It’s been a year since the deadly fighting between Israel and Hamas began, and the dire humanitarian crisis is getting worse. In addition to ongoing bloodshed in Gaza, the fighting between Israel and Hezbollah has intensified across swaths of Lebanon.

Israel’s ambassador to the UN said 70,000 Israeli civilians have evacuated the northern part of their country after an onslaught of Hezbollah rockets and drones. The UN reported that 90,000 Lebanese civilians have fled their homes to avoid Israeli airstrikes.

Meanwhile, hospitals in Gaza continue to struggle with overwhelming casualties and a lack of resources amid Israel’s ongoing operations there. Gaza’s Ministry of Health reported more than 40,000 Palestinians have been killed since the fighting began in the aftermath of the Hamas incursion into Israel one year ago. At least 1,200 people were killed in that attack. 250 were taken hostage.

Impact Your World has gathered a list of vetted organizations that are on the ground responding. You can support their work by clicking HERE or using the form below.

New Zealand’s navy lost its first ship since World War II after the HMNZS Manawanui sank on a reef off the coast of Samoa on Sunday creating a potential environmental disaster in waters used for fishing and tourism.

The specialist dive and hydrographic vessel lost power and ran aground on Saturday evening while conducting a reef survey one nautical mile off the southern coast of the Samoan island of Upolo, according to New Zealand authorities.

By Sunday morning, the vessel was “listing heavily,” the navy said. Smoke was spotted around 6:40 a.m., and by 9 a.m. the ship had slipped below the surface.

It’s the first unintentional sinking of a New Zealand naval vessel since the Second World War, authorities said, as they opened a court of inquiry into what happened.

Local businesses and conservationists now fear the potential environmental impact of the accident, which occurred in waters off Samoa’s most populated island.

New Zealand Defense Minister Judith Collins told Newstalk ZB that authorities’ first priority was assessing the depth of the vessel and the risk of a spill.

“It’s got a lot of oil on board. …. It’s got lubricating oil, hydro oil, diesel, urea. It’s got a lot of stuff in it. And I don’t think we can just sort of leave it like that,” she said.

Divers were sent to the scene on Sunday night, she said. “They’ll be having a look to see what they can, but it’s going to be quite a big job,” she added.

Acting Samoan Prime Minister Tuala Tevaga Iosefo Ponifasio said in a press statement Sunday that an oil spill was highly probable.

“The HMNZS Manawanui is not recoverable and has sunk into the ocean,” he said.

A reef emergency

Samoan police received a distress call just before 7 p.m. on Saturday night, according to local authorities. Small boats were dispatched with the warning that the ship was taking on water and its crew would likely need evacuating.

Numerous vessels and aircraft were sent to help, including a Royal New Zealand Air Force P-8A Poseidon and C-130J aircraft, the New Zealand navy said.

By 5 a.m. Sunday, all 75 passengers and crew had been rescued, but witnesses said they soon saw smoke rising from the sinking wreck.

“It took 15 minutes for the boat to be fully ablaze and then sink,” he said, adding that local villagers left a Sunday church service to watch the ship.

“They were visibly upset and concerned for their beach, reef, marine reserve and income as fishermen,” Poole said.

New Zealand Prime Minister Chris Luxon said that “environmental spill kits” had been sent from New Zealand to help mitigate and minimize the effects.

The HMNZS Manawanui was a relatively new addition to the New Zealand navy, having been purchased in 2018 for around $100 million NZD ($61 million), though it was built in the early 2000s.

According to the navy, the ship was designed to “survey harbours and approaches prior to larger support ships landing support equipment and personnel whether for combat or disaster relief.”

Africa is home to the world’s largest free trade agreement, in terms of number of countries, territory, and population – the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA). Fifty-four of 55 African Union member countries have signed up to the deal which covers a market of 1.3 billion people and a combined GDP of $3.4 trillion.

It aims to boost economic growth, intra-African trade and investment across the continent, but although it was established in February 2020, implementing the agreement has been slow.

According to the Economic Commision for Africa, African countries continue to trade with the rest of the world more than among themselves. Inadequate infrastructure, a lack of finance, and weak governance are often to blame.

The following interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Eleni Giokos: When you took on the job as Secretary General, did you think it was going to be this intense to create so many different standards across the continent, and what was the most challenging aspect of putting this all together?

Wamkele Mene: I don’t think anybody would’ve imagined how challenging and enormous the task is. One of the reasons it’s challenging and will continue to be challenging for a long time is because we are a very, very fragmented market. We have 47 state parties to the agreement establishing the AfCFTA. Hopefully the remaining few countries will ratify soon. Within those 47, we have 42 currencies. We have countries that have a GDP per capita of $110, and then at the (other) end of that spectrum, a GDP per capita of $25,000. We have the least developed countries, we have landlocked countries, we have countries that are at variance from a macroeconomic policy standpoint. So, when you try to integrate and create a single market, economic integration is incredibly difficult.

