Ep 220. - Manufacturing a Monster: Britain, America and Israeli Violence with Professor Avi Shlaim
The genocide in Gaza has opened up a new world of intellectual exploration for so many of us who have been for too long ignorant of the details. Many of us have had to deconstruct our worldviews and start again, looking at the world through a more critical lens. The impunity with which Israel pursues its ends is genuinely bewildering. How is it that most Western politicians remain uncritical allies of a regime that is eradicating a people from its land through multiple means, including the systematic use of violence?
I met with the eminent Jewish historian Avi Shlaim at the Oxford Middle East Centre. Professor Shlaim has recently authored an uncompromising book on the intent of the Israeli state and her Western backers. Titled Genocide in Gaza, Israel’s long war on the Palestinians - it is probably one of the most lucid historical books I have read on the topic in a while. Today, we want to dip into that history to truly understand the genocidal intent that is sewn into the intellectual fabric of Zionism. In particular, I want to understand the key roles of Britain and America in feeding this settler colonial project and their shared goals.
Become a member here:
https://www.thinkingmuslim.com/membership
You can also support The Thinking Muslim through a one-time donation: https://www.thinkingmuslim.com/Donate
Listen to the audio version of the podcast:
Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/7vXiAjVFnhNI3T9Gkw636a
Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-thinking-muslim/id1471798762
Sign up to Muhammad Jalal's newsletter: https://jalalayn.substack.com
Transcript - This is an AI generated transcript and may not reflect the actual conversation
Introduction
0:00
and the logic of settler colonialism is the elimination of the natives balfo Lloyd George
0:06
and Churchill they look down on Arabs as inferior you had to eliminate to remove the Arabs in 1917
0:17
the Arabs were 90% and the Jews were 10% and the Jews owned only 2% of the land and Churchill said
0:25
referring to the Palestinians he said "I think that the Arabs should make way for a better
0:32
race." You could say that the Zionists learned the really brutal tricks from the British in British
0:38
eyes a Palestinian state was synonymous with a MUI state america continued to give Israel
0:45
economic military and diplomatic support biden is the only person who could have stopped that war
0:53
in its tracks britain under a Labor government is an active partner in committing genocide in
1:00
Gaza the genocide in Gaza has opened up a new world of intellectual exploration for so many
1:09
of us who have been for too long ignorant of the details many of us have had to deconstruct
1:15
our world views and start again looking at the world through a more critical lens
1:20
the impunity with which Israel pursues its ends is genuinely bewildering how is it that
1:27
most Western politicians remain uncritical allies of a regime that is eradicating its
1:32
people from its land through multiple means including the systematic use of violence
1:39
i met up with the eminent Jewish historian Abishm at the Oxford Middle East Center professor Shalm
1:46
has recently authored an uncompromising book on the intent of the Israeli state and her western
1:52
backers titled Genocide in Gaza Israel's long war on the Palestinians it is probably one of
1:59
the most lucid historical books I have read on this topic in a while today we want to dip
2:05
into the history to truly understand the genocidal intent that is sewn into the intellectual fabric
2:11
of Zionism in particular I want to understand the key roads of Britain and America in feeding this
2:17
settler colonial project and their shared goals please do remember to subscribe to this podcast
2:24
and to help the podcast even further do think about becoming a member just head over to our
2:30
website thinkingmuslim.com/membership professor Aish Shalm welcome back to the Thinking Muslim
2:36
it's a pleasure to be with you again well it's so lovely to have you with us um professor now
2:42
uh we would like to cover today um Britain and America's role in this settler colonial project
Zionism
2:50
uh of Israel and um I really want to cover the history but also the current contemporary genocide
2:57
in in Gaza and uh a lot of what we're going to talk about is covered in your in your fantastic
3:02
book genocide in Gaza uh but I would like to start with uh the idea of Zionism maybe to uh to take
3:09
us back to our first interview um you place the current genocide within the context of an
3:15
ideology an ideology of Zionism can you explain uh a little bit more about why you you argue Zionism
3:24
as an ideology its logical outcome is what we see today in Gaza the Israeli Palestinian conflict was
3:32
made in Britain and the current war in Gaza is a direct consequence of the Balfur declaration of
3:43
1917 because during the towards the end of the first world war Britain allied itself
3:54
with the Zionist movement um and Zionism is a settler colonial movement its ultimate aim
4:05
was to establish an independent Jewish state in Palestine but the word Jewish state would have
4:17
uh provoked opposition and therefore the Zionists didn't talk about a Jewish state but a national
4:23
home for the Jewish people and Britain went along with it um and supported the Zionist
4:34
movement and um the Zionist movement was a settler colonial movement
4:46
the aim was to take over the land for a Jewish state and the logic of settler colonialism is
4:56
the elimination of the natives so this was the logic and um um we have seen the implementation
5:07
of this logic over the last century and this process has reached its climax in the war in
5:16
Gaza where the aim is the ethnic cleansing of the whole of the uh enclave noam Chomsky
5:26
once said that settler colonialism is the most extreme and vicious form of
5:37
imperialism the most extreme and vicious form of imperialism and for the last century the
5:48
Palestinians have been at the receiving end of Zionist settler colonialism on
5:55
the one hand and western imperialism on the other hand first under Britain and
6:03
uh then later under uh America and once again we see the climax of American imperialism supporting
6:15
Zionist settler colonialism in the person of Donald Trump um many Israeli leaders over the
6:22
decades especially those of the more liberal or socialist persuasions have rhetorically talked
Israeli Intent
6:29
about a Palestinian state a country within which uh Palestinians could live u uh separately or with
6:37
uh Israelis um and they've talked about limited Palestinian sovereignty um do you believe from
6:44
the outset the Israeli settler colonial project as you as you call it uh had no intent uh in in
6:53
um uh in giving some of this land uh to the Palestinians uh there were some liberal Zionist
7:01
Jews like the philosopher Martin Bubber who advocated a bational state because
7:09
um there were two nationalities uh Palestinians and Jews uh and they had to live together
7:19
so uh in the n in the inter war period there was this movement for a bational state and
7:27
Hana arand was a critic of zionism because it was ethnosentric and she support in an article in 1943
7:37
