when caught in the crossfire between his law and the is ready forces. now as we understood that the one of the civilians was skilled by his ready gunfire late to. busy the united nations forces and 11 on called the natives a getting back. this group of journalists and the civilians and handed that back to the lebanese army national jersey at our local thought. the furthest department is the re, she's to not visited israel on thursday. is part of a 2 day tour of the region to demonstrate his country's backing for these really government. he's also a pushing for humanitarian aid to be allowed into gaza under zeros mohammed. drum june was following the days of it. upon his arrival in israel on thursday, u. k. prime minister wishes to not declaring his unwavering support as a whole on head to express my phone as archie. with this ready piece, you had something to speak about who received of terrorism. and i want you to know

that, you know, i think and i know i found with for stuff for student i was a meeting with is really president issac curt sock. then he was off to meet his is really counter part benjamin netanyahu at a joint press conference in west jerusalem. that's in yahoo think so now i can make clear how essential it is to have his back and i value your support. and the fact that you are here, we must been together. that means that this has a long war and will need your continuous support. on to next agenda, an attempt to deescalate the conflict, ensure the delivery of humanitarian aid to the gaza strip and see the british nationals trapped in gaza are able to get out sooner. back reiterated the you case position that israel has a right to defend itself. but he also said that should be done in line with the international law left on mentioned was how israel has cut off fluid fuel and water to gauze, and that many would consider that to be

a breach of international law. so next trip to israel came one day after a visit by us presidential biden, with both leaders, pressing israel to allow the establishment of a tremendous harry and cord doors and $28.00 trucks are expected to enter gauze via egypt as early as friday. but on thursday it was really bombardment that continued . meaning that each and every hour an already diary, humanitarian crisis, only grew exponentially worse. how much improvement just either occupied east jerusalem? well that's it for me down jordan, my colleague, how many i'm going to be here at the top of the news continues here. now just so you're off to the bottom line. extension comes watching the we don't typically focus on the public itself, the conflict, it's the consequence of war,

the human suffering definitely the 4th time. it is one of the most serious thoughts of violence. in recent years, we brave bullets involved because we give voice to those demanding freedom the rule of law. and we always include the views from all sides. a hi are steve clements and i have a question. is how much a surprise attack on israel? a game changer in the middle east. let's get to the bottom line. the. it was unprecedented for both palestinians and israelis. hundreds of fighters from the pulsing, him group almost broke through the fence that israel maintains around the gaza strip and attacked is really military bases. civilian neighborhoods and a large re, music festival. israel was caught off guard despite the fact that it maintains an intense or balanced network of palestinians around a 1000. his release have been killed in more than a 100, have been taken back to gaza as fond stitches. israel declared war on the gaza

strip, which it is occupied for more than 50 years. now cutting off water, electricity, and food to the millions of people who lived there is really bombing is killed hundreds of palestinians, and displaced hundreds of thousands. us president joe biden, his pledge support is really even order is the biggest worship in the world. the us s gerald or for an aircraft carrier to the eastern mediterranean. so is the surprise attack leading to something g, a strategically larger out of the big players in the region like iran, russia, saudi arabia and the united states, fit into this bigger picture. today we're talking to steven wall, professor of international relations at harvard university and author of several books, including the israel lobby and u. s. foreign policy, and the hell of good intentions, american foreign policy elite, and the decline of us primacy. professor, well i really appreciate you being here. we've had many discussions on the geostrategic fault lines in the world and how they've different players are moving

. so we have another we russian right now of a hot conflict in the middle east, which you know, so well. does this particular hot conflict between home us and israel mean anything different today than the many others that have preceded it in the past? yeah, i think this is different for a variety of different reasons. mean, 1st of all, i think it is shattered of the sense of impunity that israel had for many years. i did, they hadn't been able to wall off the palestinian problem, and most israelis could go about their lives without feeling like it was directly affecting them. and that's clearly been shattered by this. and that's going to have a far reaching implications for his really domestic politics. a 2nd, it is certainly put on hold the normalization process that was underway, or at least being attempted between israel and saudi arabia. all right. whether that's on hold permanently or just temporarily, it will depend a little bit on, on how things evolve here. um,

