the, the, this is dw news, live it from berlin tonight, the you ins, top court rules that israel's occupation of palestinian territories is illegal. the judges said, is rarely settlement policies violated international law and should be a band in, but the ruling is advisory and not binding. also coming up donald trump, patel's republicans. he was saved tremendous athens bullet because god was on his side. we'll hear from an author who specializes in decoding the language used by the former present. the

i break off is good to have you with this on this friday today. the united nations top court route that is real settlements in the palestinian territories violated international law. and must be a band it. the court found that israel's occupation amounted to annexation, and the palestinians were systematically discriminated against in the occupied territories. the advisory opinion is non binding, but it comes as pressure grows on israel over the war. in garza, you in general assembly as the international court of justice back in 2022 to assess israel's occupation settlements and annexation a palestinian lance on request submitted. by the way to help us understand this ruling, i'm joined now by monica. i mean, she is professor of law at columbia university in new york professor. it's good to have you with this. the you ins,

top court says that israel's occupation is not only unlawful but that it amounts to an annexation. that means to what extent is this new language? this is a significant new gets a significant opinion and the language is quite new. it's new and a number of hers bass. first of all, as you mention because the court decided that israel's conduct in the palestinian territories did amounts to an annexation, which the court defined as an efforts to acquire sovereign title to, to that territory. as of the opinion is also significant because it decide in a, in a way that it had not. and in this early our opinion that israel was occupying the entire house and territories. and this includes east jerusalem, the west bank and gaza strip. so both of those decisions work, both of those pronouncements were quite significant and novel relative to what the

court had previously said about israel. and when we hear the word annexation, it makes me wonder what is the difference between what we're seeing with the occupied territories. the palestinian territories and what we saw back in 2014, when russia illegally annexed crimea, or is there a difference in the the eyes of the wall? i think that's exactly the right question to be asking for many, many years amex stations were sort of off the table. there was one of the time, of course, when international law permitted the acquisition of territory by force and through the massive efforts to change that law which took well over a century. the law now provides that actually the acquisition of territory by force is unlawful. in recent years, we've seen efforts to increasingly tried to increase efforts to try to acquire territory by force in violation of this foundational principle. and we see it in

ukraine. we see efforts to acquire territory by force and the south china sea and in areas that are contested in the himalayas. and we've seen it in now the middle east as well. and so this trend toward the efforts to acquire territory by force annexations is something that is quite, quite terrifying, quite frankly, because efforts to acquire territory. but for some historically, of course, been associated with world wars, words of colonization and massive amounts of human suffering. as we've seen both in the brain and then gather this opinion, this really it is advisory, it's not legally binding, but is the power here really? the fact that with this ruling, the humans top court has put the, is really government policy, basically in the same boat with vladimir putin. is that the power of this really i think the ruling is powerful because although it's not formally binding,

it is support of the united nations, which is the pre eminent court international law. and many i was looking to, it's to try to help sort out and reconfigure the situation in the middle, the specifically relating to israel and palestine. and that authority to pronounce lens, even if not finding is very likely to affect the dynamics in the middle east. and perhaps elsewhere in the world where annexations are back on the table. so it's not just in my view significant because it ties israel's conduct to russia is conduct, which is it is significant because it is designed to and i think it's very likely to have a significant impact on how various players who are sort of operating directly or indirectly in the middle east are likely to continue to do so, going forward and restructure their directions going forward. if israel ignores the i, c j as it has before. does this open the door then,

maybe for the palestinians to receive or perhaps even sue for reparations? another way as well. the court said, among other things that israel is obligated by virtue is by of its violations of international law to provide full reparations to the people. and as a result of just about sending people essentially. and so the question is, become, is, how are those reparations going to be pursued and paid? i suspect that israel is not going to be very quick to offer up reparations. and then other bodies of the, in the world, other states, other international organizations, specifically the united nations will then have to decide whether to try to put in place mechanisms to, to sort of compel israel to provide for reparations. or the very least, to start making registry. and accounting of the arms paused so that reparations,

when they might be on the table, can actually be paid out, and the amount paid can be non law. professor monica, i can be at columbia university professor. we appreciate your time and your valuable analysis tonight. thank you. thank you. you as president job i, this campaign manager says that the president is absolutely still in the running for re election in november and will return to the campaign trail next week. biden has been self isolating since a positive cobit 19 task. force them to cancel appear in the 81 year old is facing growing pressure from top democrats who were worried that he could not be donald trump in november. now the trump campaign, by contrast remains up beat. the republican national convention has closed with trump formerly accepting his parties, nomination and calling for unity. in his 1st speech, then surviving an assassination attempt, the former president told the republicans that he was saved by the grace of god. he

