von der Leyen highlighted the Commission’s efforts to mobilise funding for the Palestinian Authority and for the reconstruction of Gaza.
‘’We have delivered more aid than anyone else. Through the Palestine Donor Group and the Team Gaza Initiative, we have brought together 65 delegations. Together we have sanctioned nearly 1 billion Euro to rebuild Gaza and support a modern Palestinian Authority,’’ she noted.
She concluded her statement on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by stressing that ‘’ Europe supports the right to self-defense for Israel.’’
”The Palestinian people have an equal right to live in safety and in dignity. It is Europe’s role to keep the blame of the two-state solution alive,’’ the EU Commission President added.
Yossi Lempkowicz is Editor-in-chief of European Jewish Press (EJP).
On 18 August, Israel launched eight airstrikes against the Abu al-Duhur air base in northwestern Syria, located approximately 70 kilometres from the Turkish border. Israel also reportedly informed the United States that Turkey might be preparing to deploy radar systems and air defense equipment at the base, a move that could significantly alter the regional balance of power. Turkey is expected to respond to the Israeli strikes, raising the prospect of direct military confrontation between the two countries inside Syria,
As it stands, Turkey's growing tensions with Israel over issues including Gaza, Iran, and Lebanon are increasingly difficult to ignore. Turkey also possesses substantial military capabilities, which were originally intended in large part to strengthen NATO's ability to counter Russia but are now increasingly being used to pursue Ankara's own strategic interests, including those that are not aligned with the geopolitical preferences of the U.S. and Israel. Turkey is therefore demonstrating a degree of strategic autonomy that increasingly extends beyond the traditional constraints of the NATO framework. This development is a clear example of the broader process of regional polarization.
Regional polarization, in fact, creates the conditions for the emergence of regional hegemony. It reflects a tendency for countries within a particular region to gravitate toward a dominant power. That power, in turn, simultaneously expands its influence and seeks to establish a new regional order. Regional hegemony does not emerge out of nowhere. Instead, it develops gradually through a process of regional polarization.
Turkey is a prominent example of this process. Israel can also be viewed through the same lens, as can Saudi Arabia, which has been working steadily to strengthen its position and influence in the region. Beyond the Middle East, India and Japan are also moving in this direction. Iran, meanwhile, remains an important regional power despite currently being consumed by war.
Against this broader trend of regional polarization, China presents a particularly unique case. China's current strategic direction appears to differ substantially from the logic of regional polarization. Instead, Beijing continues to place considerable emphasis on building relationships among major powers at the global level. In this context, the idea of a G2 remains an attractive strategic concept for China, while U.S. President Donald Trump also appears to be seeking to leverage this possibility in developing a special relationship with China.
In Asia, India is already an unmistakable example of a country pursuing greater regional strategic autonomy. Japan is another crucial case. The election of Sanae Takaichi can be interpreted as an indication that Japan's own process of regional polarization is beginning to take shape. However, because of its security treaty with the U.S. and continuing domestic political opposition, Japan remains reluctant to openly acknowledge such a trajectory.
Nevertheless, Japan is likely to move progressively toward greater regional strategic autonomy. This would mean that Tokyo increasingly seeks to exercise influence in Asia regardless of whether Washington fully supports such a development. As a result, contradictions between Japan and the U.S. could become more pronounced across economic, financial, and political spheres. Japan's ability to say "no" to the U.S. may gradually become a practical reality.
Once Japan gains greater freedom to articulate and pursue an independent strategic position, it may also seek to improve relations with China. In this sense, Japan's increasing regional autonomy could ultimately prove beneficial to Japan-China bilateral relations over the longer term.
Perhaps the most important feature of regional polarization is that conflict among countries is inevitable. Such conflicts are not necessarily an anomaly. Rather, they are a natural expression of the polarization process. No country is willing to readily acknowledge another as the principal power or dominant pole within a region. Regional leadership therefore has to be established through competition, strategic maneuvering, and, at times, confrontation.
This dynamic applies to Japan, China, India, Turkey, and other emerging regional powers. As a result, international disputes are likely to become increasingly intense. The underlying reason is the growing competition for regional influence amid the erosion of the existing global order.
First, countries increasingly perceive an opportunity to become the dominant pole within their respective regions. Second, no major regional power is willing to accept another country's unquestioned leadership or submit to its influence. Confrontation, friction, and strategic rivalry therefore become increasingly difficult to avoid.
Ultimately, the countries that possess sufficient resources, strategic capabilities, and the ability to respond effectively to changing circumstances will have the greatest chance of emerging as regional hegemons. The struggle for regional dominance is therefore not merely a contest of military strength. This is also a test of economic resources, political resilience, strategic judgment, and the ability to shape a new regional order.
This content is for members only. Visit the site and log in/register to read.
Dans les médias officiels iraniens tout comme dans la rhétorique gouvernementale, cette expression désigne l'ennemi du moment, à savoir la coalition formée par de nombreux pays occidentaux, dont les États-Unis, Israël et plusieurs régimes arabes, notamment les signataires des accords Abraham (Émirats arabes unis, Bahreïn, Maroc et Soudan), qui normalisent leurs relations avec Tel-Aviv. Cette expression avait déjà cours durant la guerre contre l'Irak (1980-1988), Bagdad étant alors soutenu par Washington et les monarchies du Golfe.
Terme qui signifie « défense » ou, par extension, « contre-attaque ». D'étymologie indo-européenne, ce mot fut très employé durant la guerre contre l'Irak (1980-1988) afin de décrire les mouvements du front, y compris lorsque les troupes iraniennes devaient céder quelques centaines de mètres — rarement plus — à leurs adversaires. Depuis l'attaque israélo-américaine, son usage est redevenu fréquent dans le discours officiel.
Login