Rashid Khalidi, Chris Hedges - Collective Punishment in Gaza (2014)

Ken Nash: This is Building Bridges with Ken Nash and Mimi Rosenberg. We are going to continue to look at what seems to be the intractable cycle of violence that Israel has launched against Gaza. What is to be done? Are there any interlocutors that can take negotiations to some —reasonable root of the problem and work towards the lifting of the embargo, the occupation, opening up the borders, breaking down the walls of what is the largest open-air prison in the world, of 1.8 million people.

Rashid Khalidi: Right.

Ken Nash: So, we've got a lot of work to do. And I am very pleased to have with us as a guest, who has long looked at the issue, the American journalist who specializes in American politics and society. He's the bestselling author of a number of books: Death of the Liberal Class, War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning, Days of Destruction, Days of Revolt. He's Chris Hedges has spent nearly 2 decades as a foreign correspondent in Central America, the Middle East, Africa and the Balkans. He's reported from more than 50 countries. And with that, Chris Hedges, well, I want to begin with your thoughts on whether or not there are any meaningful or honest interlocutors, in a manner of speaking, negotiators, that Can take us from this 2-day truce, if you will, which has held up, to a more meaningful negotiation that is representative also of the voice of the Gazan people?

Chris Hedges: The short answer is no. And I think we have seen Israel's arrogance in terms of its treatment of Secretary of State John Kerry, as well as the Obama administration. They understand that through the Israeli lobby they have unanimous support. We just saw that vote in the Senate, where every single senator voted to defend Israel's actions in Gaza, including our so-called liberal senators or left-wing senators such as Bernie Sanders.

Rashid Khalidi: Right.

Chris Hedges: The only way that we are going to free the people of Gaza and liberate the Palestinians in the West Bank, and if there's any chance, is to follow the model of South Africa, where we build a movement for divestment, boycotts, and sanctions.

Rashid Khalidi: Israel's—

Chris Hedges: Israel's main pillar of support is the United States.

Omar Abarrum: Excuse me.

Chris Hedges: It receives, of course, $3.1 billion a year in military aid. But more than that, it gets cover of Israel— the United States has used its veto power over 40 times in the Security Council to prohibit resolutions that will sanction or call Israel back to the rule of law. So I think that that Any kind of struggle for justice is going to have to come, as it did largely through apartheid, through mass action, mass movement. And, of course, we have, as you know, a big action on Saturday at 1:00 in Columbus Circle. I'll be there. Cornel West will be there, and others. But that really is the only hope at this point the Palestinian people have.

Ken Nash: And, of course, what Chris was talking about is the Stand with Gaza, Stop the Murder rally, Saturday, August OK. The rallying point is 1:00 at Columbus Circle, with a 3:00 p.m. march to the United Nations towards breaking the siege on Gaza, and a mass coalition that has formed in response to that. And we will, of course, announce the coordinates again and hope that all of you mobilize for and make this indeed a mass rally. Chris, one of the things that I was speaking earlier And what I wanted to ask you about—

Omar Abarrum: Yes.

Ken Nash: —to Professor Rashid Khalidi about was the habitual kind of boogeyman of the alleged— the murder of the 3 teens as the basis for the latest assault on the people of Gaza, the tunnels, the missiles that are presumably Offensively launched against Israel. All of these things he relates to as essentially boogeymen that are set up. They're red herrings. They're straw horses that have really nothing to do with this latest incursion that has led to over 1,800 people dead and massive destruction in Gaza, in this area.

Omar Abarrum: Right.

Ken Nash: —which has been described as the largest open-air prison in the world. What is your analysis of why Israel, at this juncture, if it is not for the reasons of the tunnels or the teens who were abducted and killed, which was known to the Israeli Defense Forces and the government for some time before it was publicly announced and used to whip up hysteria, what What is the basis, as you understand it, for this incursion?

Chris Hedges: Well, this became the excuse in the same way that 9/11 became the excuse used by the Bush administration to invade and occupy Iraq. It's part of an ongoing pattern on the part of the Netanyahu government. To not only potentially destroy Hamas, but keep the Gaza Strip in a state of such misery that people invest their energy into basic subsistence. I mean, the struggle for sort of the most basic elements of life. And we can't— Forget that this blockade that Israel has imposed, the 6-year blockade, is extremely draconian, making it impossible for farmers in the Gaza Strip to sell and trade their goods, their vegetables. All sorts of items are prohibited in or come in at a trickle, including medical supplies.

Omar Abarrum: Right.

Chris Hedges: The Netanyahu government has consciously— well, I mean, I think we also have to understand that the Netanyahu government, despite mouthing the appropriate two-state solution line, all of these people, certainly including Netanyahu, before they came to power, were quite adamant that they would never permit a Palestinian state. That's, of course, even in Bibi Netanyahu's book. And we often hear Hamas criticized for their charter for not recognizing Israel, although that was amended according to the leadership of Hamas a couple years ago. But nobody has ever called Israel to account because Avigdor Lieberman, the foreign minister, Netanyahu, most of the rest of the cabinet have been quite clear that they will never permit a Palestinian state to exist. So This is part of a long pattern on the part of a really right-wing, and I would argue even racist, government in Israel that is determined to not only thwart the possibility of any Palestinian state, but seize, you know, larger and larger segments of land. And we also hear more and more talk of what they call transfer, which is just a kind of code for ethnic cleansing, for, you know, that if they can't subdue the Palestinians, then they will expel them.

