Democracy Now! Audio - Democracy Now! 2026-06-22 Monday

Episode Date: June 22, 2026

Headlines for June 22, 2026; “Document of Capitulation”: Spencer Ackerman & Behrooz Ghamari-Tabrizi on the U.S.-Iran Deal; U.K. Political Crisis: PM Keir Starmer Resigns & Palestine Action “Terrorism” Sentencing of “Elbit 4”; “Criminal Approach to Politics”: Trump Ally Abelardo de la Espriella Wins Colombian Presidency

From New York, this is Democracy Now. The question before us now is how much more can we accomplish together? Can we turn over a new leave? Can we change relations in the Middle East permanently? Or do we go back to doing things the old way? Which is not our preference, but it's certainly very much something that can't happen. Vice President J.D. Vance and Iranian negotiators met in Switzerland Sunday to formally begin a new round of talks after signing a framework of agreement.

to end the war. We'll speak with Beruze Gamare-Tubrizi. He was on death row at the notorious avian prison in Iran, and we'll talk to Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Spencer Ackerman. His latest piece is headlined Iran's forever leverage. Then to London, Prime Minister Kier-Starmor announces he's stepping down. Every decision I've taken has been about putting the country I first. That is why I will resign as leader of the Labor Party. We'll speak to Stormer's former mentor, renowned human rights attorney Jeffrey Robertson, will talk about the political upheaval and Palestine activists who took on the Ilbe. His latest piece for the key is headlined punishing protest as terrorism.

And finally, in another victory, for right-wing forces in Latin America, Colombia has elected Ovarado de la Espreya as its new president. Thank you, Colombia, for that support. Thank you for choosing us. You will not regret it. The homeland miracle will become a reality, and we, together with you and God's help,

will rebuild the homeland and take it to the place of greatness it deserves. We'll go to Colombia for the latest. All that and more coming up. Welcome to Democracy Now, Democracy Now.org, the War and Peace Report. I'm Amy Goodman. Mediators from Pakistan and Qatar say the U.S. and Iran made, quote, encouraging progress, end quote, during 18 hours of negotiations in Switzerland, where the two sides agreed to a roadmap towards reaching a final deal within 60 days.

Last week, the U.S. and Iran officially signed a memorandum of understanding aimed at ending the war in Iran, which President Trump, began in late February. Vice President J.D. Vance headed the U.S. delegation. Iran's parliament speaker, Mohamed Bahra-Ralibaf, led the Iranian delegation. On Sunday, Vance said the U.S. wants to turn over a new leaf with Iran. What the president has asked us to do is turn over a new leaf to transform our relationship with the people of Iran and to extend an outstretched hand that says to the people of Iran that if your leadership is willing to give up being a driver of regional instability,

if they are willing to give up nuclear weapons ambitions for the long term, then the United States is willing to fundamentally transform our relationship with that country. That is certainly our goal. The talks took place despite new threats from President Trump. On Sunday, he posted a message online reading, quote, Iran must immediately stop their highly paid proxies in Lebanon from causing trouble. If they don't, will hit them. Iran very hard again, just like we did last week, only harder, three exclamation points.

On Saturday, Iran announced it was closing the Strait of Hormuz again after Israel killed 83 people in Lebanon. On Friday, Israel said it would agree to a new ceasefire in Lebanon, but Israel's refusing to end its occupation of southern Lebanon, where Hizbollah killed four Israeli soldiers Friday. Residents of southern Lebanon have decried the ongoing Israeli attacks. Abbas as a dean in the town of Barish, where Israel struck a three-story building. There was an air strike this morning on this house. It was targeted by Israeli warplanes at 8.30 a.m. People were sleeping inside. Children, a woman, her two children and her husband, and a young civilian.

They were all civilians, sleeping peacefully in their home. It was supposed to be a ceasefire yesterday from the Israeli enemy. In other news from Lebanon, the acclaimed conservationist Mona Khalil has died after being wounded in Israeli strike on her home two weeks ago. The 76-year-old spent years trying to protect endangered sea turtles in Lebanon's Mediterranean coastline. Israel's continuing to attack Gaza, despite the so-called ceasefire. Earlier today, an Israeli drone killed a high school student who was on her way to take a test in Gaza City. On Saturday, Israeli strikes killed at least six people, including two children in Ahmed Wisha, a cameraman with Al Jazeera. Wisha's brother Muhammad also worked for Al Jazeera and was killed in an Israeli strike in April. Since October 2023, Israel's killed over 260 journalists in Gaza,

including at least 12 working for Al Jazeera. On Sunday, mourners gathered in Dira Bala to remember Amit Wisha. This is Al Jazeera correspondent Talal al-Aruki. The Israeli occupation deliberately assassinations largely and directly during its war of extermination in a clear attempt to suppress images, prevent the dissemination of the message, and to conceal the massacres and atrocities committed against the Palestinian people here in the Gaza Strip.

