welcome to all the party if there is one area where donald trump will leave a lasting mark it's in the middle under his leadership us policy has shattered its last pretenses of balance and law abiding coming out as unabashedly pro israel and while the democrats there is no means to breeding kulak and down trance legacy are they likely to correct the course or to discuss that i'm now joined by richard clarke professor emeritus of international law at princeton university and formerly un special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the palestinian territories occupied since 967 professor it's a grade on a great pleasure for me to talk to you thank you very much for finding the time. to be a thank you. let me start with this very long title that you have

while serving for 2 terms as the un special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the palestinian territories occupied since 1067 it's quite a mouthful it's hard to memorize it without an autocue but i suppose it was one of those titles that was intended to be more than just a job description it was i thing on purpose trying to show you a service certain vision a certain view of history were there any objection to these last words of occupied since 967 at the time when you were being confirmed. well knows that there was the general israeli objection to the mandate altogether but as far as i know they didn't object to the terminology of occupied territory in that context and the purpose for this typically un cumbersome way of describing the

position i think reflected the worry that the person that blame the road special rapporteur might exceed the inquiry into occupation and go more broadly into the relationship of israel and palestine and i think the human rights council was trying to avoid that kind of free inquiry for un delimited inquiry it was and means us that have pretty lean your freedom rather than expanding it. curtailing it and also it preclude me from examining whether the palestinians were in some ways also violating human rights within the territory they

administer and i tried to change that way of thinking about the mandate but there was a strong pushback against that effort because there was a fear that if the men and the description was changed they mandate itself might disappear your aunt you were at the time a prominent american scholar and international law and yet as far as i know it was the united states on to the outgoing bush administration that also objected pretty strongly to your appointment perhaps because of that belief that you would be. more biased towards the palestinians i wonder if the american representatives averages cast balance with you because at least at that time despite all the pro israeli leanings the united states insisted on presenting itself as a fair broker. well it insisted in public

media connections but in. things that were more or less off camera it was pretty open about its defense of israel and particularly within the un system where it is alleged that israel was victimized by. hostility toward its sovereign rights. and they viewed me as a critic of israel and therefore objected to my appointment they were not members i would not have received the appointment if the u.s. had been a member at the time when i was appointed because you have to have the support of all the 49 members of the human rights council the us read later rejoined the human rights council i think partly so they'd have freedom to

criticize me but. at the time they were not a member but the u.n. ambassador john bolton a very well known american political figure who's written this book he was national security advisor trump for a while many i guess he said well familiar to the russian audience especially there . and he attacked me. and said that pointing me showed everything that was wrong about the way the u.n. operated fires and to stand within 9 months of your appointment that the united states got a new administration the obama team came to office with this promise of a new moral vigor and i think it more than just approach to justice if i can put it this week by the way i noticed that there weren't just are just this is very frequently used in the titles. if your book 2nd you have these 5 books read

this word and incidentally that was also one of the most favorite words of president obama so my question to you is whether these years starting in 2008 with the coming of about much power change the tone or. brought anymore justice to the palestinian people because he definitely promised something of the sort and he is initial speeches yes he made this very well known speech in cairo a couple months after his inauguration which promised a new turning a new page toward american policy in the middle east but the page turned out to be rather a blank page and. when there was pushback from a very pro israeli democratic congress he felt i suppose that his priority policy priorities would suffer if he didn't

give away israel palestine and so even though his prior privately he was probably more sympathetic with the kind of point of view that i hold the people he appointed to represent the united states and in the human rights council and at the u.n. itself. attacked me personally. throughout the 6 years there was basically a continuity of american participation in the u.n. so far as israel palestine is concerned. not on other issues but on this issue in fact the u.s. took pride in the fact that it was protecting israel from censure criticism and the like i know that you often make this distinction but then symbolic and substantive

policy is and. i think that's a hugely and appreciated fact about your swine policy and how divergent its symbolism. is from real action of going back to trying to i know that you find he's . further support for israel a poor and but isn't there some benefit some ugly truth to him calling a spade a spade and not trying to present us policy as balanced as many of his successors did before. yes i think i think it is clarifying as to the real nature. of the u.s. relationship to israel and to any kind of diplomacy that would bring about a sustainable peace the problem is that he not only. took the disguise away the pretension of balance but he also endorsed

a maximalist netanyahu zionist agenda which substantively carried beyond the prove what. israel felt empowered to do and he endorsed for instance israeli sovereignty in the goal of the hives moving the u.s. embassy to jerusalem and. the u.n. consensus on that point and generally going beyond what other leaders had done substantively as well as being more candid symbolically. now many foreign policy experts would also remember 2020 as the year when. the arab countries earlier resolve

