The Rafah crossing between Gaza and Egypt has finally partially opened this week after two years of Israeli-mandated closure. The news offers relief for many – particularly those Palestinians in urgent need of treatment abroad.

But for many elderly Palestinians in Gaza, staying in the enclave is an act of survival, resistance, and historical memory. Rafah may be open, but they are not planning to go anywhere.

In Kefaya al-Assar’s mind, that decision to stay is an effort to correct what she perceives to have been a historical mistake made by her parents – fleeing their village of Julis, which was depopulated in the 1948 Nakba, and is now within Israel.

“We blamed [our parents] a lot for leaving our home there,” said the 73-year-old Kefaya.

Kefaya has faced displacement during Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza five times. Originally from Jabalia in northern Gaza, she now shelters in a classroom at a school in central Gaza’s Nuseirat.

Widowed in early 2023 and without children, she said displacement revives the trauma she inherited from her parents.

“History repeats itself now,” she said. “My parents lost all their money when they were forced to flee. We also used to have money, but now we are displaced and have lost everything.”

When Kefaya was a child, her family lived in tents in Gaza’s refugee camps, before they became more permanent structures in later decades. Now, she says that she is reliving that same fate.

“I don’t want to repeat history, I want to die in my own country,” she said. “Even here, being in Nuseirat, I feel like a stranger. I wish I could go back to Jabalia.”

Her home in Jabalia was destroyed during the war, meaning that, for now, she is staying in Nuseirat. But she is still adamant that it will not mean her departure from Gaza.

“I will not leave for medical treatment outside … I choose to die on my own land rather than be treated outside,” she said.

That’s despite her own medical issues – Kefaya suffers from high blood pressure, and has not been able to receive adequate medical care because of the war.

Hidden crisis

The Rafah crossing partially opened on Monday after being largely closed by Israel since May 2024.

The opening of the crossing is part of the second phase of the Gaza “ceasefire”, even as Israel continues to violate the agreement by regularly attacking the Palestinian enclave, killing hundreds.

Only a few dozen Palestinians have been allowed to leave so far, all patients needing treatments accompanied by family members.

Other Palestinians have also put their names on the list, some hoping to go abroad for education or simply to escape life in Gaza, where Israel has killed more than 70,000 since the war began, and destroyed the majority of buildings, meaning reconstruction will likely be a years-long process, even if Israel cooperates.

“Israel is creating unlivable conditions in Gaza, denying Palestinians all essentials of life,” said Talal Abu Rukba, a political science professor at al-Azhar University in Gaza. “When people resist and stay in their homeland, they ruin the Israeli project of creating an Israeli state on a land ‘without a people’”.

Members of the Israeli right-wing, including members of the government, have repeatedly called for illegal settlements to be established in Gaza, and for Palestinians to be forced out.

The desire to stay in Gaza on the part of elderly Palestinians is despite a largely overlooked humanitarian crisis facing the demographic.

Research by Amnesty International and HelpAge International found that Israel’s blockade of aid and medicines to Gaza had contributed to a “physical and mental health crisis”.

“During armed conflict, older people’s needs are often overlooked. In Gaza, older people are enduring an unprecedented physical and mental health collapse as a direct result of Israel’s deliberate infliction of conditions of life calculated to bring about the physical destruction of Palestinians in Gaza,” Erika Guevara-Rosas, Amnesty International’s senior director of research, advocacy, policy and campaigns, said after the publication of the report.

The two organisations found that 76 percent of the elderly people interviewed live in tents, with 84 percent saying that their living conditions harmed their health and privacy. In addition, 68 percent of respondents had been forced to stop or reduce medication because of a lack of availability. Nearly half reported skipping meals so that others could eat.

Many are also suffering from mental health problems, with 77 percent reporting that sadness, anxiety, loneliness, or insomnia had reduced their appetite and impacted their wellbeing.

Tired and lonely

Nazmeya Radwan, 85, is one of those struggling.

Ill, underweight and unable to access medication, she still refuses to leave Gaza.

Nazmeya has her own previous experience of displacement at the hands of Israel – like Kefaya’s parents, she was forced to flee her home in the 1948 Nakba, along with about 750,000 other Palestinians.

Originally from Jerusalem, her family was displaced to Deir el-Balah, in central Gaza, after 1948.

“All my life was displacement and wars since the Nakba,” Nazmeya said. “I am 85, and tired, lonely, ill and displaced, but I would never leave Gaza. I would live as a beggar and homeless and never leave Gaza.”

World Economic Forum says it is reviewing the dealings of its CEO, Borge Brende, with the late sex offender.

Authorities in Norway are investigating former Prime Minister Thorbjorn Jagland on suspicion of corruption following revelations about his ties to the late financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

The probe comes after documents released by the United States Department of Justice last week revealed years of communications between Jagland, who served as Norway’s prime minister from 1996 to 1997, and Epstein, including emails suggesting that he stayed at the disgraced financier’s home.

Okokrim, Norway’s dedicated police unit for fighting white-collar crime, said on Thursday that it had determined there were “reasonable grounds” to investigate Jagland for aggravated corruption.

The agency said it had also requested the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to revoke the immunity conferred on Jagland, who also served as the head of the Nobel Committee and secretary-general of the Council of Europe, as the former head of an international organisation.

“Among other things, Okokrim will investigate whether gifts, travel and loans were received in connection with his position,” Okokrim director Paal Loeseth said in a statement.

Norwegian Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide said in a statement that the facts of the case needed to be “brought to light”.

“That means Mr Jagland’s immunity cannot stand in the way of an investigation. I have therefore decided that Norway will put forward a proposal to the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers that Jagland’s immunity be revoked,” Eide said.

Jagland’s lawyer, Anders Brosveet, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Local media quoted Brosveet as saying that his client welcomed the investigation and was “calm” about the outcome.

Norway has been rocked by revelations of close ties between a slew of prominent elites and Epstein, who died in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges.

Norway’s Crown Princess Mette-Marit earlier this week expressed regret for “poor judgement” and extended sympathy for Epstein’s victims after the latest tranche of files showed that she had extensive contact with the disgraced financier.

On Thursday, the World Economic Forum (WEF), the organiser of the annual business summit in Davos, said it had launched an investigation to clarify the nature of the dealings its CEO, Borge Brende, had with Epstein.

The WEF said it had asked its risk committee to conduct the review in light of revelations that Brende, who served as Norway’s foreign minister from 2013 to 2017, had several business dinners with Epstein and communicated with him via email and text message.

“This decision underscores the Forum’s commitment to transparency and maintaining its integrity. Our aim is to handle this matter thoughtfully and efficiently,” the Geneva-based nongovernmental organisation said in a statement.

“Borge Brende fully supports, and cooperates with, this review, having indeed requested it himself, and will continue to fulfil his responsibilities as President and CEO without involvement in the review process.”

Brende said that he had limited contact with Epstein and that he had been unaware of his past or crimes.

“In 2018, during a visit to New York, I received an invitation from former Norwegian deputy prime minister and UN MENA envoy, Terje Rod-Larsen, who was married to the then Norwegian UN ambassador, to join him for dinner with someone who was presented to me as an American investor, Jeffrey Epstein,” Brende told Al Jazeera.

“This gathering included several other leaders. The following year, I attended two similar dinners with Epstein, alongside other diplomats and business leaders. These dinners, and a few mails and SMS messages, were the extent of my interactions with him,” he said.

Brende said he regretted not doing more to look into Epstein’s history.

“I remain committed to learning from this experience and welcome the upcoming independent review, which I indeed requested,” he said.

Brende also disputed comments made by WEF founder and former CEO Klaus Schwab to Swiss newspaper Blick in which he said he had not been informed of the contact with Epstein.

“I confirm that I informed Klaus Schwab in 2019 about these circumstances. I have no idea why he is claiming otherwise now,” he said.

Voters in Thailand will head to the polls on Sunday amid deep political uncertainty, with the country having cycled through three prime ministers in as many years, and amid a tenuous truce with Cambodia following border clashes that killed 149 people.

The snap polls pit Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul’s Bhumjaithai party, backed by Thailand’s royalist conservative establishment, against the progressive youth-led People’s Party.

The People’s Party is the successor to a group that won the last election but was blocked from power and dissolved by the courts over its proposals to reform the country’s powerful monarchy.

Pheu Thai – which has dominated Thai politics for a quarter century – is also attempting a comeback after a bruising period that saw two prime ministers from the party removed by the courts and its founder Thaksin Shinawatra jailed late last year.

The vote on Sunday is seen as a test of whether Thailand’s long-running cycle of coups, street protests and court interventions can be broken, or whether the paralysis will deepen.

Here’s what you need to know about the pivotal election:

When are the elections?

Voting will take place on Sunday, February 8.

About 53 million people in the kingdom of 71 million are eligible to vote.

The 500-seat House of Representatives will be filled through a mixed system: 400 constituency seats elected by a first-past-the-post system, and 100 seats allocated through proportional representation or on a party-list basis.

The newly elected lower house will then select the next prime minister. Unlike in 2019 and 2023, the appointed Senate, which is dominated by conservative lawmakers, will have no role in choosing the prime minister.

A candidate requires 251 votes in the House to take office as prime minister.

Voters will receive three ballot papers: two for the parliamentary election and one for a referendum on whether to rewrite the constitution.

When will we know the results?

Polling stations open at 8am (01:00 GMT) and close at 5pm (10:00 GMT). Vote counting will begin shortly after, and results will be announced as tallies are completed.

The leading party is likely to become clear by the early hours of Monday.

Turnout is expected to be high. During early voting in the capital Bangkok earlier this week, some 87 percent of registered advance voters turned out to cast their ballots.

Who are the main contenders?

Bhumjaithai

Led by Anutin, Bhumjaithai rose to prominence in 2019 with its support for medical marijuana. It has transformed from a mid-sized kingmaker – winning 51 seats in 2019 and 71 in 2023 – into a conservative force now vying to become one of parliament’s largest parties.

The party formed the current government with the People’s Party’s support, after the country’s top court removed Thaksin’s daughter, Paetongtarn Shinawatra, as prime minister over her handling of Thailand’s border crisis with Cambodia.

Anutin initially promised constitutional reform and elections within four months, but the People’s Party in December accused him of reneging on their deal. Facing the risk of a no-confidence vote, he dissolved the House and called the snap poll.

Bhumjaithai has now rebranded itself as a staunch defender of the monarchy and has been bolstered by defections, attracting 64 of the 91 lawmakers who have switched parties since 2023.

Napon Jatusripitak, director of the Center for Politics and Geopolitics at think tank Thailand Future, said Bhumjaithai is seen as “pragmatic” and has now “claimed the conservative mantle” from political parties run by former generals.

People’s Party

The People’s Party is the third iteration of a reformist movement whose previous incarnations – most recently Move Forward – were dissolved by the courts.

The party campaigns on reducing the political power of unelected institutions such as the military and judiciary.

While it was once outspoken in calling for changes to Thailand’s lese-majeste law – under which defaming or insulting the monarchy is a criminal offence – it has softened its stance during this campaign.

Thitinan Pongsudhirak, a professor of international relations at Chulalongkorn University, described the group as “strange and unprecedented” in Thai politics.

“It was the first party not driven by patronage or money politics, but by reform ideas and policies rather than personalities or provincial bosses,” he said.

Pheu Thai

Pheu Thai and its predecessors dominated Thai politics for 25 years through populist policies that secured working-class support as well as a formidable electoral machinery, particularly in the north and northeast.

Despite Thaksin’s imprisonment and having six of its prime ministers removed by coups and court rulings, the party has prevented mass defections and remains competitive.

It is campaigning on Shinawatra nostalgia, with Thaksin’s nephew Yodchanan Wongsawat as its primary representative.

Thailand Future’s Napon said he expected “a significant decline compared to the previous election”, with Pheu Thai potentially falling to third place. Still, he said the party may regain some seats from the progressive camp in its northern strongholds.

What are the polls suggesting?

A January 30 survey by the National Institute of Development Administration put People’s Party leader Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut in first place for prime minister at 29.1 percent, followed by Anutin at 22.4 percent.

Yodchanan trailed in fourth place.

For party lists, People’s Party led with 34.2 percent, followed by Bhumjaithai at 22.6 percent and Pheu Thai at 16.2 percent.

What are the key issues?

The People’s Party has proposed more than 200 policies, including abolishing military conscription, drafting a new democratic constitution, overhauling the bureaucracy and launching state-backed programmes to support small businesses.

Bhumjaithai has focused on economic stimulus and security, pledging to lift annual growth to 3 percent, expand welfare schemes, build border walls and make military service more attractive through paid volunteer posts.

Anutin has also promised to protect the monarchy, saying at a Bangkok rally that amending lese-majeste laws “will never happen and will never succeed because you have us”.

Pheu Thai has meanwhile centred its campaign on debt relief, as well as income support for low earners and transport subsidies. It has also announced a “millionaire maker” programme that will award nine daily prizes of one million baht ($31,556) each.

How does Cambodia factor in?

The Thai-Cambodian clashes erupted at their contested border in July and ended following a second ceasefire in December. The clashes have stoked nationalist fervour, strengthening Bhumjaithai’s appeal, and highlighted Pheu Thai’s vulnerability.

Paetongtarn of the Pheu Thai was removed as prime minister in September over a leaked phone call with Cambodia’s former leader Hun Sen, in which she was heard pandering to him and criticising a Thai commander.

Punchada Sirivunnabood, associate professor of social sciences and humanities at Mahidol University in Bangkok, said nationalism could boost support for Anutin.

“They use this [nationalism] as a concept for support in these elections, and a lot of legislators from different political parties have moved to Bhumjaithai. This guarantees that they’re going to win a lot of seats from the district level,” she said.

On the other hand, questions over the Shinawatra family’s connections to Hun Sen have dogged Pheu Thai candidates on the campaign trail, she said.

“This border conflict hurt Pheu Thai a lot,” she said.

What about constitutional reform?

Alongside the parliamentary election, voters will also be asked whether to replace the 2017 constitution, which was drafted under military rule following a coup in 2014.

Even if approved, the process would be long and uncertain, requiring parliamentary action, Senate support to amend key clauses, and at least two further referendums.

While polls suggest overwhelming support for the “yes” vote, it will not guarantee a new charter or a democratic one.

“It depends entirely on the post-election balance of power,” said Napon. “A more conservative parliament could still produce a conservative constitution.”

Will this end Thailand’s political turmoil?

With no party expected to win an outright majority, coalition formation will be essential. But any resulting government is “very likely to be unstable”, Napon said, as partnerships between any two of the big three parties would fall short of a majority if one partner withdrew.

Thitinan of Chulalongkorn University, meanwhile, said he was not encouraged by Thailand’s electoral history.

Only once in 25 years have voting results been fully honoured, he said, noting other elections were overturned by military coups or judicial interventions.

“Establishment forces and biases are so entrenched and run so deep that the party of reform and progress would have to win a big, convincing margin of victory to have a chance at governing,” he said.

“Such a large enough margin looks like a slim chance, unless Thai voters are fed up enough to see through all the charade and shenanigans that have kept Thailand backwards and falling increasingly behind its peers,” he added.