RSS Feeds

The expansion of illegal Israeli settlements and outposts in the West Bank, alongside the ongoing horror of life in Gaza, makes the need for a two-state solution between Israel and Palestine more urgent and necessary than ever. International dithering and procrastination must stop to preserve any chance of sustainable peace.

This was our conclusion after visiting the West Bank as part of a wider Middle East trip that included meetings with Palestinian, Israeli, Lebanese, and Jordanian leaders. 

It is clear to us that the Government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s policies threaten to make Palestine disappear politically, culturally, economically, and physically. 

Traveling through the West Bank, we had a visceral sense of a land and people under deepening occupation. Everyday life is impeded at every turn. Settler violence is an integral part of this strategy, designed to intimidate and terrorize Palestinians off their land. Far from being the work of a small number of “juvenile delinquents” as he claims, it is a state-backed campaign undertaken with the active support of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). 

We saw at first-hand how state-backed settlement expansion operates. First, hillside outposts are established by a handful of settlers. Even though these are illegal under Israel’s own laws, we heard directly how they are systematically and swiftly protected by the IDF despite Israeli authorities from time to time condemning settler violence. Connections to water and electricity supplies typically follow, as do roads reserved for Israelis only. 

The result is the physical and administrative carve-up of the West Bank. Palestinian communities are distanced from each other, their land, and the possibility of a future Palestinian state. 

Among the blatant evidence of what is happening is the decades-old E1 settlement plan for Palestinian territory east of Jerusalem. On Aug. 18, the Israeli Housing Ministry issued a tender for over 1,200 units, setting off a process which,  if completed, would sever East Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank and thereby disrupt the territorial contiguity of a Palestinian state.

E1 has long been a red line even for Israel's staunchest allies. Previous Israeli governments, including those led by Prime Minister Netanyahu, have stopped short of actually proceeding, in part due to international pressure. Now that commercial tenders are being issued and construction contracts potentially signed, any companies and banks tempted to get involved would be breaching international law and have been warned to that effect by a number of Western countries and the European Commission.

Israel’s friends and allies must demand E1’s cancellation—not just postponement or freezing, but definitively ruling it out as a threat to the two-state solution which is necessary for both Israel and Palestine to have peace and security. 

Many Israelis recognize this threat and oppose the growing extremism and intolerance in their politics and society at large. For instance, we met with President Isaac Herzog on our visit, who condemned settler violence. We also acknowledge the deep trauma Israel’s people suffered after the Hamas terror attacks of October 7, which included the detention of hostages contrary to all international law. 

We take inspiration from the brave Israeli and Palestinian civil society activists we met. They remain determined to combat impunity for abuses and injustice, and to strive for a future for both peoples based on equality and respect for international law.

Yet this vision is far from the reality we saw on our visit. We saw how ongoing settlement of the West Bank and the sustained violence against and displacement of Palestinians threatens ethnic cleansing and annexation. Combined with the occupation of Gaza, including renewed calls by Israeli ministers for new settlements in the Strip, we are convinced that what is underway is the conquest and erasure of one state by another. 

This is the logic of some of the bloodiest wars of previous centuries. It is what Russia is seeking to do in its illegal war of aggression against Ukraine. But it cannot be an acceptable way for a country which calls itself a democracy to behave in the 21st century. 

Our visit ended in Brussels, where we met with representatives of the European Commission and EU member states. The EU was founded as a values-based organization to promote peaceful cooperation between nations. Given its significant trade relations with Israel, it could play a decisive role now in exerting pressure on Prime Minister Netanyahu and his government.

Yet what is lacking is the political will to take even basic steps. In line with international law, the EU considers Israeli settlements to be illegal, yet EU members continue to trade with Israel. Suspending preferential trade under the EU-Israel Association Agreement is another overdue step due to Israel’s failure to comply with human rights requirements, as already called for by the European Commission. Nor has the EU collectively sanctioned extremist ministers Smotrich and Ben Gvir. 

There is still time to change course before it is too late, but only just.  

Meta waved a white flag on Wednesday in a long-running battle over claims it used deceptive tactics to get teens addicted to social media, reaching a roughly $18 billion settlement agreement and pledging to make sweeping changes to Facebook and Instagram to address teen safety. 

The landmark settlement marks the end of a major federal lawsuit filed by a bipartisan coalition of dozens of state attorneys general, which alleged it got teens hooked on social media while jeopardizing their mental health and safety.