but i think it has actually broader implications even beyond those immediate things . mean 1st of all, we're seeing a temper or unity within the west. this a rallying, not just the united states, but, but europe, very much in response to the brutal nature of how mazda is attacks, and in particular the attacks on civilians. but i think we're going to see a somewhat different reaction in much of the global south a not approving of what a mazda has done, but being more sympathetic to the palestinian cause. and more concerned by what they see as the selective attention of the west. that we worry or greatly about these conflicts and, but not about conflicts, equally brutal that are taking place in other parts of the world. so the divide we've seen on ukraine between say, the west and the south, i think is going to be a parent here as well. and then finally, you mentioned iran. i think there is a non trivial risk of escalation here, particularly if it is determined that iran was actively involved in the planning of

this operation. everyone knows that around has supported from us in the past and continues to do so. but if they were actively involved in planning, then netanyahu is good, it'd be under great pressure to do something about iran. and that's how this starts to get bigger in a variety of different ways. well, let's talk about the iran dimension of this for a moment. and, and i want to be careful here because i want to tell our audience that there's a lot of material about their ascribing responsibility to different players with pretty fin evidence in my, in my particular view. and so i'm just interested at how you see it and how much time will it take the rationally process, what we've just seen on full. yeah, this is a real concern here. i mean, this is one of these moments where we should all be somewhat humble about how much we understand about what happened and where this is all going to lead. because of course, where this goes depends in part on what the decisions of people make now. and none

of us can be completely certain what, how things will look into a couple of weeks of a certain amount of humility is called for. so the question of uranian involvement is an important one, but i think the early bits of evidence that have come out are certainly not definitive. and that's going to require a little bit of time to try and determine if it does, if it does appear to be clear cut, it is real or that iran was directly involved in these attacks. then i think again, the pressures for escalation go up because it will be hard for the israeli government to do nothing about that. and that's again, one of them, one of the dangers i see here that this could get actually much bigger than it is already. are we seeing something where it's really leaders in their response and gaza may run the risk of creating, you know, a much, much bigger complication, you know, even with the palestinians. how do you see that? yeah, the, there's no question is rarely leadership is, is a very difficult position because they obviously cannot just let this go uh, with no response whatsoever. but all of the responses that they might make are

actually unattractive from it is really point of view. one of the thing terrorists organizations always try to do is get their opponents to react in ways that will advance their cause to overreact in various ways. so if you is real response by simply pummeling guys or killing box of a civilians, eventually a palestinian death total with far exceeds the shocking is really death toll. then of course, the political sympathies begin to shift back the other way. israel also has the complication that how my says i committed the crime of seizing hostages, which means any is really response threatens uh, the own their own citizens being held by him off. so that's a further complication for as well. trying to go into a terribly reoccupied guys that means in you're in charge of it. now you are responsible for running the place. and that is, you know, costly, difficult, more as early as we'll die as a result of that, etc. so there's really a govern,

really like it is in a very, very difficult position and trying to figure out how to respond intelligently and not do what we did after $911.00, which was the, you know, declare a global war on terror, which ultimately did more harm to the united states, then it happened to us on $911.00. and one of the interesting arguments coming from is really political circles and political coverage is from cal schneider in his really journalist that says, benjamin netanyahu is to blame for allowing conditions to fuel him off for to money come out of his obsession with preventing a palestinian state from being created to keep a rival to the policy and authority and mock with a boss. she's saying he essentially gave from us refuge and sustenance to basically keep the palestinians divided. i'm just interested in whether you think tell, schneider has a point. yeah, i think the overall is early strategy for handling the palestinian problem has clearly failed. and this is another illustration of that than what the snyder is

describing is one element of that. but this really response of late last 8 to 10 years has been basically to say this problem can be put on the back burner. we've built a wall, we've withdrawn from gaza, but kept it in circled as essentially an open air prison. and now we can go about normalizing relationships with others and do the trump administration, and to some degree the by did ministration has gone along with that and what, how much is done heinous as it is, has shattered that a loser, at least at least temporarily. so i think the recriminations within israel of course are going to be enormous then. yeah. will be criticized. not just for a bad strategy but uh for letting israel's guard down. on the other hand, he is really right is likely to criticize netanyahu's critics for sewing disunity as well. i think there's going to be, you know, quite a bit or political fallout inside israel in the wake of this. and that may take

