was instead he started looking elsewhere for support. so is that enough to give him what he wants? or does he have more dangerous options? the chief prosecutor at the international criminal court has said he seeking arrest warrants for his really need is including prime minister and method. yahoo! so that comes out of the war in gaza, is rarely politicians across the spectrum of condemned. the move to prosecute is also applied to warrants for key leaders of how much widely designated a terrorist organizations. i guess this week from kind of even dennis ross form a specialist system to president fire aka bama. and for more than 12 years, a keep flat and shaping us policy in the middle east. he's not optimistic about what he sees now, i can tell you,

this is worse between israelis and palestinians. and at any point on which i worked on this issue, including during the 2nd intifada, b i. c, c's announcement comes at a time when as well as human rights record, is on the minute scrutiny with investigations by major media outlets. it's a violence by jewish settlers kind of a palestinian state ever and much from so much conflict on page. dennis ross, welcome to complex zone. basically with you. let's start with the announcement from the chief prosecutor. the international criminal court. arrest warrants have never been sold before for his reading. any doesn't as a storm of protest, not only from those names, but from across all political factions and israel waterford do think that this will have on israel's conduct of the more if the warrants are approved by pre trial judges. or i don't think it will have

a positive effect. i think it creates in the minds of most as rarely is across the political spectrum. that a moral a whole bunch is being established between those who came in with the express purpose of deliberately killing innocence. a kid having people as young as 9 months old, a rating uh, just engaging in unspeakable violence brutality. and made a very deliberate determined way. uh and your greeting, in a sense you're saying you're treating them and the same as your effectively treating leaders of a state who are responding to this kind of a saw a, there certainly are issues that i think the russell fusion is raising about the way the israelites have inducted the war, but most of the writers will see this as a, as creating a moral equivalence where there is no, it's not. and i,

the absence of that, i think, with, in terms of us as rarely, it will be, that they need to, they need to prosecute the war and, and try to ensure that they defeated a mazda in a way. because in the sense they're going to fear that and then no circumstances will ever be seen as being justified in terms of defending themselves against these kinds of attacks. whether that's a correct perception should exist or not. that is a perception i'm afraid will exist here. to be fair to the prosecutor here, he didn't suggest there was any moral equivalence on the country. the, the way that it's being explained by him and by is officials, is that if evidence is brought to him, problem of facia evidence is brought to him of crimes committed on both sides of a conflict. he has a due due to act and to pursue that evidence. and this is one way in which he's doing it by seeking arrest warrants for those who have been named. what other choice did he actually have?

but i think there was an excellent question here in terms of timing goes, it was an expectation he was going to visit israel and have discussions prior to coming out with this. and obviously he did not do that. but it does strike me that it might have been a, again, just from a practical pragmatic standpoint. it might have made more sense be here in advance before you shoot me. but obviously you chose not to do that. uh, there is the penalty as it is. i have to say, is this serious panel? i think the problem, however, as i'm suggesting is by not having come here before releasing this. i think it contributed to the kind of very broad reaction. you have people who are extremely critical of prime minister netanyahu. we're also quite critical of this. so a little bit more could have been done in the set the stage, i suspect, but we are, we are if these very serious jobs use

a not to be tested by the i c. c. where else would they be hud? uh, again, it's not. it's not clear, but i think there's a, there's a larger issue here that auto be kept in mind. and that is when you fight an enemy that deliberately use, is it civilian population? not just as a shield that really is a hostage, or you're putting a position where, what are the choices you have not to go after them given what is going to be this way and consequence. and therefore it faces again or go after them. and unfortunately, there is it going to be used to be and consequences that i will grab. one of the things that these where they should have done. i've made an argument with this with the very beginning of the war. they should have been much more forthcoming with humanitarian assistance. they should have gone out of their way to demonstrate this was a, an effort to and then imperative to,

to see from us and not to punish the pals to angel live in god. and israel did not act in that way, and it made it easier for those to portray what they're doing in a way that is us outside of what, outside the bounds of acceptability. what is, again, the reality is israel was faced with a very cruel dilemma. you have an enemy, the care is not one, wait for the wellbeing of its own public is quite ready to expose them. doesn't mind visual because a lot of allison in fact seems to reller said prospect. but this is what you, what do you seem to be outlined is that this is a water shed moment for international justice? isn't that i really do think there is a question here about how we, we may have to redefine international humanitarian law. i mean, the other one add, you still have an obligation to try to minimize the casualties of 2 civilians,