also talked about his campaign goals, but he gave few details about how he would achieve i'm here to night to lay out a vision for the whole nation to every citizen, whether you are a young or old man or woman, democrat, republican or independent black or white, asian, or hispanic, i extend to you a hand of loyalty and of friendship. together we will lead america to new heights of great dislike the world has never seen before. my next guest is in authority on political language, especially the language of donald trump. and her book demagogue for president the rhetorical genius of donald trump. jennifer richey ya die, sex trumps political language. she directed it during the 1st campaign run for the white house back in 2016. she is also a professor of communication in journalism at texas a and m university professor. it's good to have you with this. you know,

i can imagine when you look at the past week of milwaukee and compare that with what you saw for years ago and 8 years ago. mean a lot of this must have been deja vu to u. b. what is changed about trump's political speech? if anything that is very familiar actually, you know, i think that he had less energy this year. i think that he was trying to convey that he has changed. and so it sort of was in the performance of the script, which he of course rambled on quite a bit and didn't follow his script. but i think it was a little bit in the tone of voice more than it was in the content or the tone itself. everyone was expecting for him to make overtures and to say, you know, that we ought to unite as a country. he said those words, but i actually didn't hear him making appeal. so unification instead, he was saying essentially that the democratic party ought to capitulate to have you

know, the g or p put on a huge show this we trump's name. we, as we just saw a big of lights and use the word. performative, i'm wondering, is political speech in the age of trump. is it simply performative speech it is perform? it is um, you know, there sort of the job of politics, attending the meetings and making the decisions. and then there is the performance of the presidency on the american political stage and america's political theater. and donald trump has always excelled at the performative element of it, at least with his base. he's able to connect with them in a way that, you know, they really enjoy listening to him. they, they feel as though he is this famous business man. you know, who is defeating their enemies for them, which is what he tells them repeatedly and you know, they really enjoy his showmanship. and of course,

his detractors don't see him in such a positive light. well, where does all of this then lead substance and the politics is supposed to be about policy and not just personality, isn't it? as it absolutely is. politics ought to be about compromise and about problem solving. but the way that american politics has changed over the last 30 years or so is really about effective polarization. meaning that it's more about how you feel about your opposition, then it is about solving political problems. and unfortunately, the more polarized we become, the more polarizing political figures, rise to the, for america's political theatre. and how do you explain what is happening to end around president biden? i mean, age issues a side. he is a politician who likes to talk policy. yeah, he is and he isn't very good at performing the role of the president for america's

political theater. you know, newspapers, subscriptions are down. he doesn't generate a lot of interest or drama. donald trump did do those things. he generated a lot of interest in drama. people were very concerned every morning when they woke up. what's donald trump done now? and there isn't that interested in bite and, and so that affects the way we understand his presidency. he's had more policy successes than most presidents have such. and when political scientists rank american presidents, they rank him 14 right out of all of the presidents in america because of his policy successes. but he doesn't seem to perform that role well on tv. in the syllabus of your presidential communication course was i was looking at the courses that you teach you right, that there has been a distinct disruption in presidential communication over the past 4 years. is that disruption is it now the norm or? well, we'll see, right?

so you probably are very familiar with the term outrage media, right? so there's a whole genre of media that is designed to elicit and invoke outreach in its audience. and so it keeps them attentive. it kind of keeps them on edge, you know, wondering like, who should we be mad at today? and donald trump has capitalized on outreach media. he's the outrage president, and he's very good at outraging his base by saying everything is corrupt and you know, they're out to get you and everything is terrible. and he's also very good at outraging his opposition by doing things that are a typical and i'm presidential by using ad hominem attacks. and that's a force and intimidation saying things like, i want to be a dictator on day one. all of that means that what he's essentially doing is

outraging the left and the right in order to draw more and more attention to himself. and because there is no president who has been as good as he is doing that . i've got about 30 seconds the professor, your book has been called a vaccine against the virus that threatens the survival of democracy. when you say, we are a long way away from heard immunity, i were in danger. democracy is in danger. and you know, there are organizations that studied democratic erosion and democratic backsliding, all of the features that they indicate are threats to the stability of democracy. are things that are present in the united states at this moment and are worsening. and so, you know, i think every little bit of critical analysis that we can use is helpful. but the, the problem is big. professor g unfortunately we're out of time, but we appreciate you taking the time to talk with us on this friday. thank you. thank you. as you're watching the, the news of next, the secrets of notre dame,

a documentary on frances best. no cathedral devastated like fire 5 years ago. i'll be back at the top of the hour with more world news. i hope to see you then the good news innovation, green the green revolution global. so listen to whole lot of crime. it's probably up to speed. if the care we subscribe to those channels, we subscribe to plan. it's a the

on that day you really thought i would disappear.