Why More School Counselors And Psychologists Alone Won’t Solve America’s Mental Health Crisis Among Students

THE CONVERSATION

One-on-one time with school counselors and psychologists can be hard to come by in schools with high student-to-counselor ratios. 10'000 Hours

BY JONI WILLIAMS SPLETT

Of all the challenges that threaten the well-being of America’s schoolchildren, one of the most serious and severe is the lack of school counselors and school psychologists. Despite the increased demand for their services, there’s simply not enough professionals in these fields to go around.

For instance, the American School Counselor Association recommends that there be one school counselor for every 250 students. However, in the 2021-22 school year – the most recent year for which data are available – the ratio of school counselors to students was one for every 408 students.

Similarly, the National Association of School Psychologists recommends one school psychologist for every 500 students. But the ratio of school psychologists to students stands at just one for every 1,127 students.

The Biden administration is well aware of the shortage and has taken action to close the gap.

For instance, in 2021, U.S. Surgeon General Vivek H. Murthy issued an advisory that calls for, among other things, expanding the mental health workforce in schools by using federal, state and local funds.

President Joe Biden released a Mental Health Strategy in 2022 that seeks to provide mental health care to more children. And in May 2023, the Biden administration announced US$286 million for 264 grantees to train and hire school mental health professionals – a move that grantees say will enable them to prepare more than 14,000 new mental health professionals for America’s schools. That’s a significant number, but schools would need to hire more than five times that amount to meet recommended ratios.

As a professor of school psychology – and as a recipient of one of those grants – I also know that as important as it is to train more school counselors and school psychologists, increasing their numbers alone is not enough to change the course of the rising mental health needs among America’s children and youth. That is, doubling staffing of mental health professionals in schools doesn’t guarantee they will be used effectively or appropriately. Without accompanying changes to school systems and priorities, I fear the mental health needs among our youth will continue to accelerate, as it did during the pandemic.

To address this challenge, I see three areas where schools need to revamp the way they meet students’ mental health needs.

1. Free up school counselors and school psychologists


Research, including my own, shows that school-based mental health professionals are overwhelmed with job duties that are outside the scope of supporting students’ mental health. For instance, school counselors also serve as the testing coordinators in most schools.

School psychologists report being overloaded with evaluations to determine if students are eligible for special education services. About one-third of those responding to a recent membership survey of the National Association of School Psychologists indicated they don’t provide mental health interventions and services at all.

These school counselors and school psychologists report that about 25% to 50% of their day is consumed with paperwork and other miscellaneous duties. Constantly working outside their areas of expertise and desired practice is leading to burnout that leads many to leave the field.

To alleviate the situation, schools could search for ways to shift tasks that don’t require specialized knowledge, such as test coordination and certain types of paper work, to staff with less extensive and expensive training.

This would allow current school mental health practitioners – and the additional 14,000 the Biden administration hopes to bring into the field – to engage in the wider range of services their students need. This could be a way to better align their practice with the recommendations of their professional associations and potentially lead to more job satisfaction and less burnout.

2. Make time for mental health in schools

In my work with school districts across the Southeast, mental health professionals are being hired but then restricted to working with kids only during the student’s lunchtime or certain classes, such as art, music or physical education. Although I don’t advocate for children missing class, I also don’t think it’s a good idea for children to work on self-regulation strategies or investigate negative belief patterns while eating a hot dog or missing their favorite extracurricular. It also limits the number of students any one professional can support during a school day.

Some schools around the world have extended the school day. Some in the U.S. have moved to a year-round schedule with positive effects, such as improved achievement scores for students from low-income and minority backgrounds. Perhaps by rethinking the school day and the school year, more school time could be made for mental health professionals to take a holistic approach to all the areas a child may need instruction and support.

3. Prioritize prevention

Prioritizing prevention includes promoting a positive school climate and teaching healthy habits for maintaining one’s mental well-being to all youth. A positive school climate – including social, emotional and physical safety, respectful behavior, an emphasis on learning, and social connectedness with peers and teachers – is shown to reduce risky behaviors and aggression. It also increases positive mental health outcomes and academic success.

Teaching life skills, like being aware of one’s own and other people’s emotions, what’s causing the emotions, how to manage them in healthy ways and where to seek help, has also been shown to prevent the development and escalation of mental illness among children and youth.

There are evidence-based curricula that schools can use to teach and reinforce these skills. For example, Positive Action is designed to teach pre-K-to-12th grade students how their thoughts, feelings and behaviors are related. It is taught in classrooms by teachers for about 15 minutes, three to four days each week, for an entire school year.

There is evidence of large to moderate effects of Positive Action in elementary schools on student mental health, behavior and academic achievement. If these prevention strategies were prioritized in policy and funding, I believe America’s schools and school mental health professionals would be better positioned to more systematically address the unrelenting rise of children’s mental health needs.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

The Gaza Strip − Why The History Of The Densely Populated Enclave Is Key To Understanding The Current Conflict

BY MAHAR NASAR

ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR 

SCHOOL OF MIDDLE EASTERN AND NORTH AFRICAN STUDIES

UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

The focus on conflict in the Middle East has again returned to the Gaza Strip, with Israel’s defense minister ordering a “complete siege” of the Palestinian enclave.

The military operation, which involves extensive bombing of residences, follows a surprise attack on Oct. 7, 2023, by Hamas militants who infiltrated Israel from Gaza and killed more than 900 Israelis. In reprisal airstrikes, the Israel military has killed over 800 Gazans. And that figure could escalate in the coming days. Meanwhile, an order to cut off all food, electricity and water to Gaza will only worsen the plight of residents in what has been called the “world’s largest open-air prison.”

But how did Gaza become one of the most densely populated parts of the planet? And why is it the home to militant Palestinian action now? As a scholar of Palestinian history, I believe understanding the answers to those questions provides crucial historical context to the current violence.

A brief history of Gaza

The Gaza Strip is a narrow piece of land on the southeastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea. Roughly twice the size of Washington, D.C., it is wedged between Israel to its north and east and Egypt to its south.

An ancient trade and sea port, Gaza has long been part of the geographic region known as Palestine. By the early 20th century, it was mainly inhabited by Muslim and Christian Arabs who lived under Ottoman rule. When Britain took control of Palestine following World War I, intellectuals in Gaza joined the emergent Palestinian national movement.

During the 1948 war that established the state of Israel, the Israeli military bombed 29 villages in southern Palestine, leading tens of thousands of villagers to flee to the Gaza Strip, under the control of the Egyptian army that were deployed after Israel declared independence. Most of them and their descendants remain there today.

Following the 1967 Six-Day War between Israel and its Arab neighbors, the Gaza Strip came under Israeli military occupation. The occupation has resulted in “systematic human rights violations,” according to rights group Amnesty International, including forcing people off their land, destroying homes and crushing even nonviolent forms of political dissent.

