lights, china much less so, except in the un peacekeeping field where china has played an important role. is it fair to say that us in china are competing in africa and if so, what are they competing for? they are competing or competing for influence. among other things, africa is 54 nations. that's more than one quarter of the makeup of their general assembly of the united nations. now, those are important votes when it comes to issues that both countries are interested in. they're interested in long term global power, both countries that are interested in norm setting. and this is perhaps the most contentious area today, where the us and the western countries of traditionally set most international norms. and china doesn't like some of them and would like to change them. so it's trying to get the global south, particularly the african countries, to follow its views on norm setting, dealing with digital decisions. for example. how do you think that competition to

play out under donald trump? i think that you will not see a significant difference between the way it played out 1st and the for and the 1st trump administration on the one hand divided administration, which more or less, continued it and what will be now the 2nd trump administration, i think you're going to see essentially a repeat of where there's frankly a lot more talk then there is action because the us ability to make inroads, and some of these fields is rather limited and heavily dependent upon the u. s. private sector. the u. s. cannot the us government cannot dictate with the private sector does if it doesn't want to invest in africa, it won't matter what the us government says. so there's a great desire to increase for an investment in africa from the united states. and we would all like to see that, but you can only do so much with ad when the private sector makes the decision.

what about the terrace? trump, we know has threatened this 60 percent export tariff on chinese goods. and we just saw in that report by nicholas hack, the chinese goods. there are, there are chinese own factories in africa that make goods that then go to the us. could they be impacted? could they be caught in the middle of this? conceivably, they could 1st off, we don't know whether we're going to have 60 percent tariffs or not my. my guess is it will not be that high. but there will probably be an increase in tariff and that will have some impact. uh, but if the africa growth and opportunity act is renewed, it expires and next year. if the top administration renews. and then the african countries will still have the ability to import duty free. that is the, the eligible african countries. so china could still take a presumably still take advantage of that in terms of africa with that and that's it for me, mccloud got plenty more used to work with nice, quite often upfront. the

israel is the 97 country by population. but the 9th largest, honest producer in the world in a 2 part series of a 0, it investigates how cutting edge weapons and surveillance technology. this tested on a captive palestinian population then marketed around the globe, the palestine, the bar tree. coming soon on his jersey to how signs modern history has been marked by displacement apartheid. and now an increasingly little genocide at the hands of israel. images of death and destruction continued to pour out of gaza as the world finally opened his eyes to the plight of the palestinian people. and what's the historical significance of this moment for public sky?

and for the why to read this week on a front, i went to new york to speak to one of the pre eminent historians of the palestinian people. edward, sorry, professor emeritus of modern arab studies at columbia university. she's she's telling me thank you so much for joining me on upfront. it's a pleasure work that we've been witnessing a genocide and guys that for over a year now. israel's as killed tens of thousands of palestinians with some estimates suggesting the numbers are considerably higher over a 1000000 people have been displaced. and when you look at the major events and powers science history, whether it's the neck, but whether it's the so as crisis, the 1960 and world all the stuff, the shape, the region, just to name a few where it is this moment stand and that history as well, this is a continuation of some of those things. it's a continuation of the neck of ethnic cleansing. but it's actually worse than any of

the episodes that i can think of. a larger part of the policy and population was displaced in 1948 during the neck, but, but what has been done during this genocide in terms of the punishment that's being population is being exposed to, is actually worse than any phase that i can recall a policy and history. what, what, what, why worse is it just the sheer numbers? they are deliberately killing huge numbers in the past days. this is not, you know, accidental because there's, they're human shields for whatever. this is a systematic attempt to make guys a livable to image, right? that population in a 48, they just kill people and drove them out. and you know, a massacre here, a massacre there. i'm not trying to minimize the horrors of 1948, but there were only 15000 people killed when the bodies are, are dug up from under the ruins of gaza. the number that you quoted tens of thousands is going to be a fraction of the number killed. we don't know,

and we won't know for very long time and the conditions to which the policies have been subjected. this meeting that a half, almost 2000000 people displaced again and again and again and again. i mean, this is, this is the unprecedented even, even in palestine history, you said the goal is to make gaza and livable. mm hm. what's the in game there? is it just resettlement? is it? what's the goal? what do you, what do you imagine the calculus is there? i mean, we know from the beginning of the war that the original objective was to kick as many people out of gaza as possible and to the disgrace, the internal disgrace of the united states. the american secretary of state went around to egypt. jordan inside the room and tried to get them to take people's israel would drive out of the gaza strip. so the original objective was ethnic cleansing, of as many people from guys as could removed. what they're doing now is apparently clearing the northern part of guys, driving out as many people from there, turning it into a right now occupied zone and possibly later into settlements. we don't know. so i