of denying israel normalization of relations before a state of palestine is created gave weights you know opened dealmaking paid the u.a.e. back trains to die is that the same diplomatic ties and. other countries arab countries considering to do the same how much of it is due to trauma and how much of it was inevitable. well it's very hard to assess because these kind of decisions are covered with rationalizations publicly that are not. instructive if you want to understand the real motivations and there's very speculation that the u.a.e. and bahrain were wanted to do trump a favor in exchange for is support during the presidency and they came you remember these normalization agreements came just before the november

elections and it was seen as a way helping him in that context so it was in part a private pragmatic deal and trample of deals and partly it was a sense that the palestinian cause was going nowhere that their solidarity on a rhetorical level had no payoff and being. a kind of opportunistic government. they felt that they had more to gain i suspect by normalizing relations and seeing where that would lead. then by maintaining this sterile status quo. and it's been the normalization agreements have been somewhat misinterpreted they haven't abandoned

the demand for a independent sovereign palestinian state with its capital in jerusalem but they talk to contests and. that they used to have before. well they dropped the symbolic leverage is questionable whether they ever had geo political leverage it was going and then and there from israel's point of view it psychologically liberating should not be as isolated in the region where their state is located so from the next on yahoo israeli point of view this was and that sheaves meant they got without giving anything on the palestinian question professor fault we have to take a short break out but we will be back in just few moments stakes in. our.

own moan moan. seems wrong. just don't call. me. yet to see a palette distinct consequences. and in again because betrayal. when so many find themselves worlds apart. just on the common ground. my pappy a worry to. them because. it will park it would if you dance

was good enough for me. because. it is. you can go google have near heard. that if you come will get a. little bit the job center will turn up as a. matter. are you going to want to buy a book about one or you'll. be able to do and if. anything are you going to get some of the.

welcome back to worlds apart as with former un special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the palestinian territories occupied since $967.00 and now a professor forward before the break we were talking about the normalization of ties between israel and some of its arab neighbors and heard some russian experts to jazz the trumpet only to the crowd in this symbolism soviet but the actual she. of heart change of policy bad door negotiations between israelis and that the arabs were spurred by the obama policy in the region particularly his advice to reach out to run what it be fair to suggest that the practical or abandonment of the palestinian cause by some of the arab states is an unintended

consequence of a bomb is pursuing his deal with iran. i think you can say that i think that it. definitely the priority of the arab governments including saudi arabia which hasn't yet reached a normalization agreement is the containment of iran and the destabilization of iran and they felt that to gain any kind. of diplomatic and material support for that priority. made it worthwhile to. be seen as a betrayer of the palestinian cause and that betray though which i think is felt by the populations in these kind of arab countries that have not abandoned the palestinian struggle so you do have this kind of tension between

these regimes and their people on this issue and they were bent what must have been them from doing this openly earlier they were cooperating with israel unscary the regional issues earlier this was. making it explicit now i've heard the same before and one of the reasons the arab states fear iran so much is because it has become the primary threat to our political arrangements particularly dynastic governance i use actually saying that iran is feared because of its quote unquote democracy. not democracy but it's anti none are minor key views i had this meeting with khomeini back in 1970 known a long time ago where he compared the saudi dynasty to the shah.

who was his adversary and it was at the time when the red iranian revolution had just succeeded and he made the point that dynasties are of this sort are corrupt and are exploitative of their people and they have no place in an islamic country so there was a very deep sense of the part of iraq that of course doesn't translate into saying that the islamic republic in iran is 'd committed to a liberal democracy now professor riyadh now on the cusp of yet another changing regard as the white house and the biden administration. clearly is banned on bringing back some of them moral symbolism of

a bomb a year a day for ensuring themselves as being. for all the good against all the bad deeds being in practical terms it will result in a little bit more justice but the palestinian people well i think 1st of all it will. seek continuity with the obama diplomas. and i think the room nuclear remember is very symbolic of what obama's approach to the region was and it was done in defiance of israel not and netanyahu subjects. so if that is done it will create a least temporarily a move or. positive atmosphere for

political accommodation and it could lead to greater stability in the region which i think will be a strong prarie for the biden people they will be as produce rarely as earlier american pre-term leaders and they will restore a back to sky as we were talked of previously namely pretending to seek a balanced outcome based on mutual interests but it professor i think this is removed talked before about unintended consequences and i think psychologically it's easier to understand why they by than a situation with want to go back to disappear it's their way of sort of stroking their collective egos but do you think they could be unintended negative consequences of that and. you know. bringing back i mean if you look