Palestinians staged two major uprisings, in 1987-1991 and in 2000-2005, hoping to end the occupation and establish an independent Palestinian state.

Hamas, a Palestinian Islamist militant group centered in Gaza, was founded in 1988 to fight against the Israeli occupation. Hamas and other militant groups launched repeated attacks on Israeli targets in Gaza, leading to Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from Gaza in 2005. In 2006, Palestinian legislative elections were held. Hamas beat its secular rival, Fatah, which had been widely accused of corruption. Elections haven’t been held in Gaza since 2006, but polling from March 2023 found that 45% of Gazans would back Hamas should there be a vote, ahead of Fatah at 32%.

After a brief conflict between Hamas and Fatah militants in May 2007, Hamas took complete control of the Gaza Strip. Since then, Gaza has been under the administrative control of Hamas, even though it is still considered to be under Israeli occupation by the United Nations, the U.S. State Department and other international bodies.

Who are the Palestinians of Gaza?

The more than 2 million inhabitants of the Gaza Strip are part of the 14 million-strong global Palestinian community. About one third of Gaza’s inhabitants trace their family’s roots to land inside the Gaza Strip. The remaining two-thirds are refugees from the 1948 war and their descendants, many of whom hail from towns and villages surrounding Gaza.

The Palestinians of Gaza trend young: nearly half the population is under 18. The enclave is also very poor, with a poverty rate that stands at 53%.

Despite this grim economic picture, education levels are quite high. Over 95% of Gazan children ages 6-12 are in school. The majority of Palestinian students in Gaza graduate from high school, and 57% of students at the prestigious Islamic University of Gaza are female.

But because of the circumstances of their surroundings, young Palestinians in Gaza find it difficult to live fulfilling lives. For graduates between the ages of 19 and 29, the unemployment rate stands at 70%. And a World Bank survey earlier this year found 71% of Gazans show signs of depression and high levels of PTSD.

There are several factors that contribute to these conditions. A major factor is the crippling, 16-year blockade that Israel and Egypt – with U.S. support – have imposed on Gaza.

Years of blockade

Shortly after the 2006 elections, the Bush administration tried to force Hamas from power and bring in a rival leader from the Fatah party who was considered friendlier to Israel and the U.S. Hamas preempted the coup and took full control of Gaza in May 2007. In response, Israel and Egypt – with U.S. and European support – closed the border crossings into and out of the Gaza Strip and imposed a land, air and sea blockade.

The blockade, which is still in effect, limits the import of food, fuel and construction material; limits how far Gaza’s fishermen can go out to sea; bans almost all exports; and imposes strict limitations on the movement of people into and out of Gaza. In 2023, Israel has allowed only around 50,000 people a month to exit Gaza, according to U.N. figures.

The years of closure have devastated the lives of Palestinians in Gaza. Inhabitants there don’t have enough water for drinking and sanitation. They face electricity cuts that run 12 to 18 hours each day. Without adequate water and electricity, Gaza’s fragile health care system is “on the brink of collapse,” according to the medical rights group Medical Aid for Palestine.

These restrictions hit the young and the weak of Gaza particularly hard. Israel routinely denies sick patients the permits they need to receive medical care outside of Gaza. Bright students with scholarships to study abroad often find that they are unable to leave.

U.N. experts say this blockade is illegal under international law. They argue that the blockade amounts to a collective punishment of the Palestinians of Gaza, a violation of the Hague Convention and the Geneva Conventions that form the backbone of international law.

No end to the suffering

Israel says that the blockade on Gaza is necessary to secure the safety of its population and will be lifted when Hamas renounces violence, recognizes Israel and abides by previous agreements.

But Hamas has consistently rejected this ultimatum. Instead, militant fighters stepped up the firing of homemade rockets and mortars into populated areas surrounding the Gaza Strip in 2008, seeking to pressure Israel to lift the blockade. They have sporadically attacked Israel in this way in the years since.

Israel has launched four major military assaults on Gaza – in 2008-09, 2012, 2014 and 2021 – in efforts to destroy Hamas’ military capabilities. Those wars killed 4,000 Palestinians, more than half of whom were civilians, along with 106 people in Israel.

During that time, the U.N. estimates that there has been more than $5 billion worth of damage to Gaza’s homes, agriculture, industry, electricity and water infrastructure.

Each of those wars ended in a fragile cease-fire but no real resolution to the conflict. Israel seeks to deter Hamas from launching rockets. Hamas and other militant groups say that even when they have upheld previous cease-fires, Israel has continued to attack Palestinians and has refused to lift the blockade.

Hamas has offered a long-term truce in exchange for Israel ending the blockade on Gaza. Israel has refused to accept the offer, sticking to its position that Hamas must first end violence and recognize Israel.

In the months leading up to the latest escalation, conditions in Gaza have deteriorated even further. The International Monetary Fund reported in September that Gaza’s economic outlook “remains dire.” Conditions became more dire when Israel announced on Sept. 5, 2023, that it was halting all exports from a key Gaza border crossing.

Without an end in sight to the suffering caused by the blockade, it appears that Hamas has decided to upend the status quo in a surprise attack on Israelis, including civilians. Israel’s reprisal airstrikes and its imposition of a “complete siege” on the strip have heaped even further suffering on ordinary Gazans.

It is a tragic reminder that civilians bear the brunt of this conflict.

Liberian President George Weah Seeks A Second Term In A Rematch With His Main Challenger From 2017

Liberia President George Weah arrives to attend the Paris Peace Forum in Paris, France, Nov. 11, 2021...(AP Photo/Chrostophe Ena, File)

BY MARK N. MENGONFIA AND CHINEDU ASADU

MONROVIA, LIBERIA (AP) — Liberian President George Weah is seeking a second term in office Tuesday, hoping that his efforts to pave roads, build hospitals and bring electricity to more areas will win votes despite growing economic hardships in the West African nation.

He faces a crowded field of 19 challengers, led by his main rival from the last election in 2017, Joseph Boakai, who served as vice president under Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Africa’s first democratically elected female leader.

Weah, 57, a former international soccer star, cast his ballot with his wife and son at an elementary school in Paynesville city.

“Liberians are exercising their democracy rights. ... It is the Liberian people’s election and they will decide who becomes their president,” he said.

Boakai has campaigned on promises to rescue Liberia from what he calls Weah’s failed leadership, dubbing himself and his running mate “Rescue 1” and “Rescue 2.”

“We are all excited and optimistic about what is now a national call to rally citizens of this great country for a rescue mission to reverse the hardships so many Liberians and their families have been subjected to,” Boakai said during a recent stop at the Antoinette Tubman Stadium.

Weah has been accused of not living up to key campaign promises that he would fight corruption and ensure justice for victims of the country’s brutal back-to-back civil wars that killed an estimated 250,000 people between 1989 and 2003.