that she published uh she advocated a bational state for Arabs uh and Jews so there were always
7:45
liberal Jews progressive Jews who advocated um a bational state but the leaders of the Zionist
7:56
movement were single-minded um nationalists Jewish nationalists take Benorian for example
8:05
the first prime minister he was a socialist the ruling party was Mapai a socialist party
8:13
but if there was any conflict between socialism and nationalism nationalism always triumphs so the
8:21
Zionist movement was a nationalist uh project and um uh we have to distinguish between the rhetoric
8:31
of the Zionist founding fathers and the actual practice on the ground they spoke about universal
8:40
values like freedom and democracy and equality uh but the in actual practice with the help
8:53
of the Balffor declaration the Zionist movement embarked on the systematic takeover of the whole
8:59
of Palestine so it was ruthless and uncompromising and there was a huge gap between Zionist rhetoric
9:08
and the reality of the Zionist movement treatment of the Palestinians on the ground and the founding
9:15
fathers filled this gap with hamburg and hypocrisy so my answer to your question
9:20
is that there was never any intention serious intention to share the land with the Palestinians
9:28
fore foreign foreign
Donate to Baitulmaal
10:02
thanks for vetting mal to build our school to give us the hope today is
10:07
the first day in the school and thanks so much to make us to continue to do new
10:12
successes right so to understand this um Zionism as a project was always had as an intent to
10:30
expunge Palestinians from their land to remove Palestinians from their land and this was shared
Zionism and political elites
10:36
by most of the political elites if not all the political elites who subscribe to the Zionist
10:41
ideology is that a a fair way to express express the intent of Zionism to achieve a Jewish state
10:53
um in a situation where the great majority were Arabs you had to eliminate to remove um the Arabs
11:10
and Uh in the late 1930s there were major debates in the Zionist movement about transfer
11:22
transfer is a polite word for expulsion um so there were debates so this was not a foreign
11:30
idea to Zionism it was one of the options that were uh considered but it's only in 1948 that
11:43
um that um ethnic cleansing was actually practiced so I'd like to go back please
11:53
to the British mandate in Palestine yes uh and I'd like to go back to the Balfur declaration in
12:02
order to understand what happened subsequently yeah um the Balffor Declaration of 1917 was a
12:13
British pledge to support the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine
12:22
in 1917 the Arabs were 90% and the Jews were 10% and the Jews owned only 2% of the land um and
12:36
yet Britain allocated to the Jewish minority national rights a national home and denied
12:45
um political or national the right to self-determination to the Palestinian majority
12:51
britain only um Britain said that it would support a national home for the Jewish people
12:58
provided it did not compromise the civil and religious rights of the what was described as
13:08
the non-Jewish communities in Palestine so the 90% were just marginal insignificant the non-Jewish um
13:18
um communities in Palestine and only the the Jews uh mattered and the League of Nations mandate for
13:30
Palestine britain inserted the Balfur declaration into the League of Nations mandate uh no one
13:41
wanted no one asked Britain to it insisted on inserting the Malfo declaration so what had been
13:47
uh uh British promise to the Zionists became an international legal obligation um and the British
13:58
mandate in Palestine was unique the other three mand the other three mandates were the League of
14:05
Mand League of Nations mandate for France over Syria and over Lebanon and the League of Nations
14:13
mandate to Britain over Iraq the aim the purpose of these mandates was to prepare the people for
14:21
selfgovernment um and to uh hand over power when they were capable of running their own affairs
14:31
but the Palestine mandate was different it was not Britain's um obligation Britain's uh duty
14:39
was not to prepare the population of Palestine for self-government but to help the establishment of a
14:46
national home for the Jews in order to bring the Jews from Europe to Palestine to take over the
14:52
country and this is what happened the cornerstone of the British mandate in Palestine was to deny
15:00
democracy until the Jews became the majority and this only happened in 1948 during the war as a
15:10
result of the Jewish minority carrying out the ethnic cleansing of Palestine um the um three
15:21
quarters of a million Palestinians um became refugees and the name Palestine was wiped off
15:31
the map there is a debate among Israeli historians as to whether the ethnic cleansing was the result
15:38
of a Zionist master plan uh or whether it was the result of the war but this is insignificant the
15:47
outcome was the same the outcome was the ethnic cleansing of Palestine and I would argue that
15:54
this was implicit uh uh in the nature of settler colonialism this was the logical consequence of
16:03
settler colonialism u professor Shalem I today I want to talk about the role of Britain and America
16:12
um in in um this settler colonial project now all of what you've said so far about
Role of Britain and America
16:18
uh Britain's complicity at the very early stages the Balfur declaration how they incorporated that
16:25
declaration into the League of Nations mandates um how they permitted and encouraged uh Jewish
16:32
migration to to Israel how they denied the rights of Palestinians all of that seems to imply that
16:40
um Britain saw the settler colonial project in the same terms as maybe the Zionists saw their
16:48
project as a as a a means to expel Palestinians from from their land i mean do you think the
16:55
early architects of of Balfur and David Lloyd George and you know Herbert Samuel did they
17:02
uh share this uh Zionist zeal maybe to remove Palestinians from their land i wouldn't go as
17:09
far as to say they share the Zionist zeal to remove the Palestinians from their land but
17:15
this is what they were doing and they knew what they were doing uh and Balfuro Lloyd George and
17:23
Churchill have all said subsequently that when they talked about a national home for the Jews
17:29
they meant a state so there was no doubt um uh about about that and um um Balffor the Balffor
17:42
Declaration was a classic colonial document because it completely disregarded the rights
17:50
uh and the aspirations of the majority of the people so they were all old-fashioned British
17:58
colonialists and Zionist colonialism fitted in with the world view uh and there was also a racist
18:08
element behind British policy in Palestine and that is they look down on Arabs as as inferior uh
18:19
and in 1937 against the background of the Arab revolt against Britain
18:28
and its Zionist protetées there was the Peel Commission of Inquiry and
18:35
Churchill gave evidence to the commission and Churchill said referring to the Palestinians
18:45
uh just because a dog has lived a long time in the manger doesn't give the dog
18:53
a right over the manger yeah and I think that he said I think that the Arabs should make way