In Britain, Kirstarmer's resigned as Prime Minister and leader of the Labor Party over mounting pressure from within his own party. Starmor spoke earlier today. The question my party is asking now is whether I am best placed to lead us into the next general election. I have heard the answer of my parliamentary party to that question. And I accept that answer with good grace. Every decision I've taken has been about putting the country I love first.

That is why I will resign as leader of the Labour Party. Stormer's announcement paves the way for Britain to have its seventh leader in 10 years. Former Manchester mayor newly elected Labor MP Andy Burnham is widely expected to become the next Prime Minister. We'll have more on this story later in the broadcast. In Colombia, a Trump-back far-right lawyer has declared victory in Sunday's presidential runoff to replace Gustavo Petro. With over 99.9% of the vote counted, Abelardo de la Espreya has 49.7% of the vote. The leftist Senator Ivan Cepeda has 48.7%. Abelardo de la Esprejeia is a political novice who rose to prominence representing right-wing paramilitary groups.

Cepeda is a prominent human rights defender and legislator. His father was assassinated by right-wing U.S. back paramilitary groups in 1994. Sepeda spoke to supporters on Sunday. Once the official canvas takes place, and its final result is produced, and the corresponding verifications have been carried out. We will recognize the official result that emerges from that scrutiny process. If the election results are confirmed, Colombia would become the latest Latin American country to shift to the right, joining Argentina, El Salvador, Chile, Bolivia, and possibly Peru,

where Keko Fuhimori appears on track to win the election. Bolivia's right-wing president, Rodrigo Paz, has declared a state of state. emergency and has deployed the military to end weeks of indigenous and union-led protests. Protesters had set up road blockades across the country, calling proposes resignation and an end to austerity measures. Former Bolivian President Evo Morales has backed the protest movement. In my view, this is a rebellion by the indigenous movement against the neoliberal model and against the neo-colonial state. As time goes by, the government has moved faster.

It has tried to implement it, even without authority. In December, it already issued a supreme decree to put the entire neoliberal model in place. In news from Cuba, lawmakers have passed sweeping economic changes that could lead to the privatization of much of Cuba's socialist economy. The move comes after intense U.S. pressure and threats by President Trump to, take over Cuba. In recent months, the U.S. is blocked nearly all oil shipments from reaching Cuba. This is on top of the U.S. embargo that dates back to the early 60s. Cuba's Prime Minister Manuel Mareiro Cruz spoke Thursday. These are proposals to confront the crisis, opening a transformative window that, if not

implemented now, could bring irreversible political and social consequences. But I want to reiterate that these transformations do not represent a departure from the socialist project. On the contrary, they follow the logic of its own development. In other news from Cuba, former vice president, Mariro Valdez Menendez, has died at the age of 94. He was a close ally of Fidel and Raul Castro and was a key figure in the Cuban Revolution. Salazar, the president of the Islamic Society of Milwaukee, Wisconsin's largest mosque, has been released from an ICE jail in Indiana after being detained for nearly three months. Sarsur is a Palestinian-born community leader.

He spoke to supporters on Thursday. Because great people like you and people of freedom that is sturt with justice. That's why I'm back. I owe this to my community. to get people of freedom like JPP and other organizations with a great work standing for justice. Salas Sarsur have lived in the United States for over 30 years. In Newark, New Jersey, a Father's Day vigil was held outside

the privately run for-profit ice jail known as Delaney Hall Sunday. Families and supporters held signs reading, quote, Free the Dads, close the camps, unquote. The vigil was disrupted when a red sports car entering the facility struck a female protester who was waving an upside-down U.S. flag. Demonstrators said they believed the driver of the car was an employee of the Geo Group, that for-profit private prison company that operates the ice jail. Soon after, ice agents deployed pepper spray and mace on the crowd. The U.S. State Department has announced it'll stop funding HIV and AIDS programs in South Africa where more than 8 million people live with HIV, the highest number of any country in the world.

A State Department official justified the decision by citing, quote, South Africa's failure to make demonstrable progress on policy requests by the administration, unquote. President Trump has falsely claimed there's a white genocide taking place in South Africa. Trump is also overhauled U.S. asylum policy by pausing all asylum requests from around the world except for white South Africans. And President Trump, without offering any evidence, has claimed vandals are responsible for turning the newly renovated Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, green instead of dark blue. Last week, the Washington Post reported the reflecting pool contained more algae that at any recorded point in June over the past five years. In addition, a newly painted blue liner has begun to peel.

