madura a lawyer says she's being held in and a tory is present with a political, the chinese somebody else. i'm critical of venezuela's armed forces for decades. now, new government data in argentina says the annual inflation rate has sold above 250 percent. many are resulting to visiting soup kitchens to get something to eat, but they rely on donations and feeding the squeeze to as i last. america edit, tennessee, and newman reports from point as our children and started arriving at this community center for lunch early in the morning. even though it won't be served till mid day, all the food, so here comes from go. nations send. okay. i thought i'm really and i know what it's like to go to bed hungry. so none of the i'm on my feet, a phone to hear. it feels good to help to see someone with a plea to food smile. but the meals being served are not enough to meet the growing demand in this neighborhood. with

a number of people seeking food assistance is doubling every week. 4 months ago they only serve children here. now it's entire families that have to come here for a plate of food and because of origin tina soaring, inflation donors can't afford to give him so much as they used to. which means the soup kitchen often has nothing to give. and that means that many of the people here have to go for a full day with nothing to eat. the latest overall inflation figure for last month was 20.6 percent. soup kitchen director, santiago, picket. all us is food prices with the most critical, you know, and so the, we used to pay $0.82 for a kilo fries. and now it's triple more than $3.00. but others see the latest inflation figure as a glass half full? look at the news, what matters is the tendency inflation is down 5 percent compared to december. and well, february may not be an improvement by april. it's expected to drop 8 percent or so

. that's because the government is not printing any more money to finance the fiscal deficit. it's a textbook build type, the measure that's heating the middle income and poor families, the hardest josie, my, i am unemployed teacher. if i don't come to the soup kitchen, i don't eat no meds on my pension isn't enough to put food on the table. the lucky ones who came early got a plate for, but for many others. this huge part wasn't enough. to see a newman al jazeera window site is, well, that's it for me down jordan, for now the bottom line is coming up next. set you in defense. i'm watching the 1st mass protest of 2024

u. k. 7th national demo since the stalls of israel garza was another enormous gathering people have come from here. we have seen a group of 50 miles to the west of lincoln encased newcastle in the know. right and on the south coast as well. the sentiments here very clearly these find out if you see what's happening in there's no question about it is a broad spectrum of antique war pro palestinian sentiments among the british jewish groups of pulled up the is reading the government's actions. there is a sense the international public opinion is having an impact is putting a resist of a political pressure on international leaders. while the cottage continues close for a ceasefire, when they get loud a. hi, i'm steve clements and i have a question. what are the chances for

a real c spire to end israel's war and siege against guys that let's get to the bottom line, the both sides from us and is real, have made their offers to. and one of the most really wars of modern times from us wants to permanency speier and israel once more temporary truce now is the hard part negotiations through mediators to find a compromise as the work leads into which this month with every day that passes conditions worse than for the 2300000 palestinians were surrounded, isolated and desperate in gaza. zoom out and things don't look all that stable from the us. vantage point across the region are in groups are hitting american targets in iraq, in syria, in jordan. and the us is now heading back 11 on an israel, have daily cross border attacks. and the us has bomb targets in yemen to stop on sir all off from trying to impose enabled blockade on trade with israel. so we witnessing the beginning of a new chapter in the middle east, one where the united states has much less control and less ability to pursue it's

interest. today we're talking with political science, a steven wall, professor of international relations at harvard university and author of the hell of good intentions, america's foreign policy elite, and the decline of us primacy. steven, it's great to have you on look. i mean, 4 months ago at the beginning of this conflict you, when i spoke and you were very pressure about what you would saw saw, would evolve and come in. i guess my big question today is, does the israel gas a conflict which grinds on matter in any substantial way to the united states? what are the impacts of this conflict on president biden, on the perception of american power in the world? or is it trivial? the o, it's certainly not trivial. i mean, this is, i think, expose the double standards in american foreign policy in ways that are damaging to the united states. certainly damaging to the pies and administration. i don't know how many i've lost count of how many times the secretary state blinking has been to