Ken Nash: There's somewhat of a sea change in terms of the fact that Egypt is now in the hands of President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, who critically opposes Hamas. And we no longer have Muammar Gaddafi in Northern Africa, in Libya. The only friends, if you will, and that's really in quotes, of the Palestinian people in the region would appear to be Turkey, Qatar, and Iran is standing there. How do you look at the geopolitical forces, the role of the U.S. in its support for Israel, despite the fact that its lineup Now would seem conclusively to be supportive of Western interests. Why do they still need and support, with such ferocity, Israel in the region?

Chris Hedges: Because there are domestic political consequences for not doing so. It's why Bernie Sanders voted— because he's thinking of running for president— Along with the rest of the Senate, to support Israel's saturation bombing and act of indiscriminate slaughter in Gaza. You know, the American political system really boils down to one thing, and that's money. And the Israel lobby and AIPAC, they have a lot of money to spread. So, I mean, I think one of the things that we've seen which illustrates this is the almost open contempt by which Netanyahu has treated not only Kerry but Obama himself. And there's really nothing Obama can do about it. And that's why I think for those of us who support the BDS— boycott, divestment, and sanction— movement, we understand that if there's any hope left for the Palestinian people, it's not going to come within The formal political establishment. It's impossible.

Ken Nash: You were at a meeting last night that was to help do the outreach and build support for the Stand with Gaza rally that you referenced earlier on, that takes place on the 9th of Saturday, August 9th, rallying at 1:00 p.m. at Columbus Circle in Manhattan, will then follow— be followed by a 3:00 p.m. march to the U.N. And I want to know what you say, in what has been a very difficult and aggressive, contentious conversation, to the Jewish community, who continues to—

Mimi Rosenberg: Yes.

Ken Nash: Buy into the propaganda that the 4th largest army in the world, that the state of Israel is in danger of its life, and that what it does is merely a defensive movement against Gaza. What do you say to that community who— Well, Perpetually buys into that they are the David in the David and Goliath struggle.

Chris Hedges: Well, that is factually untrue. You cannot describe an assault by, as you point out, one of the most sophisticated and well-armed military machines in the world against a population that has no army, No navy, no air force, no command and control, no mechanized units, no artillery, as a war. It's not a war. These people are largely defenseless. They have rockets. And, you know, I want to be clear here that the indiscriminate firing of rockets by Hamas is a war crime. It's not defensible. Yet on the other hand, under the UN Charter, especially Article 51, any population that suffers that kind of assault has a right to self-defense.

Omar Abarrum: Right.

Chris Hedges: And, you know, I think at this point the policies of Israel are kind of laid bare. And one of the reasons that we see this very disingenuous propaganda on the part of the Israeli government about how they protect human life and they never bomb, you know, holy sites or schools or any— even though, of course, they're dropping ordnance all over the place.

Mimi Rosenberg: Right.

Chris Hedges: Is to feed this inherent kind of racism whereby Israel presents itself as civilized in this supposed kind of clash of civilizations, and honorable and just, fighting the barbarian Muslim hordes. So, you know, Israel routinely in its propaganda utterly inverts reality. And for those of us— and, of course, I spent 7 years in the Middle East and was the Middle East bureau chief the New York Times, which meant that I spent a lot of time in Gaza. And for those of us who worked in the territories, it was always appalling how utterly unplugged the Israeli version of events was from what we were witnessing and reporting on the ground. And I think that that was done consciously, and it was a conscious effort not only to fuel that kind of self-glorification and even racism, I would call it, among—

Mimi Rosenberg: Right.

Chris Hedges: Israeli supporters, but also to strike terror in the hearts of the Palestinians, because these statements that Israel has been making now, essentially blaming Hamas for deaths that Israel carried out, are part of the campaign of state terror that is unleashed against the people of Gaza, because they understand from those Israeli statements that not only will Israel Never speak about the reality in any honest way on the ground, but it will continue to sort of do and say whatever it wants, you know, regardless of how many people Israel kills. You know, as you pointed out, 1,800 in this latest round, some 6,000 wounded, 400,000 people displaced. And then, of course, they're displaced in the center of Gaza and then bombed again.

Rashid Khalidi: Right.

Chris Hedges: Israel has struck at the infrastructure, crippling power, water, you know, sewage. And that's all conscious. That's a conscious effort to kind of turn this into a massive dysfunctional ghetto. And we are just watching, you know, a long process. This was a very intensive part of that process.

Omar Abarrum: Right.

Chris Hedges: You know, Israel always bombs Gaza. It may go a week or two, but, you know, it periodically will use sophisticated jet aircraft to drop 1,000-pound iron fragmentation bombs all over the place. So, yeah, I think we have to put it in context of a pattern of the increasing seizure of land on the part of Israel, especially on the West Bank, now about 40% of the West Bank. As well as a plan to reduce life in Gaza to such horrific conditions that all energy is spent by the Palestinian people just basically trying to stay alive.

Ken Nash: Well, as our time runs for speaking with you, regrettably, I know that people can speak to you further.

Chris Hedges: It's the Stand with Gaza rally, 1 o'clock, Columbus Circle. Cornel West and I will be there. And then there's a 3 o'clock march on the United Nations. And I think it's very important that people begin to get behind this movement, to build a mass movement, as we did Against the apartheid regime in South Africa, and as we must do against the apartheid regime in Israel, to free the people of Palestine.