In recent days, authorities have arrested several people for touching parts of the reflecting pool, including David Hearn, a 67-year-old former Olympic canoe. racer who was arrested, handcuffed, and held for five hours after stopping by the pool during a 64-mile bike ride. Hearn denied committing vandalism and described his arrest as, quote, arbitrary, capricious prosecution, unquote. And those are some of the headlines. This is Democracy Now, Democracy Now.org, the war and peace report. I'm Amy Goodman. Mediators from Pakistan and Qatar say the U.S. and Iran made encouraging progress during 18 hours of negotiations in Switzerland, and where the two sides agreed to a roadmap towards reaching a final deal within 60 days.

Vice President J.D. Vance headed the U.S. delegation. Iran's parliament speaker, Mohamed Bahar Aliyevath, led the Iranian delegation. On Sunday, Vance said the U.S. wants to turn over a new leaf with Iran. What the president has asked us to do is turn over a new leaf to transform our relationship with the people of Iran and to extend an outstretched hand that says to the people of Iran that if your leadership is willing to give up being a driver of regional instability, if they are willing to give up nuclear weapons ambitions for the long term, then the United States is willing to fundamentally transform our relationship with that country. That is certainly our goal.

The talks took place despite new threats from President Trump. On Sunday, Trump posted a message online reading, quote, Iran must immediately stop their highly paid proxies in Lebanon from causing trouble if they don't will hit Iran very hard, just like we did last week, only harder, three exclamation points. On Saturday, Iran announced it was closing the Strait of Hormuz after Israel killed 83 people in Lebanon. On Friday, Israel said it would agree to a new ceasefire in Lebanon, but is also refusing to end its occupation of southern Lebanon, where Hezbollah killed four Israeli soldiers Friday. For more on these latest developments were joined by two guests. Bedouz Gamaray Tabrizzi is a fellow at the Center for Place Culture and Politics at the CUNY Graduate Center.

He was previously professor and chair of the Department of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University. In the 1980s, he was on death row in Iran's notorious evin prison. His latest book, just out this year, is titled The Long War on Iran, new events, old questions. And we're joined here in New York by the Pulitzer Prize winning reporter Spencer Akerman, author of Rain of Terror, have the 9-11 era, destabilized America and produced Trump, and writes the Forever Wars newsletter. His latest piece is headlined Iran's Forever leverage. Let's start with you, Spencer, your assessment of where the U.S. and Iran have come to in their negotiations. We've reached an astonishing point, a point that reflects.

how thoroughly the United States has lost this foolhardy war that the U.S. and Israel launched in February. If you'll remember, back then, there was never any consideration that Iran would close one of the world's most important economic waterways. Right now, unlike anything the United States or Israel thought it would achieve in this war, that is the main thing. issue driving absolutely everything else, and it's the main issue that's prompted the United States to essentially give away the store. Unlike the JCPOA, the nuclear deal in 2015, that the Obama administration negotiated with Iran, this memorandum of understanding that the U.S. and Iran have signed to kick off a 60-day period of negotiations only in some aspects covers the

nuclear file. What it mostly does is lay out a roadmap to a regional transformation that would have been astonishing previously to imagine. The United States is committing in this document, this signed document, to transform its military posture in the Middle East, to end all forms of sanctions on Iran, not in the staggered manner that the 2015 accord did. But apparently right now, the Iranians can sell oil, make money off of the... of their oil supplies right now. And more fundamentally, the U.S. and Iran are now looking toward a new reality in which Iran's power has been demonstrated against what had been, not just the reigning superpower in

the world, but the driving force of Middle Eastern security. I want to go to the Iranian president, Massoud Pazashiyan, speaking Sunday. We will not give up our rights to enrichment, and they, too, will be forced to accept it. You all know what the so-called President of the United States was saying. He has made a complete 180-degree turn. He was saying that Iran must surrender unconditionally. Iran has no right to do this. It has no right to do that.

Then he gave a speech and said that Iran has the right to do this. It has the right to possess this. In other words, he has reversed himself 180 degrees compared to his previous position and has accepted that they cannot ignore our rights. That's the Iranian president. Can you talk about the U.S. spin and go further into the details and what has been accomplished at this point compares to what President Obama accomplished back in 2015?

