The Israeli military is nearing completion of a vast trench and earthen barrier project designed to divide the Gaza Strip effectively in two. According to a report by the Israel-based newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth, fortification works are concentrated in the eastern sector of the Yellow Line, which separates Israeli-occupied zones from areas under Hamas control.

Alongside the deep trench excavated to block vehicular passage, an elevated earthen berm is being erected using excavated soil. Israeli units are also conducting ground drilling at regular intervals along the route to detect cross-border tunnels extending into Israeli territory.

Controlling approximately 70% of Gaza’s territory, Israeli forces are consolidating their occupation area through this fortification line.

Excavations exceed designated boundary line

The plan to partition Gaza was first detected via satellite imagery in July of this year, revealing that construction extended hundreds of metres beyond the Yellow Line.

According to data cited by the Haaretz newspaper, the trench advances more than one kilometre beyond that designated line at certain critical points in southern Gaza.

Exceeding the line by roughly 400 metres in the Khan Younis area, the line extends along Salah al-Din Road, the primary transit artery between northern and southern Gaza.

In the Rafah sector, excavations reportedly reach approximately 1,300 metres beyond the Yellow Line. Through these works, which have continued without interruption for months, the Israeli military is expanding its de facto presence on the ground.

Permanent military bases built beyond ceasefire boundary

The Yellow Line was defined under the ceasefire agreement signed last year as the withdrawal boundary to which Israeli troops would pull back in the initial phase.

However, despite the plan announced by the US in October 2025 and the ceasefire process, Israeli forces advanced beyond the boundary and constructed permanent military positions along the line.

The Israeli administration conditions subsequent withdrawal phases on the disarmament of Hamas. Palestinian factions, conversely, stress that they will not surrender weapons unless an independent Palestinian state is established.

Yedioth Ahronoth pointed out that, despite the war, Hamas maintains administrative control across certain sectors of Gaza. The newspaper carried the headline: “Three years after October 7, Hamas still governs Gaza.”

Israeli officials speaking to the newspaper noted that they would continue targeting Hamas members, stating: “We will act against them and kill them one by one.” The officials claimed they were awaiting suitable operational conditions to limit civilian casualties.

The Gaza Ministry of Health stated that more than 1,450 Palestinians have been killed in Israeli strikes since the October 2025 ceasefire plan.

While the flow of humanitarian aid into the besieged enclave remains restricted to low levels, the transit of emergency medical equipment, such as wheelchairs, is being curtailed.

According to data from the Gaza Civil Defence, three people, including a woman and a child, were injured on Monday, 5 October, in an attack on a tent encampment near Khan Younis.

In an Israeli military strike on a vehicle in Deir al-Balah on 4 October, a Palestinian director of a Turkish aid organisation was killed.

Germany’s Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) plans to examine the ties of the Left Party (Die Linke) and Elif Eralp to “extremist” groups.

The party’s lead candidate in Berlin, Elif Eralp, stands accused of “meeting with members of a PKK front organisation” while the election campaign was ongoing.

According to a report in WELT, Eralp has come under scrutiny by the BfV. During a Bundestag hearing with the heads of Germany’s security agencies, BfV Vice-President Sinan Selen also addressed the Left Party in the capital and its links to “extremist and terrorist” groups.

“We need to examine certain local situations very closely,” Selen said.

The domestic intelligence agency plans to investigate the extent to which Eralp and other Left Party politicians, such as Bundestag member Ferat Kocak, have established connections with “terrorist groups” and other organisations.

On election night, for instance, clan figurehead Issa Remmo, who is alleged to have ties to organised crime, and Ibrahim Ibrahim, alleged to be a supporter of the PFLP, attended the Left Party’s celebration.

Most recently, Eralp also faced criticism over her past membership in the left-wing organisation “Rote Hilfe” (Red Aid).

It is highlighted that this organisation, among other activities, collected donations for Daniela Klette, who is on trial over allegations of being a member of the RAF.

According to reporting by Bild newspaper, Eralp met during the election campaign with a delegation comprising several Kurdish organisations. Members of NAV Berlin were also present at the meeting.

Security agencies consider this group to be a front organisation for the PKK, which is banned in Germany.