19:01
for a better race a wiser race a worldwide uh w a worldwise race um they they should make
19:14
way for them for the Jews so you couldn't have a most stark example of the racism of the British
19:24
um ruling elite and this famous speech by um famous uh testimony by Churchill is shocking
19:36
um but it's not surprising because racism and uh imperialism always went hand in hand together
19:46
why do you think uh the project of Israel was so important to Britain in in those early days
19:52
what is it about Israel and its its geography and where it sits um um and and its its importance to
Israel and British Empire
20:01
uh the British Empire at the time uh so we have to go back to uh the first world war
20:08
and Britain had already made uh an agreement with Hussein the Sharif of Mecca in 1915 that
20:21
um if he led a revolt against the Ottoman Empire at the end of the war Britain would help create an
20:31
independent Arab kingdom under his rule this and then in 1916 Britain signed a secret agreement
20:42
with France the Sykes Pico agreement dividing the Middle East into spheres of influence and
20:49
in 1917 Britain issued the Basel Declaration which wasn't secret to the public decoration promising
20:58
um to turn Palestine into a Jewish um homeland britain was fighting a war and uh the war
21:11
wasn't going well in 1917 uh and the motive for issuing the Balfur declaration was to acquire
21:22
um an ally in Palestine so that Britain would have a solid ally and control over Palestine
21:30
through the Jewish movement and Lloyd George was anti- French he became prime minister in December
21:41
1916 and he reneged on the Sykes Pico agreement because he wanted Britain to control the access
21:51
to the Sewish Canal and also to block any French influence south of Syria and Lebanon south of
21:59
the Levant so there were imperial um uh called imperial considerations that led him mistakenly
22:09
in my opinion to side with the Zionist movement when the natural allies for Britain were the Arabs
22:18
um can you talk a little bit about the role of Sir Herbert um Samuel uh the first high commissioner
22:25
of uh of Palestine and in particular how the demographics of um of this land uh changed between
Role of Herbert Samuel
22:36
the mandate and 1948 um Sir Herbert Samuel was a Jew and a Zionist and he was the first British
22:49
high commissioner to Palestine so his role was crucial in setting the tone for what was to come
22:59
later and uh Sir Herbert Samuel was one of the one of the first people to urge the British government
23:09
to support Zionism in a paper he wrote in 1915 and then he was appointed as high commissioner
23:20
uh in Palestine and um he was completely one-sided and gave preference reference very overtly to the
23:33
Zionist movement so he helped the Jews to create national institutions the institutions of a state
23:43
in the making and he discouraged and created problems for the Palestinians uh in doing the
23:52
same so he approved and supported a Jewish agency to represent the issue of the Jewish community in
24:00
Palestine but he didn't do anything similar for the um Palestinians and he did choose Hajamin
24:09
Al Husini as the Grand Mui of Jerusalem that's when the British thought that Hajjamin would be
24:16
a stoogge that um but when he turned out to be a serious Palestinian nationalist he fell out with
24:24
them and they chased him out of the country in 1937 but Herbert Samuel um uh betrayed the mandate
24:39
because the mandate um the League of Nations mandate said that the mandate for Palestine is um
24:49
um is a great trust of civilization and he betrayed their trust by abandoning the
25:00
Palestinians and the and denying their rights and this manifested itself more concretely in
25:08
two areas one was Zionist land purchases which he facilitated um against Arab opposition but
25:18
also he facilitated and permitted um massive immigration of Jews from Europe to Palestine
25:30
uh at first there was a trickle of Jews to Palestine but after the Nazi party was to
25:37
power in in Germany in 1933 then the pace of immigration increased um very dramatically and
25:48
this led to the Arab outbreak of the Arab revolt in 1936 which lasted 3 years and the British army
25:58
um um suppressed the Arab revolt with the utmost brutality and committed a lot of serious war
26:08
crimes in suppressing the revolt and I would argue that the way in which Britain crushed the
26:18
Palestinian society decimated Palestinian society and crush the Palestinian par military forces uh
26:25
in the late 1930s was the real reason for the loss of Palestine as opposed to the conventional wisdom
26:34
that Palestine was lost in the late 1940s yeah so Britain played a crucial role in
26:42
um promoting and helping the Zionists and curbing um and restricting the um uh uh influence of the
26:55
Palestinians and also denying democracy to the Palestinians and this policy was set in motion
27:03
by Sir Herbert Samuel uh in your uh in your book you discuss uh Sir Herbert Samuel and uh
27:12
how they crushed the Arab revote and you've just mentioned there that in 1936 for 3 years there was
27:18
a very brutal crackdown of of Arabs and uh I just wonder whether um a lessons were learned or models
27:27
were built for the future Zionist state there because of course the British were um ruthless
27:34
in in uh in clamping down on on um Palestinians at that time i mean can you talk to you know that
27:42
uh that model between the uh the British and and you know the future Zionist state a very
27:50
important link was forged between um the British and the Zionist paramilitary forces during the
28:03
Arab revolt right um and Britain armed the Hagana the self-defense uh organization of the Yeshu
28:15
uh uh armed the Hagana and trained the Hagana and there was a particularly um significant British
28:27
officer called Odd Wingate and he was a religious fanatic a religious Christian Zionist and
28:37
uh a very unconventional soldier and he trained the Zionist the the night squads of the Hagana uh
28:49
and so Britain um conveyed and trained the Zionist paramilitary forces in methods of real brutality
29:02
uh and including um summary executions arbitrary arrests um detention without trial uh curfews of
29:13
whole villages the burning of and destroying the houses of rebel Um and also Britain hurt civilians
29:25
not just the rebels but civilians to extract information for them uh villages from which
29:35
rebels emerge um would be um put under curfew and then civilians would be tortured by the British in
29:48
order to extract information so you could say that the Zanis learned the really brutal uh tricks and
29:56
also um the refu the lack of distinction between combatants and non-combatants from the British and
30:06
that's what Israel has been doing throughout its history and this failure to protect civilians has
30:14
reached again it reached climax in the genocide in Gaza which is directed the war in Gaza is
30:23
directed not just at Hamas but at the entire civilian population of Gaza so yes there is a
30:30
continuity between British imperial brutality and the brutality of um Zionist imperialism professor
30:38
Shalom I mean that's very fascinating when you talk about uh the role of Britain in in the period
30:45