think that there's the ample evidence from what is rarely need or say, said and from what the us government, the office of managing management and budget put into the, the appropriation goal for israel. that was actually passed, which included money for resettlement. outside of guys, so the united states was going to help them to do this. we know that that was the original go. now they couldn't do it because egypt wouldn't play along and jordan player. but within the gaza strip, they seem to be forcing people into smaller and small, smaller areas. and again, that's what they didn't. 1948 they. they pushed as many people out of the area that they took during the 48 war. and that's what settler cool, and he'll projects always do. i mean, look what was done in north america. pushing native americans into smaller and smaller areas. the ones who weren't killed in the process of the international come to court recently issued arrest warrants for is right. prime minister benjamin netanyahu, as well as former defense minister, you have gone as well as her masses,

military chief, accusing them of crimes against humanity. the warrant means that if any of them travel to a member country, they could be arrested. right? but what's the significance of this warrant? i mean, outside the little bubble in which his release had been, you know, sequestered their media just replaced with the government once a once wants them to hear and outside the bubble of american politics. and a lot of the mainstream american media. everybody in the world has been, i think, affected by this. they realize that international instances are saying what a lot of us have been saying for all a while. these are for crowds and i think that's going to very severely affect as really, sooner or later. because it's not just this former minister and this prime minister, sooner or later, other ministers generals senior officers. so i'm going to realize i may be in danger traveling to england on i may be in date, i may be arrested now saying if nothing. yeah, who comes to our country,

we will arrest him. mm hm. it's still not the same as taking an affirmative action and mike, uh, intervening more aggressively in the midst of a genocide. right. why are we not seeing more countries taking that step? if you want my honest opinion, there's 2 things. the leads in these countries have not yet come to a realization that younger people who are looking at social media and are watching slaughter before they're very eyes have come to. they're still living in another world, a lot of a lot of leaders, a lot of politicians, much of the mainstream media in england and france and certainly in the united states. the 2nd thing is that a freight is united states. i mean, to be put in very bluntly a lot of european countries do not want across washington. a lot of 3rd world, a lot of, you know, global sales countries do not want across the washington. and i think a lot of them are afraid of what may come in the trumpet ministration. they already were, you know, having to face a lot of blow back from the binding ministration. that's not going to get any better and it may get worse under trump. it seems that without the united states, this thing within, very quickly,

i can't imagine israel could continue to prosecute a genocide, a war without us support maybe a few months, some of the some, some of these really process said they can't go on for more than 3 or 4 months without these constant shipments of munitions and resupply and new tubes for the artillery and for the tank guns, i mean, that's what they say. and that's why i'm that really true the united states, as a participant in this war. it's not just that american officials, according to the new york times, and the washington post and the bbc are helping the israelis to kill leaders of harness and his bottle. it's not just that american troops are on the ground with anti aircraft and anti missile defense. it is that the whole war machine would grind to a halt within a matter of months, according to what these really say their military says. so united states is a direct participant, in addition to which that the security council would immediately adopt a resolution forcing israel to stop were it not for the us veto, which i think has been applied for times in the security council since this war

began. so united states, as an active participant, and this was why, why are they so committed to this relationship? why do they not pull out? i mean, we spoke to political side is i'm your shower. and he argues that the us commitment to israel stems primarily from the influence of the israel lobby works to shape u. s. foreign policy in a pro israel direction. but other, say it's the other way around at the us as much to gain from having are kind of stones out. and then it's a strategic motivation rather than all right in the lobby issue. what's your perspective? i mean i, i respect john, he was a former colleague as a friend and i think is right about the lobby, but only up to a certain extent. it's really clear that for a lot of american military officials and strategist, they see 1st of all, their interventions, they believe in force. and israel is a tool in that arsenal it during the cold war, it helped united states to beat down. so get proxies defeating countries. on by the

soviet union and then in the cold war, you know, that, that black and white, you know, 0 sum a game that was an advantage to the united states. and that was, that was the anchor of the, of the strategic aspect of the american is really relationship. and united states is at odds with iran. and so is real as seen as a potential ally in that. now, i would argue these realize are trying to drag the united states into a war with iran. the united states doesn't want that. most americans, strategist, leaders, moultrie, on officials. no, would be a catastrophe. it would also be an election loser. anybody who gets the united states into a wall with the wrong will lose the next to absolute. yeah, i mean, iran, sorry, the rock or proved that was in the middle east, and as did afghanistan are extremely unpopular with the american public opinion. so the get back to your, your, your basic question. the strategic thing is part of it. the other thing is think about it. going back to woodrow wilson, where was the support for the postings. where were the post they didn't exist?