The settlement, which applies to 48 states and the District of Columbia, was greeted with cautious optimism by advocates arguing tech companies should be legally responsible for the harms they pose to teens.  

“My first thought was vindication,” said Matthew Bergman, founder of the Social Media Victims Law Center, which has filed thousands of lawsuits against tech companies over youth safety issues. “Meta has been steadfastly arguing that its platforms are not addictive. That it didn’t do anything wrong. That anything that's occurred for children is their fault or the fault of their parents.”

If approved by a federal judge, the settlement would satisfy claims first lodged in Oct. 2023, in which the states accused Meta of violating consumer-protection laws and the federal Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act by publicly downplaying what it knew about the risks of its products while taking maneuvers to keep kids scrolling their platforms even as it caused them mental distress. 

State attorneys general, school districts, and parents have argued that Meta and other social-media companies made deliberate design choices to keep young people glued to their products, including “autoplay,” in which the platform automatically surfaces another video after a user has watched one; “like” counts on social-media posts; and “infinite scrolls” that give users an endless stream of posts on their feeds.

Tech companies disputed those claims, arguing they were protected from legal liability over the effect of user-generated content posted on social media through Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. The companies have also questioned whether social media was causing young people harm, and pointed to various safety tools they implemented to keep teens safe. 

“Ensuring teens have a safe and productive experience on our platforms is an absolute imperative for Meta,” the company said in a statement on the settlement. “We want to get this right for parents and teens, and that’s why we partnered with state attorneys general to set a new industry standard.”

The agreement came during the second week of a federal bellwether trial in Oakland, Calif., which had been expected to feature testimony from executives such as CEO Mark Zuckerberg, an examination of the company’s internal research, email exchanges between employees, and a slew of safety experts. The states and Meta will also choose an independent auditor to review the company’s compliance with the agreement. 

While the settlement is expected to end the trial, experts tell TIME it leaves three key questions still to be resolved:

Will Meta’s new youth time limits work?  

Among the most significant changes Meta announced as part of the settlement were usage limits for teens under 18, who will be restricted to two hours per day across Facebook and Instagram combined. The setting can only be changed with a parent’s permission. The company will block teens from using Instagram and Facebook between midnight and 6 a.m., though it's making an exception for direct messages. Meta also agreed not to send push notifications to teens during normal school hours. Teens will be notified every 15 minutes of continuous use of Facebook or Instagram and after an hour of use. 

The new default settings may help address criticism that the company took extreme measures to hook kids on its platforms, especially at times when they should have been focused on school or sleeping. But Meta’s settlement allows teens far more wiggle room to sidestep other safety features. 

Some of the new controls will require user opt-in. Under the agreement, young people (or their parents) can choose a non-algorithmic feed option for their social-media accounts, where the order of content they see isn’t determined by Meta’s recommendation systems. Teens and their parents can also turn off autoplay, so those under the age of 18 have to deliberately press play to see the next video. 

But research shows people rarely change their settings from companies’ default offerings, and parents may not understand what those options mean, says Zvika Krieger, a former director of Meta’s responsible innovation team who is now a consultant for technology companies. Additionally, “if young users are just using adult accounts, all this is worthless,” says Krieger, who added that Meta offered little information about how it would improve its age-assurance techniques to spot teens who might be lying about their age. There should be “some concrete level of accountability rather than just saying we're working on improving our age assurance.”

How will other tech companies respond? 

The settlement has an unusual quirk: Meta agreed to pay 70% of the settlement total—some $12.7 billion—over the next decade. But the remaining $5.3 billion is conditional, depending on whether YouTube and TikTok implement similar or more restrictive settings, including a one-hour daily time limit. 

At a time when Meta faces fierce competition in the teen market from those competitors, the company is planning to run full-page print ads on Thursday in the The Washington Post, New York Times and the Los Angeles Times calling to make those settings the “new industry standard.” Neither TikTok nor Google, which owns YouTube, have commented.

In the past, tech companies have often copied one another’s safety policies. How competitors will respond to Meta’s settlement agreement is an open question.  

What happens to similar cases focused on youth safety? 

In addition to the action brought by state attorneys general, school districts and families have filed thousands of lawsuits against tech platforms including Meta, Google, Snap, and TikTok, alleging that the design of their products caused harmful consequences for teens.  In March, a jury found Meta and YouTube’s product design led to the mental distress of a young woman, and ordered the companies to pay $4.2 million and $1.8 million in damages respectively. 