before 1948 but there was a there was a point after the Second World War where Britain fell out
Britain Zionist fall out
30:51
uh with the Zionist movement or at least it seems like they fell out with the Zionist movement uh and in fact there were series of terrorist attacks against uh Britain in in in Palestine in
31:03
Jerusalem culminating in the uh in the King David hotel uh bombings um uh can you untangle these
31:11
events for me like what led to uh this apparent uh friction between Britain on the one hand and
31:19
the Zionist movement and why did Britain in a way it seems like at least from the books from
31:25
the history books it it wanted to just wipe its its hands of of this crisis and and move on move
31:31
away from u from from Palestine Israel throughout the interwar period there was some tension between
31:43
uh the Zionist leaders and and Britain because uh the Zionists were very ambitious
31:54
um and uh they wanted more and more land and to bring more and more uh Jews and in the process
32:03
they were alienating uh the Palestinians and there were many commissions of inquiry producing reports
32:12
about what Britain should do and the Zionists were saying to Britain you you promised us a
32:23
state right and now now we are going back on your promise and the British would reply no we didn't
32:31
promise you a state we promised you a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine and we've
32:36
fulfilled our promise uh uh to you but the real change in British policy happened in 1939 uh with
32:48
the approach of the second world war when Britain was in a very weak position germany had rearmed
32:57
and Britain needed Arab goodwill so that was the motive for the retreat from the mandate and in
33:06
1939 Britain issued the white paper uh which went a long way towards meeting Palestinian demands
33:18
it suggested uh that that there would be restrictions on Jewish immigration to Palestine
33:27
and restrictions on uh land purchases and after 10 years there would be a referendum to decide
33:36
the fate of Palestine and this was a very good proposal by Britain um but Hajamin al-H Husini
33:47
rejected it and he made a colossal error because by this time he didn't trust the British but
33:57
uh if he had been wiser he would have accepted this and this would have been a death sentence to the issue and this is how the Zionist leaders saw it that Britain has turned against them and had
34:09
abandoned them but Benorian was a very very smart politician and he came up with a slogan we we'll
34:18
fight the war as if there is no white paper and we'll fight the white paper as if there is no war
34:28
in other words Britain is no longer on our side but we will continue with our project of building
34:34
a state building our military forces and after the end of uh the war there was um insurgency against
34:48
Britain uh particularly by the national military organization commanded by Manahim Begin which was
35:00
a a right-wing paramilitary organization of the followers of the Jabotinski the spiritual father
35:08
of the Israeli right and there was another group a smaller group called um the Stern Gang well they
35:17
they didn't call themselves the Stern gang um they call themselves the fighters for the freedom of uh
35:24
Israel and uh the Stern gang assassinated Lord Mo Lord Moine who was a personal friend of Churchill
35:35
who was the high commissioner in Egypt and in 1948 the Stern gang ass assassinated Count Bernard the
35:45
UN um mediator in the in the uh conflict so um both the Hagana and the paramil other paramilitary
35:58
groups were now fighting the British in order to gain independence and they called the 1948 war
36:08
uh the war of independence and uh as you pointed out in there was a particularly important
36:16
um event in this process of uh alienation between the Zionists and Britain and that was the bombing
36:25
of the King David Hotel in 1946 because the King David Hotel was the head headquarters of
36:34
the British forces in the whole Middle East and uh the Irun bombed it uh and 92 British
36:46
officials and officers were killed and after that Britain really didn't have the stomach to continue
36:56
and what happened was that the cost of imperial policing was escalating and Britain had something
37:04
like 100,000 troops in Palestine and Britain was in economic um was economically bankrupt
37:14
after the war so it needed to scale down its expenditure uh and um that was the situation in
37:26
1948 uh and by this time the Zionist thought of Britain as the enemy and the Zionist case
37:38
against Britain during this period is that after the UN partition res after the UN voted for the
37:48
partition of Palestine into a Jewish and Arab state in 1947 Britain armed and incited its Arab
37:59
um allies to invade Palestine upon expiry of the mandate and strangle the Jewish state at
38:07
birth this was the charge but it's completely um baseless because Britain's aim towards the
38:15
end of the mandate was not to prevent the birth of a Jewish state but to pre prevent the birth
38:21
of a Palestinian state because in British eyes a Palestinian state was synonymous with a MUI
38:30
state and the MUI was a renegade so what Britain did behind the scenes during this critical period
38:39
was to support its um client King Abdullah of Jordan to to support his bid to capture the
38:50
West Bank the heartland of what was going to be the Palestinian state and then annex it to his
38:56
kingdom so there is a case against Britain during the twilight of the British mandate in Palestine
39:03
but it's not that he tried to prevent the birth of a Jewish state but that it colluded with King
39:10
Abdullah of Jordan in aborting the birth of a Palestinian state and this is I elaborate
39:18
this thesis at great length in a book that I published in 1988 under the title Collusion Across
39:25
the Jordan King Abdullah the Zionist movement and the partition of Palestine and I advance the main
39:35
um thesis that I advance is that by 1947 King Abdullah and the Jewish agency had reached a tacit
39:47
agreement to divide Palestine among themselves at the expense of the Palestinians and the subsidiary
39:57
um argument is that Britain knew and approved the collusion across the Jordan so um there is
40:07
an Arabic saying something that starts crooked remains crooked and this the project um started
40:20
by the Balfur declaration settler colonialism was crooked to begin with and it remained crooked to
40:30
the very end when we've turned to the Oslo Accords um you dedicate a lot of your book to Oslo and the
40:38
Oslo process and what led to uh the Camp David uh agreement uh between uh the Israelis and Arafat um
Oslo accords
40:48
and you argue that Oslo was not really a genuine peace process or a peace effort but more a means
40:54
by which Israel could continue and maintain its dominance um explain that to me please uh the Oslo
41:02
Accord was signed uh in September 1993 between the PLO and the government of Israel uh and
41:15
this was a historic moment uh a historic agreement between the two conflicting national movements and
41:26
the deal was clinched with a hesitant handshake between Yasa Arafat and its hakrabin in the white
41:35
house um I was euphoric at the time of Oslo
41:45
i thought this was the real deal this is the beginning of a solution of the conflict