there wasn't none. where was the support for us? it was robust among you angelic goals in the jewish community, among politicians from wilson right up to the last decade or 2. there was no support whatsoever, anywhere in american public opinion for the past tense, they did not exist. now that's changed. most americans oppose this war. democrats, republicans, independence. most americans want to stop us on shipments to israel. most americans did tests, nothing. yeah. i mean, there's poll after poll to pull the chose, this is a solid trend over the better part of the year. this is new, the politicians have still not, you know, begin to begin to bring this into their calculus. that that's super interesting, the shift toward a kind of public critique of nothing. yeah. who obviously can be helpful. yeah. but is there a danger in the focus being on the particular regime as opposed to the system?

instruct yourself? absolutely. i. i think you hit the nail on the head. the problem is not nothing you . i said nothing. you know, has that has a government that includes politicians from 3 quarters the way are halfway across the israeli political spectrum. and what he is doing is popular. and israel, if it's not nothing, you know, it's going to be someone else. this is a popular war and israel, in spite of the, you know, the, israel's, was what the settler movement has been doing. has met almost no push back inside israel. so if nothing else were to disappear tomorrow on criminal charges or, you know, lose no confidence vote. i know thanks very much would change, frankly. and i think that the focus on that then, you know, is it, it to some extent and attempt to divert criticism from long standing basic is really policies which nathaniel today represents but which will continue after that, you know, and apax, by the way, uh, seems to continue to be

a major player in this. i mean, when he was a senator back in the old days, us president joe biden was the largest recipient of a pac money. he is the largest recipient of pro israel money. of anybody who's ever served in us. $1400000.00 over his career. how does, how does that impact? does it impact policy directly? i mean, we, we, we live in a country in which legalized private bribery, legalized bribery is the basis of our political system. politicians shield for money from big donors, and that's the way the system works. so obviously money has a, has a role to play, but i mean, i would argue public opinion has a role to play. think about how many people ever in the history of the us congress stood up and criticized israel. and how long did they last? you know senator percy gym over is pete mccloskey, you can literally count them on the fingers of one hand and you can count the number of terms they served up. the thing is that right?

i think couple of things. that's not, that's no changing. i mean, you had 19 senators who had the courage to stand up and call for all call to arms sales to is re uh, that's unprecedented. there has never been a block in congress of people with the courage to stand up to a pack. and the cards to represent what most of their constituents actually believe that's new. but you're right. the power of a pack is, is, is still there. i would argue it's diminished, but it's still there. it's still quite fun that you mentioned the senator is standing up. mm. hm, i'm asking for an into arm says, and these are conditional demands, right, right. like as long as there's a genocide in god. so we want you to stop the arm sales. the next. that would be hey, let's just dismantle this relationship. but that's a much hard, i mean i would take holding the i'm sales, frankly, given this genocide as, as i would take, that is when it's time for this whole relationship to be re examined. but this is a, this is a, this is a terrible moment. people are being slaughtered by the dozens,

every single day by american weapons in violation of u. s. law. they, i mean, they're basically engaging themselves in criminal activity in violation of us law by allowing american weapons to be used in the way that they're being used not for defensive purpose and how does killing 500 people meet any definition of to kill one m s liter, or one has well, a liter, meet a definition of defensive purposes. how does starving the population of guys and preventing the 4 or $500.00 trucks that should be going and every day not meet the definition of this is a violation of us law in terms of preventing them at that, right? i mean, there's no way that this stuff is not a violation of us law. these people actually, all criminals will talk you a little bit about public opinions. i think has been some, as we've talked about some changes last spring, we saw a huge protest across universities. in us calling for a free power stein for ceasefire, for an in to a part time. and they were using that explicit language. you join the faculty at columbia university in new york city over 20 years ago. from the time you started