noncombatants, that's an obligation that shouldn't change. but how the tactics you can use, how you go about doing that. how do you agree? and a clear distinction between those who are using your windshield as a deliberate tackle and those who have to contend with that. i do think this, this is an issue that we're long overdue, trying to come to grips with how we can better define international that you wrote during law given these guides of non state actors and given their, the tactics that they employed, whatever system. but uh, you want to work towards or you think that the international community should work towards the, to provide some kind of justice in situations like this. we're not going to be able to live in a world where accountability is, was enemies, not friends, isn't that the question the gaza is forcing everyone to consider? it says, well, i think it, it is,

it least in part. but i don't think it's coming to grips was the question i've been posing, which is, what is a legitimate strategy? but we're trying to root out an enemy, a non state act, or is, it seems you're gonna have to have international about you're in law. it can't simply be one where it says ok you, you're entitled to strike back, but you have to minimize civilian casualties. what if it turns out that the choice for, for minimizing civilian casualties is quite limited. i mean, there is something else that could have been done. something else it could have been done is a, a situation like this, maybe international humanitarian law. should say, there needs to be a period. uh there needs to be areas where people can be evacuated. so they're not, as they're not as shields. i mean what separates, for example, as the united states approach the illusion is that the, the people who lived in felicia were actually allowed to lee a new rock in iraq,

in iraq. yes, they were allowed to leave, they could, they could leave the city. the problem here and god, good, it's so small. they're not allowed to leave. but other than what one finds in every war zone, is it people leave it look at syria or about 5 and a half 1000000 people. less fled syria. it was the simple thing to do, but 5, it happening and people let's, let's serious in gaza. the people are not allowed to leave. so one of the, i think one of the challenges for international measuring law is to be able to come up with if you're trying to predict it, the wellbeing of civilians, which is a, it's not just a moral imperative. of course, it's a moral imperative. it should be a political imperative as well. but then what do you think you have to come up with? it is strategies for evacuation that the international community can facilitate. as a way of ensuring that if awards bank fight against those who are using human

shield, it leasing and asking community is doing everything. it can us just in terms of providing imagine right assistance but in terms of getting them out of harm's way. and it tells me being help the situation has it by the fact that some of the reporting about is rails behavior by the administration in the states has been contradictory on may, the 10th, the state department wrote to congress with its most detailed assessment of israel, is conduct and it concluded that israel had most likely violated international standards in failing to protect civilians in gaza. but setting up the same time, it is not found specific instances, but with justify coughing, military aid. the department was immediately accused of a fudge democratic senator chris, around the hall and told reporters, if this conduct complies with international standards, then god help us. oh, he hasn't point, doesn't the he does, but i guess i keep coming back to the issue that rational standards. international

standards have not adjusted to a reality where you have an enemy to use as human shields. so we end up judging the actor was been attack as a, then try to root out those who are using human shoes. but how do you explain the apparent contradictions in the state department report? on the one hand, it includes the contents of both action and in action by israel have slowed the flow of age into gaza. but on the other it says we don't currently assess these ran the government is prohibiting or otherwise restricting the transport or delivery of us humanitarian assistance into the. in other words, slowing the flow is not restricting it. of course it is. you guys think what you will, you have is that you have really, i think you're raising 2 different kinds of issues. one issue has to do with the use of weapons. that's where you were 1st raising. now the 2nd thing you're raising is the issue of the permission of humanitarian assistance to go in,

in the quantities that it should have been remitted on the farm. or i think with the state department was finding was that they were looking at the totality of the, of the people, the numbers of people killed and said, almost by definition we dropped inclusion that this must have been done. force must have been done in a way inconsistent with international manager a lot. on the other hand, we don't have specific instances of what that was done. i can understand that too. well, the other issue ranging about a very professionally, the provision of international humanitarian assistance. i share that view, the fact that it is not popular here with these really body auditor who have suffered greatly from october 7th and who every day see what a mouse is doing by holding it hostage is increasing numbers of them, no longer being alive. and there the body politic here is not feeling very

sympathetic to the garden population who they see somehow being in late with i'm us . my own view is the they got in the population is a victim of loss, not only with em us. and the israel's approach to the war needed to separate from us from the population of doesn't. let's talk about the state of us as well. relations of a now as bad as you've known it during the course of your career. i think it's, we're certainly at a low point, but i wonder how much it's us israel and it's just the leadership. i do think that there is a norm as restoration with prime minister netanyahu. i don't think that extends necessarily to all of riley's and not necessarily even to everyone in the, in the correct government. but i do think there is growing frustration with him present biden's always had a,