41:53
um and I realized that the Oslo Accord had many limitations and shortcomings but I believe that
42:04
it'd be the be a step in the right direction and it would set in motion a process of slow
42:15
controlled gradual Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories and at the end of the
42:23
process there would be a Palestinian state and I was wrong i was wrong because the process was not
42:36
um irreversible and when Rabbin was assassinated and the Li could came back to power in 1996 under
42:48
the leadership of Benjamin Netanyahu the Li could set about dismantling the Oslo peace um accord
43:01
so Oslo didn't turn out to be um a step on the road to statehood for the Palestinians it turned
43:10
out to be a track their position today is much much worse than it was before um Oslo but uh
43:20
in this agreement is really really significant yeah because the PLO used to have a maximalist
43:32
program they wanted a Palestinian state the liberation of Palestine but it gradually
43:39
moderated its uh political agenda and by signing the Oslo Accord what it said in uh reality is
43:51
that well it said explicitly it was giving up its claim to 78% of historic Palestine because
44:06
uh after the 1948 war Israel ended up with 78% % of historic Palestine everything except the Gaza
44:18
Strip and the West Bank including East Jerusalem by signing the Oslo Accord the Palestinian the
44:26
PLO agreed gave up its claim to four-fifths of historic Palestine in the hope of getting
44:36
uh an independence an independent state on the remaining fifth
44:42
so um it was that moderate it was that reasonable in its demands it was unreasonably reasonable and
44:53
yet it didn't get even that bare minimum that it expected to um to gain by signing the Oslo
45:03
peace accord in answer to that question you you mentioned that Likood uh that came back to power
45:10
in the late 80s they undid uh the Oslo Accords in effect undermined it but but I remember reading in
45:18
in in one of your chapters that even Rabbine did not seem to be very sincere with uh the
45:26
idea of a Palestinian state and settler activity continued if not intensified during that period
45:32
where he professed to to show commitment towards a Palestinian entity i mean is that explain that
45:40
idea to me the Labour Party and Rabinu was typical of the Labor Party had a hashamite a Jordanian
45:51
orientation uh and there was a long history of secret um dialogue across the battle lines
46:00
between King Hussein and Israeli uh officials but after June 1967 Israel captured the West Bank
46:12
um and Gaza uh and King Hussein offered Israel total peace for total withdrawal but by this time
46:24
um the Labor Party had become more nationalistic the ideology of greater Israel gained ground and
46:35
um so there was no agreement with King Hussein uh of Jordan but there was a fundamental difference
46:43
between Labor and Liood labor believed in the partition of Palestine preferably with
46:52
the Hashemites of Jordan but also possibly with the Palestinians and that was the meaning of the
47:00
Oslo whereas the liud always claimed Jewish sovereignty over the whole of um the historic
47:09
homeland over the whole of Aritz Israel the liquor denied either Jordanian or Palestinian
47:18
uh right to to sovereignty over the West Bank so the logic of the Oslo Accord was the partition of
47:29
Palestine between Israel and the PLO and the PLO would get less than a a fifth because originally
47:38
it was Palestinian self-government only uh in Gaza and the city of Jericho so it wasn't
47:46
even the whole of the West Bank so the logic was partition of the land and the liquid was always
47:56
critical of the Oslo Accord and when they got back into power they systematically dismantled
48:03
the Oslo Accord and reasserted the claim to Jewish sovereignty over the whole of the land of Israel
48:12
when the genocide in Gaza began I vowed we would never let those responsible get away with this
48:18
silence was complicity in a world that wants us to remain flaccid a world that wants us to
Become a member
48:24
be concerned more about our immediate lives and interests the system buys our souls in return for
48:31
acquiescence with their empire building project we at the thinking Muslim set about changing the
48:39
narrative and in the process with Allah's baraka we galvanized our communities to confront these
48:45
political elites and send them a clear message in elections on both sides of the Atlantic we
48:52
brought communities together and led the way in countering their pericious agenda such is the
49:00
power of this new media our mission is simple we want to build an alternative Muslim media one that
49:08
is rooted in faith thinking and enlightened activism and we need your help to expand
49:15
this sacred undertaking our plan is to turn the thinking Muslim into a multi-show multi-country
49:23
media project please help us by becoming a member for as little as £10 a month you will have access
49:31
to bonus shows behindthe-scenes content and Q&A with me and my guests but most importantly your
49:38
contributions will make this voluntary project go to the next level and give you a share inshallah
49:45
tala in this reward now I know the demands on our saddaka are great please do consider
49:52
becoming a member of the thinkingmuslim or send us your one-off donations by going to
49:57
thinkingmuslim.com/membership and may Allah subhana wa tala accept from all of
50:04
us can I ask you about the PLO and the Palestinian Authority now since
50:13
um uh the Oslo Accords and and the establishment of the Palestinian Authority uh I think many have
PLO and Oslo accords
50:21
criticized uh that authority for colluding with the Israelis for uh providing uh security in you
50:29
know in many ways for for the state of Israel and aiding sometimes Israeli expansionism or at least
50:36
um um allowing the Israelis a gateway into into um clamping down on the resistance um I mean what led
50:45
a um a you know a popular resistance movement that had broad appeal what led it to a a point where
50:54
uh it was willing to make such deep compromises uh with u with Israel but also with the international
51:01
community yasa Arafat when he signed the Oslo Accord thought it's the beginning of a process
51:08
of reconciliation that eventually would lead to full independence um but it was not to be
51:17
because of the asymmetry of power uh between the two sides israel was too strong and the
51:24
Palestinians too weak and they had no leverage in the negotiations so all the agreements specific
51:32
agreements following the Oslo Accord were the result of negotiations between two unequal
51:40
parties and they reflected the advantage they're always to the advantage of Israel including the
51:47
economic aspects of the uh relationship arafat was the national leader who had credibility with
51:56
all branches of the Palestinian family but Amu Bazan is only the president of the Palestinian
52:04
uh authority um and um the Palestinian Authority is corrupt and incompetent
52:16
uh and um it's seen as by Palestinians as a subcontractor for Israeli security and this
52:28
is not an unfair comment because 40% of the budget of the Palestinian Authority uh goes on security
52:39