The settlement doesn't change legal precedents governing other ongoing cases. But it does add to plaintiffs’ momentum in the courts, which could lead to more cases, according to Bergman.

Meanwhile, U.S. states and other countries have proposed regulations to restrict teen access to social media, or force tech companies to take bolder actions to safeguard their experience online. Meta has often been the focus of these proposals. It’s possible that regulators could focus their attention on AI companies that haven’t yet faced the same level of legal scrutiny. 

Federal officials on Wednesday announced they had disrupted a yearslong Chinese hacking campaign that compromised or targeted several U.S. institutions, including NASA, the Federal Reserve, and even the Senate.

The Justice Department said in a statement it had seized internet domains used by two hacking platforms, called “QScan” and “QTRouter,” that were created and operated by a Chinese state-sponsored group. The platforms were used to target U.S. critical infrastructure and other sensitive networks. FBI Director Kash Patel said tools were used by Chinese government actors “to hide the origin of their attacks.”

An attached affidavit from an FBI agent accused the state-sponsored group, referred to as “QTFY,” of targeting the Department of Energy, Department of Justice, Department of Health and Human Services, and the National Institutes of Health. The group also allegedly targeted networks “operated by hospitals, telecommunications providers, power companies, financial institutions, and defense contractors.”

The DOJ’s announcement did not specify if anybody had been charged or apprehended in relation to the hacking, and the extent of what has been compromised remains unclear. TIME has reached out to the DOJ for comment.

The group’s hacking activity, which dates back to 2018 according to the FBI, adds to an ongoing record of U.S. allegations of Chinese state-backed cyberespionage operations.

A spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, D.C. pushed back against the accusations in a statement to TIME, insisting that China is a “firm defender” of cybersecurity.

“China firmly opposes the U.S. overstretching the concept of national security and using it as a pretext to impose discriminatory restrictions on Chinese companies and will firmly safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese companies,” the spokesperson said, urging the U.S. to stop using such issues to “smear or discredit” the country.

A yearslong hacking campaign

QTFY members, according to the DOJ affidavit, include former members of the People’s Liberation Army—China’s military forces—who used their PLA relationships “to obtain contracts and subcontracts supporting offensive cyber operations.” The QTFY actors were allegedly employed by the Nanjing Xinjiuwei Network Technology Company, which “conducts malicious cyber activities” for the Chinese government, per the FBI.

The affidavit stated that not all of the attempted intrusions had been successful.

In August 2019, the group failed in attempting to break into NASA's server by exploiting a vulnerability in its virtual private network.

In September 2024, QTFY actors conducted computer intrusions at three unnamed laboratories of the Department of Energy, the NIH, an HHS agency, and another unnamed U.S. security device manufacturer.

Other efforts by the hacking group were detailed in a joint cybersecurity advisory authored by the FBI, the National Security Agency, and the U.S. Cyber Command's Cyber National Mission Force.

According to the advisory, the group conducted a vulnerability scan of the U.S. Senate and an American hospital system in March 2026, and of an unidentified U.S. election system in June 2026. Both attempts to gain access to these networks failed.

Speaking to Fox News, Attorney General Todd Blanche said Wednesday that the operation has been happening for many years and is a “major national security issue” for the U.S., adding that the authorities have not only stopped the operation, but have also shared the information with the private sector to stop further attempts.

Cybersecurity has been a source of tension between the U.S. and China—two geopolitical rivals.

The 2026 Annual Threat Assessment from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence says China “is the most active and persistent cyber threat to U.S. Government, private-sector, and critical infrastructure networks.”

In 2023, the U.S. identified and disrupted operations by Chinese state-sponsored group Volt Typhoon to intrude into U.S. energy, transportation and water networks, to potentially sabotage operations during geopolitical crises. The following year, Chinese government-linked hackers were said to have targeted the phone communications of President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance, who were then running for office, as part of a larger cyber-espionage campaign.

The Justice Department’s latest announcement comes a month before Trump’s counterpart Xi Jinping is expected to head to the U.S. amid continuing disputes in trade and technology.

As to whether Trump should bring up the alleged hacking from China when Xi visits, Blanche said he would not tell the President what to discuss.

“This is something that we have talked about with our counterparts in China for many, many years. And we know that it’s happening. And they know that we know that it’s happening. And it has to stop,” he added.