a good relationship with him. i think has become very frustrated for a variety of reasons. one is that a number of occasions by minister and that's and he always made promises to him and not to fill those promises. and isaac, that is contributed greatly to the press duration that, that he feels, you know, do i think this is something that can be overcome? at least between us and angel. yes, because i don't see this necessarily is ecstatic of the 2 countries. right now. i think there's a problem between the 2 leaderships. we'll have to see how that plays out on the limiting of weapons supplies. to israel, you quoted a mistake. what the administration of done saying it took all the pressure off the how mosley, the yeah, hoss and why? and pressure on him was the key to a hostage deal. but president biden is someone who's old, but accused is riley's of war crimes by saying they've been bombing indiscriminately if he goes on giving them those same american bombs to continue

that indiscriminate bombing. it makes him look weak both of that and complicit. well i think, you know, you can, i think you can kind of present this over you choose to present at the. the fact is, i think he's trying to strike a balance. he wants an outcome where i'm us, who not only committed terrible atrocities on october 7th, but continues to do it with the way it, it brutalizes the hostages. in an old. there's a almost seems to be kind of international and difference do what a mazda is doing to the hostage. because obviously there's not that a difference here and it was, are over for all the families, their life was broken on october 7th. and the case of a president binding the watch to be sure the outcome is an outcome where i'm also no longer in control of does it. whereas it can no longer be a platform where attacks against israel. and he's trying to strike a balance between how do you achieve that objective and at the same time,

conduct of the war in a way that tries to minimize the level of damage and destruction, dinah to your policy and you live in god. it's a very hard water, very hard balance, and stripe one can, one can try to be pure in one direction or the other. but then you're not going to achieve what is the most important object. and i don't think they, it's very important to find a way to end this war with this war also needs to end in a way where a mouse is not in a position, whereas any possibility of, of grouping. another reason surely for withholding weapons is put to as well is that american tax pass of funding that is really offensive, but the majority of them now appear to be again, some of the latest polls show 55 percent of americans against 36 percent who support israel conduct of the war. don't you think that the prospect is pretty worrying for the buy but ministrations 6 months away from a presidential election? is that one of their calculations?

i, i'm sure all of the things being a little, you're the president united states, you're in an election year. this is an issue that almost by definition is not how whole. so you would undoubtedly liked to see this over as soon as possible. and while and yet at the same time while the present watched is over as soon as possible, he doesn't one out of where somehow a boss is able to recruit and wrist out. so it is, this is not the last time we'll see. it is a mouse, has shown not the slightest bit of interest in developing gaza, not the slightest bit of interest in do and providing well the for the wellbeing that was on top of the bill for miles of tiles under ground. all the materials that didn't used and then building those tunnels, all the materials that used in building a military industrial base underground. all that could have been used on the service uh to the advanced guys and the wellbeing of the people there. it did not

of that, and if it had a chance, it'll do this all over again. so you understand, of course, the president watson's over it will be much better for the president, especially in election year if this was no longer an issue. but he doesn't want, you know, we're in a way where i'm us can do this again or can reconstitute itself and subject everybody, palestinians that is really the light to another round like this. this is also a time when israel's human rights record is been on the some of the most intense scrutiny, not least because of multiple cases of set, the violence against palestinians in the west bank. how concerned are you again, that despite repeated international warnings about that very little has been done to cub it as well. i think one of the challenge is again you with this is riley government. you have a couple, a very extreme minister as while who was the minister of national security spending

of the year. and he oftentimes looks like your trends of line di, what extreme is said, let us do. uh, israel presents itself as a rule of law added as to act that way. and with many of extreme is settlers, including those right now are trying to block deliveries of assistance to bounce, that the law needs to be enforced on them. there needs to be more demonstration of that. and if there isn't, the administration is right to single out and sanction some of those individuals. year long investigation by the new york times published in recent days, crimes to reveal how fall and factions inside the sapling movement have been protected and sometimes abetted by the israeli government. and now pose of grace trip to palestinians in the occupied territories. we found the time set a government shaken by an internal war, burying reports, commissioned neutering investigations that aside, and silencing whistle blow as some of the senior officials. did you know about this?

i didn't know. does any of it surprise you? over the years, i've always had a sense that there was a sound protection. one of the things that always was troubling is that it was very hard to ever find the exact expenditures also. and then a browse is if the is where the government knew. if it was exposed, i would actually produce a reaction with it isn't. so i'm not surprised at one level at the scope of it. i have to say is surprising. mr. ross on the ground and gaza, a heavy fighting around the southern city of rough, despite the strongest possible warnings from the us. um, has this ro stop listening to the white house? the by the administration said multiple times. it wanted to see a credible plan for safe guarding civilians. if the rafa offensive went ahead, by may the 15th, at least it was still saying it hasn't seemed such