months, if not years, to play itself out. you know, one of the historical parallels and then, you know, you know, parallel is perfect, but in 2006 is real invaded, lebanon destroyed a significant portion of infrastructure, kilowatts of lebanese, in an effort to, to rid 11 on of hezbollah. iranian back has the law today has a lot is thriving and so what are the lessons israel should have learned? what are the, what are the ways in which you deal with, you know, groups like this on a border from your perspective. yeah. yeah. i think it, it just shows you the limits of military power that uh, when you're dealing with large numbers of dispossess people, there are limits to what you can do to them. even if you have militarily, military superiority, you cannot kill all of them. you cannot eradicate them as a political force, and ultimately one is forced to, to negotiate. one is forcing deal with them regardless of what the past looks like . so i think the idea that any of these problems could simply be eliminated through

force has been uh, once again demonstrated to be weak. it one of the things has been going on around the environment here before this attack happened, this surprise attack. and i should say, you know, i don't, maybe the egyptians did see it coming and maybe they did communicate to a premonition that in yahoo, that is, you know, in the rumor mill right now. but, but fundamentally what, what the, the dynamic was in the region where the abraham accords and to some degree where the saudis, in the, is really, is on the way to some form of normalization. and you know, basically a different kind of relationship which couldn't change the topography of power in the middle east. and i'm just interested in whether you see that that step was the, was a prob occasion that drew out how mosse and potentially the iranians. yeah, we certainly don't know exactly what the calculations were uh, was this, you know, kind of a preventive war kind of situation where they felt how i felt that had to act

before this went any further. that's certainly a logical possibility. but i think also the behavior of israel on the west bank, some of the acceleration of the settlement activity under this government, et cetera, may have created a sense that you know, windows were closing, etc. i don't know. it certainly certainly a possibility as well. i think the greater error though, was simply the belief that there was sort of nothing that the palestinians of any sort could or would do here. again, that is not a justification from us as action, which is a work crime by any definition. but it was the larger set of policies that it seems to me may be all over confident that they could keep the lid on this forever. and unfortunately, the consequences now have been visited, you know, and innocent israeli civilians. and again on, you know, now in response on innocent palestinians, many of whom do not support from us. right. but every read out i've read

a president biden of, of secretary of state anthony blinking of anyone dealing in an official level with israel, continues to talk about the importance of the 2 state solution and a focus on a 2 state solution as an en game of this ongoing incendiary convulsive situation . what is your view of the so called to state solution? given what we've seen on fold it, i've always thought that the 2 state solution, as envisioned by the oslo accords was the best outcome here. i also think unfortunately that has now been overtaken by events that the expansion of settlements in the west bank, the discrediting of the palestinian authority, some in part due its own actions, et cetera. the right word shift with him is really politics. all of those things have essentially rendered the 2 state solution impossible. one, i say that with,

with great regret. and so i think when the, by the administration or other american officials talk about the 2 state solution, there actually is a sense discrediting themselves. they're talking about a world that no longer exists and it's increasingly difficult to take them seriously. that this has become the sort of fig leaf that they try it out at press conferences, but it doesn't bear much resemblance to any of the political possibilities. and one of the things the united states needs to start doing is ask, well, if a 2 state solution is not possible, then what are we in favor of? what are we going to support? and what are we going to try to encourage to put this conflict to an end once in for all? stay, why is the united states move the u. s. s gerald are forward to this theater into the mediterranean, and what do you, what do you think it gets you? well, hopefully it doesn't have to be used in any way. but i do think it's

a way of signaling american interest. it's a hedge against some possible outcomes, whether or not, you know, american citizens were endangered and had to be rescued. whether or not the war does escalate in a way that starts to threaten other american interested in the region. i don't think the biting investigation believes that it's actually going to need be needed . but if it is needed, they wanted it to be there and it is way a way of signaling support, you know, for israel as well, which is something they're clearly trying to do. you know, one of the things i've learned from you over the years is how unexpected events can be triggered that, that'd be comp, have massive consequence down the road. i've been watching some things that were there and not reported much anywhere related to this, but no, the other day the united states shut down a turkish drone that apparently was hovering over with missiles. our missiles over us troops in syria. maybe they were looking for courage or something that one element, but we've also said rates up arrow on the president of turkey come out and say,

