Core Viewpoint - The Israeli government, led by Prime Minister Netanyahu, has approved a controversial plan to "defeat Hamas" and prepare for the takeover of Gaza City, which has drawn widespread international condemnation and concerns over potential violations of international law [1][2][4]. Summary by Sections Israeli Government's Plan - The Israeli security cabinet approved Netanyahu's plan for the military to take control of Gaza City after extensive discussions, highlighting the internal divisions and challenges faced by the government regarding the Gaza issue [2]. - The approved plan is seen as a compromise, reflecting Netanyahu's need to maintain political power while facing opposition from military leaders who warn of prolonged conflict and civilian casualties [2]. Military Actions - The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) have continued military operations in Gaza, resulting in the deaths of key Hamas and Islamic Jihad leaders, indicating an escalation in military engagement [3]. Reactions from Hamas and Palestinians - Hamas condemned the plan as a war crime, accusing Israel of evading legal responsibilities for civilian casualties and calling for international accountability [4]. - Palestinian representatives at the UN criticized the Israeli actions as contrary to international law and urged immediate intervention from the UN Security Council [5]. Domestic Criticism in Israel - Israeli opposition leaders criticized the plan, predicting it would lead to further disasters, increased casualties, and significant financial burdens on taxpayers [6][7]. Public Protests - There have been significant protests within Israel against the government's military actions, with citizens expressing concerns for the safety of hostages and the implications of the military strategy [12]. International Condemnation - Following the announcement of the plan, several countries, including Germany and Belgium, have condemned Israel's actions, with Germany suspending military exports to Israel [13][14]. - Turkey and other nations have labeled Israel's actions as expansionist and genocidal, warning of the broader implications for regional stability and humanitarian crises [15].

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the article emphasizes that China does not recognize the South China Sea arbitration ruling as valid and considers it a "piece of waste paper" [1][2] - China asserts that the arbitration violates fundamental principles of international law, including the lack of prior consultation and the breach of agreements to resolve disputes peacefully [1][2] - The article highlights that the arbitration is seen as an abuse of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), as territorial issues are not within its jurisdiction [2][3] Group 2 - The article points out significant flaws in the arbitration's factual determinations and legal applications, particularly regarding the classification of Taiping Island [2] - China expresses its commitment to resolving disputes through negotiations with other South China Sea claimants and aims to implement the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea effectively [3] - The article warns other countries against using the arbitration ruling as a pretext for provocations, suggesting that such actions would lead to negative consequences [3]

Group 1 - The article reports that Iran launched a missile attack on Israel, resulting in 86 injuries, following the U.S. announcement of a successful strike on Iranian nuclear facilities [1][2] - The Israeli Defense Forces assessed that Iran fired at least 27 missiles in two waves, affecting areas including Haifa and central Israel [1] - Israel's military responded by destroying the missile launch sites and began targeting military objectives in western Iran [1] Group 2 - Iran condemned the U.S. military actions against its nuclear facilities, claiming it violated international law and the UN Charter [2] - Iran's Foreign Ministry stated that it reserves the right to resist U.S. military aggression and called for an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council and the International Atomic Energy Agency [2] - The Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency announced an emergency meeting to address the escalating tensions on June 23 [2]