a plan. is there any way of red line which in the which of the no circumstances israel would be allowed to cross by the administration? i think that the president has made it clear that if they go into a rough, a city that is a red line that's been cross without the incredible evacuation plan or is there will be consequences. that's right. well, there israel is operating all around or off of and not within raffle city now. and what right now, but $800000.00 people actually have less is still the probably the other 5 of 6 hours out were there. so they're still not in the city. i think for the administration, if they were to go into the city, there wouldn't be consequences. i think the president present vine or someone who what he says something you dentist, a minute. so i suspect. yeah, and that's why the reason i suspect these really is having not gone in is because

that is something that they understand is going to trigger a response and, and with a price that they probably don't want to pay. these rarely prime minister has made it clear that the prize of a palestinian state is not on offered to the power. steering is particularly after what have mazda has done. is that any way but a palestinian state come in your view, emerge from all this conflict? well, not in the near term. best of all, the policies are divided between the west bank and gaza. you're going to have to politically re unified them. look i in my own view is the policy and people have a right to self determination. and whether that's a state they choose that's in the state, or there's some kind of confederation that should be their choice. but by the same token, right, with rights come responsibilities. when we talked about of housing state, we cannot have housing states. it's going to be led by i'm us. so that's certainly

not a 2 state solution that some guarantees were continually war. it can be of housing state that becomes a member of the actions of resistance. what i call the access of misery being aligned with iran. that's also a garrett, that's the, that's a guarantee against and state. i can't be of housing state that doesn't have institution, so it'd be a failed state. so you need, you need to great rights and responsibilities. i would like to see some benchmarks created. some milestones created all with the, all under the rubric that allison and have a state in the making. and they have to fulfill their responsibilities to be able to achieve their rights. now obviously the same time that you're creating that item set of standards or milestones or obligations on the housing side, you have to impose and responsibilities on the very side, including among other things they cannot after on the ground in the west bank in a way that makes it impossible to handle the housing state,

but everything i've just said, this is not something you can produce overnight. we have to start by having both sides even begin to cooperate and the functional way. again, we're at a very low ever you asked me about. was this is difficult, the type of i've ever seen in terms of us and really relations. i can tell you this is worse between israelis and palestinians. and at any point on which i worked on this issue, including during the 2nd intifada. so we have to get back some kind of a baseline, so we can move from there and move in a direction of a piece becoming possible. right now we're not dealing with a conflict is seen in, in political time, we're saying we're public, it's almost seeing an excess detriment germs and we're going to have to get back to creating a such a possibility. yeah. and then we're quite a ways from that. god just raised with you briefly, the desk and the helicopter accidents of the radium president, right? you see any sign of an opportunity or

a danger emerging from this accident? i don't think it changes things very much. i mean, it creates and certainly within a rad. but the supreme later i'll a hominy as a decision maker, right? you see was not the decision maker. he might be the decision implementer, but it wasn't good decision makers. like yes it is. and i scream later will emphasize, and boards of people participating in the election because he likes to portray that as being an indication of legitimacy. the fact it turned out to him, so small right now is an indication about uranium public really feels about is why my rebuttal, again the regime. but i think in the near term, their focus will be much more on trying to work out the selection, trying to maximize the numbers of people vote and much less adventures on the outside as well. since being good to have your own comfort zone. thank you very much indeed for your time. thank you. a good to be with

the,

the the, to the point. strong opinions, clear positions, international perspective. bolton's buttons far into him shows no end from being opened. the aggressive and you dream to using hybrid meshes and countries like modal law in georgia. on to the point we are discussing rich strategy as working better a couple times to the point in 30 minutes. on d w. there is a village in kenya. more yeah. where women,

my mama knows my husband would have killed me if i hadn't planned that along. we should be. they escaped violence. both marriage antennas, who mutilated a new malia. the women take a stand against the patriarchy of the tribe, december, and demand on an ocean. in 75 minutes on d, w the this shadows these are costs and video shed lights on the donkey street. devastating colonial harper is infected by germany across and he employed to score farms and destroy lives. what is the legacy of this wide spread races, depression? today, history, we need to talk about here,

the stories, shadows of german colonialism. the some people don't care about me because they don't see my beauty. some people don't care about me because they think i have nothing to give back to you to do to them. i am inside the home, they have food and livelihood that day by day i do so and so does everything 92000000000 people care about me? me me. and now i mean the

the, this is dw news and these are our top stores. germany's 5, right? if the party has been expelled from the 5 right identity and democracy faction in the european parliament. this follows a series of scandals including one involving the parties lead candidate in the forthcoming european problem entry elections. maximillian. commas recently quoted assigned to no old members of nazi germany, s s, but criminal view, and general assembly has decided to establish an annual day to commemorate the

remnants of mexico july. the 11th will be the international diet.