but it's not security for the Palestinians it's security for Israel um and the Palestinians on the
52:48
West Bank enjoy no security and no protection whatsoever they have the militant and violent
52:56
settlers and they're armed they have the border police which is very brutal as well they have
53:05
the police and the army on their side against completely defenseless um Palestinians that's
53:14
why the Palestinian Authority doesn't enjoy legitimacy um Abu Mazen uh the president um is
53:24
a figurehead he's in his late 80s he doesn't enjoy any legitimacy and the last Palestinian election
53:34
happened in January 2006 and it was an election not just in Gaza but in Gaza and the West Bank
53:45
and Hamas the Islamic resistance movement won a clear majority in what was a fair and free uh
53:55
election and Hamas proceeded to form uh a government and Israel refused to recognize
54:09
this government israel resorted to economic warfare to undermine that government and the
54:17
United States and European Union sided with Israel in undermining and plotting the downfall of that
54:24
government there was a plot to support Fata in driving Hamas out of power so Hamas preempted a
54:33
Fata plot by seizing power in Gaza and uh since then the two branches of the Palestinian family
54:44
have remained fir firmly divided firmly separate with Israel not allowing any
54:51
contact between between them why did Hamas win a majority it is because it represented resistance
55:00
to the occupation whereas the Palestinian Authority had ceased to was a collaborationist
55:08
uh body it was not posing any resistance to Israel that's why Hamas won a clear majority
55:18
um and if there was an election today Hamas would win that election but paradoxically because Hamas
55:29
is seen as responsible for the destruction of Gaza it has less it has lost support in Gaza but
55:38
it had gained support on the West Bank because it's the only Palestinian body that represents
55:45
resistance to the occupation there is a belief that the Palestinians were the reason behind the
55:51
failure of of Oslo um how do you understand um uh its failure there are two explanations for
55:59
the failure of the Oslo peace process one is the official Israeli narrative which says that
56:07
the process failed because the uh Palestinians um return to violence uh and that the second inifer
56:28
um and um and right-wing Israelis said that Oslo was a mistake because the Palestinians did not
56:40
mean it they did not mean reconciliation but they were proceeding with the theory of the stages and
56:49
the theory of the stages says that you gain uh territory not in one go but bit by bit and you
56:57
keep pressing for more and more so you dismantle you fight Zionism and you dismantle Zionism not
57:06
in one battle but in stages um and therefore Oslo was a mistake um and Arafat is a liar and Arafat
57:20
is the one who made a strategic choice to return to violence in the second inifada and that's why
57:26
the process failed i totally totally reject this explanation as selfserving my explanation um for
57:36
the failure of the Oslo peace process is that uh Israel under the liquood reaged on its side of the
57:48
deal that's why the process broke down uh and the charges against Arafat are not
58:01
substantiated people forget that in the first year after the um Oslo Accord was signed there
58:11
was very close security cooperation between the two sides and terrorism was virtually zero
58:19
so the Palestinian authority under Arafat and his successor was a genuine partner for peace
58:29
um it's the change happened on the Israeli side another charge against Arafad is that
58:37
he instigated the second Inifada in 2000 not true yeah um it's uh Ariel Chaon the leader
58:49
of the Liku the leader of the opposition who in October 2000 stage a walkabout in
58:56
um the old city of Jerusalem with the intention of provoking violence there are some riots
59:04
some stones throwing but it's Israel which immediately escalated the use of force and
59:13
um uh so and then they claimed that Arafat planned the second antifada he didn't he was taken by
59:21
surprise by events on the on the ground so uh the Palestinian Authority under Arafat and under Abu
59:29
Mazan were genuine partners on the road to peace it's Israel which reade agreements and returned
59:37
to brute brutal repression and all this time under labor and liquood settlements were expand
59:45
expanding uh land grabbing and peacemaking don't go together it's one or the other and if you look
59:54
at the record it's quite clear that it's Israel uh which has chosen land over peace how do you
1:00:02
assess the role of America during this period um you know was it really a neutral arbiter in
1:00:08
in this peace process of Oslo and beyond america likes to present itself as an honest broker i say
America’s role
1:00:18
America was never an honest broker america is a dishonest broker because America is Israel's
1:00:27
lawyer uh and you can't be both a lawyer and an honest broker and an arbiter so America was
1:00:36
always Israel's not always but at least since 1967 under Eisenhower uh during the um uh Suez
1:00:47
war in 1956 America didn't take Israel's side america denounced the attack by Israel France
1:00:56
and Britain on Egypt and Eisenhower gave Benuan an ultimatum to withdraw from Sinai unilaterally
1:01:06
and immediately and unconditionally but he's the only American president who stood up for Israel
1:01:14
or who stood up uh to Israel and used American leverage to force Israel to withdraw since 1967
1:01:25
um all American presidents have not all of them there are some exceptions but since 1967
1:01:35
the special relationship between America and Israel deepened and America arrogated
1:01:42
to itself the the role of a monopoly over the diplomacy surrounding the Arab-Israeli conflict
1:01:51
that role belongs to the United Nations but um uh Brit America sidelined the UN sideline the Soviet
1:02:03
Union during the cold war sidelined European Union and uh arrogated to itself a monopoly
1:02:12
over the peace the so-called peace process but it failed to push Israel into a settlement
1:02:22
um America continued to give Israel economic military and diplomatic support
1:02:38
uh Obama signed an agreement with Israel um in his last year in office which gives Israel
1:02:50
$3.8 billion in military aid every year um and America uses regularly the victor in the
1:03:04
Security Council to defeat resolutions that are not to Israel's liking and in the current war in
1:03:12
Gaza America defeat used the veto three times to defeat ceasefire um uh resolutions so the trouble
1:03:23
with American support for Israel is that it is unconditional that means that Israel doesn't have
1:03:33
to fulfill any conditions to continue to enjoy American um military and diplomatic support so
1:03:45
um America is not part of the solution it's not an honest broker it's done nothing to bring about
1:03:53
a two-state uh solution uh America is part of the problem because of the unlimited support that it
1:04:04
gives uh Israel and Israel is largely responsible for um the conflict for the pro uh continuation
1:04:17
of the conflict because of its expansionism and because of its diplomatic intransigence
1:04:25
but I blame America as well for the state of affairs because America has done nothing to