EG: How has AfCFTA evolved since it came to inception, since it’s been launched on the continent?

WM: We were established in the middle of Covid-19 in February 2020. The following month, March 2020, is when the entire continent of Africa shut down – closure of borders, closure of airports, everything that is an instrument for trade was shut down. For the first six to nine months of the year, it was extremely difficult to get anything done.

Now, we have concluded all the protocols of the agreement – in other words, the legal construct – including very difficult areas such as digital trade; rules of origin of local content for textiles and clothing, for the automotive sector; creating a dispute settlement mechanism for an entire continent of 47 countries trading under the AfCFTA. All these rules are the nuts and bolts of trade, and I am very happy that we are now in transition from negotiating the rules to implementing the rules.

EG: In 2022, seven countries chose to pilot the African Continental Free Trade Area. How is that going, how is that being adopted, are you seeing the actual implementation?

WM: In 2022, seven countries were ready. By readiness, we mean they introduced the customs systems, they gazetted the AfCFTA into their national law. This October (there) will be 37, which means that 37 countries are at a state of readiness and are trading under the rules and the preferences.

EG: A lot of people in the private sector say they don’t really feel the impact of the African Continental Free Trade Area. They don’t, frankly, think it’s working. What do you say to that?

WM: We are integrating a market of 47 countries. The private sector is, as I always say, a co-pillar and a co-driver of market integration on the continent because it’s the private sector that trades. What I would say to them is this: we are overcoming 60 years of market fragmentation. It’s not going to happen overnight. And we know this from the experience of the European Union, which is arguably the most successful market integration model in the world today. It is (31) years since the establishment of the European Union, and yet it still continues to have challenges.

EG: Here’s one of the most controversial issues. Aliko Dangote has been talking about the fact that he needs 35 visas to travel across the African continent. If the richest man in Africa can’t get around easily, who can? How does this hinder people doing business cross-border?

WM: It’s a significant barrier and constraint to intra-Africa trade and intra-Africa investment. There are only four countries that to date have ratified the African Union’s protocol on movement of persons – only four countries. There is an emotional instinct against allowing movement of persons in some countries. In some countries there are legitimate national security concerns. So, we have to work hard to make sure that we convince countries about the importance of moving in the same direction on free movement of persons whilst at the same time addressing the national security concerns that those individual countries have.

EG: Can we even be having this conversation on integration if we don’t actually focus on infrastructure that links the continent up? 

WM: More needs to be done to enable the continent of Africa to have the infrastructure that we need so that these goods can transit through borders seamlessly, efficiently, based on the rules that we have agreed to. So, we look forward to the operationalization of the Lobito corridor (a railway project that links link Angola, Zambia, and the Democratic Republic of Congo). All of these trade corridors that are embedded on world-class infrastructure will enable our continent to take drastic steps in boosting intra-Africa trade.

It’s not just about the trade rules, it’s about establishing the supply chain networks, the transport and logistics infrastructure that will support trade.

EG: It’s five years from now: What kind of conversation do you hope to be having with me about where we are?

WM: I think that what I’ve learned over the last four years in this position is that you have to be extremely patient. If in five years time we can demonstrate that we have moved intra-Africa trade from let’s say 15% to 25% or 30%, that will be a very important step forward.

I think we can double intra-Africa trade in the next five years, provided we introduce the tools that are required. So in other words, payment, ensuring that there is ease of access to intra-Africa payments; ensuring at the very minimum (there is) trade supporting infrastructure, particularly in the trade corridors (between) Central Africa, Eastern Africa, Northern Africa; and then third, we combine all of that with the political will and the rules that have been negotiated to create the single market. I believe that we’re going to get there.

In 2018, many (people) around the world, including on the continent of Africa, were saying that these Africans will negotiate forever and that the AfCFTA shall never be signed. And then of course, the AfCFTA was signed in Rwanda in 2018. Then they said it’ll never be ratified, and a year later the agreement was ratified – now 47 countries have ratified it. Now they’re saying that it shall not be implemented. In October, 37 countries will demonstrate implementation when they showcase the goods and the certificates of origin that they are trading in. At every milestone, there’s a new goal post for us to meet.

It is “absolutely impossible” for Communist China to become Taiwan’s motherland because the island’s government is older, Taiwan’s president has said in a carefully timed speech that underscores the intense historical rivalry between the two.

Lai Ching-te, who took office in May, has long faced Beijing’s wrath for championing Taiwan’s sovereignty and rejecting the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)’s claims over the island.

Despite having never controlled Taiwan, China’s ruling Communist Party has vowed to “reunify” with the self-governing democracy, by force if necessary. But many people on the island view themselves as distinctly Taiwanese and have no desire to be part of the People’s Republic of China.

