dating and washington accomplishing that task would be anything but simple. in a meeting with the chinese president to a student being told, blinking us had often failed to keep its would say one thing and do another 2 countries or should we part in this? not rivals, both countries issues the common ground. well reserving differences. instead of vicious competition. those differences were made clear during a 5 and a half hour meeting between blinking and china is for administer earlier on friday . when you want increasing negative fact is going to trigger a downward spiral and ties china's legitimate development rights has been unreasonably suppressed. an our court interest facing challenges this included us trade restrictions designed to limit china, access to its market and advance technologies. describing this as containment and not set competition. one also raised tie one as a red line issue for they jake warning against any moves that could be seen as us

support. so the islands, independents, and said the bud and administration should not turn the asia pacific into a battle ground. so the 2 superpowers blinking race ton, his actions against philippine vessels and the south china sea, cooling them dangerous and pointing out to us. his defense treaty with manila walkthrough. another major point of frustration for the us, china support for rush during its invasion. this is crazy. i reiterated our serious concern about the p r. c, providing components that are powering rushes, blue war of aggression against ukraine. he said this threatens not only ton, his relationship with the us, but with europe too. but there was some areas with the true side degree to deep incorporation, including in scheduling the tide of power from john spencer to the us in our special intelligence and increasing student exchange. no major breakthrough was enough to keep those of communication open until the next diplomatic inc. katrina,

you to 0. the largest ever joint military exercises between philippines and the united states are currently underway in the disputed south china sea. the annual drills run until may 10th and involve more than $16000.00 military personnel along with more than $250.00 french and australian forces. so, sire has swept through a homeless, hostile in southern brazil, killing at least 10 people, the blaze in the city of 4 to a leg re broke out early on friday. officials say the building was not license to operate as a guest house and did not have a fire prevention plan. that does it for now upfront is next on that, the phone counting the calls, global ministry spending. as i said, all time hype,

one nation is racing to buy weapons. will western side issues impacts or wrongs ability to wage war against israel. fuss, why it's means ancient city advantage is charging entry fees per day. trippers counts you the cost on out of their the taxes are high and universities in the united states, pro palestinian student protests are springing up around the country. and universities are cracking down, putting questions, a free speech back in the spotlight. our school officials escalating their responses to anti war demonstrations and can student protesters with span the pressure from universities to back down? that's coming up for the 1st. israel continues, it's definitely campaign. and as of the united states, just approved roughly $15000000000.00 and military a to is what is this transfer of weapons against both domestic and international law. escaping report released this week, argues that by providing weapons that may be used in war crimes, the fighting administration may have acted in violation of not just international law,

but its own regulation. let's make the 2 of the reports. authors will let the task force investigating potential is really war price. the newly released reports suggest that us weapons provided to israel had been used in a way that systematically disregards the principles of international law. the automated supply of us arms to israel. the reports, authors argue, could be in violation of a new white house, memorandum known as the national security memo 20 or n s. m. 20. the memo released in february requires recipients of us for an assistance to prof. 5 written assurances that they will comply with us and international law and not impede us efforts to provide humanitarian assistance. but after months of israel's actions in gaza, from striking refugee camps and family homes to killing more than 200 humanitarian aid workers, the office argue that there is mounting evidence to suggest that us arms are being used in ways that contravene international law. joining us to discuss this or 2 of

the office of the report, the etiquette is a human rights lawyer and professor at rutgers university. and josh paul is a former senior official at the us department of state resigns this past october in protest of increased us arm sales to israel is now a non resident fellow at democracy for the arab world now. well, thank you both for joining me. i know what i'm going to start with you, but can you share some findings of the reports and key findings? specifically, what evidence you found that indicates that you as armed sales to israel could be a violation of u. s. law. and international law, particularly was discussed in biden's memo are absolutely, i want to emphasize mark that national security memorandum number 20 isn't anything new, but actually lifts preexisting laws that have not been enforced as they should have . and it includes international humanitarian law understanding very well that international humanitarian law as often contested and can be a slippery terrain. 2 thirds of our report focuses on us lot alone on civil harm