1:04:32
restrain Israel or to push Israel into a states two-state solution it's become fashionable to say
1:04:41
that the two-state solution is dead because of Israeli expansionism and ethnic cleansing
1:04:49
i say the um two-state of solution was never born because since 1967 no Israeli government
1:05:01
has offered a a plan for a Palestinian state that even the most moderate Palestinian leader
1:05:09
could accept first secondly America talks keeps talking about a two-state solution
1:05:19
uh but he's never done anything to bring it about so it's not an honest broker it's a
1:05:26
dishonest broker and and uh uh turning to the current um Joe Biden uh Biden in your book
1:05:35
uh you discuss how Biden gave the green light to Israel to commit uh this horrendous genocide
Biden’s presidency and Israel
1:05:43
in in Gaza um the Democrats to today will will argue that uh Biden held back the worst
1:05:51
impulses and restrained Netanyahu and and prevented him from doing worse in what what
1:05:58
u uh what he ended up doing in in Gaza how do you assess uh Joe Biden's presidency in Israel joe
1:06:05
Biden described himself as a Zionist and he once said that if Israel didn't exist
1:06:20
it would have to be invented because it's crucial for American security
1:06:27
uh Biden has been an ardent supporter of Israel throughout his long political career he's always
1:06:37
been very close to Apac he's received a lot of money from AAP for his um political campaigns uh
1:06:46
for his elections um and he this is important he was opposed to attaching any conditions to
1:07:00
American aid to Israel he opposed conditionality in principle he was vice president under Obama for
1:07:10
eight years and he consistently opposed attaching any conditions to American aid for Israel um and
1:07:22
there and in the crisis in Gaza he regarded the the defeat of Hamas not just as an Israeli
1:07:35
interest but as an American strategic um interest so he didn't really restrain Israel except in
1:07:47
words empty words he would occasionally say Israel has gone too far he would sometimes say uh Israel
1:07:56
Israel is using force indiscriminately uh Israel must reduce the number of civilian casualties
1:08:09
but he never said stop the massacre stop the carnage or I am going to stop the flow of American
1:08:23
uh arms to Israel biden is the only person who could have stopped that war in its tracks by
1:08:31
threatening to stop arm supplies and the Israeli army couldn't have continued for uh very long
1:08:39
without American constant resupply during the Israeli invasion of Lebanon and the siege of
1:08:50
Beirut Ronald Reagan was president he was very emotional he saw a picture
1:08:59
of a little girl who had lost um an arm and he phoned Manahim begging and he said
1:09:09
uh the um the brutality must stop the killing of civilian sm or it would have consequences
1:09:24
for Israeli American relations and 20 minutes later uh begging phoned him and he said I'd
1:09:32
given the order to stop the firing in uh Beirut uh Biden could have done that but he never did that
1:09:43
he allowed Netanyahu to humiliate him he used the American veto to defeat ceasefire resolutions how
1:09:53
can you vote for against a ceasefire resolution when there is a brutal war going on and genocide
1:10:00
uh but he used the veto and once in last May last May uh Biden announced a ceasefire plan
1:10:12
and he said it was an Israeli plan and it was israel had agreed to this plan and he
1:10:19
launched it and immediately Netanyahu said it was a non-starter with a deliberate aim of humiliating
1:10:30
um Biden but that Biden did nothing and then um a ceasefire didn't come into effect until many
1:10:38
many months later so a lot of civilians could have been spared a lot of destruction could have been
1:10:45
avoided if if um uh Biden had used leverage to impose that ceasefire that Israel had agre
1:10:56
had agreed to so So Biden um is the proof that American policy doesn't work with Israel yeah um
1:11:10
there is the argument that if you show commitment to Israel you show the Israelis that you are on
1:11:15
their side they would be more flexible but there is no evidence israelis just take all the American
1:11:23
um support that they can get and they take it for granted uh and um that is one reason why this war
1:11:35
wasn't brought to an end much much earlier and why it continues today um so it continues today
1:11:42
but there was a a period where we did have a ceasefire and uh many argue that ceasefire
1:11:49
was brokered really by the uh Trump's insistence steve Wickoff uh went to Netanyahu and gave him an
Trump’s diplomacy
1:11:56
ultimatum and so there was a period where America was using its leverage at least that's the that's
1:12:02
the the popular conversation uh that period seems to have lapsed and um if anything we've
1:12:09
now got a an extremely uh an extreme American administration that is willing to not only
1:12:17
uh continue the genocide but also we've got these the illusions of of um of Trump's
1:12:23
Riviera i mean how do you uh understand uh Trump's diplomacy to date trump's election
1:12:35
um marked a turning point in the American position on Gaza and Trump in the month
1:12:48
before his inauguration as you say put pressure on Israel to agree to um a ceasefire
1:12:58
but it wasn't a ceasefire that Israel really believed in because it was in three stages
1:13:08
stage one was uh to a ceasefire uh and this this happened and there was a relief and
1:13:16
the resumption of humanitarian aid to Gaza that stage two was going to involve Israeli
1:13:24
withdrawal from Gaza total Israeli withdrawal um from Gaza and Netanyahu never intended to
1:13:35
proceed to stage two and stage three was going to be negotiations about the future governance
1:13:42
of Gaza and Netanyahu wouldn't agree to any discussions about the day uh after And when
1:13:56
uh Israel agreed to the
1:14:01
ceasefire Betsal no sorry Itamama Beng the leader of the farright Jewish power party
1:14:16
resigned he resigned over the ceasefire and he said he'd only rejoin the government if
1:14:24
the fighting continu was resumed it's absurd but that was the reality and Betel Smrich the
1:14:33
leader of religious Zionism said if the ceasefire continues then he will uh quit the government and
1:14:46
bring down the government so he would only stay if the fighting was resumed and now that the
1:14:55
fighting that Israel violated the ceasefire um Smottridge stays and uh Ben Greer has come back
1:15:04
to the government so this is a government that cannot agree to a ceasefire it can only agree
1:15:10
uh there is only a consensus to continue the war in Gaza now let's go back to Trump biden
1:15:19
was mildly critical of Israel but he didn't do anything effective to restrain Israel whereas
1:15:29
um and also he said that the people of Gaza must not be uh expelled they must stay remain in Gaza
1:15:41
with along comes Trump and he reverses this American policy and he supports the agenda of
1:15:47
the Israeli right and of Netanyahu to ethnically cleans Gaza and in the famous speech he said Gaza
1:15:57
is a bomb site he didn't say who turned it into a bomb site and a wasteland and he said
1:16:04
the people of Gaza should move elsewhere they should move to Jordan or Egypt um and the place
1:16:12
needs to be cleaned up that's what he said and note the imperial hubris of this man treating
1:16:21
the Palestinians as if they were rubbish to be to be disposed of but that's not just rhetoric
1:16:30
um there is active American pressure on Egypt and on Jordan to take some of the population uh from
1:16:45
Gaza and one thing is clear when Israel expels Palestinians from the Palestinian territories it
1:16:52
never allows them to come back so if Trump managed to find a temporary solution for moving the people
1:16:58
of Gaza uh they will never go back and the idea that Gaza could be turned into a real estate asset
1:17:08
for America and a Riviera um is just completely uh absurd and it reminds me of what the Israelis
1:17:18
said after the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 uh they said they are giving the people of
1:17:28
Gaza a chance to turn their enclaves into the Singapore of the uh Middle East but they gave
1:17:39
them no chance nothing of the kind they impose a a blockade on them which had been in force for
1:17:47
the last 17 years and continues now today uh so both the Israeli claims Israel has treated Gaza as
1:18:01
a settler colonial state and now the uh elements of settler colonialism are back in action because
1:18:11
Netanyahu and the extreme right-wing of his um government coalition government want not just
1:18:23
um the ethnic cleansing of Gaza they want to take back the land uh as a for real estate that's the
1:18:34
reality and there was a there was a conference about recently in Gaza and some of the ministers
1:18:42
in the government attended this government this uh uh conference and Trump supports this agenda
1:18:50
of the extreme right so now the Palestinians are in a very difficult situation because they are
1:18:58
the victims of Zionist settler colonialism on the one hand and a the most vicious form of American
1:19:05
imperialism on the other professor Schm I have one last question for you uh you've called your book
1:19:12
uh genocide in Gaza uh of course the British government uh Sakir Stalmer Kst Starmer
1:19:17
and David Lammy uh the foreign secretary refused to use the term genocide because
UK’s Labour government
1:19:23
uh they suggest um it it requires a court of law before one can designate a conflict to be a a
1:19:32
genocide um c can you give me your your thoughts about the general approach of the current British
1:19:39
government the Labor government in Britain and why they refuse to uh censure even lightly the
1:19:46
Israeli state both Star and Lami uh are supporters of Israel very strong supporters of Israel um and
1:20:06
uh the Labor Party won the last election with a manifesto and the manifesto said
1:20:16
if Labor gets into power we will recognize Palestine but Stalmer who is an unconditional
1:20:26
um Zionist his term unconditional Zionist um uh retreated from this commitment and now the
1:20:37
position the British position is very ambiguous it says we will recognize Palestine only when
1:20:46
the conditions are right but there will never be raim uh so here you have the basic contradiction
1:20:58
in British policy support for a two-state solution but recognition of only one side
1:21:06
of only Israel and refusal to recognize um Palestine uh then Sama was asked is Israel
1:21:18
um an apartheid state and he said no Israel is not an apartheid state this flies in the evidence of
1:21:27
four major human rights groups in the last two or three years who issued detailed reports with
1:21:36
detailed evidence all concluding that Israel is an apartheid state yes indisputable but he disputes
1:21:44
that and recently David Lami was asked "Is Israel guilty of genocide?" And he said "No genocide is a
1:21:58
legal term and we have to wait for a court of for the International Court of Justice to uh give its
1:22:06
ruling on the subject." But he's quite wrong he should know better because he also is human rights
1:22:14
lawyer so he should read the 1948 convention on the prevention of genocide and it defines genocide
1:22:26
it says genocide is the intent to destroy in whole or in part a religious ethnic or racial group
1:22:40
the refi what Israel is doing in Gaza fits the bill it's indisputably genocide an attempt to
1:22:48
destroy um in in whole or in part the Palestinian population of Gaza and also on the West Bank uh
1:22:58
but I won't go into the West Bank at the moment just look at Gaza what Israel has done it's um
1:23:06
killed over 50 million 50,000 people including about 18,000 children so it's a war on children
1:23:17
and killing children is not a form of self-defense israel has destroyed 80% of the housing and
1:23:26
civilian infrastructure in Gaza 80% israel has forced 2 million out of 3.3 million Gazans to
1:23:38
evacuate their homes sometimes more than 10 times and often when Palestinians obey the orders to
1:23:48
move to what the Israelis describe as a safe zone then they get attacked and bombarded from um the
1:23:56
air so what is going on in Gaza is definitely genocide but there are other sides there is
1:24:08
um doicide which is the destruction of homes there is echoside the destruction of the environment
1:24:18
uh there is e a con e a e a e a e a e a e a e a e a e a e a economicide which is a destruction
1:24:23
of the economy and Israel is destroying the means of livelihood within Gaza and preventing
1:24:30
humanitarian aid of reaching Gaza and last by not least but not least for me as an academic
1:24:38
Israel is carried out uh scholasticide in Gaza scholasticide is a destruction of the
1:24:48
educational system of a place and Israel has destroyed the whole infrastructure of
1:24:58
schooling it bombed 412 schools it had bombed and damaged or destroyed all 12 universities
1:25:10
um uh in Gaza it's destroyed libraries uh and archives and they completely disrupted
1:25:19
uh education for 600,000 children uh in Gaza so this is um scholastic side uh and um
1:25:32
um and the western leaders still refuse to call a spade a spade and still side with Israel so there
1:25:46
is a huge and growing gap between the western elites that are pro-Israeli and the western
1:25:55
publics that are overwhelmingly and increasingly critical of Israel and pro- Palestinians and I'm
1:26:05
think that the trend now is for governments to adjust their foreign policy to meet this strong
1:26:14
public support for the Palestinians there are signs of that uh since the war in Gaza started
1:26:22
a number of European countries re recognized Palestine um Ireland Norway Spain Slovenia
1:26:33
um but Britain is an outlier eventually I hope that Britain too would recognize
1:26:40
uh Palestine i hope that Britain would stop all arms supplies to Israel at the moment this
1:26:48
government has only suspended export licenses uh for of arms to Israel for 10% it's still supplying
1:26:58
90% so Britain is not just complicit in Israeli war crimes is Britain under Labor government is
1:27:08
an active partner in committing genocide in Gaza professor Abishm thank you so much
1:27:14
for your time today you've been very generous with your time thank you it's been a pleasure
1:27:22
please remember to subscribe to our social media and YouTube channels and head over to our website thinkingmuslim.com to sign up to my weekly newsletter no fat
English