History - Manufacturing a Monster: Britain, America and Israeli Violence with Professor Avi Shlaim.

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