Transcript : well when I refer to israel in these 0:04 remarks I generally have in mind the 0:08 United States and Israel it's important 0:12 particularly for Americans to recognize 0:15 that virtually everything that Israel 0:18 does is with the decisive support often 0:22 direct participation of the United 0:25 States that's economic military 0:28 diplomatic and not least the ideological 0:33 the way the issues are framed in the 0:35 united states quite differently from 0:37 elsewhere and when Washington draws the 0:41 line Israel obeys having no choice right 0:47 now 0:48 Israel is facing a very severe crisis in 0:52 fact double crisis a crisis of 0:56 legitimation and a crisis of dealing 0:59 gitam ation those are the terms they use 1:02 and they're both matters of pretty 1:04 serious concern the issue of 1:08 legitimation is coming to a head in the 1:11 next few months at the United Nations 1:15 Palestine is appealing to the UN to 1:21 recognize Palestine as a Palestinian 1:26 state and also to admit a Palestine to 1:29 the United Nations the US administration 1:32 is pulling every string it can to try to 1:35 prevent it but it looks as if they may 1:39 do it that could come up as early as 1:41 September if it comes to security 1:45 council the United States almost 1:48 certainly veto it as it usually does the 1:52 most recent veto was three months ago 1:57 februari and that was a kind of an 1:59 interesting one that actually got some 2:01 attention most vetoes don't one thing 2:04 because there's so many of 2:05 but it's rarely recognized how isolated 2:10 the u.s. is at the UN on a whole range 2:12 of issues the that the last one did get 2:17 some notice because it was a little 2:18 unusual the Obama administration vetoed 2:22 a resolution affirming Obama's official 2:26 policy that got some notice the 2:29 resolution called for an end to 2:33 settlement expansion in the West Bank 2:36 which theoretically is supposed to be 2:38 Obama's policy about the u.s. vetoed it 2:42 want to read something embarrassing take 2:45 a look at the Ambassador Susan Rice's 2:47 explanation I thought you should have 2:50 had the dignity to resign 2:52 anyway the resolution also add another 2:58 aspect to it declared the settlements in 3:03 the West Bank illegal and of course the 3:05 Golan Heights which nobody talks to them 3:07 at the regard to MIT declared that they 3:11 are illegal and it's important to 3:12 recognize that that's non-controversial 3:14 in fact Israel itself recognized that 3:17 back in late nineteen sixty-seven that 3:20 recognize the highest legal authorities 3:22 advised that the Attorney General agreed 3:26 that any transfer of population into the 3:29 occupied territories is in violation of 3:32 the core principles of international 3:34 humanitarian law the geneva agreements 3:38 and technically the israeli supreme 3:41 court also recognizes it that they find 3:45 various ways around it was repeatedly 3:49 been recognized by the Security Council 3:51 and 3:53 most recently a few years ago by the 3:56 International Court of Justice the World 3:58 Court with the US Justice in a separate 4:02 declaration affirming the conclusion 4:06 that this wasn't technically about the 4:09 separation wall that affirming that any 4:12 part of the separation wall about 4:15 eighty-five percent that's there in 4:18 order to protect the Israeli settlements 4:21 is de facto in violation of 4:24 international law because the 4:25 settlements are illegal so that part's 4:28 not really controversial the other part 4:32 of the resolution was reaffirming 4:35 official US policy but Obama decided to 4:38 veto it 4:39 the general assembly in the coming 4:42 session is a little different the United 4:45 States can't veto General Assembly 4:49 resolutions so it'll probably be another 4:51 one of the familiar resolutions again 4:55 not just on Israel on a whole range of 4:58 topics overwhelming the rarely gets 5:01 reported but there's vote after vote 5:04 which is you know a hundred and eighty 5:06 two three or something like that 5:08 the us-israel sometimes some pacific 5:11 island or something like that sometimes 5:14 it's even worse sometimes 252 one the 5:17 United States so probably happen again 5:20 and probably won't get reported 5:22 recognition of the Palestine is already 5:26 quite overwhelming including important 5:31 countries like Brazil which is the most 5:33 respected influential country in the in 5:36 the South other South American countries 5:39 and quite a few others in fact Palestine 5:42 is now recognized by about over hundred 5:46 countries including about eighty-five 5:49 ninety percent of the world's population 5:52 that's far more than recognize Kosovo 5:56 but in the case of Kosovo 5:59 admission to the United Nations is 6:02 implemented because there's only one 6:04 vote that counts in a world that's run 6:07 by force and violence not law that's the 6:11 one with the big stick 6:13 so the United States supports Kosovo's 6:15 therefore it's in whatever the world 6:17 thinks the United States opposes 6:19 Palestine so it's out whatever the world 6:22 things 6:23 well this are important things to 6:25 remember the United States in fact is a 6:28 declining power for a lot of interesting 6:31 reasons many of them internally 6:33 self-inflicted but it's happening and it 6:36 may not be able to hold back the tide 6:40 forever even though it's got canada good 6:44 part of Europe kind of toddling along 6:46 politely for the moment at least the in 6:51 Israel the government and political 6:53 commentators refer to the coming votes 6:57 at the United Nations as it's tsunami 6:59 that they're going to have to do 7:01 something about and their flailing 7:04 around the decide what they might do it 7:07 could be dangerous 7:09 it's a unpredictable violent state with 7:13 plenty of force behind it and it has a 7:16 doctrine goes back to the nineteen 7:18 fifties the doctrine back to the 7:20 nineteen fifties is that if we're 7:22 pressed too far will go crazy 7:25 mr. gay is the Hebrew now back in the 7:28 nineteen fifties there were a lot of 7:30 ways they could do that but by the late 7:33 sixties there are two powerful nuclear 7:35 state they might do all kinds of things 7:38 i hate to think about it but one 7:42 possibility is another attack on guys so 7:44 there's bombing Iran you know who knows 7:46 what they'll do but something might 7:48 happen 7:49 I suppose they don't know themselves but 7:51 so of course we can only speculate 7:54 that's the legitimation of that Israel 7:59 tsunami is 8:00 the took another step forward just a 8:04 couple days ago with the unification of 8:06 Hamas and Fatah under Egyptian 8:11 initiative and that's important 8:14 the fact that it was Egyptian initiative 8:15 and it went forward is a reflection of 8:19 the really quite dramatic spectacular 8:23 changes that have been taking place in 8:25 the Arab world and North Africa and 8:28 bless the couple of months the Arab 8:31 Spring is it's called and this example 8:35 the unification is one of the many 8:37 reasons why Israel in the united states 8:40 are deeply concerned about what they 8:44 correctly regard as the growing threat 8:46 of democracy in the Arab world in this 8:50 particular case from 1991 the US and 8:55 Israel have been dedicated to separating 8:58 Gaza and the West Bank breaking them 9:01 apart that's in direct violation to the 9:04 Oslo Accords sign right the same time 9:08 which declare them to be a territorial 9:11 unity 9:12 well the unification it might impede and 9:15 might even reverse this process of the 9:19 separation of the two parts of Palestine 9:22 and even more dangerous the unification 9:28 might undermine Washington and 9:32 facilities dedicated efforts to prevent 9:36 any political settlement any diplomatic 9:39 settlement of the israel-palestine 9:41 conflict that settlement terms of that 9:45 settlement are very well understood 9:46 supported by essentially the entire 9:49 world including Iran 9:54 Hamas just reiterated its support for 9:57 the virtually everyone say unified 10:01 unification it's tough it's been 10:03 prevented for 35 years now by the United 10:08 States primarily and of course by Israel 10:10 again important to recognize i'll come 10:12 back to it 10:13 well that's the Krait basically the 10:15 crisis of legitimation there's also a 10:18 crisis of dealing gitam nation that 10:20 Israel's facing and that's the term 10:22 that's used when you read say the 10:24 Israeli press that process of the 10:27 legitimation was carried forward last 10:30 December when Human Rights Watch which 10:33 is a pretty cautious conservative 10:35 organization Human Rights Watch quote 10:39 called on the United States to suspend 10:42 financing to israel in an amount 10:45 equivalent to the costs of Israel 10:47 spending in support of settlements so 10:50 cut back any us support that goes to the 10:53 settlements and also called on us to 10:56 monitor contributions to israel from 10:59 tax-exempt us organizations that violate 11:02 international law including prohibitions 11:06 against discrimination that cuts a very 11:09 cast a very wide net for those of you 11:11 know the details of this in the 11:14 background is also a madness 11:16 international head also had already 11:18 called for an arms embargo on Israel 11:22 it's using arms and us arms in violation 11:25 of international law actually violation 11:28 of US law to the the background is also 11:32 a popular movement of divestment from 11:36 anything involving the occupied 11:38 territories in the United States 11:40 crucially that includes major US 11:43 corporations likes a caterpillar which 11:46 provides the equipment for the 11:49 destruction of the West Bank for illegal 11:52 construction also four straight murder 11:55 the Richard Cory case includes motorola 12:00 another major corporation which is 12:01 providing electronic systems for the 12:04 illegal separation wall again 12:08 uncontroversial illegal and for the 12:11 settlements all illegal and many others 12:15 and this is also extending beyond to the 12:18 broader boy cuts so that's the crisis of 12:21 dealing generation alongside the crisis 12:24 of legitimation and you can see why it's 12:26 considered you know what tsunami 12:28 something very dangerous and might 12:30 elicit a unpredictable and maybe a very 12:34 dangerous response 12:36 well there's a good reason why the 12:38 United States fears democracy in the 12:40 Arab world to find out why all you have 12:43 to do is to take a look at the poles of 12:46 our public opinion they're certainly not 12:49 the planners but they're not published 12:51 here and I presume they're not published 12:53 because the press doesn't want you to 12:55 know what people think I can't think of 12:57 any other reason it's hard to think of 13:00 anything more important at this stage 13:02 with what's going on in the Arab world 13:04 than what our public opinion is I'm hear 13:07 a lot about what they are dictators say 13:09 but you don't hear about what the public 13:11 thinks that's very revealing 13:13 so what is the public the polls 13:15 incidentally are taken by the leading us 13:18 polling agency's most prestigious ones 13:21 they're released by major institutions 13:23 you know brookings institute and so on 13:25 it's inconceivable that the media don't 13:27 know about them and planner certainly do 13:29 and they're interesting so for example 13:32 in Egypt the most important country in 13:34 the Arab world about ninety percent of 13:37 the population regard the United States 13:39 as their main enemy made threat that 13:43 they faced opposition to US policy is so 13:47 strong that about in Egypt about 80% 13:50 think the region would be more secure if 13:54 he ran had nuclear weapons not just 13:57 nuclear and 13:57 tree but nuclear weapons the maybe ten 14:01 percent regarding right here as a threat 14:04 and the figures are a little different 14:06 country by country but that's roughly 14:08 the story throughout the Arab world so 14:11 you can see very clearly way the US and 14:14 its allies Israel of course and the 14:17 Western Allies it cannot tolerate 14:19 democracy in the Arab world not 14:21 authentic democracy at least the kind of 14:23 democracy in which public opinion would 14:26 have some impact on policy 14:28 I mean if it did in the United States 14:31 not only wouldn't control the region 14:33 which has been a primary goal for 70 14:37 years but it would be driven out and 14:40 that's no small things a major major 14:43 concern is with the maintain control of 14:46 the energy reserves in the world 14:48 concentrated there so of course the US 14:51 and its allies are very frightened of 14:54 democracy in the Arab world of course 14:57 they talk about democracy Stalin talked 14:59 about democracy to they can't they can't 15:03 possibly accept that will do anything to 15:05 block it and if you look closely at the 15:07 policies towards the various uprisings 15:10 you see it clearly could go back to that 15:12 if you like it should be should bear in 15:16 mind that there's nothing new about this 15:18 this goes way back and there's plenty of 15:21 evidence about it plenty of 15:22 documentation should be on the front 15:24 pages of the newspapers certainly should 15:26 be taught in schools so let's go back to 15:30 say to the nineteen fifties in 1958 15:33 print in then classified since then 15:38 declassified documents internal 15:41 documents President Eisenhower 58 raised 15:46 with his staff a problem that bothered 15:49 me 15:49 that he was concerned about what he 15:51 called the campaign of hatred against us 15:53 in the Arab world and not by the 15:55 government's which are more or less 15:57 supportive but by the people and wanted 16:00 a discussion of this well right at that 16:02 time the National Security Council which 16:04 is the highest planning body that came 16:07 out with a memorandum in which they 16:10 analyze that situation they said there's 16:14 a perception in the Arab world that the 16:16 United States supports dictatorships 16:19 harsh brutal dictatorships and blocks 16:23 democracy and development and that we do 16:26 this because we want to maintain control 16:28 of their energy resources and it went on 16:31 to say that the perception is more or 16:33 less accurate and furthermore that's 16:35 what we ought to be doing because we 16:37 want to control it and democracy would 16:39 get in the way 16:40 well that was 1958 to fast-forward to 16:44 2001's plenty in between little skip it 16:49 and you'll recall that in right after 16:52 nine eleven George W Bush made a 16:57 pathetic speech in which he asked the 17:01 why do they hate us 17:03 eisenhower 17:05 his answer was they hate our freedoms 17:12 well that elicited a study by the 17:15 Pentagon Pentagon research group defense 17:19 Science Board which I think was reported 17:23 here but they essentially reiterated 17:24 with the National Security Council I 17:27 said in 1958 they said they don't hate 17:30 our freedoms they had our policies and 17:33 then they went through it essentially 17:35 the same policies they haven't changed 17:37 what they should have said is we hate 17:40 their freedoms and we hate their 17:42 freedoms for a really good reason 17:44 if they're free we're not going to carry 17:47 out these policies and we want and we're 17:50 beginning to see that there's a doctrine 17:53 it was articulated pretty well by former 17:59 Jordanian high official Marwan washers 18:02 that middle east specialist the special 18:06 research specialist for the carnegie 18:07 endowment and great during the arab 18:09 uprisings he said that this general 18:13 principle which is that as long as 18:16 everything's quiet as long as the 18:19 population isn't is under control and 18:22 then the powerful can ignore the 18:24 population and do anything they like 18:26 that's call it the washer doctrine a 18:29 very very wide application actually 18:32 applies within the United States as well 18:34 rather crucially so the washer doctrine 18:38 holds and therefore we don't care about 18:40 the campaign's of hatred we don't care 18:42 that they hate us we hate their freedoms 18:46 are good read 18:46 will ignore the polls all this became 18:49 pretty dramatically clear here just in 18:52 the last few months with WikiLeaks 18:56 exposures the of all the WikiLeaks 18:59 exposures the one that got the most 19:01 publicity you know big headlines love 19:04 you for common theory it was that the 19:06 Arabs support us policy on Iran and 19:10 that's a core US policy now isolating 19:13 you know undermining Iran and the Arabs 19:16 support us that was the headline love 19:18 clapping and so on 19:20 well they were talking about the Arab 19:21 dictators what about the population 19:25 like I said the population is about ten 19:29 percent think you ran as a threat and a 19:31 considerable majority think the reason 19:33 would be better off they had nuclear 19:34 weapons but under the washer doctrine 19:37 doesn't matter as long as they're 19:40 suppressed by the dictatorships that we 19:43 back our know somehow silenced then we 19:49 can do what we like if the Arab 19:50 dictators support us who cares about 19:52 anyone else 19:53 now that's strikingly not just the 19:56 diplomatic record that's the press 19:59 that's the intellectual community the 20:01 whole intellectual community just read 20:04 the commentary on this and see general 20:07 assumption maybe they'd like to have 20:10 here and have nuclear weapons but as 20:13 long as the dictators are with us who 20:14 cares as long as they're quiet 20:17 that's the prevailing attitude right 20:20 through the whole educated articulate 20:22 community not just on this issue and as 20:24 I said it holds domestically as well 20:27 we're thinking about a different topic 20:29 well the Arab Spring has had a number of 20:32 effects already one of them i just 20:35 mentioned Egypt did move forward to 20:37 bring about the indication that the u.s. 20:40 is and is really quite a bit concerned 20:43 about that's only one one thing I mean a 20:46 couple of weeks ago Egypt the new egypt 20:50 to allow d ready and ships through the 20:53 Suez Canal into the Mediterranean and 20:55 as first time that's ever happened in 20:58 the US and Israel don't like it 21:00 mediterranean our lake not anyone elses 21:02 and they broke with that the it looks as 21:08 if they're going to move to open the 21:10 guy's a border the closing of the Gaza 21:14 border participating in the Israeli 21:16 siege is very unpopular in Egypt and it 21:19 looks as if Egypt is taking some steps 21:21 now to open the border which would break 21:25 the siege and that's critical the went 21:32 in the background is another question 21:34 which is uncertain 21:36 there is a treaty of Egypt Israel treaty 21:40 1979 which is also extremely unpopular 21:44 in in Egypt on the population if you 21:48 read about it here there's a lot of 21:50 concern that they may weaken it or maybe 21:54 even rescinded the way it's described 21:57 here is literally you know New York 22:00 Times that the treaty is very important 22:02 because it helps preserve stability in 22:04 the region that's very interesting 22:06 commentary because what the treaty does 22:09 is preserve instability in the region 22:12 and that's very clear and explicit as 22:16 soon as the treaty was signed 1979 22:18 Israel recognized for its obvious but 22:23 they of course also recognize that with 22:25 a treaty with it with Egypt the main 22:29 Arab deterrent is out of the game 22:32 Egypt is the main by far the main 22:34 military force the only big organized 22:36 military force in the region so with the 22:38 Arab deterrent gone 22:40 Israel's free to proceed with its 22:43 policies elsewhere kind of trivial they 22:46 can expand illegal settlement of the 22:49 occupied territories and critically they 22:51 can attack their northern neighbor 22:52 Lebanon that was recognized right away 22:56 you read Israeli strategic analysts who 22:58 very uneven and others they said 23:00 straight off look this is we didn't like 23:03 the treaty much but it has a good side 23:05 we are free to do what we like 23:07 because there's no deterrent any longer 23:08 and right away Israel planned its 23:10 invasion of lebanon a couple years later 23:13 and total fakery about pretext go into 23:18 it if you like and it was no small thing 23:20 the invasion of lebanon a 92 killed 23:23 maybe 20,000 people devastated the 23:26 southern Lebanon destroyed a large part 23:29 of beirut it finally got so bad that the 23:33 u.s. was backing it all the way Reagan 23:35 photos great you know but they back to 23:39 however got to the point where you know 23:41 even Thomas Friedman who this is going 23:44 pretty far he was a reporter and Beirut 23:47 and it kind of dawned on him that having 23:50 bombs dropping using water fun so he 23:52 started writing critical comments about 23:55 the bombing 23:56 ok now we're at the outer limits and it 23:59 was it was becoming a really an 24:00 international scandal so the Reagan kind 24:04 of order Israel to terminate in 24:06 mid-august 1982 lot of Horrors happened 24:10 after that like summer she loved another 24:12 story but that Israel of course had to 24:14 obey they had the choices even though 24:17 the novel beggin the Prime Minister was 24:20 talking at the time about how Hitler's 24:23 hiding in his bunker and we got to go 24:25 after that's a yes or our foot but the 24:29 boss said no so they stopped and they 24:33 often did something else and sober 24:34 steelmaster the 60 in fact the the 24:42 treaty contributes to instability in the 24:44 region but in the technical terms of us 24:48 political discourse that's stability 24:51 stability means something that we like 24:54 instability is something we don't like 24:57 literally so for example you take a look 25:00 at Iran 25:02 the big threat of Iran now is that there 25:04 are destabilizing the region 25:06 how are they destabilizing it they're 25:09 trying to expand their influence into 25:11 neighboring countries Afghanistan Iraq 25:14 when we invade and occupy and destroy 25:18 those countries that's stabilization 25:20 when they try to expand their influence 25:23 into the neighboring countries that's 25:25 destabilization and that makes perfect 25:28 sense if you own the world and that's 25:30 and and that is the basic assumption of 25:35 us culture we own the world if anybody's 25:38 in the way they're doing something wrong 25:41 definition this reaches such a level 25:49 that you can even get things like this a 25:52 couple years ago the former editor of 25:55 Foreign Affairs and the establishment 25:57 journal James chases liberal sensible 26:00 liberal commentator was writing about 26:02 the u.s. overthrow of the parliamentary 26:06 regime and in Chile installation of a 26:09 brutal dictatorship 26:11 no shit dictatorship and he literally 26:13 said reluctantly we had to destabilize 26:18 chili in order to bring about stability 26:20 and nobody saw that is contradiction and 26:24 they're right it's not 26:26 we had to destabilize it in order to 26:28 bring about our rule under a 26:30 dictatorship which is by definition 26:31 stability so that's what it means when 26:35 the New York Times others tell us that 26:37 the peace treaty is the foundation of 26:40 stability in the region that's the 26:42 foundation of our rule of the region but 26:45 the Egyptians may not go along with that 26:47 so we'll see the isolation of the US on 26:52 these issues is quite significant than 26:55 you should be talked about in a free 26:57 society so takes a ran again 27:01 Iran is the centerpiece of US policy its 27:04 last year was called the year of Iran 27:06 and foreign policy journals around 27:09 is no major issued and story is that 27:14 Iran is isolated 27:16 it's the international community is 27:19 isolating Iran who's the international 27:23 community 27:24 well that's another technical term like 27:26 stability the international community is 27:29 of course the United States and anybody 27:32 who happens to be going along with it 27:33 like Israel maybe for some marshall 27:37 islands that's the international 27:39 community literal so take a look at Iran 27:42 the non-aligned countries which is most 27:46 of the world have been vigorously 27:48 supporting Iran's right to develop 27:53 nuclear energy they've been doing that 27:54 for years but they're not part of the 27:56 international community the Arab world 27:58 that not only supports Iranian the right 28:02 to develop nuclear energy they actually 28:04 go so far as to support already nuclear 28:06 weapons so the Arab were world is not 28:09 part of the world the international 28:12 community the leading you know the 28:15 leading countries of the world like 28:17 again brazil the most respected country 28:19 i mean they talk strongly reject the US 28:22 policy in Iraq Turkey the major regional 28:25 power they object to US policy in fact 28:28 that Turkey and Brazil recently just 28:31 worked out a deal to handle the uranium 28:35 enrichment policy the u.s. quickly shot 28:38 it down because they don't want anything 28:40 getting out of their hands so they're 28:41 not part of the international community 28:43 in fact the international community in 28:45 this case is the United States Israel 28:48 canada large parts of Europe that's the 28:52 international community that's pretty 28:54 isolated instantly we might ask what is 28:57 this Iranian threat that we're so 28:59 worried about actually the right in 29:01 governments are rotten 29:02 that's a terrible threat to its own 29:04 population but unfortunately it's not 29:07 unique in that regard including our 29:10 friends and that's not the threat 29:12 because we support governments which are 29:14 horrible threats to their population so 29:17 what's the threat 29:18 well actually there's an authoritative 29:20 answer to that which again would be 29:22 front-page news in a free press every 29:27 year the Pentagon and US intelligence 29:30 that provide analysis of the global 29:33 security situation to Congress the last 29:36 one about a year ago of course had a 29:38 section on the Iranian threat big 29:40 section so what's the Iranian threat we 29:43 can look it up on the internet and find 29:45 down the they point out that the Iranian 29:48 threat is not a military threat around 29:52 in military expenditures are very low 29:54 even by the standards of the region I 29:57 mean minuscule was compared to the u.s. 29:58 of course they say that they go into his 30:01 Iranian military doctor and they say 30:04 Iranian military doctrine is strictly 30:06 defensive it's designed to deter an 30:09 invasion long enough so that diplomacy 30:12 can sit in they say very limited 30:15 capacity to deploy force they say they 30:20 talked about the nuclear the possibility 30:22 of developing a nuclear capacity they 30:25 say if Iran is developing a nuclear 30:27 capacity it would be part of their 30:29 deterrence strategy deterring the 30:32 us-israeli attack and if any country 30:35 needs at the turret it's ran just take a 30:39 look at the geography it's completely 30:41 surrounded by a military bases of a 30:44 hostile violence superpower and that's 30:48 constantly under threat threat of attack 30:50 in violation of UN Charter if anyone 30:53 cares about that nobody sane once your 30:57 and have a nuclear weapon I don't think 30:59 despite whatever opinion is but it's 31:02 possible that they're developing a 31:03 nuclear capability 31:05 no and if so yeah it's likely part of 31:07 the deterrence strategy chances they use 31:09 it almost zero they be vaporized 30 31:13 seconds of the amount of the missile but 31:16 so that's that's part of the threat of 31:20 deterrence there a deterrent and they do 31:23 it raining deterrent would limit what 31:25 the US and Israel can do you know if 31:28 you've got to be careful if somebody 31:29 could attack you with nuclear weapons so 31:32 put a limit on us and Israeli 31:35 aggressiveness and violence and that's a 31:37 threat and the other one the other 31:38 threat which they go into is what i 31:40 already mentioned their destabilizing 31:41 the region by trying to expand the 31:44 commercial cultural and other relations 31:46 with their neighbors 31:47 that's the Iranian threat and on this 31:50 the u.s. is quite isolated the real us 31:55 can sort of tolerate with dismay turkeys 31:58 disobedience but there's another country 32:00 that's much more worrisome that's China 32:02 China doesn't take any nonsense 32:05 china is regarded as a great threat by 32:08 the United States because they refused 32:10 to be pushed around their sense china is 32:13 look we've been here for three thousand 32:15 years fending off the barbarians and ok 32:19 you want to make noises that's your 32:20 business 32:21 we're paying a country and that's really 32:23 frightening like if you're say the Mafia 32:26 Don and somebody says I don't mind 32:29 paying attention to you and you can't do 32:31 anything about you're in trouble and 32:33 that's the problem with China not 32:35 Chinese aggression it's just 32:37 disobedience the his name in fact if you 32:41 look at the Washington pronouncements 32:44 there's a kind of a touch of desperation 32:46 in them so the State Department recently 32:48 on Iran issued warnings to China saying 32:53 if you want to be admitted into the 32:55 international community you know us then 32:59 you have to meet her you have to meet 33:00 your international responsibilities and 33:03 your international responsibilities are 33:05 to obey us sanctions 33:07 well US sanctions have no validity 33:10 whatsoever except that the u.s. is a 33:12 powerful state and can smash people up 33:15 but the china is observing un sanctions 33:19 which are mostly toothless and the u.s. 33:22 is condemning them for that they say 33:24 yeah they're they're not meeting their 33:27 international responsibilities China 33:30 just laugh 33:31 they don't care of us is unhappy that 33:34 they're not obeying the meaningless US 33:38 sanctions that's infected this as in 33:42 many other cases the u.s. is most of us 33:45 just refusing go along 33:47 that's part of the reason why the u.s. 33:49 is in fact a declining power but there's 33:52 much more to it than that 33:53 however that's not the topic let's 33:55 return to Israel Palestine specifically 33:58 the their mentioned a few crucial 34:03 moments of recent history is a lot to 34:05 talk about the most important real 34:07 turning point was nineteen sixty-seven 34:10 was in 1967 with the 1967 war that the 34:17 us-israel relations were solidified and 34:20 pretty much the current form a big 34:22 change from before and a new framework 34:25 was established in the region so what 34:27 happened 67 well in the background was a 34:30 war that was going on between radical 34:34 Islamism and secular nationalism in the 34:37 Arab world a radical Islamism is 34:40 centered in Saudi Arabia the most 34:43 extreme fundamentalist arab state of the 34:47 extremely hub is the most extreme form 34:50 of Islam supporters of jihad missionary 34:54 movement and so on 34:55 that's centered and Saudi Arabia so 34:59 that's radical Islam court at that time 35:02 secular nationalism was centered in 35:04 Egypt masters Egypt there was a war 35:08 going on between Saudi Arabia and each 35:11 the proxy board in the Yemen and it was 35:15 serious 35:16 the United States and Britain have 35:19 traditionally supported radical Islam 35:23 almost always Saudi Arabia and Pakistan 35:27 you know sported information of Hamas 35:31 it's very consistent us been very strong 35:34 written two very strong supporter of 35:36 radical Islamism there's a reason 35:38 because if they considered a barrier to 35:41 secular nationalism and secular 35:43 nationalism is the real threat not only 35:45 in the Middle East but everywhere for 35:47 example secular nationalism might 35:49 involve a move towards real independence 35:52 and towards the taking over the 35:54 resources of the region and using it for 35:56 its own population instead of for the 35:59 west and for you know the ruling 36:02 gangsters and that's a threat so very 36:07 consistently the US and his and Britain 36:09 have supported radical Islam Israel to 36:12 in 67 Israel effectively destroyed 36:16 secular nationalism that was the main 36:19 outcome of the war and defended Saudi 36:21 Arabia defended radical Islam and that 36:24 was a big plus for us policy and 36:27 relations with Israel change almost 36:29 totally at that time militarily 36:32 diplomatic alee ideologically you know 36:35 all kinds of ways 36:36 well that was continues but the after 36:44 that in nineteen seventy couple years 36:50 later 36:52 the Jordan us back dictatorship and 36:55 Jordan was carrying out a real massacre 36:59 of Palestinians black September's called 37:01 it looked for a while as the Syria might 37:04 intervene to prevent the massacre us 37:08 pretty upset about that at the u.s. at 37:11 the time was completely bogged down in 37:12 Southeast Asia just invaded Cambodia you 37:15 know that things were totally impossible 37:17 couldn't do anything it called on israel 37:20 to react Israel mobilized its quite 37:25 formidable military forces Syria back to 37:28 off that was considered a positive step 37:32 in protecting the hashemite monarchy and 37:34 also the saudi arabian monarchy and in 37:38 fact the US aid is required triple or 37:40 quadruple that year and sir continued in 37:44 the Nixon Nixon was president and the it 37:48 was a mix of doctrines of gold and the 37:50 Nixon Doctrine was that the way that the 37:55 u.s. ought to have surrogate States 37:57 carrying out the dirty work couldn't do 37:59 everything by ourselves anymore and in 38:01 the middle east there had to be what 38:03 were called cops on the beat the cops on 38:07 the beat and keep the place under 38:08 control had to be non our they do a 38:12 better job killing Arabs so Pakistan 38:16 Iran has been up to the Shah Turkey 38:19 Israel there the cops on the beat at 38:22 police headquarters of courses in 38:24 Washington and there's a branch office 38:26 in London that's essentially their way 38:29 around the region Israel with joined as 38:32 one of the cops on the beat at that time 38:34 and that's stayed pretty much like that 38:37 in nineteen it became critical in 1971 38:42 that was one 38:43 most important moments in Israel's 38:45 history i think in 1971 the president 38:49 the president of Egypt present so that 38:51 offered Israel full peace treaty full 38:54 history 38:57 nothing for the Palestinians Palestinian 39:00 issue hadn't really reach the 39:01 international agenda then so Palestinian 39:04 some words about refugees the quid pro 39:08 quo is that Israel was to withdraw from 39:10 Arab territory and in fact Egypt only 39:14 cared about Egyptian territory occupied 39:16 sign actually Jordan came along a year 39:18 later with a similar proposal with you 39:21 over the West Bank well Israel had a 39:24 choice at that point crucial choice and 39:27 they made a fateful decision i think 39:29 they could have had talked almost total 39:32 security a peace treaty with egypt and 39:35 jordan nothing for the Palestinian 39:38 Syrians out of the game that's 39:40 essentially as much securities you can 39:43 get in this world the alternative but 39:46 they had to decide we want security or 39:49 do we want expansion 39:50 well the primary expansion at that time 39:53 was into Egypt it was into the Egyptian 39:55 Sinai Israel at that time was driving 39:58 thousands tens of thousands of veterans 40:01 farmers out of the Sinai they were 40:04 laying plans to build a big city meet 40:07 them on the ocean million people a lot 40:10 of settlements and so on and they 40:12 decided they'd rather have expansion and 40:15 security question is what would the u.s. 40:18 do as always in the u.s. went along with 40:20 them 40:21 Kissinger supported that this is what he 40:23 called stalemated his 40:24 memoirs no negotiations just force that 40:28 had a lot of consequences that one 40:30 consequence that led to the 73 war was a 40:32 very close thing for Israel another is 40:35 it set the stage for what amounts to 40:38 have time to go into the details but 40:41 since then there's been essentially 40:43 permanent choice of accepting expansion 40:47 over security Israel could have security 40:50 right now on accepting the international 40:53 consensus but they want expansion and 40:55 now it's primarily in the West Bank and 40:57 the illegally annexed to go on Heights 41:01 which people don't talk about the 41:03 security council declared illegal but us 41:07 didn't care so Israel doesn't the and 41:11 that that remains the situation there 41:13 was 71 72 in January 1976 the major Arab 41:19 states Egypt Syria and Jordan 41:22 neighboring states bro resolution to the 41:26 Security Council calling for a two-state 41:29 settlement by then the Palestinian issue 41:31 had reached the international agenda so 41:34 they called for a two-state settlement 41:36 on the international border they 41:37 recognized international border 41:39 so-called green line and then the 41:43 resolution added the standard wording of 41:47 the major diplomatic documents un 242 41:51 recognition of the rights of every state 41:54 in the region to live in peace and 41:56 security within secure and recognized 41:59 borders 42:00 it's basically the resolution the u.s. 42:03 heated vetoed a similar resolution in 42:06 1980 the Security Council's ruled out 42:10 shifted to the General Assembly and then 42:13 you get these annual votes with you know 42:16 are 51 2 3 and so on year after year the 42:19 most recent Linda's februari the next 42:22 one will be 42:23 this winter session very likely well 42:26 that's meanwhile settlement expansion 42:30 continued in the Oslo agreements came 42:34 along in 1993 with a total disaster for 42:38 the Palestinians quite predictably the 42:40 don't say in retrospect Rove at 42:44 immediately because it was obvious the 42:46 pace of settlement to increased steadily 42:51 right through the nineties not to the 42:53 peak year with your 2,000 points last 42:56 year Gaza was closed off and separated 43:00 from the West Bank and violation of the 43:02 Oslo treaty and that's been us is really 43:05 policy since i'll quote the American 43:10 hostage one of Israel's leading 43:13 journalists wonderful journalists and 43:15 also this domain their main specialist 43:17 on gaza she's been there for years and 43:20 she writes that the total separation of 43:23 the gaza strip from the West Bank is one 43:26 of the greatest achievements of Israeli 43:28 politics whose overarching objective is 43:31 to prevent a solution based on 43:33 international decisions and 43:35 understandings and instead dictate an 43:38 arrangement based on Israel's military 43:40 superiority and the u.s. backs it that's 43:45 very bitter means that students and Gaza 43:48 for example can't to go a couple miles 43:51 at the universities in the West Bank the 43:54 patients who have to go to a Jerusalem 43:56 hospital or pretty much bar people can 43:59 visit their families and a couple of 44:01 kilometers away and meanwhile repression 44:05 intensified and Gaza was reduced to 44:08 misery 44:08 well in 2005 became the famous 44:12 disengagement Israel had about 7,000 44:16 settlers illegally in Gaza using a large 44:21 part of the meager resources and 44:24 and maybe thirty forty percent and 44:27 defended by big mass of the Israeli army 44:30 and general char on the move was Prime 44:33 Minister the most hawkish Israeli leader 44:36 be recognized rationally it just made no 44:39 sense to keep the small number of Jewish 44:42 settlers in Gaza which by then had been 44:46 utterly devastated used to be a pretty 44:48 healthy place but totally destroyed by 44:50 then so that was pointless 44:52 it made a lot more sense to take them 44:54 out and send them to settle illegally in 44:59 the West Bank which Israel want so that 45:02 was the disengagement but you couldn't 45:04 present it that way so a farce was 45:07 enacted a really comical first if Israel 45:13 hit that they could have just done it 45:14 very easily they could have just said 45:16 you know in august for first the IDF the 45:20 Army is going to withdrawal from gaza 45:22 and at that point the seven or eight 45:25 thousand settlers would have climbed 45:28 into the lorries that were provided for 45:30 them and be taken from there illegally 45:34 subsidized homes and Gaza there 45:36 illegally subsidized homes in the west 45:38 bank and I would've been the end of it 45:39 but that was no good you have a PR 45:42 operation so what they staged stage this 45:46 correct was a confrontation so you get 45:50 front-page news papers and pictures you 45:53 know the little boy pleading with the 45:56 army not to destroy his home and so on 45:58 and then the cries of never 46:00 again you know holocaust that we have to 46:04 stay in West Bank forever 46:06 no such a transparent force that was it 46:09 was ridiculed in Israel and what made it 46:12 even more of a force was it is a replay 46:14 of something that was done a couple 46:16 years earlier when I had to withdraw 46:18 from Yummie finally seen the sign on but 46:22 it passed the Western press accepted it 46:24 and that's a model for what could happen 46:27 in the west bank if the u.s. takes a 46:29 stand 46:30 well that was the that was the 46:34 disengagement the best description of 46:36 what happened next this from one of 46:39 Israel the two of Israel's leading a 46:42 commentary historian needed their towel 46:45 and Lucky there got held are made 46:48 diplomatic correspondent now they write 46:50 that after israel withdrew its forces 46:52 from gaza in august 2005 the ruined 46:56 territory was not released for even a 46:59 single day from Israel's military grip 47:02 or from the price of the occupation that 47:05 the inhabitants pay every day Israel 47:08 left behind scorched-earth devastated 47:11 services and people with neither a 47:13 present nor future the settlements were 47:16 destroyed an ungenerous move by an 47:19 unenlightened occupier which in fact 47:22 continues to control the territory and 47:24 kill and her assets inhabitants by means 47:27 of its formidable military might 47:30 which can be exercised with extreme 47:32 savagery thanks to us thanks to firm us 47:36 support and participation 47:38 well the attacks continued that was 47:41 august 2005 the Israeli us tax continue 47:45 the escalated in january 2006 in that in 47:50 January the Palestinians consider did 47:53 carry out a major crime that may be the 47:56 worst time they were carried out and 47:58 they had a free election and they voted 47:59 the wrong 48:00 way that's not allowed and the u.s. 48:07 reacted instantly go back and look at 48:10 the newspapers within days the United 48:13 States announced harsh punishment of the 48:14 Palestinians Israel to force your kind 48:18 of went along as usual so and in fact 48:21 we're apparently what the desert all and 48:23 old are described picked up the 48:25 significantly then I won't run through 48:28 all the details but there were repeated 48:31 escalations in journ 2007 Hamas which 48:38 won the election injured what was 48:43 described is that was described as this 48:46 and put in june two thousand seven there 48:48 was a civil war in which Hamas drove out 48:51 FATA us favorites and that showed that 48:56 they're just a gang of terrorists that 48:58 what actually happened is really not 49:01 contested the US and tried to initiate a 49:05 military coup to overthrow the results 49:08 of the elections that standard operating 49:10 procedure us does that all over the 49:12 world so they try to military coup is 49:15 run by a strong man man I'm a tough one 49:19 the crew the coup was preempted by Hamas 49:23 and they drove out the Palestinian 49:25 Authority and they did take over 49:27 well that's the Hamas crime not that 49:31 they're nice people 49:32 it's a harsh brutal organization i 49:35 wouldn't want to live into their rule 49:36 but that's a separate story the and of 49:40 course the attacks then escalated again 49:43 siege tighten in june two thousand eight 49:47 there was a true school 49:51 between israel and hamas and start very 49:56 important actually 2008 there's a 49:58 ceasefire basically so no Hamas rockets 50:02 and is really call off the siege notice 50:05 a siege is an act of war Israel of all 50:08 countries insists on that Israel has 50:11 launched two major Wars 5667 on grounds 50:16 that it was very partially blocked from 50:19 the outside world very partially through 50:22 the streets of Tehran the total sieges 50:25 of course an active work so the terms of 50:28 the troops were Israel would call off 50:30 the siege Hamas which stop rockets will 50:33 Hamas lived up to that hundred percent 50:36 you can read it in the official 50:37 us-israeli records they concede that 50:42 during the period of the truth that 50:43 wasn't a single commander rocket Israel 50:46 never accepted the truth maintain the 50:48 siege that was jun 2008 in november two 50:52 thousand eight the day of the u.s. 50:55 election you know everybody's paying 50:57 attention to that Israel invaded Gaza 51:00 scented troops killed half a dozen 51:04 hostility ins meaningless pretext and 51:10 then rocket firing started again and I 51:12 went up and back there were all the 51:14 deaths as usual or Palestinian but it 51:16 did continue until december in late 51:21 December Hamas offered to renew the 51:23 truth the Israeli cabinet considered and 51:26 rejected they had a choice then they 51:30 could have had a truce no Rockets they 51:33 would have had the weekend the siege but 51:36 they decided to reject it and instead 51:37 invade gaza with us support that was the 51:41 december two thousand eight january 2009 51:44 invasion which you know about or should 51:47 the u.s. supported the invasion as 51:51 always us weapons us intervene at the UN 51:55 to prevent the ceasefire Obama was had 51:58 been elected but 51:59 and taking office but he wouldn't say 52:01 anything about it 52:02 his line was there's only one president 52:05 so I can't say anything 52:07 Presidents Bush he was saying things 52:09 that are kind of other topics like that 52:11 Pakistani terrorism so on but couldn't 52:13 say anything about this us attack on 52:16 Gaza which was destroying the attack was 52:20 very carefully calibrated so that would 52:23 end hours before the inauguration that 52:28 did that save Obama the necessity to say 52:32 anything about it now he was the one 52:35 president but it stopped so he could 52:37 give the usual story about let's forget 52:40 about the past and look forward to the 52:42 future and so on 52:43 very convenient story for those who told 52:47 the club's others don't like it much so 52:50 that right after that obama gave his 52:53 first infact only major speech on enough 52:57 israel-palestine it was an interesting 52:59 one he made one good move 53:02 he appointed George Mitchell as his 53:05 negotiator is a sensible move however he 53:08 immediately undercut it by making it 53:11 clear that Mitchell would have no 53:12 authority the way he did that was clever 53:16 clever enough so that the press and 53:18 commentators could pretend they didn't 53:20 our standard what he said was take a 53:23 look at it but you know January 28 53:25 something like that 2009 roughly he said 53:29 I said there's now a great chance for 53:32 peace we have to move forward for peace 53:34 no peace process he says there's a 53:36 constructive plan on the table the error 53:39 peace plan said finally the Arabs of 53:42 come along with the plan actually they 53:44 can no longer in 1976 but let's forget 53:47 about that but now the Arabs have come 53:49 along with a plan and their plan calls 53:53 for normalization of relations with 53:54 Israel and he called on the Arab states 53:57 to move forward with their plan and 53:59 normalize relations with Israel you know 54:01 obama is an intelligent 54:03 favorite person you can read Harvard 54:06 degree and so on 54:07 he knows perfectly well that that's not 54:10 what the plan said the plan reiterated 54:13 the international consensus on a 54:16 two-state settlement and went even 54:18 beyond it 54:19 it said once that's established we 54:22 should move on to normalize relations 54:23 with Israel well Obama omitted carefully 54:27 omitted the guts of the plan and said 54:30 normalize relations with Israel that's 54:33 his way of telling the world where I'm 54:34 going to do anything 54:35 we're going to block piece which is 54:38 exactly what it meant and exactly what 54:40 happened settlement expansion continued 54:43 Obama claim to be opposed to it but he 54:48 made it very clear to Israel that the 54:50 opposition didn't mean anything 54:52 he was asked is that spokespeople were 54:54 asked its press conferences are you 54:56 going to do anything if Israel violates 54:59 your demand to end settlement expansion 55:03 he said no this is just symbolic 55:05 in other words mr. Netanyahu go ahead 55:07 and do whatever you like he was asked 55:10 specifically are you going to do what 55:12 the first George Bush did first George 55:16 Bush did impose very mild sanctions 55:19 women if Israel violated its demand that 55:23 they not expand sanctions Clinton ended 55:26 them but wish that the bush with obama's 55:29 with specifics with you know we're not 55:31 going to do that we're not going to do 55:32 what bush did just symbolic 55:34 so it's a clear statement go ahead and 55:36 expand the settlements which is exactly 55:38 how is understood 55:40 meanwhile George Mitchell was kind of 55:43 displaced by Dennis Ross Ross come 55:46 straight out of a pack is it was 55:49 clinton's negotiator his position as he 55:51 says is there is a symmetry between 55:53 israel and palestine israel israel has 55:57 needs that Palestine only has wants so 56:00 therefore we can dismiss them that's the 56:03 neutral negotiator is now the leading 56:06 advisor then comes a series of steps up 56:11 to the veto of the UN resolution 56:14 last februari they are bleak meanwhile 56:18 they do talk they actually have voices 56:20 they don't say much but they do say some 56:23 things like a couple months ago they 56:26 called for two no-fly zones you heard 56:29 about one of them they called for a 56:32 no-fly zone in Libya and the big uproar 56:34 about that great 56:35 no flies on Libya we got a bomb Libya 56:37 because the Arabs demanded they also at 56:40 the same time called for a no-fly zone 56:41 over Gaza not a word 56:45 no actually you can read about it you 56:48 can read about it in the London 56:49 Financial Times the main International 56:51 Business Journal someone around the 56:54 corners in the United States you could 56:56 read about the note national press that 56:58 no-fly zone over Gaza didn't conform to 57:01 US policies so therefore that when I 57:03 didn't exist the let's go on to what the 57:09 options are now what are the options 57:12 today 57:13 well in there's a lot of commentary 57:15 about this of course and the way it's 57:16 usually phrased is that there are really 57:18 two options one is the two-state 57:22 settlement which has been the 57:23 international consensus for 35 years 57:26 you know you can argue about this not 57:28 detail with the basic framework of over 57:30 this understood that's one and the other 57:33 option that's proposed is that Israel 57:36 should take it all over take over the 57:38 whole territory and then they'll be 57:41 civil rights struggle what kind of an 57:43 anti-apartheid struggle and actually 57:45 that's a position which is argued for by 57:47 a lot of supporters of the Palestinians 57:49 they say that even better in two states 57:51 that we could have an anti-apartheid 57:53 struggle that's a real delusion 57:56 those are not the two options there's a 57:59 third option a third option is that 58:02 Israel and the u.s. will continue doing 58:04 exactly what they're doing right now 58:06 what they're doing right now is 58:09 implementing over 58:10 you know what used to be called the 58:11 Sharan plan for general charan expansion 58:16 is namely Israel takes what it wants in 58:18 the west bank and we know what it wants 58:21 not a secret it wants everything behind 58:24 the separation wall which is in fact an 58:26 annexation wool that's terrible and 58:29 water resources the nice suburbs of the 58:33 Lewis limited even the highway system 58:37 connecting them and so they will take 58:38 that they'll take what's called 58:40 Jerusalem which is far bigger than 58:43 anything that was ever called Jerusalem 58:45 they've illegally expanded Jerusalem 58:48 illegally annexed it over security 58:49 council orders so they'll take Jerusalem 58:52 which cuts out a big piece of the West 58:54 Bank and I'll take the jordan valley 58:56 from which Palestinians are being mostly 58:58 evicted and settlements are being set up 59:02 that in prisons what's left 59:05 it's separated from Gaza so no outlet to 59:08 the sea or anything like that and then 59:10 they're cutting the corridors through 59:13 what's left the big Carter that goes 59:15 east of Greater Jerusalem was almost 59:18 Jericho essentially bisects the West 59:20 Bank big town mild human being built 59:24 there mostly under Clinton it started in 59:26 the seventies another corridor up north 59:30 it goes through RL another town another 59:33 one above that through the main still 59:35 another town it's essentially you know 59:39 breaks the remaining parts of the West 59:42 Bank up into almost non-contiguous and 59:47 unviable Canton's big infrastructure 59:51 projects too so that no Israelis and 59:55 visit American visitors can drive 59:57 through the whole area you know it never 59:59 even seeing a Palestinian maybe some 60:03 figure on a hill with a goat or 60:05 something 60:06 tourist office probably funds and you 60:09 know looks good but that's it and the 60:12 Palestinians can just rot not entirely 60:15 so like in Ramallah the US and in fact 60:19 Europe are Europe mainly our funding a 60:24 kind of an island of affluence so you 60:27 live in Ramallah you know nice 60:29 restaurants concerts and so on 60:32 that's the standard neo-colonial program 60:35 to go to any third world country in 60:38 miserable colony you can find islands of 60:42 affluence and you know 60:44 no glamour and so and beyond what we 60:49 have that's for the elites and that 60:52 shuts them up and meanwhile the rest 60:54 just collapses they can leave if they 60:57 want 60:58 well that's the third option and that's 61:00 the one that's being implemented so we 61:02 don't have to speculate about it being 61:03 implemented you're paying for it or your 61:06 parents if you're not old enough to pay 61:08 taxes that's and that's what's going on 61:12 before our eyes 61:13 so that's the real option and the 61:16 choices that are two states there is no 61:19 third option at this point you can think 61:22 of the longer-term know maybe down the 61:24 road they'll be something better but 61:26 it's gotta be a first step in the first 61:29 step is to states there's no other 61:31 proposal it's now argued very commonly 61:34 thatthat's impossible with settlements 61:36 have gone so far that's impossible 61:38 well the world doesn't agree that's why 61:40 you had the affair very resolution world 61:44 thinks it's possible that the 61:46 Palestinians think it's possible with 61:48 the both factions father and Hamas which 61:51 again reiterated its support for it so i 61:55 think this reason to believe that is 61:57 possible 61:58 what's crucial is as always what the US 62:01 will do if the u.s. access to the US 62:04 joins the world it will be possible and 62:07 Israel will go along because there are 62:09 many choices and we can do things about 62:11 it like we can stop participating in the 62:14 crimes 62:14 that's not a major 62:18 unimaginable action stop stop 62:22 participating the crimes along with 62:24 what's a human rights watching Amnesty 62:27 International and others are calling for 62:28 that would make a difference now there's 62:31 a lot of it's very common now these days 62:34 to draw analogies between Israel and 62:37 South Africa and most of them are pretty 62:40 dubious in my view but there are some 62:41 which are reasonable and instructive 62:45 okay that's five minutes something I'm 62:51 used to that when my kids were little 62:53 and they asked questions you know that 62:56 they often say just the five minute 62:59 lecture so tired I get the five-minute 63:07 like there's one analogy between Israel 63:11 and South Africa which is very real and 63:14 never discussed probably because it's 63:16 real in around nineteen sixty the South 63:21 African government Nationalist 63:23 government recognized that they're 63:24 becoming an international pariah and the 63:27 South African foreign minister called in 63:32 the American ambassador we have the 63:34 documents now and he 63:35 you talked to him he said look we're 63:37 gettin voted down by everyone in the UN 63:39 everyone supposed to us and so on but 63:42 you and I both know that there's only 63:44 one vote in the UN yours so as long as 63:47 you're with us we don't really care what 63:48 the rest of the world thinks and that's 63:51 pretty much what happened if you look 63:53 through the come following decades by 63:56 the 19th big anti-apartheid movement did 63:58 develop by around nineteen eighty 64:01 American corporations were pulling out 64:03 the the Congress was passing sanctions 64:06 the UN has already declared an embargo 64:08 the nobody was supporting apartheid was 64:12 overwhelming opposition but exit the 64:14 only person who's supporting apartheid 64:16 was Ronald Reagan and his administration 64:18 they were strong supporters of apartheid 64:21 and they continue to support it in the 64:24 framework of what they love the war on 64:26 terror war on terror was declared by 64:28 reagan-bush and had to defend the 64:33 African nationalist the apartheid regime 64:35 against the terrorists nelson mandela 64:39 and the African National Congress and I 64:42 made it literally in 1988 the White 64:47 House declared the ANC Mandela's ANC to 64:51 be one of the more notorious terrorist 64:53 groups in the world of course we had to 64:55 support the white nationalist regime in 64:58 fact Mandela himself only got off the 65:00 terrorist list about two years ago so 65:03 now he can come to the United States 65:05 without a special 65:07 the special arrangement and that 65:10 continued until around nineteen ninety 65:13 at that point US policy changed we don't 65:17 have all the documents being guess what 65:19 Mandela was let out of Robins island a 65:22 couple years later apartheid was gone 65:25 it's not a nice situation pretty rotten 65:28 situation in many ways but at least the 65:30 part height was dismantled which is a 65:33 big victory now that's not the only time 65:35 that that's happened in this case after 65:37 case that when the boss lays down the 65:40 law people have to do something and 65:43 that's you know that's actually an 65:46 optimistic conclusion for us it means 65:49 that it's really very much in our hands 65:51 if we take the right kinds of actions if 65:55 we're capable of if our own society is 65:58 democratic enough so that popular 66:00 opinion makes a difference which it 66:02 should be and if it isn't we have a lot 66:05 to worry about not just this then plenty 66:09 of things we can do to change that to 66:11 compel the united states to join the 66:13 world on this issue as well as others 66:15 and in that case this israel-palestine 66:19 conflict can be certainly mitigated not 66:23 solved but mitigated and blade set on 66:27 the basis to a much more favorable 66:29 outcome that's that's the five minutes
The Financial Armageddon Economic Collapse Blog tracks trends and forecasts , futurists , visionaries , free investigative journalists , researchers , Whistelblowers , truthers and many more
No comments:
Post a Comment