planet last weekend. ♪ adrian: good to have you with us. adrian finighan here. people living in crowded gaza neighborhoods have been warned to leave their homes ahead of israeli airstrikes. they live near main roads the israeli military says it is planning to attack. we are in gaza with more. reporter: one of the most crowded population neighborhoods

is here, and all the people living in that neighborhood, we speak about a few thousand people living in a very crowded, houses close to each other. they have received a warning to leave their homes because israelis are going to bombard one of the main roads, what are the essential roads in the gaza strip because it leads -- it links gaza city with gaza. adrian: earlier, israeli airstrikes took place in a southern gaza city. more than 220 palestinians have been killed, including 60 children. secret negotiations are set to be underweight or the white house says u.s. president joe biden put israeli leader benjamin netanyahu on notice during their latest phone call. several u.s. democrats have backed a resolution opposing the

sale of $735 million of million -- of military weaponry israel. pressure is mounting in the president's own party and in his administration to end the violence. top diplomats from the u.s. and russia have struck an optimistic tone after their first face-to-face meeting. antony blinken insert date lavrov spoke in iceland. the u.s. secretary of state repeated warnings against what he called aggressive russian actions. he also talked up the benefits of working together. the russian foreign minister said he agreed. those are the headlines. more news here on al jazeera after "the bottom line," which is coming up next. ♪

>> is the democratic party's traditionally rock-solid support for israel eroding westmark let's get to "the bottom line." when president joe biden got to the white house, he had a list of priorities in the palestine -israel issue was probably competing for last place on that list. but as it always does come of the open wound of the palestinian-israeli conflict as a way of forcing itself onto the world agenda. and now, biden is facing calls within his own party to address it. the u.s. president called for a cease-fire after about 10 israelis and 200 palestinians were killed, including scores of women and children. the administration mostly emphasizes strong support for israel and issued mild statements expressing concern about loss-of-life on both sides. the biden white house blocked a

un security council resolution criticizing israel for the hostilities three times. there has been harsh criticism of israel, including by moderate members of congress, who are now demanding that biden do more. are things changing? today we speak to a university of michigan history professor, as the block on the middle east -- as the blog on the middle east turns 20 this year. professor, i had a chance to ask senator chris murphy about the biden administration stance on bloodshed in palestine and israel. >> do we have tools in our two t told box, do we have more latitude, less latitude, what tools do we have? >> it is hard for us to

influence events in israel and the palestinian territories because of the lack of leadership on both sides that are interested in dialogue. unfortunately, netanyahu ha been rewarded politically from m moving further away from a palestinian state and equally, hamas has been rewarded for organizing l militant opposition to israel. we don't have the kind of brokers we need in the region. we have an important relationship with israel, important humanitarian relationship in that territories. >> that was senator chris murphy, democrat from connecticut, whom i caught up with congress -- caught up with in congress earlier today. let's get to professor cole. we have been discussing this for decades. are there are limits of this particular crisis that seemed different to you? >> the difference is primarily

on the american side, from the sense that you have had impassioned speeches by mainly democrats on the left. in congress, they are pretty roundly condemning the netanyahu government of israel for its actions in gaza, and not accepting the israeli narrative about these things, which is that this is necessary self-defense. the issues are being reframed, almost like black lives matter, in terms of palestinian human rights. there is a change also in the middle east in that we have, for the first time in a long time, seen solidarity across the greenline, so palestinians are striking today not only in the

west bank and gaza, but israel proper, where 20% of the population is of palestinian heritage. there is a cross-border solidarity, there is some solidarity with palestinian rights. that doesn't necessarily mean a lack of sympathy for israeli wounded in congress, and this is not something we saw in 2014, 2012 or earlier. >> i think a lot of people are looking at, what were the sparks? for this was it the grant -- what were the sparks for this? is it mahmoud abbas postponing presidential elections again? when you look at the origin and you look at joe biden, and there is no love lost between bibi

netanyahu and joe biden, how would you quit the biden how would you rate the biden administration response so far? i am not yet sure what the u.s. position is. >> there isn't any daylight between the biden administration and the netanyahu government on the issue of gaza. the israelis are taking advantage of the heightened tensions and the firing of those little rockets from gaza, to degrade hamas'military capabilities, and to do so without regards to civilian life or property. and probably, although this is difficult to know for sure, some of the israeli actions in gaza are intended to make the gaza strip even more uninhabitable, to encourage immigration from

it. in any case, the biden administration has blocked the u.n. security council attempts to call for a cease-fire, and has given over support to israel, and announced $725 million and further military aid, right in the middle of all this. there isn't any daylight between washington and the israeli government on this issue. >> i want to play a clip of an exchange with ned rice, spokesman for the state department. >> talk about what you said about the principal sovereignty? it definitely applies -- the principle of sovereignty. it definitely applies to the palestians. palestinians have a right to self-defense. >> we believe in the concept of self-defense. we believe it applies to any state.