mitigation and u. s. military best practices as well as 620. i am the point assistance act and then when we're looking at, i chose humanitarian law. we're looking at the customary international law that is less contested. based on that framework, we found things that were really striking, right? that included we documents, 16 incidents that are credible that are compelling, that are undeniable. 11 out of those, 16 incidents, there wasn't even a target. that is real, says that it was trying to attack, there's an incident, incidents of the u. s. u. s. provided weapons. so we're focusing specifically on those instances where is really use us provided weapons. so we take thousands of lines of data. and from that we're looking in which of these instances are there credible violations of, of law. and then in those as those which of those are used by or you know, are supplied by us weapons. and then we evaluate them well. events. 16, well, we know we found far more than 16. we decided to focus on 16 to provide an analysis

for them, including an 8 and then included and 18 page annex for the white house to use. the objective here is that the department of state and defense are supposed to write their own report and then submit that to congress in order to trigger enforcement mechanisms which we hope will result in that the association of arms transfers to israel. right now here what we, what we're providing is enough for the department of state and defense to submit this report if they wanted to. what i was saying about the 11th about the 16 incidents that we scrutinize in detail is of them 11 out of the 16. there isn't even a target which really just invalid the argument about human shields. and that's before we get into this misinterpretation of how we evaluated it, international law, and how is realized evaluated in this moment. 11 of a 16, there isn't even a military target. half of those incidents are resident with the turn their home homes. the reason i ask is because it is rarely representative would probably say

those homes had a mass competitive in there, or there was some kind of military action going on. so when you say it wasn't a military target, what do we mean? so that's where it is so far as i'm going to say in response for us to say that in these instances, they didn't even say there was a target inside. nor did they, when they were asked for comment, provide justification. so this is blatant we're giving the us government the lowest hanging fruit, the least controversial cases where there isn't going to be that back and forth exchange. that's number one on the number to saying that there's a how much combatant inside, for example, isn't enough. that isn't the beginning and the end of the analysis, both in us law and, and international law is realized that but if somebody was using human shields illegally, that doesn't absolve as real of its responsibility to protect civilians and to reduce harm. that's it, just by his memorandum requires that countries receiving military aid have to provide credible and reliable assurance is that they're using his aid in compliance

with us law and international law of the us says that these really government has provided them with these assurances. but for weeks now, groups like ox, fam, human rights watch and others, but not to mention dozens of members of congress have written to the by the administration, the dispute of the credibility of israel's claims. so how is the us evaluating the credibility of israel's assurances like, is it, is there transparency even here on how we assess that? well, so that's the question. ok, i think the authors there's none so blind as those who will not see. we have seen a consistent pass and from the administration of denying from the podiums that the department of state at defense at the white house that there been any violations of international humanitarian law. 5 to go from to visual, in spite of, you know, massive reporting, including all over 4 sandwiches in ways and metro analysis as the mentioned of thousands of other reports and hundreds of other lines of data that have been contributed by both international

n g o's. and by 8 organizations on the ground. the problem is that the administration today has not actually off its own lawyers to take a look at these allegations to come to a determination is a fact regarding whether that have been violations of international humanitarian law. those a less a for members of congress just last week, urging them to do so. i would sing them as well to all the intelligence community for its assessments. our understanding is that today, so the administration has simply not off those whose opinions would be binding opponents, such as lawyers as to whether these violations are happening. it is all hope to prove by providing the level of detail contained in this report that you know, the administration will have to when it reports to congress by may 8th, as it is required to do at least acknowledge the fax, at least come to terms with some of these issues and some of these incidents i would be concerned, but what we will see instead is a continuation of the problem in which they have some feet, dodge the question. according to a new report commissioned by the united nations,

israel has yet to provide any evidence to substantiate his claims that a number of unreal employees are members of terrorist organization is. when is your made these accusations the us was with to cut much needed funding to. and really, despite the fact that it plays an indispensable role in providing humanitarian assistance, the guidance in the meantime, the u. s. has continued to fund israel's military despite the fact that they are clear this tremendous evidence of human rights violations. what do you make of this stark contrast between the, the administrative response to unreal versus how they are regarding the is really military? i think what fix what, what's evidence in the pattern um, over many, many decades, not just in the past 6. my are almost 7 months now, which is that there is both a difference to israel and what is real says without an adequate amount of scrutiny . and there is also a lack of even acknowledgment and respect for what palestinians are saying. i think one of the things that's happening here when we talked about the dehumanization of palestinians, is the realization that even nicks their testimony,