until now. how market is the shift in public opinion on this? i mean, i can give you an example from campuses. i can give you an example from public opinion in general, just before i, john court joined colombia in 2003. there was a vote among students about divesting from companies that support israel's occupation. it failed into, i think was 2002 or 2001. i don't, i wasn't, i wasn't uncle. and they had a vote in 2020, over 2 thirds of students voted in favor of the assessment at columbia, an important college and those votes were, were produced at michigan and brown. and so among young people, public opinion has clearly shifted in the last 20 years. there's just no question. there is no question whatsoever that for young people, at least this is now a different issue than it was for, you know, the generation before the, i don't think public opinion as a whole has shifted as markedly,

but it clearly has shifted. i mean, i cannot remember and is really war. that was this unpopular with the american public opinion. you look at the polls. this war is unpopular with majorities of americans, that's new. so there has been a shift you talking with these young people and i think you're right on college campuses. yeah. very different. i mean, differently, there's a strong pro palestine sentiment there. that's the students. right. i was wondering if you saw a similar shift among the faculty just recently mar finkelstein, a tenured associate professor at muhlenberg college and pensylvania. i was terminated for re posting an instagram story of it featured a statement from a palestinian poet, right? she's not the only professor who is at scrutiny, although she's maybe the 1st 10. your profess it'd be fine. but i think that may be true. yeah. yet. how secure is academia for people who support palestine these days they are under enormous pressure. i mean, several of my colleagues are facing disciplinary procedures. proceedings at

columbia. um, lots of staff are under pressure staff have been fired. yeah. contingent faculty or under much greater pressure, non tenured faculty graduates. the mechanisms of repression are concerted. are often in coordination with law enforcement are operating according to the dictates of right wing politicians like virginia fox and it least authentic who are on the house education committee. and brought those presidents in for a grilling and the donors. and a lot of the parents and a lot of the alumni are putting huge pressure on american universities to correct. so the older people, the more conservative people, are weighing in with their money with their voices and as far as the politicians. so the atmosphere is actually very, very harsh. not just for students, but also from faculty and staff. i mean, even at your own campus, during the encampments, you're accused of being a, quote,

spokes person for how may i ask by a colleague or another, columbia university professor who's now been temporarily banned from the campus. right. how did you process that? how do you make sense of that kind of experience? it's not the 1st time i've been called a terrorist. i mean, i have a what i call a harassment file, in which there are thousands 100 scores of, of similar avionic accusations. i didn't pay much attention to what i was about to retire anyway. what are they going to do to me? i don't care for people who are younger, for people who are not tenured, for people who are contingent for graduate students. these can be career and for somebody like me, you know, my water off a duck's back. well, that's, that's a, that's a very mature way way of, of, of thinking about that and processing that. now there were um allegations that some students protesting made comments about murdering scientists, or said things like go back to poland and then there were some pro israel student

also reportedly called who calling protesters terrorist and they were harassing students with where he jab, for example, write up or where i guess he is ok, fee or anything. i mean, how do you sort of establish clear boundaries between principal protests even if we disagree with it, and some, and harassment and harmful behavior. and what is that line and your case, the columbia do a good job of establishing that line in columbia, the terrible job from the beginning to the current moment. but i think this is a broader problem. i think the 1st thing to say is you have to draw a clear line at violence, actually physically harming people. and there's no question that in a few cases that boundary was trans transgressed, but much fewer. then the hysterical media made it out to the end. the historical politicians made it up to appear. there were almost no incidents of violence in what is it now a year and a month now of unrest at columbia. and most other universities are campuses. i'm

aware of and what violence there was came off in from the police or from counter demonstrators. the 2nd thing is a lot of the stuff people are talking about didn't even take place on campus demonstrations that took place off campus or not the responsibilities of our students, the responsibilities of groups in society. and the 3rd thing is we have something called free speech in this country. people can say, hateful, nasty things. i'm not happy when they do that. they maybe shouldn't do that, but they have a right to do that. as long as they don't cross the boundary that the supreme court is established with the campus clements have a greater i was gonna say one more. so here police, which is all of that has to be distinguished from the, the classroom that this year. there are things that may be acceptable in the public space, are not acceptable. there are things you cannot and shouldn't say. and there's a, there's a level of a mutual respect and a dialogue that has to take place in the classroom, or you can have education. i don't think education was interrupted. i don't think there were cases where people were on in the classroom. there were people who were