Ken Nash: Well, thank you for your commitment and for your years of reportage in the area, and for the information that you imparted to us. And we will see you, 1 o'clock, Columbus Circle, Saturday, August 9th, at the Stand with Gaza rally. Thanks for what you do.

Chris Hedges: Thank you.

Ken Nash: And we have been speaking with Chris Hedges. And Chris has helped us unpackage some of the events in Palestine. He takes no prisoners. He maintains that the U.S. and Israel, who are by far the most powerful actors in the Middle East, through successive administrations and a variety of key officials, have conspired to deny Any semblance of self-determination, a stinging indictment of really one-sided policymaking, destined, if undisturbed, to result in even greater violence. Right now, I met, just by happenstance, a young brother, Omar Aba-Rub. I hope I pronounced that correctly.

Rashid Khalidi: Yes.

Omar Abarrum: Yes, he did.

Ken Nash: Well, he is— well, you're how old, Omar?

Omar Abarrum: I'm 14 years old.

Ken Nash: Well, I met you in the context of helping to build for a rally that is going to be taking place this Saturday, August 9th, at 1:00 p.m. at Columbus Circle at 58th Street and 8th Avenue, for the world to stand with Gaza. We talked a little bit about the rally earlier with Chris Hedges, but I was just I was totally struck by your— just by you, by you, by the things that you said about why you're mobilizing for and supporting the rally. And I wonder if you would tell us a little bit about yourself and why you are standing with the people of Gaza.

Omar Abarrum: I'd be glad to do that. Well, of course, my name is Elmar. I already said I'm 14 years old. I'm Palestinian. And I really believe that the reason I stand with Gaza is that these people have— their land has been occupied since 1948. The Israeli Zionists occupied the Palestinian land, and they killed nearly half a million Palestinians over the timeframe of about 60 years.

Chris Hedges: Okay.

Omar Abarrum: 66 years, and lately there's been terrible, terrible genocide. And I think the violence has to stop completely. And it's not right. You know, there are 7-year-old kids on the beach playing, and they're being pretty much destroyed by predator drones. Like, how do these kids threaten Israeli security at all? And they're just loosely slapping on the word self-defense.

Mimi Rosenberg: Right.

Omar Abarrum: To justify their dirty crimes. And it's wrong, completely wrong. There's no justice in it. Since then, the Palestinians have been targeted by Israel and 2 major supporters that are the U.S. and the U.S. media. And honestly, we give Israel $3 billion yearly. These are taxpayers' money. And that's not all. Money that we can use to get the homeless out of the streets, that'll feed hungry people, to focus on problems happening in our own economy, in our own nation. We can get better education for people. And we're using this money to give Israel heavy artillery to kill unarmed civilians. Thank you. And that's what disappoints me the most.

Ken Nash: Omar, do you have family still in Palestine?

Omar Abarrum: Yes, ma'am.

Ken Nash: And do you have family in Gaza?

Omar Abarrum: Yes.

Ken Nash: Can you tell us if you've been in communication with them, and if so, what they have told you?

Omar Abarrum: I have not been in communication with them. I don't know if they're in the country at all. I don't— well, they have 2 houses in Gaza. One of them has gotten destroyed, you know, by Israeli missiles. And once they moved into the second house, it immediately got destroyed 2 days after by Israeli missiles. And I think they fled to a homeless shelter. They fled somewhere, I'm sure. But both of their houses got destroyed, unfortunately.

Chris Hedges: That's all I know on them.

Omar Abarrum: Okay.

Ken Nash: And I'm interested in the people here whom you speak to, and I assume you do, about what is happening in Gaza, what is happening in Palestine. And what do you tell them, and what do— what are their responses to what you communicate to them?

Omar Abarrum: Like yesterday at the demonstration, Well, I would think people agree with me, honestly, is their response, because I'm not sure how they wouldn't. You know, these are facts. You can't turn a blind eye to them. And all those people were willing to help and support the cause.

Ken Nash: What do you think that— The bombardment and the displacement, the killing and the maiming does for the children who are enclosed within Gaza? What happens to them?

Omar Abarrum: Excuse me?

Ken Nash: What happens to the young children? What happens to their minds and their sense of self?

Omar Abarrum: Oh, my gosh. It's like a second Holocaust. It's like pretty much psychological torture, really. These kids should not have to go through what they're going through. No kids should have to ever suffer through this, endure this kind of pain, you know? Killing, that blood and murder should not be an everyday sight for them. You know, we are humans. We are people. And we stand together as a whole.

Chris Hedges: OK.

Omar Abarrum: We need to make sure that these kids don't grow up getting used to seeing their home destroyed, or growing up to see other people, their parents, their siblings, under rubble. And that's why we need to do something for the cause. We need to protest. We need to make demands and end the occupation, stop the funds going into Israel.

Ken Nash: Well, I will tell you, with your vigor, with your sensitivities and your ability to articulate them, I think your mom should be pretty proud. And I'm delighted to have gotten to know you and hope to get to know you better. And thank you for bringing your voice to WBAI. And we are going to— and if you want to speak more with Omar and to meet him, he is going to be Saturday, August 9th, at the 1:00 p.m. rally at Columbus Circle, 58th Street and 8th Avenue.

Mimi Rosenberg: Yes.

Ken Nash: Which will then be followed by a 3:00 p.m. march to the U.N. And one of the things that was proposed at the organizing rally is that people coat their hands— their hands— in red paint and hold their hands aloft, because there is blood on our hands as the U.S. government continues to support the Israeli military.