at their rationale of the of that nuclear deal back in 2015 the obama administration seemed to believe that the main goal was to curtail iran's nuclear ambitions as a way of arresting a nuclear arms race in the region the thinking i think was that if iran was thoughts or have a nuclear weapon then nothing could stop turkey or saudi arabia from acquiring one but we now see that that produced a whole rift of. new alliances that may have actually reason to tensions and in the region do you think something like that could happen again when you are led by similarly good motives but you don't think it through. completely. well i think i think you have to start with the understanding that iran is desperate for normalization and the end of sanctions and they will i believe. try to give very reassuring kind of image to the west and make it

appear as if this is a win win outcome now and it will have the repercussions you suggest and the assassination of this nuclear scientist just now is a way of trying to provoke i think raney an act of retaliation or to put the hardliners in control in iran and. my impression is that iran is too sophisticated and shrewd to fall for bad. kind of. provocation you've written before that israel takes the normalization of arab neighbors very seriously and that it may even see that as a prelude to an escalated tensions with iran do you think israel

is genuinely all that threatened by tatiana or is it perhaps a way of redefining * its territorial conflict with the palestinians and completing the promised land project on its own terms well i think israel has genuinely and to some extent in a manipulative way. feared any. strong state in the region. and it has specially if that state isn't. true its government sympathetic with israel's legitimacy and iran in that sense is a psycho political threat more of them than i think a material threat whether it's used to be material threat is used to manipulate in part the israeli public which is very divided

now and they need symbols of unity and one of them is the iran threat and whether that works in the present context i'm not sure now speaking out you mentioned this assassination of. iranian their. scientists and israel is widely believed. to be behind it just as it is believed to have nuclear weapons but it would not comment on any of those issues what do you think i mean putting aside the moral s.-s. meant all of the means of israeli foreign policy what do you think it's abjectness will be in the few weeks that remains in power. will is it partly depends on the signals they receive from washington there's been a lot of speculation. trump wants to maximize the pressure on

iran. during this period and that certainly would be encouraged i think by israel netanyahu and it would serve as a distraction from both countries both for israel and the u.s. but it's very dangerous distraction could be very costly. iran has lots of weapons non-nuclear sophisticated. missile technology it could if they so decided inflict tremendous damage on israeli city of course they would suffer tremendous retaliate tory consequences and so i'm quite sure they don't want that to be the preferred scenario but if things get out of and as they sometimes have is. there is this

danger and i think trumps recklessness is being challenged in washington by the more experienced security bureaucracy that wants a calm transition and not a fiery transition but i do understand your correctly that because he is written before that the biden destruction is very unlikely to change course on any of the trumps. have pro israel policies i mean it's unlikely that you know the embassy back it's unlikely to be practically against the incorporation of all and hides it may boysen criticism all festival and the expansion but it will change nothing on the ground what would be fair to say that under by then the united states is likely to remain a bouncer for israel with

a slightly more cultured face. exactly i think that's a good summary of what it's reasonable to expect whether you know the middle east has been a. ascending where things happen that you don't anticipate started with the arab spring of 201011 i wouldn't be surprised if some disruptive events occur that will alter how the. prospect of continuity plays out and if i may task you very quickly because we're running out of time but is there any real conscientious that position to that in the well because i know that the latest ad and u.n. general assembly yet again passed a resolution affirming the palestinians right to self-determination but it strikes me as one of those all the symbolism is that it makes. do what it was didn't just

us feel a little bit better about themselves rather than delivers anything practical to you . today actual victim i think you shouldn't forget the global solidarity movement that has been growing in relation to the palestinian struggle and the israelis themselves are very worried about the so-called b.d.s. campaign boycott divestment and sanctions campaign that has gained a lot of momentum and that has led israel to take very strong steps to try to criminalize participation in b.d.s. and do all kinds of things they're worried about losing legitimacy and if you look back at history including the n.t. who o'neill wars the winning side in the end was not the militarily superior.

it was the side that can. morrow. little girl just i just hope you're right but it's been that way too long for the palestinians i think i'm burying live long and their professor we have to leave it there thank you very much for being with us good to be with you or. i think or what you hope to see you again next week on the worlds of our.

anger and frogs runs into a 2nd we cando for a bill that could stop the public from filming the police but the government insists it was packed out of all 6 comhairle the weekly. let's go inside and talk to the 1st woman 2 years of world's poorest and she called a mass vaccination rush hour rolls out its free mafraq the nation program for coke $98.00 and we speak to a doctor on the front line of the pandemic who is among the for us to get the job. is to help people who are sick with hospitalizations and intensive care and needing long ventilators and i don't want to see this any more becomes that your patients myself and in a humane.