He obtained 61.5% of the total votes cast in 2017, while Boakai received 38.5% though it remains to be seen whether the incumbent can coast to a similar victory this time. Liberia’s 2.47 million eligible voters are also casting ballots for legislative elections Tuesday.

“Weah’s political position going into the vote is not assessed as being stronger than it was in 2017, given the mixed performance during his first tenure,” said Zoe McCathie, a political and security analyst at Africa-focused Signal Risk Consulting. “While some policies such as free higher education for public universities have proven popular, Weah has largely failed to effectively combat corruption and improve the economy, as he had promised when first elected, causing some support to wane.”

Already election-related violence has claimed two lives in Foya, located in Lofa county. Ruling party and opposition candidates have blamed each other for the Sept. 29 clashes.

Liberia began as a settlement for freed slaves from the United States in 1822, but declared itself an independent nation 25 years later. Liberia’s flag, constitution, form of government and many laws are modeled on those of the U.S. The capital is named in honor of America’s fifth president, James Monroe, who was in power when the freed slaves were repatriated.

Weah rode into power six years ago in the first democratic transfer of power in the West African nation since the end of the civil wars amid high hopes brought by his promise to fight poverty and stir infrastructural development in Africa’s oldest republic. His goal, he had said in 2017, was to push Liberia from a low-income country to a middle-income one.

But his government is perceived by many to have performed below expectations, especially in the management of the economy, which contracted in two of the six years he has been in office, with the rate of economic growth in decline since 2021.

It’s been “turmoil”, to create business, said Seah J. Trustmo, a voter. “It has been hard, very, very hard,” she said.

Corruption continues to stifle Liberia’s growth and many people will look to use the vote to show their concerns, analysts say. Research network Afrobarometer’s 2023 surveys found that large numbers of Liberians say corruption in the country has increased during the past year and the government is doing a poor job of fighting it.

In a country where at least one in two citizens are in poverty according to multiple measures, Weah faces accusations of mismanaging government funds. Between November and December last year, he was out of the country for seven weeks touring several countries, including Qatar where he watched his son play in the U.S. football team at the World Cup.

Protests have also been rampant under Weah and analysts have raised concerns about the likelihood of another round of demonstrations if the electoral process is flawed. While the campaigns have been largely peaceful, there have been pockets of violence — including this week when violent clashes between opposition and ruling parties’ supporters marred the close of Weah’s campaign rally.

“This popular dissatisfaction (of the government’s performance) will likely be utilized by opposition parties to renew demonstrations in the event of a victory for Weah,” Signal Risk’s McCathie said, before pointing out that political violence following the election is, however, unlikely to pose any risk to Liberia’s political stability.

Weah is still the only African to have won the Ballon d’Or. He played as a forward for Paris Saint-Germain, AC Milan, Chelsea and Manchester City during an 18-year club career. His final appearance for Liberia was in September 2018 when he made a surprise appearance in an exhibition game against Nigeria at the age of 51, a year after he’d been elected president. His 23-year-old son, Tim, now plays for Serie A club Juventus and the U.S. national team.

Asadu reported from Lagos, Nigeria. Associated Press writer Krista Larson in Dakar, Senegal, contributed.

US Begins Delivering Munitions To Israel As The American Death Toll Rises To 11 In Hamas Attacks

Israeli soldiers are seen in a staging ground near the Israeli Gaza border, Southern Israel, Monday, Oct. 9, 2023. (AP Photo/Ohag Zwingenberg)

BY MATTHEW LEE AND TARA COPP

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. has already begun delivering critically needed munitions and military equipment to Israel, and the Pentagon is reviewing inventories to see what else can be sent quickly to boost its ally in the three-day-old war with Hamas, a senior Defense Department official said Monday.

Planes have already taken off, said the official, who declined to provide details on the weapons. The official, who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive shipments, also warned that the U.S. is closely watching Hezbollah and other Iranian-backed groups, noting that the decision to shift American ships in the region was to deter any of them from entering or expanding the conflict against Israel.

The weapons movement came as President Joe Biden announced that the U.S. death toll in the war has gone up to 11.

The official said the U.S. is “flooding the zone” with calls and other messages so that extremist groups and other nations know they should not question America’s commitment to supporting the defense of Israel. The official, however, would not comment on whether U.S. military forces would be used at all.

While the official said the U.S. has the ability to support weapons needs in Ukraine and Israel and maintain security for America, the rapid delivery of munitions to the new war has raised concerns.

Congress must pass more funding quickly for the U.S. to be able to give both Israel and Ukraine the weapons and munitions they both now need, Army Secretary Christine Wormuth said Monday.

“The intent is to lean forward in support of Israel,” she said. “But in particular with munitions and the ability to support Israel and Ukraine simultaneously, additional funding is needed to increase our capacity to expand production and then also pay for the munitions themselves.”

It is clear the administration is now facing potentially competing requests from Israel and Ukraine for additional weaponry. And while there is strong bipartisan support in Congress for aid to Israel, the next steps are uncertain, with the House lacking a leader after the ouster of the Republican speaker and the Senate out of town until next week.

Also uncertain is whether the debate over further assistance to Ukraine, which is opposed by a group of hard-right Republicans, will complicate efforts to pass assistance for Israel.

Wormuth, speaking at the annual Association of the United States Army conference in Washington, said the administration is still “in the early stage of the process of evaluating our ability to support what the IDF needs,” referring to the Israel Defense Forces. She did not provide details, but Doug Bush, the Army’s assistant secretary for acquisition, told reporters at the conference that conversations are underway about what the U.S. can provide. He said it likely will be a wide range of equipment, from small arms to sophisticated munitions.

Most of the weaponry sent already to help Ukraine has come from Army stocks and defense contractors at a rate that has challenged the global supply chain, and while the Army has recently ramped up production of some critical lines, such as 155 mm ammunition for howitzers, they are not yet at full speed.

With a new ground offensive in Gaza imminent following the Saturday surprise attack by Hamas, Army officials said Monday they were concerned about the ability to meet additional demand for ground munitions and that Congress needed to act quickly to provide help in time.

In addition to the 11 American citizens whose deaths Biden confirmed, an undetermined number of remain unaccounted for. It was not yet clear if the missing are dead, in hiding, or had been taken hostage.

Biden said the U.S. believes it is likely that American citizens may be among those being held hostage by Hamas, but officials are working to confirm that.

“I have directed my team to work with their Israeli counterparts on every aspect of the hostage crisis, including sharing intelligence and deploying experts from across the United States government to consult with and advise Israeli counterparts on hostage recovery efforts,” Biden said in a statement.

The attack by Hamas and Israel’s response have left more than 1,100 dead and thousands wounded on both sides.