he's absolutely behind the palestinians. the any assault policy is, is it got some very, very hyperbolic language from air to one. at the same time, both political parties, the united states and president biden, are from, lead behind is real turkey is a nato ally. are we seeing fragility in our relationships and superstructures and defense that we need to be taking? uh, you know, be, be much more aware of. yeah, i think there's no question about this. i think the by did ministration has a real bandwidth problem. now let me just take a look at what's on their plate. they've got to warn you. crane still underway and where they're facing real opposition from the public and it's about continuing support there. this event is not going to help because it doesn't make divided ministration. looked particularly confident embarrassing to netanyahu, but also embarrassing to the, by the administration. they have an economic war going on with china. they've got concerns about taiwan as well. of, um, there's uh, you know, obviously a very bad relationship with russia. there's a big migration problem now that the probably didn't issue i should is having to

deal with as well. and you might also notice if we're thinking, you know, politically that china and russia are actually directly implicated, are involved in this particular conflict. they can sit this one out and continue to talk to everyone. so in some respects, this is good news for them. it's a distraction from the war and ukraine. it's something that's going to keep us entangled for quite some time, and they're rather aloof from most of these things is i think they, you know, again, the geo political, the larger geo political ramifications of this could be quite far reaching. what is keeping antagonists who know that war over the long time is devastating of their populations, etc. from actually talking you're talking about players talking. but if you look at the israeli palestinian situation, they are not talking. if you look at ukraine, russia, they are not talking at so all of the kind of intractable conflicts out there are defined by players lining. it feels like very worried were one s to me,

that both sides are developing superstructures of allies that aren't actually pragmatically coming to terms with their conflict. what do you think is driving that? well and you could add, you could add to that day. we don't talk to a ron in any substantial way, even though there is at least the potential for serious conflict there. and, you know, most of us tend to think that you really ought to be talking to potential adversaries as much as possible. not because you agree with them, but because they are the ones that you have of the problems with that you're trying to, trying to work out. i mean, some part of this is that the agendas are completely incompatible. you know that if a mazda is genuinely convinced that israel should go out of business as a state, then there's not much to talk about. if the is really right, is convinced that, occupying all of the west bank and making it one greater is real. and basically expelling those palestinians or keeping them in apartheid situation permanently. if

that's their agenda, then there's not much to talk about there either. so some part of it is that, i think finally what, what fuels it is when, when people feel that they don't have any alternatives, i, that there is no actual diplomatic or political pass. it might lead to a mutually acceptable outcome. not an outcome that either one might like it is it's on the streams, but a mutually acceptable outcome. then i see we think we see this problem in lots of other circumstances around the world. not just this one, where as long as the objectives are incompatible and each side can tell itself a story that it ultimately will win if it just hangs on and get everything you want . you don't have much basis for discussion. you know, some years ago, at the doha, for him, i want to tell people, there was an official from him off there and i spoke to this person and he said, aren't you worried about triggering and his really, you know, reaction at some point that wipes you out or many palestinians and this person said

it was man, he said, no, you can't kill a nation. and is real taking those actions like right now we know it is called electricity, water and food, which it controls for millions of people. but this officials and you can't kill a nation, but he said what it will do was we'll inflame a nation and make us look more legitimate in the eyes of the world. i'm. i'm interested in that triple layer chest game that someone is talking about that involves the murder of so many israelis in this case and, and what will end up in the depths of many palestinians looking at inflaming their legitimacy. and whether or not that is the future we're going to see. um i, i worried about that certainly that that has been the, you know, the belief of, uh, the word stream parts of the palestinian resistance. i think the basic insight that it's very, very difficult to eradicate a people once they have developed a national consciousness. we've seen this in all sorts of places. again,