Right. So you heard the vice president talk about how Iran has to transform its behavior, how its proxy support for militias like Hezbollah. has to end. That's not actually in the MOU. The memorandum itself really puts the onus on the United States to both end its sanctions, all sorts of sanctions on Iran, secondary sanctions, which basically means the customers, the consumers of Iranian oil, have sanctions on them as well. And as well, it makes the United States sort of responsible for Israel withdrawing from Lebanon, which the Israelis are not agreeing to do at this point.

The actual terms itself we should be cautious on. I would not be surprised if what happened in the reason why this accord is so tilted in the memorandum of understanding toward the Iranian position is not only because Iran demonstrated it can withstand the United States in the war, but because the Trump administration needed this agreement so badly to reassure markets, to reassure in particular energy markets and to get that energy flowing that very likely the negotiators Steve Wickoff and Jared Kushner just needed to give Iran basically the terms of the agreement in order to show that this process would in fact move forward. But right now, what's ended up is that the terms of this agreement are overwhelmingly tilted toward Iran. I want to bring

Beiruz into this conversation, Beiruz-Gamari-Tabrizi. You yourself were held in prison on death row in Iran. You don't have a lot of sympathy. You didn't for the, to say the least, the Iranian regime. Now a professor at CUNY before that at Princeton. But can you talk about how that regime has changed? Who is in power right now? What the U.S. has done in changing that regime?

First, thank you for having me again in the program. I think this was a war that was doomed from the beginning, and it was exactly because of a total misunderstanding of the Islamic Republic power structure. And this misunderstanding and ignorance about the power structure in Iran was partially promoted by the Israelis and American intelligence and partially basically put forward by the mass media in the US. The misunderstanding was that you know you decapitate the state and then falls apart and the reality after three or four days of war basically undermined that kind of understanding.

And the second thing, the second misunderstanding was, that the relationship between the Iranian people and their state. And it is true that there is large segments of society are opposing the state in Iran, and they've shown their grievances in many different forms, and they were repressed and massacred by the Iranian government. But at the same time, that relationship did not. translated into organizing to overthrow the states after the beginning of the war. And we saw that how people rallied around the flag and despite their opposition to the state,

they supported the war efforts that was organized by the Islamic Republic. And the third issue was that miscalculating the Iranian military power. And I want to borrow from Mao Zetong and his notion of paper tiger. And for many years, Americans thought that Iran is a paper tiger. And they're sort of seen formidable, threatening, and powerful. And while in actuality they're weak and ineffectual. But in practice, they showed that not only they were not a paper tiger, but they were willing to withstand these attacks and in a very twisted way show that Americans seem like a paper tiger more than Iranians. And last but not least, the Iranians, the Islamic Republic always threatened that if there is a war against them, they're going to turn that into a regional war and force a global war.

And the U.S. administration, President Trump and others, they thought that this is only a meaningless threat. And in practice, they did that and showed a particularly surprising resilience and survived this attack. And I think that the way now it's working and diplomatically, politically, the Islamic Republic focused on creating a rift between Israel and the U.S. And I think possibly, along with their successes in the war front, politically, that was one of the most successful projects that they followed. And as we see today, that rift between the U.S. and Israel is deepening. And for the first time, we see this kind of political attacks and criticism on Israeli government that has been quite – unprecedented. And the other thing that the Iranians did, they shifted their position on Lebanon from supporting their allies, particularly Hezbollah in Lebanon, to defending Lebanese sovereignty.

And I think that was also a very successful campaign, and that that's how we see all those points are reflected in this 14-point memorandum of understanding, which, as Spencer's this is a document of capitulation on the American part, because this is actually an unconditional surrender, because I don't see any parts of this agreement that shows any concession on the Iranian part, except their commitment not to develop nuclear weapons, which was a commitment they made more than 20 years ago.

Spencer Ackerman. Excellent points by Beiruz, as always. I would just want to remind everyone, you know, zoom out a little bit. The war in February began as a way, supposedly, for the United States to extract a stronger position in nuclear negotiations. The United States had launched nuclear negotiations with the Iranians, pretextually, to bomb them. And now what's happened is the Iranians have not only withstood that, they have fundamentally transformed, the United States' position in the Middle East. The Iranians have cratered the airbases, destroyed the radar systems that protected those

air bases, and have held at risk the energy and other critical infrastructure data center facilities around the Gulf states that hosted the United States' military presence, made those U.S. allies in the Gulf think very seriously about whether the United States' is military umbrella actually defends them to the point that in the memorandum of understanding, the Iranians have extracted, at least on paper for now, we'll see how this is implemented, a commitment from the United States to move its military posture further away from Iranian territory. What that actually means in practice will have to await, whether this is an insincere commitment, we'll have to wait, or whether this is actually compelled, as is, you know, on some

level, quite likely, is it's a material reality, derivative of the fact that Iran basically destroyed a whole lot of these bases have now made the U.S. military posture in Iran, not the strength that the United States thought, not the anchor that the United States thought it had in the region, but fundamentally a point of weakness, something that the Iranians can leverage against the U.S., not vice versa. That's a fundamental transformation. And can you talk about how U.S. Israeli relations are shifting. You have Vance saying recently to the New York Times, you're speaking about Israel,

you're a country of 9 million people. You can't just kill your way out of solving every single national security problem that you have. Yes, anti-Zionist champion J.D. Vance, of all things. I don't really believe that it's actually sincere. One thing that you always want to look at when you see people on the right criticize Israel is whether they actually support Palestine or not. That's typically the critical distinction here.

But more fundamentally, Iran has, in addition to the way that it's turned the American military presence in the Middle East from its strength to a weakness, so it's done with the U.S. Israel alliance. It is placing a wedge between those two allies, most importantly. the memorandum of understanding that the U.S. and Iran signs talks about the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Lebanon. As Beiru's pointed out, that is a mechanism to say that unless the U.S., there's a major difference of opinion between the U.S. and Israel here, which I'll talk about in a second, but unless the U.S. compels Israel to cease its devastation of Lebanon.

I mean, on Friday they killed, Israel killed 83 people alone in Lebanon. That's correct. and then what did Iran do? Iran ordered the Strait of Hormuz shut. It is using leverage that previously it never had employed against the United States, let alone the U.S.-Israel alliance. I think if there's a weakness in the memorandum of understanding in terms of how it places this wedge between Iran and, I'm sorry, between the U.S. and Israel over Lebanon, it's that it doesn't mention Palestine, it doesn't mention Gaza. Israel has killed 1,000 Palestinians since the October ceasefire. This memorandum of understanding is silent on that. So that's really one weak point

that we can look at as a measure of criticism. But now it's basically holding the United States responsible. It's holding the quote unquote peace right now, the ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran, hostage to the U.S. ability to reign in Israel. Whether that actually happens is going to depend on, to a great degree on the difference between, you know, Vance's interpretation of this, as a proxy for the Trump interpretation of this, and the Israeli interpretation of this. The Israeli interpretation is that right now what it's done, the MOU is done, is freeze Israeli military positions in Lebanon in place. The Iranian position, and it's trying to see what the United States will do about this, and say, no, it means the Israelis have to withdraw from Lebanon

and cease bombing it. We're seeing right now is that Iran has, through its throttling of the Strait of Hormuz, enormous leverage. to produce pain on not just the United States, but global markets. And we're going to await how the Iranians will ultimately play that card when it comes to Lebanon fully. And finally, let me put this question to Beruiz Gamare-Tabrizi. And that is the response inside Iran of everyday people, many of whom are dissidents. I mean, with the first day, the U.S. Tomahawk missile strike on the girls' school in Menlob, in southern Iran that killed at least something like 175 people, mainly primary school girls.

Has this shifted public opinion in Iran and are now the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps in in charge? We actually don't know who exactly is in charge. And revolutionary guards always played a key role. in political decision-making and controlling the country's economy. So that continues to be the case. With how much that has changed,

we need to wait and see how the post-war governance unfolds. The inside the country, Iranians, you know, are in a kind of waiting mode to see how, For example, this $300 billion reconstruction fund is going to be appropriated. And who's going to be a part of the conversation about its allocation, what projects get priority, and how the government is going to create some sort of context to relieve that economic pressure that people are dealing with every day.

and every day is becoming harder and harder for people to survive under these hardship, economic hardship. And of course, I think that Iranians are not in one voice. There are so many different voices. As Spencer mentioned, there are also voices that are skeptical of the fact that the Palestinian question is absent in the memorandum. and also people who are thinking that how can we trust Americans this time? Because this happened, this is a pattern that they agree on some frame of work. They agree on resolving their differences. And in the middle of that, suddenly the US and Israelis change the game and attack Iranians.

And I've heard many sort of voices inside the country that whether the government and the state should trust this time that Americans are sincere about turning a page and rethinking the relations with the Iranian government. 30 seconds, Spencer Ackerman. We shouldn't think of this as the end of anything. We shouldn't even necessarily think of it as the beginning of the end. We have as an inauguration of a new period in U.S. Iran and indeed global relations. Because Iran, now that it knows that it can leverage the closure or the throttling of the Strait of

Moose, will never give that up now that they know that the Americans can't transform that equation militarily. We should probably get used to a prolonged period of bombing, retrenchment, closure, and so forth. And that's probably going to look like the scope of the new reality going forward, whatever happens with these negotiations. Well, I want to thank you both for joining us, Spencer Ackerman, Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter, author of the Forever Wars newsletter, his latest piece, Iran's forever leverage. And thank you so much to Beruiz, Gamare Tabrizzi, fellow at the Center for Place Culture and Politics at the CUNY Graduate Center, imprisoned in Iran in the 80s at the notorious of in prison on death row there. His latest book just out, The Long War in Iran, new events,

old questions. He was speaking to us from Camden, Maine. Coming up, British Prime Minister Kier Sturmer has resigned. We'll talk to his former mentor, the renowned, rights attorney, Jeffrey Robertson, about this latest news and the crackdown in the UK on Palestine's solidarity activists labeled terrorists. Stay with us. What emerges through the mud in a garden that you sowed with blood. Because now our streets along the flight, it's wartime. We lost a chance to stop the flow. So many millions of lives ago.

And now we'll reap what we don't know. Board time by Farrell Foster performing at the Brooklyn Folk Festival. This is Democracy Now, DemocracyNow.org. I'm Amy Goodman. We go now to Britain, where Keir Starmers announced his resignation as Prime Minister and leader of the Labor Party following growing pressure from within the Labor Party to step down. Starrmer spoke earlier today. The chance to change the lives of millions of people for the better.

That's what I came into politics for. Six years ago, I inherited a Labor Party that was politically, financially, and morally bankrupt. I was told time and time again that, My party was finished. That we were consigned to history. That a majority at the general election, let alone a landslide majority, was impossible. But we proved those people wrong because we changed our party, ripping out the poison of anti-Semitism, restoring trust on the economy, defence and national security.

And becoming a party that wants a party that wants a party. again, stood proudly with, not against our national flag. Starmer's election as Prime Minister in 2024 ended more than a decade of conservative rule in the UK, but during his time in office, he's faced mounting opposition over his embrace of austerity measures and a cost of living crisis in Britain, as well as his crackdown on Palestinian solidarity protesters. Starmor's announcement paves the way for Britain to have its seventh leader in 10 years. Former Manchester mayor, newly elected Labor MP, Andy Burnham, is widely expected to become

the next prime minister. However, some leaders of the British left have worn Burnham may do little to shift from Stormers' policies. British MP Jeremy Corbyn, who led the Labor Party from 2015 to 2020, said Burnham's, quote, basic economic strategy and views seem to me to be accepting too much of the austerity we've had imposed on us, unquote. And added in an interview with Sky News that Burnham, quote, doesn't appear to be doing anything different internationally, unquote, referring to Britain's supply of weapons to Israel for its war on Gaza and beyond. We're joined now in Paris, France, by Jeffrey Robertson, renowned human rights lawyer founding head of Dowdy Street Chambers, Europe's largest human rights law practice. He's been widely described as a mentor to Starrmer who worked at the

law firm for nearly two decades. Jeffrey Robertson is also a former UN judge who ran the UN war crimes court in Sierra Leone. His most recent book is titled World of War Crimes, Eilis in Gaza and Beyond. Jeffrey Robertson, before we ask you about Britain's crackdown on Palestine's solidarity activists, the so-called Elbit Four, we want to get your response to today's announcement by the Prime Minister that he is stepping down? Well, there is a connection, you know. I advised him over the weekend that if he had the numbers, if he didn't have the numbers, he should do a deal with Burnham,

who is the obvious favorite to succeed him, because he's a bit more charismatic than Keir. who's a bit dull of a public taste. But if he didn't have the numbers, he shouldn't resign, but rather do a deal with Burnham that he became his foreign minister. Because Kier Starrmar, in my view,

has been absolutely brilliant as Prime Minister dealing with foreign affairs. Most importantly, of course, dealing with Donald Trump. And he has not conceded to Trump. He has not joined in the illegality of the invasion of Iran, as Trump was insisting. He's kept the distance and kept Britain out of the war crimes

that Trump has tried to pull it into. So for that reason, I hope he stays on in that capacity. But we don't know. If he had the numbers, I advised him to make a speech accepting that he made several mistakes,

which he has. He has, for example, in relation to the left, and the left wing of the Labour Party, if you like, the beating heart of the party, they don't know,

don't accept the need ever for economic austerity, but they have got the heart and soul of what is traditionally the Labour Party, and they were upset by his support for Israel, in particular, they were upset by his prohibition on any protest from Palestine action, a group that his protests about Israeli attacks on Palestine. And he had been banned and had over 3,000 people were now a waiting trial for holding up panels, saying that they support Palestine action. So that

kind of thing lost in popularity in the Labour Party. It was his attack on the left his throwing out of the Labour Party, Jeremy Cormond, Corbyn, who led it for several years

and here was one of its ministers, that just wasn't seen as just. So if he knew a little more to the left and he may well have kept the party on side but I think he really lost support in the party because he was perceived as too right wing for it and because he was too boring he lacked charisma everyone went around saying

from a party whose most uncharismatic leader was Clement Attlee just after the war had no charisma whatsoever but the great things that Britain now both are like the National

Health Service and so forth so it's sad that charisma is now a quantity for leading the Labour Party but there it is You've been fierce in criticizing governments like the U.S. and Britain as well for its approach to Israel and Palestine. And you specifically talk about what's happened to Palestine action. Last week, four Palestine action activists in Britain were sentenced as terrorists over their involvement in a 2024 protest and raid on a factory operated by,

one of Israel's largest arms manufacturers, Elbeet Systems. In May, the four activists known as the Elbit Four, were found guilty of criminal damage for destroying property at the Elbit facility. But onbeknownst to lawyers or the jury, the judge in the case added a terrorism component to the case months earlier. It's the first time a judge has issued terrorism sentencing enhancements on people who are not actually charge with or convicted of terrorism. Their prison sentences range from four to over seven years.

They must also legally register to a law enforcement terrorist surveillance system for 15 years following their release from prison. Palestine Action co-founder Huda Amory told Navarra media in response this is the first case and therefore the test case for trying to convict activists as terrorists, terrorists using a manipulated court process. So Jeffrey Robertson, you just wrote a piece for the new magazine, The Key, headlined punishing protest as terrorism. Can you explain the significance of what happened in this case and put it in the context of your new book, World of War Crimes, Ilus and Gaza and beyond? Well, it goes like this.

For several centuries, Britain's democracy has been affected, influenced, improved by protests, protests for the vote. The vote for women came about because of quite violent protests. And the vote generally, I mean, we go back and look at the way protest movements, movements of one sort or another, particularly in America, were actually led by people who were devoted Democrats. And now we have a situation where, thanks to a law passed by the conservative government, not by Labor, recently, a few years ago, that sudden, cases where you have quite ordinary crimes that protesters often commit, like criminal damage,

usually dealt with by a fine or an 18-month sentence if their damage was bad, is now, can be coupled by the judge, not the jury, but the judge can if he decides in his mind that they're terrorists, he can make them go to prison for a lot longer, be labeled as terrorists, be discriminated against in prison. All sorts of bad things can happen to these young, usually, and sincere but maybe headstrong protesters because although they're all they want to do

is to change the attitude of the British government which was very slow in complaining about the massive killings in Gaza that's all they want to do and yet that is a ground

this judge the other day dealing with four protesters who smashed up a little bit of Elbert, the chrome manufacturers, this judge secretly decided that they were terrorists, and so could do all those harsh things to them. And that, I think, is one matter which needs to be sorted, because we have Mr. Vance coming over and telling us how we get things wrong. And this would be a good example of, because it's quite contrary to our idea of justice

that anyone should be sent to prison for long periods and have always discrimination against them. when I haven't been convicted by a jury. I wanted to end by just naming. I just wanted to name the Elbit Four, as they are known, and who they are. Leona Camio, 30 years old and nursery school teacher. Samuel Corner, 23 years old and Fatima Rajwani. Both 21-year-old students. And Charlotte Head, 30 years old, a domestic abuse caseworker.

Jeffrey Robertson, I want to thank you very much for being with us, renowned human rights lawyer, founding head of the law firm, Doughty Street Chambers, most recent piece for the new magazine, the key we will link to called Punishing Protest as Terrorism. His most recent book, World of War Crimes, I Listen, Gaza, and Beyond. Coming up, we go to Colombia, where a narrow victory in Sunday's runoff presidential election, the right-wing millionaire, Trump-back candidate Abelardo de la Aspreya has won. Stay with us. Someone's hiding in the bushes with a telephone lens. While their editor assures them, the means justifies the end. Because we only hunt celebrities, it's all a bit of fun.

but scouses never buy the sun while the parents of the missing girl cling desperately to hope and the copper takes in proper payments in a thick brown envelope and no one in the newsroom asks where's this headline from Never Buy the Sun by Billy Brad. This is Democracy Now, Democracy Now, Democracy. Now.org. I'm Amy Goodman. We end today's show in Colombia where the right-wing Trump-back candidate, Abelardo de la Aspreya, has clinched a narrow victory in Sunday's runoff presidential election

defeating the leftist Senator Ivan Cepeda. An initial ballot count shows de la Espreya received about 49.7 percent of the vote while Cepeda, who's an ally of current Colombian, President Gustavo Petro, trailed by only some quarter of a million votes at 48.7%. The results must still be verified with the final review of the ballots. Thousands of people reportedly took to the streets of Bogota and Kali Sunday night, some denouncing U.S. meddling in the election. Sepeda spoke last night, called on Colombia election officials to scrutinize the initial results during the ballot verification process. He had this message for his supporters. We extend our most sincere, profound, and heartfelt appreciation and gratitude to the 12.7 million

Colombians whose support at the polls reinforces our conviction that profound democratic social change in Colombian society is entirely possible. Yvonne Sopeda is a prominent human rights defender who'd vowed to continue Petro's progressive agenda and to negotiate peace with Colombia's armed groups. His father was assassinated by right-wing U.S.-backed paramilitary groups in 1994. In contrast, de la Esprejeia is a millionaire businessman and lawyer who ran a fear-mongering tough-fund crime campaigns promised to build mega-prisons inspire Bel Salvador's authoritarian president, Naiboukele, to bomb narco-terrorist camps, quote, unquote, and to abandon Petro's peace efforts.

De La Espraya's reported victory is also a win for U.S. President Trump and his administration, as his administration intervenes across Latin America, waging and intensifying so-called war on drugs in which even Colombia's current President Petro has been a target of after he faced false accusations and threats from Trump. Following news of Della Espreya's victory, Trump wrote on social media, he won big, unquote.

Despite threatening to, quote, disembowel the left throughout his campaign, De La Espreya shifted his tone last night while speaking in Colombia. I will govern for all Colombians, for those who voted for me and for those who chose another candidate. There will be no winners or losers. There will be no reprisals, no persecution, because in a democracy, there are no irreconcilable

enemies. There are compatriots who think differently. Dilla Aspreya refers to himself as the tiger. He's a lawyer and political newcomer. For more, we go to Cali, Colombia, where we're joined by Manuel Rosenthal, long-time Colombian physician and activist. He's been exiled several times for his political activities. Dr. Rosenthal is part of the group Pueblos and Camino, or people on the path. Manuel, protests have taken place in Cali.

Please describe what's happening on the ground and how Colombians are responding to the election news. Well, thank you, Amy. Now, the situation is tense, but it's also calm. And it's calm because of the speech part of which you presented of Ivan Cepeda last night, calling for calm and for... So there were some peaceful mobilizations yesterday, but the situation is tense, has been very tense, but it's calm now, and we have to see what happens.

Of course, most of us, me included, feel a tremendous hangover after this result. But let me tell you after your introduction what this election is about and was about, and it's beyond Colombia. It's from Colombia. Two projects that are confronting themselves through the electoral process from Colombia, but not only in Colombia. One represented by Ivan Cepeda, social reforms, human rights, progressive government justice and the fight against corruption and crime and for peace. The most decent candidate you can find with the transparent trajectory. On the other hand, Belespreya clearly represents a criminal approach to politics,

lying, propaganda, coordination and collusion with criminal narcotrafficking, restriction of rights and money laundering, and how these two projects confront each other electorally and how the criminal project is winning. The context of this, of course, is what you mentioned, a link between local to regional to national mafias where drug trafficking, legal and illegal control of territories and resources are producing wealth,

and transferring it to the north. That in coordination with the Monroe Doctrine, the Shield of the Americas and the US project linked to drug trafficking with the pretext of attacking it while bombing boats in the Caribbean and so on. So this project is now labeled as an outsider project. It's a mafia-type criminal project from the ground up, taking over a new state,

and then defeating a progressive institutional, state-based democratic process. Manuel, we just have less than a minute. What does this mean for the peace process? It's a horrendous perspective. We expect to have military operations and a U.S. intervention within the country. We expect to have human rights abuses. We expect to have militarization. and it's all for the extraction of resources and the link of drug trafficking to the U.S. government, U.S. interests, and global mafia.

Manuel Rosenthal, we're going to continue the discussion and post online at DemocracyNow.org and also have a conversation in Spanish and we'll post it online. Manuel Rosenthal's longtime Colombian physician and activist exiled several times part of Pueblo San Camino, or people on the path. That does it for our show. Tomorrow, June 23rd at 7.30, the film about Democracy Now, still the story, please. We'll be playing at the IFC here in New York City. It will be, there will be a Q&A after. I'll be with the directors, Carl Deal and Tia Lesson.

The moderator will be Elliott Page. You can check our website at DemocracyNow.org. That does it for our show. I'm Amy Goodman for another edition of Democracy Now.