On Saturday, in a move likely to further infuriate Beijing, Lai dug into history to make his point, stressing that Taiwan is already a “sovereign and independent country” called the Republic of China (ROC), whose government ruled mainland China for decades before relocating to Taiwan when the CCP came to power.

The ROC was founded in 1912 after a Nationalist revolution overthrew China’s last imperial dynasty, the Qing. At the time, Taiwan was a Japanese colony, ceded by the Qing dynasty after it lost a war to Imperial Japan nearly two decades earlier.

The ROC later took control of Taiwan in 1945, following Japan’s defeat in World War II. Four years later, its Nationalist government then fled to the island after losing a civil war against Mao Zedong’s Communist forces, moving the seat of the ROC from the mainland to Taipei.

In Beijing, the CCP took power and founded the People’s Republic of China (PRC) on October 1, 1949. Since then, the two sides have been ruled by separate governments.

Successive Chinese leaders have vowed to one day take control of Taiwan. But Xi Jinping, China’s most assertive leader in decades, has ramped up rhetoric and aggression against the democratic island – fueling tension across the strait and raising concerns for a military confrontation.

Speaking at a concert ahead of Taiwan’s national day on October 10, Lai noted the two governments’ different political roots, delivering a lesson in comparative history.

“Recently, our neighbor, the People’s Republic of China, just celebrated its 75th birthday on October 1. In a few days, the Republic of China will celebrate its 113th birthday,” Lai said, receiving to a round of applause from crowds in a stadium in Taipei.

“Therefore, in terms of age, it is absolutely impossible for the People’s Republic of China to become the motherland of the people of the Republic of China. On the contrary, the Republic of China may actually be the motherland of citizens of the People’s Republic of China who are over 75 years old.”

Monday is the last day of China’s week-long national day holiday and the Chinese government has not responded to Lai’s remarks.

But his comments have already drawn criticism from politicians in Taiwan’s largest opposition party, the Kuomintang (KMT), which has long accused Lai’s ruling Democratic Progressive Party of needlessly stoking tensions with China.

“President Lai has deliberately mentioned ‘People’s Republic of China’ and his ‘motherland theory’ to incite political confrontation on both sides of the Taiwan Strait,” Ling Tao, a city councillor from the KMT, wrote in a post on Facebook.

The KMT are the political successors of the Nationalists who fled to Taiwan, ruled the island under martial law for decades and long harbored ambitions to one day restore the Republic of China on the mainland. They later joined Taiwan’s evolution into a democracy and have made significant ideological transformations, including favoring closer ties with Communist China.

Leaders in both Taipei and Beijing have long used their national day addresses to send a message across the Taiwan Strait.

Last week, on the eve of the PRC’s 75th birthday, Xi reiterated his pledge to achieve “reunification” with Taiwan.

“It’s an irreversible trend, a cause of righteousness and the common aspiration of the people. No one can stop the march of history,” Xi told a state banquet at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, according to state-run news agency Xinhua.

“Taiwan is China’s sacred territory. Blood is thicker than water, and people on both sides of the strait are connected by blood,” he said, vowing to resolutely oppose “Taiwan independence” separatist activities.

Beijing has labeled Lai a “dangerous separatist,” and tensions have ratcheted up over the last five months since Lai’s inauguration in May, during which he called on China to cease its intimidation of Taiwan.

Lai is expected to give his first national day address as Taiwan’s president on Thursday.

It is almost impossible to remember life in Israel before Hamas launched its brutal October 7 attacks a year ago, killing more than 1,200 people and kidnapping more than 250 others. There is little point, because that life is gone for good. And not just because more than 100 hostages are still captive.

The same is true beyond Israel’s borders.

Israel, its enemies and allies are all harbingers and painful witnesses to a remaking of the region’s diplomatic and political architecture on a scale that could rival the upheavals of the Arab-Israeli conflict a half-century ago.

The post-October 7 changes are both inevitable and, in their current chaotic form at least, preventable. The civilian cost is mounting when diplomacy might have saved lives.

A year ago it seemed the political architecture of the region was on the cusp of significant change. Propelled by US incentives, Saudi Arabia and Israel seemed closer than ever to a historic normalization of relations. Diplomacy and the deft skills needed to stitch such a complex deal together were in the ascendency.

But the prospect of approaching peace and prosperity evaporated as Hamas surged through the Gaza border fences at sunrise that Saturday morning. Butchery was afoot.

Irrespective of whether Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar was calculating he could torpedo normalization and push the Palestinian cause ahead of regional priorities for peace and economic integration, in the short term he succeeded.

I can remember, with gut-churning clarity, the smell of rotting human flesh as we entered Kfar Aza, about 800 yards from the Gaza Strip. It was October 10, and Major General Itai Veruv of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) was leading the first international press access to see the devastation of Hamas’ attacks.