not just israel, palestine, the nations are very powerful. the forces of loyalty nationalism really is the most powerful political force in the world. and once that national consciousness is aroused, it's very difficult to do anything about it. we're seeing that in the ukranian resistance to russia. uh, is it just another illustration of how powerful it is? so in that sense they're, they're correct and cannot bomb a nation out of existence. and to do so, of course would be a crime against humanity in itself. whether or not of course, i committed war crimes. the other way advances your cause is a separate question, right? first of all, is it legal? it tends to, it tends to drive public opinion around the world away from you, seconded harden's attitudes on the other side. right? i think we seen throughout the israeli palestinian conflict this mutual back and forth on each side, doing horrible things to the other and discovery,

right. surprise, surprise, the other side doesn't want to talk to them is prime minister netanyahu strengthened her weekend by what has just happened? i think there's no question he's been weakened by this. again, his overall strategy for dealing with the palestinians is shown to be a failure to be presiding over the government, which allowed this surprise to happen and was not prepared for it. and where the reaction time once the attack began with so slow, that just looks and confident. and the fact that so many of the security forces were in the west bank, you know, backing up the settlers and leaving other is really citizens vulnerable. will also, you know, i think be brought i a home to roost here. so i think this has a really, you know, very powerful and negative implications for his and 5 and finally, see if you have a piece out right now on foreign policy magazines, website. and its title is real, could win this cause of battle and lose the war is really, as i might view the undisputed superpower in the region. what do you mean that it

could win the gaza battle and lose the war? well, it can you see that, that there, militarily, they are far more powerful than a mazda, ultimately the damage i believe that will be inflicted on a mosque and on the palestinians. and guy so will be greater than the considerable suffering that the israelis have suffered themselves. but if israel overreacts, if, in fact the public opinion in the world begins to shift the other way, if they do, in other words what we did after after 911, then, you know, at a tactical level how moss could lose but gain, again, putting the policy an issue back on the agenda, getting countries like the united states, the european union, the arabs to say, seriously, this is something we have to attend to, that there will not be peace in the middle east until this issue is resolved. if they've restored that to the agenda, then you know, it's a strategic success,

even if it's an accomplished in a, you know, quite heinous manner. or professor stephen was one of america's leading political sciences. i really appreciate your candor and thanks so much for joining us today. nice talking with you guys always do. so what's the bottom line is real and the whole world, including the palestinians, were shocked by the events of the last few days. it's legitimate that everyone is surprised by the breath and scope of the hamas attacks. but isn't legitimate to be surprised that the palestinians are demanding away out of their situation. they've been shouting for decades to anyone. they will listen. hey, we're here. remember us, this conflict is fueled by grievances by injustice and rage, but there's also cold hearted strategy beneath the tears and moral anguish when any military, how mosse is real, russia, ukraine, the u. s. anyone commits work crimes. it's absolutely unacceptable,

but so to is trying to maintain the status quote in the palestine is real relationship. real leadership means standing up and resolving the underlying factors, driving the ongoing destruction. and that's the bottom line. the it is still a fire bomb into someone's house. that is significant in numbers that insignificant, ideologically, that is significant, even as a crime gang of very significant by dictating the governments, the fact of the policy that was shown up can terms of the radicalized div series on our, to 0. the southern surgeon votes as people have to do so not so the 1st time in the process of european political debate. what's

not up for arguments is tiny island comp codes. the most nights you ever spent in the open days seeking what are the help. there is 3 of with this album it's and i've seen some people with full good. is there anything a lamp it is. it is less than a 150 kilometers with introducing coast, and it's become the main sea route from north africa into europe. the freelance producer jobs, the islands deputy, they're saying the residents a tired and want to return to a life based on tourism. and fishing are still of on demand will be here on sunday along with georgia maloney. but it's far from clear exactly how much of what she wants. it least prime minister will get one demand or most certainly went out of reach the idea of an e. u. naval blockade that will prevent migrant boats from reaching the shows. the the challenges

with the

guy, the guy boss, i mean got several people killed in johnson's trapped under rubble. as a greek orthodox church has he finds riley strikes on guns on the hello. i'm emily anglin. this is elsa. 0 alive from the house are coming up. confrontations in occupied east jerusalem and the west by.