In the aftermath of the Hamas attack, the White House has asked Senate leaders to fast track confirmation of President Joe Biden’s nominee to be the next ambassador to Israel, former Obama-era Treasury Secretary and White House chief of staff Jack Lew, according to a U.S. official who was not authorized to comment publicly and requested anonymity. The White House has received assurances that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will push forward hearings for Lew, the official added.

The U.S. is currently without an ambassador after the departure of Ambassador Tom Nides in July. Biden nominated Lew in September.

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said Sunday he has ordered the Ford carrier strike group to sail to the Eastern Mediterranean to be ready to assist Israel. The USS Gerald R. Ford, the Navy’s newest and most advanced aircraft carrier, and its approximately 5,000 sailors and deck of warplanes will be accompanied by cruisers and destroyers in a show of force that is meant to be ready to respond to anything, from possibly interdicting additional weapons from reaching Hamas and conducting surveillance.

The senior Defense Department official said worries about Hezbollah opening a second front of violence against Israel was the main reason for moving the ships to the Eastern Mediterranean. The official said the U.S. is deeply concerned Hezbollah and other Iranian-backed groups will make the wrong decision to try to “pile on” and widen the war.

Along with the Ford, the U.S. is sending the cruiser USS Normandy and destroyers USS Thomas Hudner, USS Ramage, USS Carney, and USS Roosevelt, and the U.S. is augmenting Air Force F-35, F-15, F-16, and A-10 fighter aircraft squadrons in the region.

The Norfolk, Virginia-based carrier strike group already was in the Mediterranean. Last week it was conducting naval exercises with Italy in the Ionian Sea. The carrier is in its first full deployment.

Senior officials from the Pentagon and

Senior officials from the Pentagon and State Department briefed senators Sunday night, and Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said they were assured that the United States was giving Israel “everything they need.”

Associated Press writer Seung Min Kim contributed to this report.

What Went Wrong? Questions Emerge Over Israel’s Intelligence Prowess After Hamas Attack

Palestinians transport a captured Israeli civilian, center, from Kibbutz Kfar Azza into Gaza Strip on Saturday, October 7, 2023. (AP Photo/Hatem Ali, File)

BY TIA GOLDENBERG

TEL AVIV, ISRAEL (AP) — For Palestinians in Gaza, Israel’s eyes are never very far away. Surveillance drones buzz constantly from the skies. The highly-secured border is awash with security cameras and soldiers on guard. Intelligence agencies work sources and cyber capabilities to draw out a bevy of information.

But Israel’s eyes appeared to have been closed in the lead-up to an unprecedented onslaught by the militant Hamas group, which broke down Israeli border barriers and sent hundreds of militants into Israel to carry out a brazen attack that has killed hundreds and pushed the region toward conflict.

Israel’s intelligence agencies have gained an aura of invincibility over the decades because of a string of achievements. Israel has foiled plots seeded in the West Bank, allegedly hunted down Hamas operatives in Dubai and has been accused of killing Iranian nuclear scientists in the heart of Iran. Even when their efforts have stumbled, agencies like the Mossad, Shin Bet and military intelligence have maintained their mystique.

But the weekend’s assault, which caught Israel off guard on a major Jewish holiday, plunges that reputation into doubt and raises questions about the country’s readiness in the face of a weaker but determined foe. Over 48 hours later, Hamas militants continued to battle Israeli forces inside Israeli territory, and dozens of Israelis were in Hamas captivity in Gaza.

“This is a major failure,” said Yaakov Amidror, a former national security adviser to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. “This operation actually proves that the (intelligence) abilities in Gaza were no good.”

Amidror declined to offer an explanation for the failure, saying lessons must be learned when the dust settles.

Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari, the chief military spokesman, acknowledged the army owes the public an explanation. But he said now is not the time. “First, we fight, then we investigate,” he said.

Some say it is too early to pin the blame solely on an intelligence fault. They point to a wave of low-level violence in the West Bank that shifted some military resources there and the political chaos roiling Israel over steps by Netanyahu’s far-right government to overhaul the judiciary. The controversial plan has threatened the cohesion of the country’s powerful military.

But the apparent lack of prior knowledge of Hamas’ plot will likely be seen as a prime culprit in the chain of events that led to the deadliest attack against Israelis in decades.

Israel withdrew troops and settlers from the Gaza Strip in 2005, stripping it of a close handle on the happenings in the territory. But even after Hamas overran Gaza in 2007, Israel appeared to maintain its edge, using technological and human intelligence.

It claimed to know the precise locations of Hamas leadership and appeared to prove it through the assassinations of militant leaders in surgical strikes, sometimes while they slept in their bedrooms. Israel has known where to strike underground tunnels used by Hamas to ferry around fighters and arms, destroying miles (kilometers) of the concealed passageways.

Despite those abilities, Hamas was able to keep its plan under wraps. The ferocious attack, which likely took months of planning and meticulous training and involved coordination among multiple militant groups, appeared to have gone under Israel’s intelligence radar.

Amir Avivi, a retired Israeli general, said that without a foothold inside Gaza, Israel’s security services have come to rely increasingly on technological means to gain intelligence. He said militants in Gaza have found ways to evade that technological intelligence gathering, giving Israel an incomplete picture of their intentions.

“The other side learned to deal with our technological dominance and they stopped using technology that could expose it,” said Avivi, who served as a conduit for intelligence materials under a former military chief of staff. Avivi is president and founder of Israel Defense and Security Forum, a hawkish group of former military commanders.

“They’ve gone back to the Stone Age,” he said, explaining that militants weren’t using phones or computers and were conducting their sensitive business in rooms specially guarded from technological espionage or going underground.

But Avivi said the failure extends beyond just intelligence gathering and Israel’s security services failed to put together an accurate picture from the intelligence they were receiving, based on what he said was a misconception surrounding Hamas’ intentions.

Israel’s security establishment has in recent years increasingly seen Hamas as an actor interested in governing, seeking to develop Gaza’s economy and improving the standard of living of Gaza’s 2.3 million people. Avivi and others say the truth is that Hamas, which calls for Israel’s destruction, still sees that aim as its priority.

Israel in recent years has allowed up to 18,000 Palestinian laborers from Gaza to work in Israel, where they can earn a salary about 10 times higher than in the impoverished coastal enclave. The security establishment saw that carrot as a way to maintain relative calm.

“In practice, hundreds if not thousands of Hamas men were preparing for a surprise attack for months, without that having leaked,” wrote Amos Harel, a defense commentator, in the daily Haaretz. “The results are catastrophic.”

Allies who share intelligence with Israel said security agencies were misreading reality.

An Egyptian intelligence official said Egypt, which often serves as a mediator between Israel and Hamas, had spoken repeatedly with the Israelis about “something big,” without elaborating.

He said Israeli officials were focused on the West Bank and played down the threat from Gaza. Netanyahu’s government is made up of supporters of Jewish West Bank settlers who have demanded a security crackdown in the face of a rising tide of violence there over the last 18 months.