During the election campaign, Eralp said that she wanted to abolish the Berlin State Office for the Protection of the Constitution.

When questioned by Bild, Eralp refrained from commenting on her stance regarding the PKK.

The domestic intelligence agency, meanwhile, issued the following statement:

“The PKK continues to be the organisation with the largest membership and the greatest influence in the field of foreign-linked extremism and terrorism in Germany.”

The leaders of France and Germany have called for the creation of a new trade instrument to cut off access to the EU market if third countries cause severe distortions.

The tool would function effectively as an emergency “kill switch”, allowing Brussels to intervene swiftly, and potentially immediately, against systemic distortions.

This would grant striking new powers to the European Commission, the EU executive body that oversees the 27-member bloc’s trade policy.

The strategy was set out in a joint paper prepared by the bloc’s two largest members and in a letter addressed to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen ahead of a critical period of EU-China negotiations.

The letter, signed by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and French President Emmanuel Macron, said: “We need a credible instrument at the Commission’s disposal that enables a decisive, systemic response: powerful measures that can be triggered through reverse qualified majority and, where necessary, extend to immediate exclusion from the internal market.”

Although neither document names China, and both explicitly state that the new tools must be country-agnostic, the texts are filled with phrases widely viewed as hallmarks of Beijing’s policies, including “unsustainable trade deficits with key partners”, “structural overcapacity”, “dumping, excessive and widespread subsidies”, alongside currency manipulation and undervaluation.

Unlike existing trade defence instruments, the mechanism would address distortions extending beyond traditional dumping or subsidies, tackling political or economic coercion as well as currency manipulation, and could be applied to anything from an individual product to an entire sector.

To prevent a single capital from blocking the use of the tool, the Commission could deploy it unless a qualified majority of EU member states objects.

The unnamed mechanism is among a series of fresh recommendations submitted by the French and German governments, which previously clashed over China policy but have moved closer together in recent months.

Berlin’s stance has shifted markedly amid a surge in Chinese imports across key sectors, a trend officials describe as “China Shock 2.0”.

An Elysee Palace source said: “It is important today to make heard the European consensus that these imbalances are unsustainable.” The source continued:

“We want this dialogue [with China] to lead to concrete measures, rather than being a dialogue that leads nowhere. Therefore, I believe there is a very clear Franco-German determination, and a very clear European determination, to say that we are not the ones seeking a trade war, but that we are determined to enforce fair competition rules.”

The document also calls for the creation of a new diversification instrument to reduce dependencies and compel companies to spread supply risks, as well as more frequent and rapid trade investigations.

Berlin and Paris are seeking urgent and targeted measures, particularly regarding chemicals, certain plastics, and plug-in hybrid vehicles.

The documents set the stage for talks between EU Trade Commissioner Maros Sefcovic and Chinese Commerce Minister Wang Wentao on Thursday and Friday.

Next week, they will help shape the direction of an EU leaders’ summit in Brussels.

Leaders will discuss what action to take on an issue viewed as an existential challenge for European industry.

France hopes the Beijing talks will yield a negotiated solution; however, major political groups in the EU appear to be growing impatient with waiting for China to change.

An Elysee Palace source said:

“A point has been reached where some of our sectors have faced unfair competition for months and cannot be forced to await the uncertain outcome of a dialogue when specific industries are at stake. Therefore, as this dialogue progresses and delivers results, we expect concrete measures so that sectors under strain for months can benefit from a measure of protection.”

European Commission trade spokesman Olof Gill said they “warmly welcome” the letter sent to von der Leyen.

Gill said: “This is a valuable contribution to the ongoing debate on how the EU can best address geoeconomic risks and global macroeconomic imbalances. It aligns with the European Commission’s work and the President’s clear stance on competitiveness and her approach towards trading partners, including China.”

Since reports of the new mechanism emerged last week, it has drawn various comparisons to the US Section 301 tariff instrument and the EU’s own Anti-Coercion Instrument (ACI), which was adopted three years ago but has since lain dormant.

This comes despite a perceived increase in coercive behaviour directed at Europe from both the US and China.

An Elysee source noted that the proposed instrument would be more preventive than the ACI, which functions as a retaliatory weapon: “There, the goal is to end coercion. Here, our objective is to have a genuinely deterrent tool.”