He stood at the gates, quoting General Eisenhower when he reached the Nazi death camps in World War Two: “The first thing he said was bring the press here to see.”

Over the past year Israel has struggled to keep the world focused on those nation-changing events of that bloody weekend.

For the first time, many Israelis realized their state was no longer the safe haven for Jews they had always believed it to be. The idea that whatever prejudice and persecution they may face around the world, in Israel they had sanctuary, was destroyed.

What emerged that first week as a scramble to seal the Gaza border and chase down remaining Hamas cells inside Israel soon manifested as a red mist of revenge and retribution against the attackers, and anyone near them.

Israelis’ feelings of vulnerability haven’t gone, while national rage has been refined into a steely logic of regional deterrence, manifested by Israel’s right-wing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

He has interwoven his own political survival, in part to escape accusations he failed to stop Hamas’ attacks, with bombastic new tactics shredding the old rule book and its red lines that previously prevented regional escalation.

It is being called “escalation for de-escalation,” but as October 7, 2024, arrives, de-escalation, and any form of day after plan from Netanyahu, are absent.

The Jewish state’s relations with US President Joe Biden’s White House, its most important ally, are at their lowest ebb in a generation. Nearly 42,000 Palestinians in Gaza have been killed, many by US bombs and bullets in Israel’s hands, authorities in Gaza say. IDF killings and arrests of Palestinians, some of them US citizens, in the occupied West Bank are unsustainable for many of Israel’s European allies whom after a year of waiting are beginning to curb arms supplies.

But the pressures on Israel to rein in its survival instincts at a time when it is riven with deep political, religious, and maybe existential divisions are having little obvious traction.

Israel’s wiliest nearby adversary and Iranian mega-proxy Hezbollah – a blight on Lebanese post-civil war democracy – which began escalating cross-border rocket attacks the day after October 7, has undergone a lightening defenestration over the past few weeks. Its leader Hassan Nasrallah and many of his top commanders have been assassinated in Israeli air strikes, its forces partially crippled, ahead of Israel’s launch of its third ground war in Lebanon in the past half-century.

Hamas’ October 7 attacks, if not coordinated in detail with Iran, certainly had its blessing. The theocracy has been the Palestinian terror group’s biggest backer for decades, funneling money, military material and know-how. Iran vows to destroy Israel and chase its biggest ally the United States out of the region.

It uses pro-Palestinian messaging to enflame passions on the ‘Arab street’ in the region, most of whom are Sunni like the Palestinians, and most of whose leaders consider Iran, a Shia theocracy, at best untrustworthy, at worst an adversary. In this way Iran holds off regional rivals.

The past year has revealed the extent of its plans and co-opting of Shia communities to build up pro-Iranian militias. Yemen’s minority Houthis are no longer only anti-Saudi stooges for the Shia clerics in Tehran, but have turned their Iranian-supplied ballistic missiles and drones on Tel Aviv.

Iran has also, aided and fronted by the Houthis, begun blocking Red Sea commercial shipping – more than a thousand miles from Israel – on the pretext of supporting the Gazans.

Tehran’s Shia proxies in Iraq have also answered its calls and begun escalating drone attacks on Israel.

It is a multi-fronted war, escalating faster than would have ever seemed possible a year ago.

Back then rocket sirens in central Israel were not part of daily life. Today parents inside their home shelters in Tel Aviv scan cell phones for messages from their children, serving on the front lines as they too once did.

Each generation here is trained to fight in the defense of the nation; where the country divide is over how long to keep that fight going before switching to diplomacy. The reality is, the longer the escalation goes on, the less control the country and its prime minister will have over the outcome.

Potential regional partners like Saudi Arabia are now demanding a steeper and steeper diplomatic off-ramp for Netanyahu.

The normalization between Israel and the most powerful Gulf state that seemed so close before October 7, is for now out of reach, Netanyahu unwilling and too toxic to be a partner in the deal.

It was a deal that would have given Biden a legacy to be proud of; for Saudi’s Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman, MBS, the legitimacy and security he craves; and Netanyahu, an inoculation against a millennia of animus.

Saudi Arabia’s price now is an “irreversible path” to a Palestinian state, which is an anathema to Netanyahu, his extreme nationalist right-wing cabinet, and in the wake of October 7, even further beyond the pale for much of the rest of the country too.

Days before the anniversary, a veteran sage of UAE diplomacy, Anwar Gargash, foreshadowed the influential Gulf state’s direction of travel, saying “the era of militia with sectarian and regional dimensions has cost the Arabs dearly.”

An end to Iran’s proxy powerplays and a path to a Palestinian state. The question is how to get there from here, particularly as the butcher’s cleaver is ascendant over the diplomat.

For now, in the absence of successful peace talks, uncertainty is the new certainty.