“We have warned them an explosion of the situation is coming, and very soon, and it would be big. But they underestimated such warnings,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to discuss the content of sensitive intelligence discussions with the media.

Israel has also been preoccupied and torn apart by Netanyahu’s judicial overhaul plan. Netanyahu had received repeated warnings by his defense chiefs, as well as several former leaders of the country’s intelligence agencies, that the divisive plan was chipping away at the cohesion of the country’s security services.

Martin Indyk, who served as a special envoy for Israeli-Palestinian negotiations during the Obama administration, said internal divisions over the legal changes was an aggravating factor that contributed to the Israelis being caught off guard.

“That roiled the IDF in a way that was, I think, we discovered was a huge distraction,” he said.

Associated Press writers Samy Magdy in Cairo and Aamer Madhani in Washington contributed to this report.

Hamas Assault Echoes 1973 Arab-Israeli War – A Shock Attack And Questions Of Political, Intelligence Culpability

A member of the security forces walks past an Israeli police station in Sderot on Oct 8, 2023. Ronaldo Schemidt/AFP via Getty Images

BY DOV WAXMAN

The parallels were striking – and surely not coincidental.

Exactly 50 years and a day after being taken completely off guard by a coordinated military attack by its neighbors – Egypt and Syria – Israel was again caught by surprise.

Early on Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas militants invaded southern Israel by land, sea and air, and fired thousands of rockets deep into the country. Within hours, hundreds of Israelis were killed, hostages taken and war declared. Fierce Israeli reprisals have already taken the lives of hundreds of Palestinians in Gaza, and many more will surely be dead by the time this war is over.

Because war it is. After the Hamas attacks began and the Israeli death toll grew, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared the country is at war, just as it was 50 years ago.

And that is not where the parallels end.

Both wars began with surprise attacks on Jewish holy days. In 1973, it was Yom Kippur, a day of atonement for Jews. This time it was Simchat Torah, when Jews celebrate reading the Torah.

Hamas, the Palestinian militant group in control of the densely populated Gaza Strip that adjoins Israel, seemingly hopes to send the same message that Egypt and Syria delivered in October 1973: They will not accept the status quo, and Israel’s military might will not keep Israelis safe.

The 1973 war proved to be a watershed moment not only in the Arab-Israeli conflict but also for the politics of Israel. Will this war be the same?

Caught flat-footed both times

Certainly, the sudden outbreak of war has again left Israelis deeply shocked, just as it did 50 years ago. This war, like the one in 1973, is already being framed as a colossal intelligence failure.

Although Israeli military intelligence had warned the government that the country’s enemies believed Israel vulnerable, the intelligence establishment did not expect Hamas to attack.

Rather, the intelligence assessment was that Hamas was most interested in governing the Gaza Strip and didn’t want to have a war with Israel, at least not for a while.

The assumption was that Hamas would be deterred from carrying out major attacks in Israel out of fear of Israel’s potential disproportionate retaliation bringing more devastation to Gaza. The enclave, home to 2 million Palestinians, many living in poverty, has still not recovered from the last major round of fighting in May 2021.

Instead, the intelligence establishment, and many analysts, believed that Hamas preferred to export Palestinian violence to the Israeli-occupied West Bank, where it could help to undermine the already weak and unpopular Palestinian Authority, led by Hamas’ political rival.

Their intelligence assessment has proved to be terribly wrong, just as it was prior to the outbreak of the 1973 war. Then, as now, Israel’s adversaries were not deterred by its military superiority.

Israeli intelligence not only misjudged the willingness of adversaries to go to war, but it also failed – both in 1973 and now – to recognize their enemy’s preparations.

This time, that failure is even more glaring given Israel’s extensive and sophisticated intelligence gathering capabilities. Hamas must have been carefully planning this attack for many months, right under Israel’s nose.

This is undoubtedly Israel’s worse intelligence failure since the 1973 war.

But it is not only an intelligence failure, it is also a military failure. The Israel Defense Forces, or IDF, was clearly not prepared for an attack of this magnitude – indeed, most IDF units were deployed in the West Bank.

It is true that IDF’s top brass had repeatedly warned Netanyahu Netanyahu that its military readiness had been diminished by the wave of Israeli reservists refusing to serve in protest of the government’s attempted judicial overhaul. Nonetheless, the IDF was confident that its defensive fortifications – especially the expensive hi-tech barrier that had been built around the Gaza Strip – would prevent Hamas militants from entering Israel, as they had previously done in a May 2021 raid.

But just as the so-called Bar-Lev defensive line along the Suez Canal failed to stop Egyptian soldiers from crossing the canal in 1973, the Gaza barrier did not stop Hamas militants. It was simply circumvented and bulldozed through.

The blame game begins

There will surely be the same blame game after this war as there was after the 1973 war. A commission of inquiry will probably be established, as happened after the 1973 war – the Agranat Commission – which published a scathing report, pointing the finger of blame firmly in the direction of Israel’s military and intelligence establishment.

But it is not Israel’s military and intelligence establishment that deserves most of the blame for this war. It is Israel’s political establishment – above all, Netanyahu, who has led the country since 2009, save for a one-year exception between 2021-2022.

The 1973 war was also due to a political failure, not only an intelligence failure. In fact, it was Israel’s political leadership, chiefly Prime Minister Golda Meir and her defense minister Moshe Dayan, that was primarily to blame because in the years before the war they had spurned diplomatic overtures from Egyptian President Anwar Sadat. The Israeli government was determined to retain parts of the Sinai peninsula – which Israel had captured in the 1967 war – even at the price of peace with Egypt.

Similarly, Netanyahu has ignored recent Egyptian efforts to broker a long-term truce between Israel, Hamas and fellow militant group Palestinian Islamic Jihad. And Israel’s current far-right government prefers to retain the occupied West Bank rather than pursue the possibility of peace with the Palestinians.

Moreover, the Netanyahu government has been preoccupied with its widely unpopular attempt to reduce the power and independence of Israel’s Supreme Court, a move seemingly aimed at removing a potential obstacle to a formal annexation of the West Bank. The domestic turmoil and deep divisions that the proposed judicial overhaul have created in Israel is almost certainly one reason why Hamas decided to attack now.

More broadly, with the latest attack it is clear that Netanyahu’s strategy to contain and deter Hamas has failed catastrophically. It has been catastrophic for Israelis, especially those living in the south of the country, and even more so for Palestinian civilians in Gaza.

Maintaining a blockade of Gaza for 16 years, crippling its economy and effectively imprisoning its 2 million residents, has not brought Hamas to its knees.

Rather, Hamas’ control over Gaza, sustained by repression, has only tightened. Innocent civilians on both sides of the border have paid a high price for this failure.