i wouldn't want my words to be construed as -- >> i understand. i don't want to hop on this either, but the israelis killed 13 people just now, including maybe five or six children. and you condemned the killing of children? i am asking, do you condemn the killing of palestinian children? >> these reports are just emerging and i was speaking to the team. we don't have independent confirmation of facts yet, so i am hesitant to get into reports that are just emerging. >> i think many people understand the notion of self-defense and understand there are issues on all sides of this. but when it gets to horrific pictures we have seen of the death of women, young children, scores of them, maybe more than 100, why is it so difficult for our officials to basically say, that is a red line? >> because the doctrine of force

and self-defense chains states, according to the united nations charter. and palestinians don't have a state. the self-defense issue is a red herring in any case. the issue is rights. the palestinians don't have rights. they are stateless. when you don't have a state, you have no courts, you have no struures that guarantee your rights. palestinians don't know if they own anything. his release can show up -- israeli schedule up and take away their home of the only records palestinians have at the moment is israeli courts, sometimes military courts, which by and large are going to favor israeli. things so they don't know if they actually -- favor israeli things. so they don't know if they actually own their own homes at the moment.

so this is the actual issue, rights. and it is not a matter of self defense. the palestinians can't defend themselves. they are stateless. they don't have means to defend himself. the world community as a was talking about hamas as a terrorist organization and hamas engages in terrorism occasionally, but there are tens of thousands of irregular militiamen who, if they went to fight the israeli army, would all be killed in an afternoon. has has been firing those little rockets at israel, most of them land in the desert, third of them landed in israel, most of them injured civilians. d they have killed since hostilities began over a week ago, very tragically because all life is precious, but they have killed less people than some

mass shooting attacks in the united states by one individual. so this is not a military confrontation. we are not talking about self-defense. we are talking about occupation. we are talking about denial of rights. >> many years ago, professor, we were together at a conference and the now late national security advisor zbigniew brzezinski spoke there about a crisis like this and he said, this is like killing hostages. these people are occupied by israel and of this is like killing hostages. these were his views. but when you look at that legacy of time, at that moment, palestine always came up as a strategic fault line between the west and the arab world. it was filled with that much consequence. with the abraham accords, with so many arab states having

normalized with israel, one wonders if there is any strategic relevance in palestine anymore, and whether it is just a moral play at this point. what are your views? i remember you being in the room when brezinski said that, and that was a moment when palestine and its state seemed to matter more than it does strategically to the various stakeholders in the region today. >> i am of the view that the palestinians have never been strategically important. at that is why they are in the position that they are. it has never been important to anyone to settle this issue and make sure they don't remain stateless. there have been lots of stateless people, and their statelessness has been resolved by the international community because it has been recognized as a kind of atrocity. the taiwanese and japan in 1971, when japan recognized one china,

they were left without diplomatic residue mission -- without diplomatic recognition for a while, but the japanese eventually solved that problem. for the palestinians, 5 million of them have been left stateless inside the area controlled by israel, plus stateless palestinians in lebanon, in syria, and even palestinians who were given citizenship, their citizenship is second-class citizenship and often fragile. and 40,000 of them had it taken away from them not long ago. that is the big issue, that these people are stateless. and since egypt made peace with israel, which was a separate peace -- which was a separate peace in the late 1970's, there

was no strategic player who had an interest in protecting the palestinians. sami: -- >> the president of the council on foreign relations said the real instigator this is mock mood -- mahmoud abbas, who postponed elections and his 12 years past his fourth four-year term, and that this created the dynamic work hamas wanted to demonstrate its muscle and legitimacy to palestinians. what complicity does mahmoud abbas in the palestinian authority have for conditions we see? >> mahmoud abbas is irrelevant. the palestine authority was supposed to have all of and bibi netanyahu himself's. destroyed that prospect of the oslo peace accords, and left the palestine authority with only 40% of the west bank, and even

there, they armed the thumb of the israeli military occupation. they can't do anything israel doesn't want them to do when they are basically policing these people for israel. so richard haas is just wrong about mahmoud abbas. it is the situation on the ground. people in the night and states don't actually follow events in the west bank and gaza and they are almost never on the news, unless there is a big blowup like this. but if you read palestinian -israeli newspapers about what has been going on in every little town and village in the west bank, you see brutalization, colonization, militant squatter/settlers from israel and palestinian land that they stole from palestinian families, burning down their olive trees, cutting them down,

invading their property, building on it, taking over their homes. and this is a daily staccato performance of occupation. and in gaza, the israelis bombed the airport 20 years ago. and gaza depends heavily on fish for protein, they are not allowed to fish beyond three to six miles, by the israeli navy. the israelis carefully monitor what serial, including building material, goes into the gaza strip. so these people are living in hell. it is a tinder that can explode at any time, so looking

at a particular trigger for it is a fool's errand. it is not abbas. the particular event of the invasion by the israeli government, they attack on the mosque, the throwing of flash bombs, the setting of fire to rugs during the holy period of fasting during ramadan, sure that set off a lot of problems. but it is not one incident. everyday life is creating these constant tensions and flareups. and as long as the occupation goes on like this, and as long as israel is actively colonizing palestinian land, than there is going to be trouble. >> my discussion with not only senator chris murphy come but casual conversations with other senators i had today, i heard

from them that what they feel is different that they noticed about this conflict versus the many other times we have been around this circle is that arab israelis are rising in protest, that there is violence inside between jewish israelis and arab israelis inside israel. this is a new feature. is this a key element of how this unfolds? how does this fit into the puzzle? >> i called them palestinian israelis, on the model of italian americans. palestinian israelis have been fairly acquiescent. they are heavily policed. in 1966, they were actually under internal village every rule inside israel -- under internal military rule inside israel.