Mimi Rosenberg: Right.

Ken Nash: And in about 30 seconds, a final message for The final seconds for our audience, Omar?

Omar Abarrum: The final seconds for our audience. Wow. Well, I just want to say— I'd just like to say, anybody, you know, if you can make it, come to the rally, you know, support the cause. It would be very appreciated. The more numbers we have, the more of a change we can all make. And we need to be united. You know, it doesn't matter whether you're Arab, Palestinian, black, white, whatever. We are humans. We are people. We need to stand as a whole and fight against injustice, discrimination and genocide.

Ken Nash: Thank you so much for giving voice to the support for the people of Gaza, for the Palestinian people. And I've been speaking with Omar Abarrum, and we're going to see him on August 9th, and we're going to hear more from him. Very, very bright, heartfelt, intense young man.

Omar Abarrum: Thank you, Omar.

Ken Nash: It's been a pleasure.

Omar Abarrum: My pleasure.

Rashid Khalidi: We talked with Rashid Khalidi, the Edward Said Professor of Arab Studies at Columbia University and the editor of the Journal of Palestine Studies, an adviser to the Palestinian delegation at the Madrid-Washington Palestinian-Israeli negotiations of 1991 through 1993.

Mimi Rosenberg: His most recent book is Brokers of Let's begin by debunking some of the mythology or misconceptions. And let's begin with the issue of Israeli attacks as a response to the rockets from Hamas.

Rashid Khalidi: This allegation entirely relies on people not paying attention to what happened before the rockets started flying. It's really important It's important to note that for the last year or 2, Hamas aggressively policed the ceasefire, refraining, according to what Israeli military intelligence itself said, from firing rockets itself and repressing attempts by other groups, smaller groups, to do so. The last couple of years were among the relatively calmest in terms of rocket fire in the last 7 or 8 years. Moreover, No one seems to count Israeli provocations, which were, I think, designed to provoke Hamas into reacting with rockets. In the several weeks before the fighting broke out on July 8th, Israel carried out a massive search-and-destroy campaign throughout the West Bank in which it arrested about 500 people, killing 9 innocent civilians shot down in demonstrations. And most of those people arrested were members of Hamas.

Omar Abarrum: Right.

Rashid Khalidi: So Israel presumably considers a ceasefire to consist of one side refraining from acting, in this case up to July 8th, Hamas, but doesn't seem to consider it is bound by the same ceasefire. The ceasefire of November 2012 included a specific provision that there be opening of the A lifting of the siege of Gaza. That never happened. So Israel did never— never, never fulfilled its side of a bargain, which to the best of its ability, according to the Israeli press and Israeli military intelligence spokespersons, Hamas was doing. So, you know, in order to repeat allegations of that sort, Americans have to basically take all their talking points from Israeli sources.

Chris Hedges: Right.

Rashid Khalidi: from the Israeli playbook and pay absolutely no attention to what was actually happening on the ground immediately before the rockets started flying. The Goldstone Commission in 2009 listed various and numerous violations of human rights in the Israeli bombings of Gaza back then. Has anything changed? Has it gotten worse this time? Well, I actually think that the doctrines that govern the use of force on the part of the Israeli military have not really changed in their dealing with the Palestinians for several decades. If you look at the way in which the Israeli military used massive firepower against built-up urban areas in 1982, or when it reoccupied the West Bank in 2002, or in its attack on Lebanon in 2006, or in the 2 earlier rounds, The one dealt with by the Goldstone Report in 2008, 2009, and the one in 2012 against Gaza. In all of these cases, I think there are several specific characteristics. The first is that Israel specifically said after the 2006 war, General Eisenkot said— I believe he was the chief of military planning at the time— he enunciated what he called the Dahya Doctrine. The Dahya was in the region of South Beirut that was completely flattened by Israeli bombing. They destroyed dozens and dozens of high-rise 10-, 12-, 14-story buildings. They said, this is what's going to happen. We're going to attack civilian areas. We're going to kill civilians. He said it. He said it out loud. He said, this is the Dahiya Doctrine. This is what they can expect. And this has been repeated again and again. It is particularly employed when Israeli ground troops are engaged. In other words, during the battle in Shaja'iyya, When Israeli troops of the Golani Brigade entered the area— this is a suburb of Gaza City, immediately to the east of Gaza City— about 10 days ago, and 13 of them were killed. This is— the Golani is one of the crack units. The Golani Brigade is one of the top units in the Israeli military. When that happened and Israeli troops were ambushed, an Israeli officer, I think the chief of Israeli artillery in the south, said to journalists in a press conference, We would have had 600 body bags had I not acted to bombard the area with artillery and call in airstrikes. They basically flattened an entire neighborhood as part of what they would call force protection. And an Israeli commentator thereafter said, you know, we shouldn't be so squeamish. The Russian army or the U.S. army would do the same thing without having any qualms to protect their forces. So Israel will use these means, attacking civilian areas, in some cases simply as a means of putting pressure on civilian populations to put pressure on a militant group like Hezbollah in Lebanon in 2006 or Hamas in Gaza today or in 2008, but even more intensively when Israeli ground troops are engaged. And in those circumstances— we saw this in '08-'09, and that's what Goldstone was talking about, and I think we're seeing it again and again in this most recent round of fighting. The bombardments are particularly ferocious when Israeli troops are anywhere near, ground troops are anywhere near.

Mimi Rosenberg: So we continue to be barraged in the media by that Israel is merely responding to the rocket launches from Hamas and incursions into Israel for the possible harm and capture of its civilians and/or soldiers, and that this is the motivation and they are the defenders of peace. How do we respond to that? And in any event, would there have been alternatives if indeed they thought security was their main objective?

Rashid Khalidi: 2 points. I mean, I think I tried to speak to the issue of rocket fire. Yes, of course Israel has been subjected to rocket fire, but every time I think that has to be put into context. Israel systematically chokes the Gaza Strip and expects the Gazans to just shut up and take it. When eventually there's a response, they start howling about the response rather than talking about the fact they are in occupation, they are choking the Gaza Strip with a blockade and a siege, and eventually, you know, people And moreover, as I tried to point out earlier, in almost every case— not every case, but in almost every case— there has been systematic provocation in the sense of Israeli attacks on either Hamas in the West Bank or, in the case of the Gaza Strip, targeted assassination of Hamas militants was resumed by Israel at the very beginning of this round, back at the beginning of July, in a means obviously intended to provoke Hamas.

Chris Hedges: Right.

Rashid Khalidi: That's the first part of it. As far as capturing Israelis, well, Israel released a number of imprisoned Palestinians after the kidnapping of an Israeli soldier by the name of Gilad Shalit, and they then rearrested all of those released former prisoners at the end of June and the beginning of July. Hamas does dig tunnels in order to capture Israelis. They've done it before. They apparently have done it again. And their stated objective is to bargain for the release of their prisoners. There are 6,000 Palestinian political prisoners in Israeli jails. As far as Israelis are concerned, of course, these are terrorists. Israelis who've killed hundreds or tens or thousands or scores of Palestinians are not considered terrorists, but Palestinians who've killed however many Israelis are. The point is that there are thousands of Palestinians in Israeli detention.

Omar Abarrum: Right.

Rashid Khalidi: And nobody pays any attention to them. Israel's promises to release them are never kept. A group of them was supposed to be released as part of the negotiations that Secretary Kerry was brokering, and that broke down a couple of months ago. So, yes, it is true, Hamas is trying to kidnap. I think most— they're most interested in soldiers, 'cause Israel responds best to that, apparently. But be that as it may, there's no question that they are doing that. But the larger questions are never raised by people who talk about either tunnels or talk about rockets. What about occupation? What about siege? What about blockade? What about imprisonment? What about detention without trial? The numbers of Palestinians who've gone through Israeli detention are quite mind-boggling. About 40% of the adult male population of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip has served in Israeli prisons. 750,000 to 800,000 Palestinians have gone through Israeli prisons. 4 in 10. That is certainly worthy of consideration when one talks about one Israeli imprisoned or captured. Obviously it's not the same, but nobody ever wants to talk about that, the continuing occupation for 47 years, the humiliation, the demeaning treatment of Palestinians always, everywhere, systematically, all over, several million people treated in ways that are quite inhuman. And we have the testimonies of Israeli soldiers. Through the group Breaking the Silence, of exactly what the daily routine of Israeli patrols breaking into people's homes arbitrarily, for no reason according to the soldiers who've given these testimonies, what that is like. If you don't put that in the equation, of course Hamas or the Palestinians look awful. Systematically eliding the basis of Palestinian resentment is absolutely necessary to painting Israel as the bad guy.

Mimi Rosenberg: Right.

Rashid Khalidi: the victim and painting Israel as completely blameless and making the Palestinians look like terrorist monsters. In the most recent attempt at a ceasefire, Israel is saying that Hamas coming out of a tunnel after the ceasefire, and Hamas is saying that this was before the ceasefire. Have you been hearing anything about what's happening there? Well, I've heard 3 things. I've heard the 2 versions, the Hamas And the Israeli version, each one claiming— one claiming that this took place before the ceasefire, and Israel claiming that it took place after. I've also heard that there was a lot of shelling and fighting in the Rafah area where this apparently took place before and during the ceasefire, and 40 or so people were killed according to one report, more according to another— more Palestinians were killed according to one report, more according to another report.

Omar Abarrum: Right.

Rashid Khalidi: And apparently there was fighting, in addition to Israeli bombardments, there was fighting between Israeli soldiers and Hamas or other armed Palestinians in the Rafah area, which led to at least 2 Israeli soldiers apparently being killed. I'm not sure about that number. That's according to one report. So, yes, both sides claim completely different things, in keeping with the— entirely in keeping with the nature of this war. The ceasefire has completely broke down, as well.

Mimi Rosenberg: Professor, is this invasion and bombardment of Gaza, which has rendered Gaza to look like Dresden during World War II, is there a sea change? Can we think of words like genocide? Is this about ethnic cleansing? Is there a critical departure such that there really is the targeting of the elimination Of the Palestinian from the limited landmass that they were prepared to claim for a 2-state solution.

Rashid Khalidi: There's been a debate over whether this term genocide is applicable. An Israeli sociologist, now dead, Baruch Kimmerling, came up with the term politicide to describe what he understood Sharon and the Likud Party were doing to the Palestinians. And there's an argument that that or the much more specific legal term in international law, genocide, might apply. I'm not a lawyer. I've seen the different arguments about this. I will say, though, that ethnic cleansing and attacks on Palestinian civilian populations did not start with Gaza in 2008 or 2012 or 2014, nor did they start with the First or Second Intifadas. in 1987 and 2003-04, they go right back to 1948. Attacking Palestinian civilian populations in Jaffa and Haifa with mortars, with barrel bombs, with other kinds of bombs, car bombs, truck bombs, as well as other targets, the King David Hotel and so forth, was the tactic of the founders of the ruling party of Israel, Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir. Right. Were the architects of systematic attacks on Palestinian civilian populations. There were, by the way, systematic Palestinian attacks, much less effective, on Jewish civilian populations at the same time, the difference being that in the case of Israel, what became the state of Israel, we were talking about a powerful para-state, and then later a state operating very effectively on a massive scale such that, although quite heavy losses were inflicted on Jewish civilians, much heavier losses were being inflicted on Palestinians. And it was part of a systematic campaign to take over those cities. Jaffa and Haifa were emptied of their population by systematic indiscriminate bombardment in April and May of 1948. So this is not new. This is not new, whether one calls it ethnic cleansing, whether one calls it genocide, I will leave to legal experts. And I think, though, it should be taken into account Israelis rail about the Palestinians not recognizing Israel. Israel has systematically acted to destroy Palestine as an entity, the Palestinians as a people, to deny their right of self-determination. Yes, at different occasions, various Israeli politicians have offered what appears to be some recognition of Palestinian self-determination, or even statehood. Netanyahu had said he accepts a Palestinian state, at the same time as they were acting In an absolutely systematic fashion to ensure that no such state could possibly be created. I mean, when you settle 600,000 Israelis in the territory of a putative state you are trying to destroy in ways that destroy its contiguity and take over most of its land, you are not in favor of a Palestinian state. You are saying you are while you are systematically destroying any possible foundation for a Palestinian state. That has been the policy of Israel. Certainly since the Likud came to power in 1977, Israel's policy. So I don't know whether you want to call it genocide. I myself would shy away from the term, though I've heard lawyers— I'm not a lawyer. I've heard lawyers whom I respect enormously, like Michael Ratner, one of the cofounders of the Center for Constitutional Rights, argue that this does rise to the definition of genocide. I don't know if that's true.

Chris Hedges: Okay.

Mimi Rosenberg: May I just follow up on that by asking whether or not you think there's any viability to the 2-state solution at this juncture, or has, again, there been a shift, and should there be a shift, to discussion of a one-state with Palestinian rights, of course, being fully and equally established?

Rashid Khalidi: Let me say a couple things. The first is that anyone who argues for a 2-state solution would have to explain how a process that's been underway for 47 years, and particularly since 1977, can be reversed. This is a process that's moved Israel to the far right, wherein the partisans of the greater land of Israel now control every important position of Israeli political life, and wherein the bases have been destroyed for a Palestinian state. So anyone who talks about a 2-state solution has to tell me how those bulldozers are put into reverse, how that concrete is unpoured. Right. How those 600,000 Israelis, 1 in, I believe it's 7, Israeli Jews, are going to be removed from where they live, or 1 in 5 of them, or 1 in 4 of them, or 1 in 8 of them, or however many, depending on where you end up with borders. So that would be— my first point, therefore, is that I don't see how you could possibly create a 2-state solution. The second point I would make is we have a 1-state solution now. There is 1 state between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River, and that state is the state of Israel. It's a state in which 1 group of people have exclusive rights and privileges, that is, Jewish citizens of the state of Israel. Arab citizens of the state of Israel are systematically discriminated against but have some rights. And everybody else has no rights, essentially. There's a systematic policy of encouraging them to— how should one put it? Forcing populations to leave by making their lives impossible, by blowing up their houses, by refusing to renew residency, and so on and so forth. So there's a slow Ethnic cleansing taking place of that population. And that is what we have. How you go from that to a situation which, as is reflected in your question, where both populations have equal rights, I don't know. But I don't think that anyone who argues for a 2-state solution has a leg to stand on, frankly, right now, given the way in which Israeli policies have gone over at least since 1977, and I would say even back to 1948.

Mimi Rosenberg: Right.

Rashid Khalidi: In the U.S., the news media is totally in support of the Israelis. And, of course, the Jews. I'm not sure that's entirely true. But anyway, go ahead. Okay. Well, you can elucidate on that.

Mimi Rosenberg: Yes.

Rashid Khalidi: And also I'm more— also interested in what's been happening with protests and news coverage in Europe, where you are right now. I would say that the people who run and own the American media are completely Won over to an entirely pro-Israeli point of view. We could see that from the removal of Ayman Mohieddine, an NBC correspondent in Gaza. He was later reinstated, and I think the reinstatement says something. We could see that from the firing of Lola Djibril from MSNBC. We could see that from the removal and her sending— being sent off to Siberia of a, I believe, CBS correspondent. I don't recall her name. So the people who run the American mainstream media certainly are uniformly pro-Israel. That is to say, the people who own and manage, the senior executives. I think that a lot of the journalists on the ground, as has happened again and again going back to '82 in Lebanon, going back to the First Intifada in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1987, have been deeply affected by what they've actually seen, by the overt racism By the racism of many Israelis, by the absolute brutality of the Israeli military in its operations, and by the suffering that they've seen. Even though many of them are also alienated by Hamas, they recognize that these casualties, the extraordinary imbalance— we've had almost 15,000— sorry, 1,500 Palestinians killed. 2 Israeli civilians and a Thai agricultural worker have been killed, in addition to Israeli troops who were killed while attacking Gaza. There are also many many, I'm sure, many Hamas and other militants who've been killed. My point is that that affects, I think, the coverage over time, especially some of these images that are indelible. It's much more pronounced, I think, in Europe than it is in the United States, where the news hierarchy, the people at the political level and the news hierarchy, are sympathetic to Israel, but not, by no means, to the same extent as is the case in the United States, and where public opinion is much more open to different views than it is in the U.S. It's been almost impossible in the past for a Palestinian perspective to gain any, any airing at all in the United States. I went and talked to people at the New York Times op-ed, people who run the New York Times op-ed section. And one of the things that we were planning to say to them is, your coverage is extraordinary. That is to say, who you invite. There's an overwhelming majority of pro-Israeli and Israeli voices, and very, very few— And the first thing they said to us is, we looked at our coverage and we realized there's an overwhelming majority of Israeli views and very, very few Palestinian. And that is more the case, even more the case in some other organs of the mass media. Certainly Fox News and The Wall Street Journal and so forth are entirely won over not just to a pro-Israeli point of view, but the most extreme pro-Israeli points of view. Nevertheless, I would say that some elements in public opinion and some elements of the mass— of the mainstream media have changed a little bit in the United States. States in the course of this fighting. And I think it's partly the images and the impact on journalists on the ground, who are not stupid people, who are not dupes, who have figured stuff out. I mean, these are experienced reporters in most cases, or many cases. And when they see what they see, they come to have different views than the ignorant, bigoted, biased views that their bosses have. And it's very hard for them to break through that bigotry and those biases. Because those are their bosses. But some of it does come through, and it comes through even more strongly in the non-mainstream media.

Mimi Rosenberg: Talking about images, Israel tries to explain the high civilian tolls by blaming Hamas for using human shields. The claim is that Hamas stores weapons and launches rockets near residential areas, leaving Israel with no choice but to bomb those locations.

Rashid Khalidi: Well, I think there's 2 things I think there are two things to be said. One is either Israel is using weapons that are completely inaccurate and are therefore indiscriminate, and it's therefore not able to target them, and therefore— things like, actually, field artillery are not intended to be pinpoint weapons. Naval artillery is not intended to be a pinpoint weapon. Many other forms of weaponry which Israel is using, I would argue, are inevitably necessary necessarily going to be indiscriminate and not accurate. Therefore, whatever they're supposedly firing at in those cases, they clearly are doing so in an indiscriminate manner. So even if they're being fired at, they simply are blanketing an area with indiscriminate fire in order to respond to the sources of fire. Now, there are other weapons systems that I think are pinpoint, and in some cases these kill or hit their intended targets.

Mimi Rosenberg: Right.

Rashid Khalidi: But in some cases it's very hard to understand what they're doing with the drone-fired or drone-controlled fire. The Israelis have a system of drones that blankets the Gaza Strip. They're buzzing over people's heads all day. They see everything. I've seen on Israeli television pictures of these— from the— taken apparently from these drones showing Hamas fighters coming out of tunnels or whatever and being brought under fire, or coming out of the sea and being brought under fire, or other kinds of similar— if they are able to see their targets so well via the drones, one wonders why several United Nations schools housing huge numbers of refugees have been hit. If there are mortars or artillery firing at them, presumably they have the means to find where those weapons are using this system of drones that blankets the sky of Gaza. And I have to say, you have to go back to what General Eisenkot said with the so-called Dahya Doctrine. I mean, they flattened a whole neighborhood in southern Beirut because that is where— that is the stronghold of Hezbollah. And they've done the same kinds of things in areas like Beit Hanoun, Beit Lahya in the northern end of the Gaza Strip, the Shajai neighborhood on the eastern side of Gaza City, and are apparently doing the same thing to Rafah right now at the southern end of the Gaza Strip. I would argue And not just in terms of getting at sources of fire. I would argue as a means of punishing the civilian population. They've said that that's what they do in the past. I see no reason to assume that that is not their doctrine today.

Mimi Rosenberg: And we certainly can't neglect the role of the U.S. in relationship to its support through military expenditures, weaponry. How do we evaluate and understand that? Its role in what is the devastating death toll in Gaza and the continued occupation, and for that matter, the expansion of the settlements, which are virtually whole cities, tens of thousands of units in the West Bank?

Rashid Khalidi: Well, as I wrote in my piece Yes. —for The New Yorker. In my view, by supplying the weapons it is supplying, by resupplying Israel with ammunition, as the United States just agreed to do, the United States government is complicit in actions that may rise to the level of war crimes. In the version of the piece that I originally sent to The New Yorker, there was a passage which was edited out in which I said that United States complicity might well subject the United States to, as well as Israel, to prosecution. And I think that that frankly is the case. The United States has prevented— and I've been reading carefully what comes out of the United Nations— has prevented any action, any binding, legally binding action by the Security Council, having exerted itself with vetoes 42 times on behalf of Israel in the past. Council members know the United States has very clearly indicated it will veto any such action. So there's diplomatic support. There's actually arming Israel to the tune of $3.1 billion a year, plus whatever extras they're about to get, several hundred million dollars' worth of extras, apparently, as a result of this latest Israeli attack on Gaza. And so, yes, the United States is complicit in these actions. Whatever some politicians at the top may think about what Israel's doing, they are acting in a way that makes them party to whatever Israel is doing.

Mimi Rosenberg: And why? Why is it there— is there—

Rashid Khalidi: Why? Because of political realities in the United States. Because the political reality in the United States is that a majority of Americans are so misinformed as to believe that the Palestinians are bad guys and the Israelis are good guys, because that— those general views are supported by very powerful lobbying efforts. which have made Congress, you know, seem like occupied territory. They will pass any bill that they're told to pass by AIPAC. And they have put into law a whole range of Israeli-inspired legislation, which are involving things like terrorism vis-à-vis Hamas and so forth, and have limited the— or tried to limit the executive's ability to make foreign policy in different ways. In a manner that shows that But the political— on the political level in the United States, we live in a fantasy land where whatever Netanyahu says is true and whatever the Palestinians say is false. We could see this when you compare how the president is received by joint session of Congress and how Netanyahu is received by joint session of Congress. He gets a lot more applause than the president does. And I should say, I don't think that reflects American public opinion. American public Public opinion is pro-Israel, but not to that point. There is a percentage, especially of younger Americans, a very high percentage of younger Americans who are quite critical of Israel. You don't see any reflection of that in the American political constellation, no reflection whatsoever of any nuance of that sort.

Mimi Rosenberg: And what would be a basis for a just ceasefire and to begin begin to look at the underpinnings and a more permanent solution for— and I use the word with great care— peace in the region between Israel and Palestine?

Rashid Khalidi: Well, that's a huge question, Mimi.

Mimi Rosenberg: Of course.

Rashid Khalidi: The ceasefire part is relatively easy. Hamas originally and Islamic Jihad originally said, we're not going to go back to our cages, we They refused to accept the deceptive, lying promises which in the past were made such that a ceasefire would be followed by a lifting of the siege. Never happened. Ceasefire was followed by, in most cases, intensification of the blockade and the siege. And they made that very clear at the beginning. There was some back and forth on that, but that now seems to be a universally supported Palestinian demand. Whatever— the lackey regimes, the unrepresentative, undemocratic, autocratic, pro-American regimes of the Arab world may say or do, aligning themselves with the United States, aligning themselves with Israel. Arab public opinion actually also follows the Palestinian line on this. A ceasefire has to be linked to a lifting of the blockade and the siege. 1.8 million people cannot be treated in this fashion, put in a ghetto, put in an open-air prison. You can use whatever metaphor you choose. And left to rot just so that Israelis can sun themselves on the beach without rockets. I mean, I think it's awful anybody should have to fear rockets and have to rush to shelters, and that children should be traumatized in that fashion. But the children of Gaza are traumatized by the fact that they haven't got enough food, they can't leave this— it's an area a third the size of New York City, for heaven's sakes. Most of the people of Gaza have not been able to leave for years. They are imprisoned.

Mimi Rosenberg: Right.

Rashid Khalidi: They're imprisoned, in effect. They can't go to school, university, jobs. They can't go worship in Jerusalem. They cannot travel to other parts of Palestine. They can't leave the Gaza Strip. And that, to my way of thinking, is something that is unacceptable. Now, whether this is going to be doable, that is to say, whether it's going to actually be possible to find conditions whereby this siege can be lifted, I really don't know. But that seems to be one of the conditions for a proper ceasefire, that you're going to have to be able to say to the people of Gaza, no, we're not going to put you back in your cage. You're going to be able to breathe. You're going to be able to rebuild. You're going to be able to live like normal human beings. I don't know how that's going to happen, but that would seem to be one of the important conditions for a ceasefire. As far as peace, I think we're farther away in some ways from peace than we've been for a very long time. It's very hard to see how Given not just the failure of Secretary Kerry, because I think Secretary Kerry's efforts had no chances whatsoever of succeeding, given the bias in the Secretary of State's approach, but given the rightward trend of Israeli politics over many, many years, it's very hard to see not even a 2-state solution, but any solution involving equality between these 2 peoples and their living together in peace. I mean, I could sketch out for I mean, the late Tony Judt once said, what any politician has done, another politician can undo. I mean, an Israeli politician can come along and say, yes, 1 in 9 Israelis, or 1 in 7 Israelis, or whatever the number is living in illegal settlements in the occupied territories, you have to leave your homes, we're going to move you, and we're going to undo the billions of dollars of concrete and roads and barriers and so forth that we've poured all over the West Bank, and we're going to move back beyond the '67 '67 line. And that's the only way to do it. frontiers. I'd like to see how that could be done. It's even more difficult in many ways to see these 2 peoples living together. There are very, very few— In a single state. Even in a single state that involved, you know, some kind of cantonal system, federal system, whatever, such that both peoples could enjoy a sense of self-determination within a single state. But I actually think that it's going to be much harder to achieve a ceasefire and and tamp down the fighting this time because of the intractability of the larger conflict. It's now been pretty clearly shown that a 2-state solution has had the stake driven through its heart. The most recent part of that was Prime Minister Netanyahu's statement about 5 weeks ago— I forget the date; it was in a New Yorker article— in which he said, well, we'll give up security control. Basically saying the Palestinians are condemned to eternal subjugation by Israel, like it or lump it. He said, I've always said this. Now you see why. That's always been his view. That's always been the view of Likud. That was the view of Shamir. It was the view of Begin. It is the view of the dominant trend in Israeli politics. Anybody who doesn't see that is just not looking at reality, in my view.

Mimi Rosenberg: Professor Rashid Khalidi, thank you for spending this time with us in this most tragic and difficult of circumstances.