In the wake of the 1973 war, Meir was forced to resign, and a few years later, the ruling Labor Party – which had been in power, in various guises, since the country’s founding in 1948 – was defeated by Menachem Begin’s right-wing Likud Party in the 1977 general election. This was a watershed moment in Israeli domestic politics that was brought about in large part by the public’s loss of confidence in the then-dominant Labor Party as a result of the 1973 war.

Will history repeat itself this time around? Will this war finally spell the end for Netanyahu and Likud’s long dominance of Israeli politics? Most Israelis have already turned against Netanyahu, repelled by the mix of corruption scandals that surround him, his attempts to downgrade the power of the judiciary and the lurch to the right that his ruling coalition represents.

More Israelis may now do so because this devastating surprise attack surely contradicts any claim by Netanyahu of being Israel’s “Mr. Security”.

Whatever the outcome of this new war and its political repercussions in Israel, it is already clear that its outbreak will be long remembered by Israelis with great sadness and anger, just like the 1973 war still is.

Indeed, it will probably be even more traumatic for Israelis than that war was because while in 1973 it was members of the military bearing the brunt of the surprise assault, this time it is Israeli civilians who have been captured and killed, and on sovereign Israeli territory. In this crucial respect, then, this war is unlike the one in 1973.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

The Israel-Hamas War: No Matter Who Loses, Iran Wins

BY AARON PILKINGTON

There will be only one winner in the war that has broken out between Israel and the Palestinian militant group Hamas. And it is neither Israel nor Hamas.

In an operation coined “the Al-Aqsa Storm,” Hamas, whose formal name is the Islamic Resistance Movement, fired thousands of rockets into Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad fighters infiltrated Israel by land, sea and air. Hundreds of Israelis have been killed, more than 2,000 injured, and many taken hostage.

In response, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared war on Hamas and launched airstrikes in Gaza. In the first day of reprisals, close to 400 Palestinians were killed, according to the Palestinian Health Ministry.

In the weeks ahead, the Israeli military will surely retaliate and kill hundreds more Palestinian militants and civilians. As an analyst of Middle East politics and security, I believe that thousands on both sides will suffer. But when the smoke settles, only one country’s interests will have been served: Iran’s.

Already, some analysts are suggesting that Tehran’s fingerprints can be seen on the surprise attack on Israel. At the very least, Iran’s leaders have reacted to the assault with encouragement and support.

The champion of Palestine

The decisive factor shaping Iran’s foreign policy was the 1979 overthrow of the U.S.-friendly, repressive Shah of Iran and the transfer of state power into the hands of a Shiite Muslim revolutionary regime. That regime was defined by stark anti-American imperialism and anti-Israeli Zionism.

The revolution, its leaders claimed, was not just against the corrupt Iranian monarchy; it was intended to confront oppression and injustice everywhere, and especially those governments backed by the United States – chief among them, Israel.

For Iran’s leaders, Israel and the United States represented immorality, injustice and the greatest threat to Muslim society and Iranian security. The enduring hostility felt toward Israel is in no small part due to its close ties with the shah and Israel’s role in his sustained oppression of the Iranian people. Together with the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, Israel’s intelligence service, the Mossad, helped organize the shah’s secret police and intelligence service, the SAVAK. This organization relied on increasingly harsh tactics to put down dissenters during the shah’s last two decades in power, including mass imprisonment, torture, disappearances, forced exile and killing thousands of Iranians.

Support for Palestinian liberation was a central theme of Iran’s revolutionary message. The 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon – in retaliation for Lebanon-based Palestinian attacks against Israel – provided Iran an opportunity to live up to its anti-Zionist rhetoric by challenging Israeli soldiers in Lebanon and checking U.S. influence in the region.

Subsidizing conflict

To that end, Iran sent its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps – a branch of Iran’s military, usually known as the “Revolutionary Guard” – to Lebanon to organize and support Lebanese and Palestinian militants. In Lebanon’s Bekaa Valley, Revolutionary Guardsmen instructed Shiite resistance fighters in religion, revolutionary ideology and guerrilla tactics, and provided weapons, funds, training and encouragement. Iran’s leadership transformed these early trainees from a ragtag band of fighters into Lebanon’s most powerful political and military force today, and Iran’s greatest foreign policy success, Hezbollah.

Since the early 1980s, Iran has maintained support for anti-Israeli militant groups and operations. The Islamic Republic has publicly pledged millions of dollars of annual support to groups and provides advanced military training for thousands of Palestinian fighters at Revolutionary Guard and Hezbollah bases in Iran and Lebanon.

Iran runs a sophisticated smuggling network to funnel weapons into Gaza, which has long been cut off from the outside world by an Israeli blockade.

Via the Revolutionary Guard and Hezbollah, Iran has encouraged and enabled Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hamas violence, and these Palestinian fighters now represent a crucial element in what foreign affairs analysts call Iran’s “Axis of Resistance” against Israel and the United States, which constitutes Iran’s chief purpose.

But Iran cannot risk confronting either state directly.

Iranian weapons, funds and training enable surges in Palestinian militant violence against Israel when frustrations boil over, including during the Palestinian uprisings known as the first and second intifadas.

Israeli-Palestinian conflicts and death tolls have escalated steadily since 2020. Palestinians are outraged by increased evictions and destruction of property, and how Israel allows Israeli nationalists and settlers to violate a long-standing agreement preventing Jewish prayer at the Al-Aqsa Mosque – a site holy to both Muslims and Jews. In fact, a recent incursion by settlers into Al-Aqsa was specifically cited by Hamas as a justification for the Oct. 7 attack.

Attacking normalization

That is not to say that Iran ordered Hamas’ attack on Israel, nor that Iran controls Palestinian militants – they are not Iranian puppets. Nevertheless, Iran’s leaders welcomed the attacks, the timing of which serendipitously works in Iran’s favor and plays into the Islamic republic’s regional battle for influence.

“What took place today is in line with the continuation of victories for the anti-Zionist resistance in different fields, including Syria, Lebanon and occupied lands,” according to Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson Nasser Kanani.

The week before the Hamas attack, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman denied reports that Saudi Arabia had paused its recent efforts to normalize relations with Israel, which includes a formal declaration of Israel’s right to exist and increased diplomatic engagement. “Every day we get closer,” he said, an assessment praised and echoed by Netanyahu.

Israeli-Saudi normalization would represent the pinnacle of achievement thus far in U.S. diplomatic efforts, including the Abraham Accords, signed by Israel, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Morocco in 2020. The accords aimed to normalize and build peaceful relations between Israel and Arab countries across the Middle East and in Africa.

Iranian supreme leader Ali Khamenei lambasted Arab states for signing the Abraham Accords, accusing them of “treason against the global Islamic community.”

Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah praised Saturday’s violence against Israel and echoed Khamenei’s sentiments, warning that the attacks sent a message, “especially to those seeking normalization with this enemy.”