harassed or hung maybe in some ways, emotionally or, or in their feelings, in the demonstrations on campus. but that's the public space. let's talk about those feelings because if you're on a college campus and people are chatting and marching and you feel unsafe. mm. what, how much do we factor that in? for example, there were a jewish students who would say that some of the palestinian chance free palestine right made the months a for riveted to see made them understand. how do you balance that, you know, a part of being on a college campuses hearing ideas and make you on company? yeah. but what's the difference in being uncomfortable with an idea and actually feeling unsafe even if nobody physically harms you? i mean, i have to say the, the language of safe and unsafe, i think, is a lot more appropriate for kindergarten than it is to university campus. i'm terribly sorry to say this. you know, they are in the public space where you're not in the classroom. if you walk around

the demo, if you don't like what they're saying, but people have a right to free expression. there is freedom of speech in this country. people can say things that i hate to say it are hateful. and that may hurt people's feelings. tough. that's my, that's my personal view. i mean, i've been called things on the, on campus when i was engaged in demonstrations that were nasty and hateful and, or if they can, you know, false. you're out there demonstrating you, you take what, that's what comes your way. and if you don't want to listen to it, walk away. i mean, i think that this whole language of safe and so on and so forth, is entirely inappropriate to political protest about issues of the day. whether we're talking about a motion or whether we're talking about a native american rights or with whatever we may be talking about. you know, some people are offended when people say things about native americans and cyber colonialism. tough. your feelings are hurt. because somebody said this about

slavery or that about separate colonialism. tough luck in the classroom. it's different. okay, in the family, it's maybe different. that's those are the and the conflation of those things is an insidious tactic to shut down freedom of speech and also academic freedom in my opinion. and let's talk a little bit about the future. me, as we think about the resistance and also thinking about the entity that's being resisted. mm hm. how stable is israel's control over the region given shifting public opinion, given the icbc decision given even internally, what's happening in israel? i mean, what they sooner or later have to realize is they cannot rule over another people. it never worked in the past. the conversation always happens sooner or later. and they have to give up their addiction to force. i mean, there's an is really adage if force doesn't work using more force, well hasn't worked very well and it's not working and it's not going to work. you can kill and kill and kill. you can take out level after level,

after level of leadership and they've been doing it for decades. and they're in a worse situation today. the idea that you can implant a jewish state in our country without that coming back to haunt you in the 21st century. i mean, tony just said that if they had done this centuries ago, they might have gotten away with it. but today, very hard. but that's the long term. the other thing is the connection between israel and it's as it were metro poll, which is united states and then western europe is framing every day when we talk about israel's isolation, we're not talking about the global sales. it's already isolated and the global self we're talking about it's isolation in canada and australia and, and britain and france and united states in terms of public opinion. they still have the leaks, they sit there and arrogantly think, well, you know, as long as congress voted down that resolution, we're good. well, they're not good sooner or later. the public opinion is going to have it, and it took us 101215 years to stop the vietnam war to 10 more than 10 years to stop the rock war. sooner or later,

public opinion is going to catch up and they cannot go on without that external support without the details, without the trade. and most importantly that the guns i was excited you. thank you so much for telling me that fine. you're very welcome. thank you. the the latest news as it break suite equal s time for is now adults here that is because when you shall, 14th april support and seizes the full a total weight with detailed coverage. so say they have no way of knowing how many people are still on the ground. they only given official number. once a, with the operation is complete from around the world. full cost is a warning of extreme winds. i had everybody head across the southern california, fully aware this may be far from the a unique has been danger. biodiversity lies in the heart of one of those practical jungles. there was

a little missing information about the animals that we have here. i know the probably just become about others of conservation in their communities out, is there a chinese deep into the rain forest to follow a scientist onto teams efforts to save the fluoride and for now so precious and the region women make science equity to is hidden treasure on al jazeera, the gold and untold stories from asia and the pacific on the shaker model was for translation and international understanding is inviting nominations for its 11th edition, starting january the fast and ending march the 31st 2025. for more information, please visit the awards official website at w w w dot h t a dot q

a the the 90 pilot, sitting in prison is a free from his ready jails. as part of the goal is to cease fire the many bucket. this is just a license though, also coming up the celebration is that the most are really and this is the posted in prison is a well combined by jubilant.