a lot of palestinians live in villages that are not actually recognized by the israeli government as existing. they don't have permission, if a wall falls down, to repair it, or to fix their toilets. the likud party has recognized some of these villages and given them these permissions to have a decent life, in return for which some palestinian israelis have vod [indiscernible] even though it campaigns on them as terrorists and a threat to the state. so there have been mechanisms inside israel whereby palestinian israelis were capped acquiescent -- were kept acquiescent. they are the least educated in the least well-off of the israeli population. i think there aspirations have a lot to do with their attempts to

become more a part of the israeli fabric. their joint list, there have been so many elections recently, but less summer they managed to get 13 members of parliament out of 120, and they should manage a swing vote and all the other parties, which are jewish-based, refused to deal with them and the cabinet refused to have talks with them. and they were sidelined. so it would be as though the african-american caucus in the house of representatives were [indiscernible] from all the other politicians in congress, and you could never have an african-american in the cabinet, and so forth. the relative internal success, then the sidelining in the recent election, they didn't bother to come out and vote very much from all this has added to

the frustrations. there are local problems. i said they are heavily policed with regard to secure, but that leads to a lot of crime in palestinian-israeli areas that is really police don't bother to follow up on. at there have been -- and there have been protests about the lack of state-provided security. so there are a lot of tensions. and i think the al-aqsa mosque invasion really set them off. >> i remember in 1980 six, jimmy carter said israel is becoming an apartheid state. we are many years past that point. what are your views on that framing? and is there any solvency anymore 282-state solution -- to a two-state solution?

it hardly comes up anymore. what are your thoughts on the choices facing israel and palestine now? >> there is no plausible two -state solution anymore. if you look at a map of the squatter's elements from israel into palestine territory, it has become swiss cheese. palestinians are divided up they can't even get to one another without going through israeli checkpoints. there are roads for israelis only. so there is not going to be two states. and by the time jimmy carter talked about apartheid in palestine, it had been a reality for decades. and that is just way to go on. apartheid has become a term of art in international law. some people say the situation is and exactly like apartheid south africa.

but south africans often say, from their point of view, what is going on seems to them worse than what they experienced. but the international criminal court defined apartheid as systematic denial of rights to one ethnic by another. and that is certainly what is going on in israel/palestine. palestinians are being denied rights that jews have. they are on the order of 14 million people between jordan and the mediterranean, all of them under israeli rule in one way or another, and jews are privileged and palestinians are this privileged -- are dis-privileged? >> what would be a bank shot to get us out of this tragedy that is unfolding every day? >> the palestine/israel

situation is so heartbreaking that most people just turn away from it. and there is always this hope that there is some magic bullet, some solution, some negotiations that will resolve it. there aren't. this is as hopeless a diplomatic situation as you could possibly imagine. this is beyond diplomacy. this is apartheid and it will just go on like this. you and i will be ancient and near-death and still be talking about it. there is no prospect of this getting better soon. >> it is one of the few times i fear you are right, i wish you were wrong, thank you juan cole, university of michigan professor of history. thanks for joining us today. >> thanks. steve: what is the bottom line? the murder of george floyd

centered a discussion in america on racism and colonialism, so the discussion between israel and palestinians has shifted in the united states. new york city candidate for mayor andrew yang had to acknowledge palestinians exist after he took a one-cited position on the conflict last week. and some american media and human rights groups are calling out israel being an apartheid state. but that doesn't change the reality of harsh u.s. policy toward the region. israel is the regional superpower and is closely aligned with the united states. now that israel has normalized relations with the uae, jordan, sudan, morocco and others, fault lines have changed the israeli -- faultlines have changed. the israeli government thinks there is little cost to what they are doing right now and

republicans may win back control of congress from democrats. all benjamin netanyahu has to do is wait. even though policy may be shifting, it is unlikely america is going to save the day. at that is "the bottom line." ♪ y>y>y>y>y>y>y>y>y>é>é>é>óñóñawa?

- hey, i'm valerie june. comin' up on "reel south." - [woman] it became this placthat was a safe haven for black falies to bui a comnity - [verie] th histori afcan-ameran tn is engfed by iusy. [woman] you've g 14 industal facilies antremenus potentiafor incints d releas every day. - [valer] and onman refuseto leaveisome and s ancestracommunity. - [stace my relaves are dire descendants of theeople wh unded movill fr slas. [valerie discer "mosslle" next on reelouth - nnouncer] major funding for reel south