Israel’s expected heavy-handed response is likely to complicate Saudi Arabia’s normalization with Israel in the near term, furthering Iran’s aims. Netanyahu said that Israel’s retaliatory operation seeks three objectives: to eliminate the threat of infiltrators and restore peace to attacked Israeli communities, to simultaneously “exact an immense price from the enemy” in Gaza, and to reinforce “other fronts so that nobody should mistakenly join this war.” This last objective is a subtle but clear warning to Hezbollah and Iran to stay out of the fight.

Israeli troops have already mobilized to secure its borders, and airstrikes have hit Gaza. In all likelihood, Palestinian attackers will be killed or arrested in a matter of days. Israeli troops and air forces will target known or suspected rocket launch, manufacturing, storage and transportation sites, along with the homes of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad members. But in the process, hundreds of civilians will likely also lose their lives.

I believe that Iran expects and welcomes all of this.

How Iran wins

There are at least three possible outcomes to the war, and they all play in Iran’s favor.

First, Israel’s heavy-handed response may turn off Saudi Arabia and other Arab states to U.S.-backed Israeli normalization efforts. Second, if Israel deems it necessary to push further into Gaza to eradicate the threat, this could provoke another Palestinian uprising in East Jerusalem or the West Bank, leading to a more widespread Israeli response and greater instability.

Lastly, Israel could achieve its first two objectives with the minimal amount of force necessary, foregoing usual heavy-handed tactics and reducing chances of escalation. But this is unlikely. And even if this occurred, the underlying causes that led to this latest outbreak of violence, and the enabling role Iran plays in that process, have not been addressed.

And when the next round of Israeli-Palestinian violence occurs – and it will – I believe Iran’s leaders will again congratulate themselves for a job well done.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

20 years after the publication of ‘Purple Hibiscus,’ a generation of African writers have followed in Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s footsteps

Nigerian writer Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, Torino, Italy, October 2021. Image: Leonardo Cendamo/Getty

BY SIMON LEWIS

Twenty years ago, in October 2003, 26-year-old Nigerian author Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie burst onto the North American publishing scene with her debut novel,“ Purple Hibiscus.”

Since then, Adichie’s literary fame has only grown: She’s published two more novels and a collection of short stories, while two of her TED talks have garnered tens of millions of views. In September 2023, she published her first children’s book – a joyful celebration of mother-daughter love – under the nom de plume Nwa Grace-James.

But the October 2003 publication of “Purple Hibiscus” didn’t just signal the start of a single author’s brilliant career. It also forged a path for a whole new generation of African novelists who had come to America as immigrants or students and who have been mining that experience in their writing.

The struggles to get published by prior generations of African authors are almost legendary. Thirty years apart, Chinua Achebe and Tsitsi Dangarembga have both described how close their manuscripts of “Things Fall Apart” (1958) and “Nervous Conditions” (1988) came to being lost. Achebe’s only copy of the manuscript was a handwritten draft. He sent it to a typing agency in London that nearly dismissed it as a joke. Dangarembga’s manuscript sat unread in the basement of a British publishing house for years. Only when the writer stopped by the offices during a work trip to London did the editors agree to read it.

Through attending American MFA programs, however, Adichie and her contemporaries were able to tap into the networks of agents and found their work snapped up by American publishers.

Writers born in Africa who studied at American universities – Teju Cole, Yaa Gyasi, Uzodinma Iweala, NoViolet Bulawayo and Akwaeke Emezi, to name just a few – have followed in Adichie’s footsteps.

“Purple Hibiscus” has been to these writers what Gabriel García Márquez’s “One Hundred Years of Solitude” (1967) was to aspiring Latin American writers during the Latin American literary boom of the 1960s and 1970s, and what Salman Rushdie’s “Midnight’s Children” (1981) was to the proliferation of Indian writers in English from the 1980s on.

While it would be reassuring to think that the current surge of African novelists represents a wider American interest in all things African, the success of these novels may also have to do with the fact that so many are actually set in the U.S.

The recurrent theme of immigration to the U.S. gives many of these works direct – and instructive – relevance to U.S. readers. As Black outsiders in the U.S., African immigrants have a particularly acute insight into the way race and racism affect daily life in this country. One of the common features of these novels is the way in which they explore the tension of racial solidarity and mutual misunderstanding between African immigrants and Black Americans.

When I first started teaching African literature, I often had difficulty finding books in print. Now my problem is deciding who to leave out of my syllabus. Here is a very brief list of some of the books that I would consider must-reads.

1. Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, “Americanah” (2013)

As its title suggests, Adichie’s fourth novel, “Americanah,” is arguably the definitive novel of contemporary African immigration to America.

It tells the story of Ifemelu, a young Nigerian woman overstaying her student visa, and how she negotiates the new Black identity forced on her by the blunt instrument of American race-construction.

In a brilliant metafictional move, Adichie has Ifemelu achieve internet fame by writing a blog dedicated to non-American Blacks: “Dear Non-American Black,” Ifemelu writes, “when you make the choice to come to America, you become black. Stop arguing. Stop saying I’m Jamaican or I’m Ghanaian. America doesn’t care. So what if you weren’t ‘black’ in your country? You’re in America now.”

Ifemelu’s experience of racism is simultaneously hurtful and baffling to her. On the one hand, her illegal status makes her both psychologically and physically vulnerable. But at times American racism is almost comical; Ifemelu doesn’t understand why an innocent reference to eating watermelon might be misconstrued, for instance, and she is totally bewildered by a shop assistant’s attempt to avoid distinguishing between two shoppers by reference to their skin color.

2. Yaa Gyasi, “Homegoing” (2016)

Ghanaian-born Yaa Gyasi’s debut novel takes the form of a series of skillfully interwoven stories set on either side of the Atlantic.

Beginning with two half sisters, Effia and Esi, in the Gold Coast in the middle of the 18th century, the stories trace the two sets of the sisters’ descendants through six subsequent generations in West Africa and the U.S. In the final two stories we meet the young teenager Marjorie, who, as the American-born daughter of Ghanaian parents, struggles to come to terms with her identity as one of Ifemelu’s “Non-American Blacks.” She finds herself ostracized by her Black classmates for “acting white” but is unable to enjoy a normal relationship with a white classmate. One of the only Black teachers at her high school tells her, “You’re here now, and here black is black is black.”

3. NoViolet Bulawayo, “We Need New Names” (2013)

When “We Need New Names” appeared, Nigerian novelist Helon Habila accused NoViolet Bulawayo of peddling “poverty-porn” by pandering to American stereotypes of Africa.

However, for Bulawayo’s teenage protagonist Darling, it’s American culture that is dangerously dysfunctional – and personally discombobulating. Darling finds American high school ridiculously easy, is horrified by the laxness of American parenting and is generally unimpressed by the urban blight she sees around her in the city she calls Destroyed, Michigan.