the region to try and make some progress thus far. i use failed across the board. and this is, i think, made the united states look more hypocritical, im claiming to expand for rules based order to be a defender of human rights. and, and, you know, when you think about it hits america's adversaries who benefit most gravely from events like this. because not only does the united states look somewhat ineffectual, but it makes us look inconsistent in the eyes of many. and yet when it comes to try to influence is rarely prime minister netanyahu to not kill innocent people at a country that is large, be dependent on usa didn't support america, looks pretty darn impotent in my view. what do you think? no, there's 2 problems here. one problem about which i've written extensively in the past, of course, is american domestic politics of the united states has lots of potential leverage over israel, which doesn't use because that would generate

a backlash from the israel lobby. and that's a domestic political problem for binding or any other american president. the other difficulty here and it doesn't just apply to israel, is that in conflicts like this? others usually have more staking the game then we do precisely because we're so secure already. so all of the various actors in the middle east, whom we're trying to influence are hard to push around because ultimately they've got more skin in the game. they're willing to bear greater costs and they're going to pursue their own objectives independent of what the united states does. especially if the united states is not using all the leverage at his disposal. but sometimes even if it tries, others are willing to resist. you just look at that, who sees in yemen right now, who are not very powerful, but they care more about what's going on in their neighborhood. then we do. so one of the things that i know you've been waiting in on are the various chess pieces and moves of the players and how mosse has come out and issued its terms on what it

would accept as part of a ceasefire. very large, a release of pre prisoners in israel and exchange for all of a hostages and, and ending all conflict in here for 45 days. israel is rejecting out at the moment and it has its terms for ceasefire. on top of this, you have secretary of state anthony blinking, continuing to talk to the saudis. and somehow in that picture, are rumors of a palestinian state of some sort being in there. what are the real elements that you see at play? and is there any chance that you see of this crisis leading to some constructive creation of you know, some assembly a palestinian justice and autonomy? well, i don't think it's going to happen quickly. i mean, the, the most immediate effect that this whole conflict has had, is it is put the palest, any issue back on the agenda. this had been put to one side by several administration, certainly by the trump administration, but also by the,

by the administration of the israelites. of course we're attempting to keep the palestinian issue off. the agenda on one could even argue that some of their countries were not paying very close attention to it any more, either on and of course, what, how much it did. unfortunately, through a very brutal attack was to remind everyone that the fate of 7 and a half 1000000 palestinians could not be ignored forever. so it's back on the agenda. the question is whether or not you're actually going to see something tangible the saudis issue to stay for the last week, suggesting that they are not gonna play unless there's something really concrete that finally comes through. they're not going to normalize relations with israel until you actually see a genuine, a viable palestinian state. we'll see if they stick to that. the biggest problem we face is, you know, we've tried to get it to dates solutions in the past. american presidents have occasionally worked pretty hard, they added, although again, they rarely used all the leverage at their disposal. but the conditions for and if

anything are less for patients now less appealing. now a personal, all it in the wake of a riff at conflict where $1200.00 is or at least died. and now 27000 gallons have died. you've had the steady, right? we're drift of the is really a body politic over the last 10 or 20 years, which means it's much harder to sell any kind of 2 state solution. israel now you have a government that's committed to a greater israel. so the issue is on the agenda. i think more and more people realize this problem will never be solved if you don't get a political solution. but getting to that political solution is just as difficult as it ever was. and probably more. so i want to play a tape for you of pentagon spokesman major general tat right are commenting on some of the hot action that's just occurred in iraq and with yemen. it should be very

clear that our goal here in both situations is to ensure security and stability in those regions. we're not seeking to escalate. but if our forces are threatened, as i've highlighted, we will respond appropriately on my question to you is, are we being told? no, we're not asking, but in fact we are escalating. yeah, there's several things going. yes, we're escalating as are others. it's uh, it's not, i wouldn't want to say that the united states actually started this process. what's interesting about this is that at the very beginning of the war and gaza, there was a, i think, a pretty conscious effort by many of the interested parties to try and keep the lid on the signaling and various ways that they didn't want to see it expanded ron made this clear, has of all i made this clear to some degree of use really did not want to expand it beyond a garza as well. so and the united states certainly was hoping to confine the problem to gaza. but the longer a conflict like this goes on and the more is suffering is witnessed every day,

the harder it is to keep the lid on the corner, it is for outside or is to remain involved without appearing to be, you know, complicit either tacitly or, or actively, and that has gradually, with other actors to start doing more. the most obvious case was of course, but who is these beginning to attack shipping in the gulf of us who as, as, and read c. but now you've also seen this. how be getting to happen with malicious in iraq and syria, the attack on an american uh base in jordan as well. so you're seeing the effort to keep the lid on a big into a road. the irony and all of this, of course, is the american statement. along with some others that our goal is always to restore deterrence, that you know, we have to retaliate duties a tax in order to re establish a situation of stability. and that's a perfectly acceptable goal. but if you're restoring deterrence for the 10th or

15th, or 50th, or a 100 time, maybe you should ask yourself whether or not the action for taking to restore that service or actually making the problem worse. so i think that may be the define amick. we're now finding ourselves in i think one of the fascinating things is happening in the world. i often try to sort of put myself in the, in the shoes of the, the, who to use or the humanities or the, you know, other players in this, in and look at how they're looking at the, at the order. you know, we just called the rules based order, but let's copy, anarchic order and, and to look at that situation and say, why does the united states get to make rules about shipping lanes? why are we able to take actions on behalf of people we think are under siege? do you think america is place in the world is being shot back by some of the small players? um i think to some degree yes. as i said at the outset, you know, the part of it is the exposing ellen in some photography. and we all know that countries are sometimes hypocritical. but this has been unexpectedly vivid case as

well. with respect to the who is the scene of what they're doing, actually, to me highlights the importance of getting a cease fire as rapidly as possible. they have repeatedly said that their attacks will cease once the war stops. now that may be a bluff, that may be why they may be lying, but in, but let's test stumble on that if you are upset about the attacks that are undertaking and we should be. and you don't want to have to get into a situation where you're constantly bombing human in an attempt to stop them. then maybe the thing to do is get to cease fire and see if they cease their attacks. if so, that would be a successful diplomacy. we would also be good for all of the other parties involved with the possible exception of prime minister netanyahu himself. well, if you put yourself in the shoes of his really prime minister netanyahu and look at his terrain, okay. so i also try and do is overwhelmingly in support of the conflict continuing . and, and i guess that to me,

looks pretty dire for those that want to look at. it looks dire from a position on, on red sea shipping. it looks dire when it comes to the state of palestinians and gaza. mean, do you see any way in which the alignment that prime minister netanyahu has right now would be shifted by for it by circumstances? i want to unpack that particular question and separate out the issue of a ceasefire to end the conflict in gaza from the question of establishing a palestinian state. those are 2 separate things and the establishing a palestinian state is the long term or medium term goal. the short term goal that i think is in most of the parties, interest is the actually in the finding itself. in part because there isn't a military solution here. it's increasingly clear and the is rarely defense forces are not going to destroy a moss, which is the stated war came up there. so a ceasefire would 1st of all be very much in the interest of the palestinian

civilians who are suffering in time. it would very much be in the american insurance, but we would be seen as a peace maker rather than encouraging a conflict on the war itself is costly for israel because they have to keep mobilized in troops. people are displaced as well. they are losing soldiers to i think it would be in the interest of the rest of the region and certainly in because it would remove the gasoline that is fueling the, the expansion of the escalation that we talked about before. the one person who many israelis recognized does not have much of an interest in ending the work quickly is prime minister netanyahu. because as soon as you get to cease fire, there's going to be accountability for how he mis handled things that lead to the original october 7th attacks. and many people believe that the end of the war will also be the end of his political career. so in the sense he has an incentive to try and keep it going. it keeps the unity cabinet intact and it avoids the day of

reckoning. he is likely to face within his rarely domestic politics there. steve, i see you as an altar realist, so this next question may be unfair, but it has to do with another lived. it may be coming off for israel and that's what brewing in the international court of justice and the requirement israel respond to the international court of justice. findings that there may be plausible genocide underway is real, is required to respond to that finding. and i'm just interested both. what do you think is real go with that. but also again in the court of global opinion and this about the finding possibly of genocide. do you think that has any force in chasing the direction of israel? yeah, i think this is a really great question and even as a realist, i think words and labels do matter. it's important to note the international court of justice didn't i find that israel had been committing genocide, found that there was a plausible grounds for concern issued orders that it should take,

that israel should take steps to avoid this and authorized a lengthy or investigation as to what has happened, which was probably going to take months if, if not years. this is already had some immediate effects and you know, a japanese trading firm announced a couple of days ago that was severing ties with and is really arms company over this issue in light of the i c j a ruling. so it's already having some short term consequences, but over the longer term it's, it's affecting israel's image in a fundamental way that word now gets associated with israel in ways that all you know are obviously deeply troubling for, for everyone on it's the same reason that israel was very concerned when people started describing the situation on the west bank is one of apartheid. by the way, that's not just groups like amnesty international. that's also is really human rights groups as well because that's a label that carries with it a whole series of images are not surprisingly, israel has bought the use of the term

a part time. they are now actively contesting the use of the term genocide because they understand that words do matter here and are going to shape opinions. it to the extent that that label gets assigned and it does make it harder for other countries to cooperate. it creates problems for politicians who want to work with israel for one reason or another. it certainly makes it more difficult for error countries to move closer to israel despite some common interest as well. and i think, you know, it's not surprising therefore that this has become such a hot and contested political issue. um, even if that label doesn't ultimately get applied, i think it's all abundantly clear that what israel has done is been conduct a sort of massive work crimes in gaza just as some of us also conducted work. crimes in the attacking is early civilians on october 7th, and that's going to be a permanent state on israel's national image to let me ask you something about the

us dynamic and israel right now. we've seen in the west bank many policy and the palestinians have been killed and harassed by settlers. president biden is actually begun to actively pro active. we sanction is really settlers 1st time that is happened. so the dynamics in the west bank don't get a lot of air time, but it, but it raises the broad question of what israel's ultimate objective is. but how do you figure in westbank dynamics into this into this problem? yeah, well that's been, you know, an underlying issue for a, for a long time. that's one of the reasons why people kept pointing out that the agreements like the abraham records that were negotiated under the trump administration, were ultimately not a peace plan because they didn't solve the most fundamental part of the conflict, which is again the long conflict between israelis and palestinians, and that as israel's government, you know, moved rightward and eventually began to include as ministers,

settlers and advocates of a greater israel in this problem was just going to get worse. and unfortunately, both the trump administration and also the vitamin ministration paid almost no attention to this problem until you get to the last several months or so. i think what it highlights though is the israel does not have a political strategy here. and when i say that is if you're committed to great or israel, and if you're committed as prime minister netanyahu has been throughout his political career to opposing any form of palestinian state. then what are your options? your only options are permanent, a par side that you have to deny political rights to 7 and a half 1000000 palestinians or. and by the way, that's roughly the same number of a is rarely use or you have to get rid of them in some fashion. you have to do ethnic cleansing of to expel them from the territories or,

or worse. those are your only 2 options. if you're committed to a greater israel. and of course, you're not willing to have a multi ethnic democracy wherever, buddy, as political rights. and this is why the united states and most of the rest of the world have have said that a 2 state solution is the answer here. it has to be 2 viable states. it has to be 2 states that can thrive next door to one another. but unfortunately, we've been not able to bring that about. and as i said earlier, unfortunately, the obstacles to getting there now seemed bigger than they ever have been before. let me ask you a big question about your book is real lobby and it's, i'm just wondering, is really lobby stumbling. i think it's facing obstacles. it hasn't face before. you know, if you go back 4050 years, i would support for israel was bi partisan. israel had a very positive image in american politics and of a lucky under dogs, surrounded by hostile errands. it was seen as something of

a strategic partner in the cold war as well. so i as many people, including some officials in groups like a pack used to say, you know, we had a pretty easy product to sell on that. so i think of fundamentally different today, and the reason is the long occupation, the sense that israel was never going to give back the territories it had conquered during the 6 day war was actually trying to essentially colonize them, filled them with, with settlers uh, its treatment of the palestinians was increasingly arch repeated bombing campaigns in gaza, etc. and suddenly you don't have a lucky under dog. you have a powerful, wealthy nuclear armed israel, treating this subject population in terrific ways. and you see this most evident in a generational change that people under 40, including i should add an or of the younger american jews with just a very different attitude towards israel that has not played itself out in the

political system as yet. because again, a pack and others are quite effective. well organized, well established have access to lots of you know, packs and other sources of money and money drives, american politics and all sorts of ways and on many, many issues. so it's not gonna be a see change overnight in american politics, but he, what we are seeing is essentially a lobbying group that can't win the arguments now on the basis of facts, logic and morality. and therefore, has to use sort of rock political power, intimidation, trying to control the discourse, trying to prevent people from speaking out on these issues. because it can't win the fight if it's just an open discourse. i think that the, i think you're starting to see some cracks in the edifice. uh, let me just ask you finally about about president biden. we are in the 2024 raised . think about the equation in his mind. he has spoken frequently about the trauma

of october 7th and he is really public and i understand that. but he is not talked about or very infrequently about the enormous suffering and situation of palestinians right now. and i'm just wondering whether or not that equation which might have worked in 1974 really works in 2024. and whether or not we may be looking for one of the 1st times i can remember of foreign policy, actually undermining a presidential election and mattering in a significant way. what are your thoughts? you know, that's a great, it's a great question. i and nobody quite knows the answer here. mean in some respects by them is damned if he doesn't damp if he doesn't, right? if you, if he comes down hard on israel, you know, stem threatens to withhold aid really pushes for as he's fire, et cetera. he will alienate, is rarely supporters. there'll be lots of op eds written again stem. they'll be people denouncing your mind congress some members of the democratic party. we'll protest on this. there might be some effect on campaign contributions,

etc. so he knows that there is a cost to be paid if he does that. but of course, if he doesn't do that, if he sides with his real as he has, he's alienating young progressives who are very energetic in supporting him in 2020 . he's certainly alienating air of american populations and they are critical in a couple of battle ground states. i think the other thing it's going on here is that bite and has a very traditional view. the us is really relationship. i don't think he has fully taken a board how much that relationship has changed and how much is real has changed since, say the years that he was in the senate, and he may not understand as well as i wish he did that and more independent stance would actually be better for the united states, better for his campaign, but in the long run, probably better for israel as well. well, we will leave it there. i very much appreciate that conversation, steven wall, one of america's leading political sciences. thanks so much for joining us. today,

nice talking to you as always, dave. so what's the bottom line? my guess steven will make some important points that don't often get enough attention. first, america is strategically distracted. so it's actions are often inconsistent and contradictory. second, even if america, one of the things that go a certain way, other smaller powers can still get their way. global military power used to work during the cold war. because the competition with the soviet union was everywhere. but today when it comes to the great and powerful united states, just trying to get israel to stop killing innocent civilians, the united states looks impotent. that's because israel is focused on what it wants . and the us has other priorities. and the palestinian issue is still very low in america's totem pole. the story of guys that the real horror is not just israel's unwillingness to change the temperature and find the last thing and fair arrangement with the palestinians for its own sake. but it also is the story of america's weakness around the world. and that's the bottom line. the,

the child does not die from the landing. he will die from the cold that no clothes, no food, nothing. no diapers was 5. and children in attends of one square metre towards without having a hostages. specs for the government of the country protects us on october 7th, this government fails miserably. hard hitting into buildings as a un ambassador position given to you by or die. suppose you describe that is better than is that any thoughts provided? hang on my question to you all. the good cooks, i think, is the most difficult press than our part to answer facing realities. usb to in the

security council. this is a may just don't think look as if it exit or to hear the story on told to how does era the

devastation inside southern guns as largest hospital is ready for us. is that top not so medical? complex, hundreds of palestinians of trumped inside the jordan. this is down to 0 life and death also coming up. and it's really s try coming to say read refugee camp in central gaza, kills at least 14 condominiums, one persons killed in a shooting of the parade center making. the kansas city chiefs super bowl. we h.