less credible so that folks will hear them perhaps, and the state department just aren't taking them as seriously unless somebody else is speaking for them, so i think that's 1st and foremost, the 2nd is that this should tell us, right, but there is an object problem with scrutiny of israel and the information that they're providing and that there isn't enough scrutiny and, and what they're providing and in their prevention of access to who might of terry and aid we document in the report. this is a violation of 620. i am the for an assistance act. we're not even talking about under international law. you cannot starve communities. we're basically saying the us shall not provide arms to a situation where they're also trying to get, you know, providing humanitarian cord or an access to food. well, it was a little small stretch, told the us that we will not allow some one and a half $1000000.00 worth of ease that you're trying to bring into gaza. because it's going to be distributed to honor why and the us side on their hands and started dropping food from the sky. and so we know that the administration know

something pro public a has just published a report that there is enough and could, and considerable all internal descent within state. and before is secretary of state and to me blinking. we also know that the administration is now towing with the idea of applying sanctions. so then that somebody who the battalion in the westbank for, for the killing them aside, the 78 year old palestinian man who was killed even before october 7th. so we understand that the administration is feeling the heat from everywhere, but we also think that that's a little bit too too late and far too little given what we're, what we're looking at. let me pick up on that in december after reviewing allegations that several is really security units have committed, grieve, human rights violations, especially the state department panel, known as the israel lahey vetting forum, recommended that secretary blinking to disqualify these units from receiving us 8 or 4 months later, a state secretary state blinking has finally addressed the recommendations and he

stated to the press of the results of the investigation, we made public in just a few days. you worked at the state department for years. what would be the significance if he does decide to sanction them? so if yeah, i mean, so not only that i work at the state home for several years, but i sat as a member of the israel, a he reading for him for several years. and the allegations we are talking about now, allegations that have been sitting for years, these dates back to 20 to 2022, or even many years earlier. i know there's always been an effort to elevate these concerns to put the memo to the secretary, which is by the way, a requirement only for as well. there is no other country for which we need to seek the sectors approval before and both can both literally know what the cut over the country where a unit becomes ineligible for assistance under the label. and we have to offer this extra to sign off on that. so the very fact that it is this actually making this decision demonstrates the double standard when it comes to israel, a box, you know, for us, we'd been asking the department to move forward on these sorts of allegations. and

so yes, could never get some positive political level. i think there's always been told agreement within the experts within the state department or that these, this is all happening is that day it is of to be cut off under the light he law from us grant assistance, but guessing anyone who was in a, from this clear points a job or send a confirm job to actually do what was necessary to move that paperwork to the secretary. at least the price of the time i left. it never happened. i think it's a good sign in some ways, but that is now that has been at least a memo going forward. i think it's important to note 1st of all that this late, he 1st thing will display restriction only applies to us funded assistance. so the same units that will not be eligible if this actually makes us determinations. for brand systems can still turn around with the money and buy anything they liked from the us in terms of weapons. this is a very narrow restriction. at the same time, it will relates to the things that happened before the car conflicting casa. so on the one hand, through us can say, look, we all taking steps. on the other hand,

it can continue to the flow of items that we know all creating. so much suffering and also killing so many civilians and gaza unimpeded. are there other legal instruments that can be used against the united states if it continues the armies room. so i know from colleagues inside the department that they are an increasing number of people who are declining to be a part of this. because precisely as they are afraid of being on holiday initially one day and having enough funds or saying the icpc would like to talk to you that does have an impact. and what i would say to the colleagues who are not stepping back from this work is that they should be thinking about that as well. because there is some real liability. we have both for a government officials who are authorizing the transfer weapons. and for those in the defense industry, who are, you know, try building the homes that are being used. and i think, you know, any level of due diligence would tell them that the arms they are making will be used to kill thousands of civilians that are also claims that are going to be made . and that are being made in domestic quotes around the both around the country, but also internationally. you know,

there are lots of crimes here that have universal jurisdiction. and the fact that the us justice system may or may not be an effective tool in this case. does not mean that that will not be justice systems in europe or not numerical for that matter in africa with such cases cannot be brought. and you know, once those, all the, those charges and all significant and will have an impact on people. we've actually seen maybe the 1st time in opening question by members of congress, right? should we be funding israel? is there meaningful shift in washington? i know that. is it meaningful? i think that's, that's a big question. are we seeing many shift? obviously, we've seen an insurgency within the democratic party, but they're obviously a minority and they the same body censored, the one palestinian american member of congress for staying from the river, tennessee. right. some invocation of that while they failed to say anything to their own fellow members who have called for a dropping and an atomic bomb on the gaza strip, or with call to kill off all palestinian children. not only the representative of