Late in the novel, her mentally ill countryman Tshaka Zulu is shot to death by police when off his meds and ranting in his home language. You might think that such a violent, tragic event would be a major plot driver. Sadly, it seems to exemplify just one more random peril – little different from being hit by a car or struck down by cancer – that many Africans coming to America have to endure.

4. Uzodinma Iweala, “Speak No Evil” (2018)

Even wealth and class status offer no protection from such perils.

In Uzodinma Iweala’s “Speak No Evil,” the main character, Niru, is the high-achieving son of high-achieving Nigerian parents in supposedly cosmopolitan Washington, D.C. The first three-quarters of the book appear to be exploring Niru’s dilemma: how to come out as gay to his conservative parents.

It turns out that Niru’s gayness – an invisible characteristic, after all – is not the problem; his Blackness is. When he gets in a row outside a bar with his best friend, Meredith – an equally well-off, well-connected, high-flying white female classmate – someone calls the cops. In the space of a paragraph the inevitable has happened: Shots are fired. “You’re safe,” someone says to Meredith. “He can’t hurt you.”

By extraordinary coincidence, Adichie grew up in the very house that Chinua Achebe had lived in on the campus of the University of Nigeria in Nsukka. She, and the other writers of her generation, grew up in the house of fiction that Achebe and his generation established. The writers of that older generation were concerned with the material and cultural despoliation of colonialism. In Achebe’s words, their task was to let their African readers know “where the rain began to beat” them.

Today’s African writers demand readers’ attention by letting them know that for African and African-descended people in the U.S., although the winds may have shifted, the storm is far from over.

South Africa’s Surveillance Law Is Changing But Citizens’ Privacy Is Still At Risk

BY JANE DUNCAN

In a ringing judgment for the right to privacy, the South African Constitutional Court declared sections of the country’s main communication surveillance law unconstitutional in February 2021.

The court gave parliament three years to pass a new law remedying the areas of unconstitutionality. The February 2024 deadline for these amendments is looming fast.

The Regulation of Interception of Communication and Provision of Communication Related Information Act (Rica) was intended in part to protect privacy, combat crime and promote national security. It requires all cellphone sim cards in the country to be registered, and prohibits interception of people’s communications without their consent, except under certain conditions.

But Rica had some weaknesses which have been abused by rogue elements in intelligence. The court case was brought by the amaBhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism, after the state misused Rica to spy on the centre’s managing partner, Sam Sole, in an attempt to reveal his sources of information.

The justice ministry has produced an amendment bill to meet the court’s deadline.

Having researched issues relating to communication surveillance and its oversight for years, my view is that the amendment bill is flawed. It doesn’t provide enough safeguards against the violation of privacy.

The problem with Rica

In terms of Rica, intelligence and law enforcement agencies must apply to a special, retired judge for interception directions (or warrants) to conduct surveillance to solve serious crimes and protect national security. The judge is appointed by the justice minister.

The court found Rica to be unconstitutional on the following five grounds:

People don’t have to be told that they have been under surveillance.

The appointment and renewal processes for the Rica judge lack independence.

The judge only has to hear from one side: those applying for interception warrants.

Rica does not ensure that intercepted data is safely managed.

Rica fails to recognise that lawyers and journalists have a professional duty to keep their sources and communications confidential.

The court prescribed two interim measures while the law was being redrafted. The first was that within 90 days of an interception direction (warrant) having lapsed, those state agencies applying for surveillance need to inform the surveillance subject that they have been spied on. The second is that applicants must also tell the judge if the surveillance subject is a lawyer or journalist.
Post-surveillance notification

With the proposed amendments, the justice ministry has responded largely by reproducing the court’s first interim measure. However, it has added another clause stating that if notifying someone that they have been surveilled could potentially have a negative impact on national security, then the judge may withhold notification and for such period as may be determined by the judge.

This clause is too broad and does not provide an ultimate deadline for notification. It introduces speculation into the decision-making. That’s because the impact needs merely to be possible. There is no requirement to show a national security threat, merely a possible negative impact.

Independence of the Rica judge

The justice ministry has inserted a requirement for the Rica judge to be appointed by the justice minister, in consultation with the Chief Justice. This is adequate to the extent that it means that decision does not rest with the executive only.

The ministry has also introduced an entirely new position of a review judge, to automatically review the decisions of the Rica judge. It would have been better to build automatic review into the process once surveillance subjects have been notified. That might make the review process more robust as the subject may provide details that shed new light on the Rica judge’s decisions. If the judge’s decision to grant the warrant was misplaced, this could lead to the original decision being overturned or intercepted material being destroyed.

However, given the load of several hundred cases a year, one judge may not be enough, either at the decision stage or the review stage. Consideration should be given to establishing a panel of judges.

Hearing both sides

It is possible that the review judge was introduced to respond to the problem of hearing only from the applicant (the “ex parte” problem). If that is the case, then it is not an adequate response. Both judges will still be making decisions based on the same one-sided secret evidence.

Rather, as amaBhungane argued in the Constitutional Court case, the bill could include a new position of a public advocate, to defend the interests of the surveillance subjects.

The public advocate could be granted security clearance, in line with well-recognised processes involving “cleared counsel”.

Such lawyers have clearance to access the secret evidence the state is relying on. They are on the same footing as the agency applying for surveillance. They will be able to interrogate the case beyond what is provided for in the application.

As has been argued recently, the public advocate could represent the interests of surveillance subjects who decide to take decisions on review following post-surveillance notification.
Confidentiality for lawyers and journalists

Regarding the need for the applicant to inform the judge that a subject is a journalist or lawyer, the ministry has left out an important safeguard from the interim measure provided by Constitutional Court’s judgment. It required the judge to grant the warrant only if necessary, which means that the warrant must be an investigative method of last resort.

On the management of surveillance data, the court required more details in the law on how and where surveillance data must be accessed, stored and destroyed. The justice ministry has failed to provide such detail.

Metadata surveillance

The amendment bill is silent on possibly the most serious surveillance issue, relating to the state’s massive and underregulated surveillance of data about a person’s communication, or metadata. Rica allows the state to use procedures other than those provided for in the act to access metadata.

For example, the state has preferred to use section 205 of the Criminal Procedure Act as it contains much lower privacy standards than Rica. It is thus open to abuse.

One solution is to make Rica the only law governing access to metadata, but retain the procedure whereby the ordinary courts can grant warrants, rather than restricting decision-making to the Rica judge only, to ensure speedy decision-making.

Missed opportunity

The justice ministry had more than enough time for the review of Rica, section 205 and the entire surveillance setup to assess whether they were still fit for purpose.

The failure is an indictment on the ministry’s leadership of the review process. It missed the opportunity to address the growing concerns about unaccountable state spying.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE