Occupied since 1067 is quite a mouthful its hard to memorize it without a nod to q but i suppose it was one of those titles that was intent to be more than just a Job Description it was i thing on purpose trying to assert this certain vision a certain view of history were there any objection to these last words of occupied since 967 at the time when they were being confirmed. Well theres that there was the general Israeli Objection to the mandate altogether but as far as i know they didnt 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 playing the role of 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 under on the limited inquiry it was there and means us that are pretty lean your freedom rather than expanding it yet occurred tailing it and also it precluded 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 who is who feared that if the men the description was changed the 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 objective pretty strongly to your appointment perhaps because of that believe 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 israel leanings the United States insisted on presenting itself as a fair broker in. 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 theyd 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 whos written this book he was National Security advisor to 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 the word just the justice that 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 a bomb much power changed its own 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 didnt 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 thats a huge they hadnt appreciated that about your swine policy and how divergent its symbolism. Is from real action that going back to trying to i know that you find hes. First support for israel a whore and but isnt there some benefit some ottilie share with you 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 us 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 pretension of balance but he also endorsed a maximalist netanyahu zionist agenda which substantively carried beyond the print 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 in defiance of the un 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 creative gave way to open deal making with the brains to die establishing diplomatic ties and. Other countries arab countries considering to do the same how much of it is. And how much of it was inevitable. Well its 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 this 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. Kind of opportunistic governments 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 its been the normalization agreements have been somewhat misinterpreted they havent 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 drop the symbolic leverage its questionable whether the geo political leverage it was. And from israels point of view its psychologically liberating should not be as isolated in the region where their state is located so from the next on your israeli point of view this was and that shed meant. Without giving anything on the palestinian question professor fault we have to take a short break now but we will be back in just a few moments stay tuned. On. My pappy always. Getting up. Near had. Some fun fact. That. Im back on. Some of the monkey. Welcome back to well the party that reacher the fog for my un special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the palestinian territories occupied since 1967 and now a professor follow before the break we were talking about the normalization of ties between israel and some of its arab neighbors and ive heard some russian experts suggest that trump only to you credit is symbolisms of it but the actual change of heart change of policy bad or negotiations between israelis and that the arabs were spurred by the obama policy in the region particularly his assets to reach out to iran what it be fair to suggest that the practical or abandonment of the palestinian cause by some of the arab states is in the unintended consequence of a bomb is pursuing his deal with iran. I think you could say that i think that its. Definitely the priority of these. Governments including saudi arabia which hasnt 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 pro or to. Made it worthwhile to. Be seen as a betrayer of the palestinian cause and that betray though which i think is felt by the population 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 bets 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 ive 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 its 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 of iran 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 have no place in an islamic country so there was a very deep sense of the part of iraq that of course doesnt translate into saying that the Islamic Republic in iran is committed to live wrote a monstrously 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 for the Palestinian People well i think 1st of all it will. See continuity with the obama diplomas. And i think the Iranian Nuclear remember is very symbolic of what obamas approach to the region was and it was done in defiance of israel not an netanyahu subject. 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 preterm 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 remove talked before about unintended consequences and i think psychologically its easier to understand why they by than a situation with want to go back to disappear its 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 Irans 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 dont think if 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 youve 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 isnt. True its government sympathetic with israels legitimacy and iran in that sense is a psycho political threat more of them than i think a material threat whether its used to be a 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 im not sure now speaking out you mentioned this assassination or. Talk 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 its abjectness would be and if the few weeks that remains in power. Will is it partly depends on the signals they receive from washington theres 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 its very dangerous distraction could be very costly. Iran has lots of weapons nonnuclear 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 im quite sure they dont want that to be the preferred scenario but if things get out of hand as they sometimes have is during play. 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 do i 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 broad israel policies i mean its unlikely that you will the embassy back its unlikely to you be practically against the incorporation of all unhide it may boysen criticism office at all and the expansion that if you change nothing on the ground wouldnt 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 thats a good summary of what its reasonable to expect whether you know the middle east has been a. Ascending where things happen that you dont anticipate started with the arab spring of 201011 i wouldnt 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 were running out of time but is there any real conscientious that position to that in the world because i know that the latest ad and u. N. General assembly yet again passed a resolution affirming the palestinians rights youve selfdetermination but it strikes me as one of those all symbolisms that makes. Do with listed injustice feel a little bit better about themselves rather than delivers anything practical to you. Today astro victim i think you shouldnt forget the Global Solidarity movement that has been growing in relation to the palestinian struggle and the israelis themselves are very worried about the socalled b. D. S. Campaign boycott divestment and sanctions campaign that has gained a lot of momentum and has led israel to take very strong steps to try to criminalize participation in b. D. S. And do all kinds of things theyre worried about losing legitimacy and if you look back at history including the n. T. Who oneill wars the winning side in the end was not the militarily superior. It was the side that can. Mended the morrow and who lit it just i just hope youre right but its been there way too long for the palestinians i think im bearing along anyway 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 this year again next week on worlds apart. Imagine picking up a future textbook on the early years of the 21st century what are the chapters called Gun Violence School shootings homelessness 1st it was my job it was my building was my savings i have nothing i have nothing theres no i dont alter alou for resources i look for jobs i look for everything i can to make this house. Annoying the doing is. The road to the American Dream paved with did refute. This very idealized image of. Americans look pasta the deaths that happen every single day this is a modern history of the usa america. Join me every thursday on the alex salmond show and ill be speaking to us from the world of politics sports business im show business ill see you then. The public. Says the new security bill is incompatible with human rights however insists it. Could be. The 1st. Nation. Right here in the capital. The head of the International Red cross warns that
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.