the bleeding. you know, d, human ization and racism, that afflicts, you know, the logic within congress. but it's also telling us that, you know, what does meaningful change look like at the top. you know, i think we need to think about us congress as being, you know, the role that it plays as it has in the past. it will probably be the last domino to fall in. the shifts at the us make similar to the way that it was the last time or to fall in the movement against apartheid in south africa. you know, the regular administration was the last to hop on that train. and so i think that we're going to see this shift continued to move until we push down that final domino just when you resigned from the state department in october, you mentioned that you stayed in a public letter of israel's actions in gaza and unbridled support that it receives from the united states. uh quote, is not in the long term american interest. would you mean by? well, no, that's exactly right. and i think we see that, you know, we've existed in the last 30 years and this moment of american hegemony where we

can do a lot of dumb things around the world and not pay a cost for them at that moment is going if it is not already gone, we are in an error, strategic competition where that is a cost attached to all supports as well. and we'll paying that cost every day in terms of our ability to, for example, rally partners to support ukraine in terms of, you know, all credibility at the united nations. i think that there is a deep close here. and what's even more concerned is, you know, this country has worked for generations in the post cold war era to build an international system. and that is an the national system that protects us. oh, with its noise, with its nose, we on now the ones tearing it defaults to protect israel and to allow israel to continue its actions and its violations of that international law that at the end of the day, will come back to bite full of us. just call in order to get thank you so much for sharing your report with us and thank you for talking doesn't upfront thank you. like the college students in the united states are

taking to their campuses. they're protesting, israel's ongoing war and gaza, and they're calling on universities to invest and to several all ties to israel. this wave of protests began after students at columbia university set up a guys assigned with verity and can't middle in april 18 following the university presidents congressional testimony about anti semitism on campus. so what officials calling the police who arrested more than a 100 pro palestinian protesters? dozens of students were suspended and evicted from the university housing. medi, my one is a student at columbia university and one of the lead organizers with students for justice in house that she joins as now met him. so good to see you. welcome to upfront, good to see you too. thank you for having me. i met him, you are one of over 100 student protests there is that were arrested on colombia as campus, and you've also been suspended as a consequence of protesting. can you talk to me about what happened on april 18th? so that whole morning we were anxious awaiting the police because the school have

threatened to call them we just weren't sure when they would come and then um, we also were confused because normally the president supposed to consult with the university senate before calling the police on the campus and we later found out that they did not approve the presence of police on campus. in any case, we received word through allies in the administration that the police were coming in. and so we all got into the middle of our encampment. we locked arms began chanting and singing, and then they came on suddenly all at once and they started picking us off one by one and uh, taking us to the corrections vans and even when you're going to the precinct we were continually chanting as we were going in to take our mug shots, it was this, the protests never ended. so the sense of community made the whole experience. feel a little bit better then, then it could have been. now this experience, is it totally new to you or you're part of students, but just as in palestine, you guys were banned from campus last year. and you said before that you faced

consequences were standing up on this issue. ah, how surprised are you or not surprised? are you up by the university's response to your protests, into the demonstrations that are going on? it feels like it's supposed to be an exception to free speech. columbia has continually violated their own policies with regards to a suspension of s g, p, and g d, p. in the fall semester we have a student governing board. we have so many protocols in place for to handle student groups if they violate policies, but colombia did not go through any of this when it suspended us and made a utilize a real decision and blast it to the press. and here we are again with the, with the president, unilaterally calling the cops on her own students, taking over a 100 of them out in the zip ties. and due to some sort of safety concern, when the police chief himself said that there was no safety concern that he could see there was no clear and present danger. and the only danger really is for their investments that they have. they want to keep funding,

in addition to the spread of student activism across the country, following the risk that columbia faculty have spoken out against universities response even joined in with student protesters. oh, what's it been like to see that level of support from faculty? it's incredible. um, it shows that we're a united front and really we are united front and this because they are also being subject to this. the cost is campaign. that is, you know, can you put them on their academic freedom and trying to get them fired from their jobs just as our school is cracking down on us with disciplinary measures. so it's really important and i means a lot you talked earlier about the police chief saying that there was no unsafe conditions that there were no safety concerns that warranted police intervention. but people are raising concerns about safety. they have the reports of violence at protest. uh, the use of anti semitic rhetoric, harassment, some jewish students have said that they feel unsafe on campus. and they've been targeted by protests to some of the even left campus because they say they feel unsafe. and of course,

university administrators are in this interesting position where they have to tow the line between allowing for free speech, but also addressing student safety concerns. what do you make of all this? as i think that with every social movement, there are detractors. but we stand for human rights and equality for all people. we're in fox, our leadership is multi religious and lead by many jewish people. we. we just recently held the state or celebration and i think that frankly, government officials and the media are, are over over blowing some things and sewing nicest syria in order to manufacture consent to genocide and, and find an excuse to, to stifle our movement. and the knox violence upon us. um, of course there are detractors and the movement that will try to infiltrate. but i think that the majority of the movement is extremely peaceful and that's not what we stand for. and we've taken great, we've gone to great lengths to try to, to establish community guidelines and make sure that everyone adheres to them. there have been outside protests outside of the campus gates and i think that's the

majority of what has been going on. has been out there, but inside you walk around and you see people piece, we chatting and reading on the lawn. and i think the fact that the president made classes online for the rest of the semester only is play into this nice peer and hyper paranoia. a mass graves, more than 300 bodies, was uncovered and also the hospital in southern guys of this week. a similar mass grey was recently reported and as schiffer hospital following, israel's troops departure prompting the un to call for an independent investigation . now the us media has been focusing a lot of attention on the protests and concerns over school policy and concerns about free speech and anti semitism on campus, all of which are important. what do you feel like the media is engaging with the substance of what you're actually protesting for? which is israel's continue to saw on gather as i do, but they are not engaging with what we are trying to bring attention to in the 1st

place. i've that we've had this issue from the beginning of the genocide. every time we talked to the news, they tend to hyper 6 a on our safety or, you know, the campus situation. we, we had, we began to some comment on the day of the congressional hearing, completing some of the isn't with docusign as i'm in an effort to redraw attention to the fact divestment, our demand and situation. because the a now a week later, we've seen that instead of talking about the literal mass graves that are being uncovered as we speak, they are still making it about anti semitism on campus and things like this, which is incredibly frustrating. because the whole reason we are out here in the 1st place, the whole reason we are willing to risk arrest and, and sleeping the cold and sleep in the rain is because we know we can't, we can't stand by any longer as our money is funding this and we want our government and our school to wake up. so it's disheartening to see what outcomes do you expect from this. what do you hope to achieve from these demonstrations are

from this kind of long term resistance on campus. and we hope to achieve our demands 1st and foremost of divestment and amnesty for students. but beyond that, we're creating a sense of community on this, on this campus. we're reclaiming our education. we've been having kitchens. people have been bringing food and meeting each other and mingling on the lawns. it's been really beautiful to see um and, and just educating people about the post to me and struggle of these are going to be the future leaders in our country. and i think that's also why the establishment of the leads are so scared because they know that if people see posted in the human, now they might, you know, when they pick positions of power, they might be able to make change in that regard. so, um, i think there's a lot going on here and i'm very proud of what we're doing. i met him. thank you so much for joining me on upfront. thank you. lovely to meet you. you too. all right, everybody, that is our show upfront will be back the

unique perspectives. why is it the doctors didn't get to have to say and any of the medical workforce has been so and devalued by the british government from time on hub voices. tick tock had been a place for organizing politically, for getting people to vote for getting people to protest, connect with our community and tap into conversations you weren't find elsewhere. why is our government taking us toward, on the basis of live we the public has to get out there and do something about it. the stream on al jazeera or the

business latest is brought to you by, i guess, as i live slowly on, one of your lives makes most inflates. the

business life just is free to you, i guess is an ice fly on one of your ex makes modern plates. the the come on several venue to have you with us. this is the news. our live from bill coming up in the program. this our american universities rocks by protests against israel's war on gaza. they've also triggered demonstrations beyond the united states spending from the u. k. and australia. i'm present salumi at columbia university where student demonstrators.