Front Burner - UN Palestinian rapporteur Francesca Albanese

Episode Date: November 19, 2024

Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories, recently returned from a week-long trip to Canada. She was given standing ovations at sold-out speaking events, yet also faced backlash from groups who called for the Canadian government to condemn her, and advocated for the UN to remove her from her position.Today, a wide-ranging conversation with Francesca Albanese.For transcripts of Front Burner, please visit: https://www.cbc.ca/radio/frontburner/transcripts

In the Dragon's Den, a simple pitch can lead to a life-changing connection. Watch new episodes of Dragon's Den free on CBC Gem. Brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization, empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. This is a CBC Podcast. Hey everybody, Jamie here. On the show today we have a wide-ranging interview with Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories. We spoke late last week on the heels of her week-long speaking tour in

Canada. The special rapporteur is an independent expert appointed by the UN Human Rights Council. They're not a UN employee and they're not paid by the UN. Ms. Albanese came to the role as an international human rights lawyer, an author, an affiliate scholar at Georgetown University, and a senior advisor at the Arab Renaissance for Democracy and Development think tank. She's produced two major reports for the UN this year, making the case that Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinian people. We're going to talk about the case that she's making in those reports, as well as Israel's siege of northern Gaza and what the incoming Trump administration could mean for the war. We'll also talk about her recent visit to Canada, which underlined what a polarizing figure Ms. Albanese has become. She has many ardent supporters, people who packed venues

in Montreal, Ottawa, and Toronto to hear her speak. And she also has many detractors. Some called for her Canadian speaking engagements to be cancelled and for the Canadian government to condemn her. And have advocated for the UN to remove her from her position. Canada's special envoy for combating anti-Semitism has accused her of Holocaust distortion. To put it plainly, Ms. Albanese has become a lightning rod. Both here and in other countries. Alright, lots to get into. Here's my interview with Francesca Albanese has become a lightning rod, both here and in other countries. All right, lots to get into. Here's my interview with Francesca Albanese. Francesca Albanese, thank you so much for coming on to the show today. We really appreciate you taking the time. Thank you for having me.

you so much for coming on to the show today. We really appreciate you taking the time. Thank you for having me. So at the start of October, Israeli forces began a siege in northern Gaza, which they said was to fight Hamas militants who had regrouped there. Can you talk a bit about the picture that you and your colleagues have been able to get from witnesses, from reporting, from the footage that has emerged about what's actually been happening to civilians in northern Gaza over the past month. The cries for help from northern Gaza are desperate. And there are human rights monitors there. Of course, I prefer not to name any organizations because it's very dangerous

and anyone is a target right now. We are talking of a population that has been the object and the target of continuous bombardment for 13 months. A siege on top of a siege without food, without water, if not in very scarce and insufficient quantities, which is what has provoked famine. For Palestinians here, it is either surrender the north and leave, or stay in your homes and starve. There have been deaths of starvation, and still we don't know how many have perished because of lack of medical facilities. Of course, the medical staff numbers are very low and the volume of injuries is not at all

proportional to the space available. Therefore, we had to implement the difficult triage system for cases. We had to leave some to die and some to live. 400,000 Palestinians who were not forcibly evacuated in October last year have endured the most serious grave circumstances. And now many of them have been rounded up, stripped naked, kidnapped by the army, or killed on the spot. The reports are really, really shocking. There are these verified videos,

some of them shared online by the IDF or by Israeli soldiers, that show hundreds of people in Jabalia in the north marching in these long lines between ruins, really, of buildings. They were reportedly queuing up to get through an Israeli checkpoint as they were displaced south.

Some videos and photos also show Israeli military rounding people up with tanks, and some appear to show men being separated from the women and children. And just how does that footage line up with the accounts that you and your colleagues have heard from witnesses in northern Gaza right now? So let's forget the context for a second and let me tell you, had it happened in any other context, would qualify this as unlawful, inhumane treatment of people who objectively look like civilians. There are even kids, an elderly person, people with disability that appeared in the pictures you mentioned. There were people who were identified as doctors and journalists. So

there has been a rounding up of anyone really, no one looked like a combatant. The question is the context. The context is one in which Israel has perpetrated crimes after crimes, because what I said, the wanton destruction of civilian infrastructure, which is massive and is visible in the pictures that have been shared by the army itself. Israel is pounding northern Gaza. Its airstrikes described by the UN as relentless. What the world calls a massacre is a recurring daily reality for Palestinians. They bombed us with drones. They threw us out of our homes in the camp.

May God sustain us and give us vengeance. Israeli forces systematically empty homes, hospitals, schools and shelters before setting them on fire. Extrajudicial killings, fatalities attributed to excessive use of weaponry, starvation, lack of civilian infrastructures, in a situation where conditions of life leading to destruction of the group have been created. Often, I mean, losing entire families and members of their families and communities and collecting the bodies of the who remained often in plastic bags. It's ferocious.

So we have been documenting, I mean, 30 UN experts. I've led investigations that have concluded that reasonable grounds existed to say that Israel was committing genocide already in March. And in October this year, I provided the context why Israel is doing so. It's to take the land of the Palestinians by forcibly displacing and annihilating the rest of the population, as it has been done, at slow pace for decades. So this is violence at fast pace to push forward the colonial erasure of the Palestinians. And it is a genocide.

There is an increasing consensus today, another UN report by the Special Committee on Israeli Practices, which has normally been quite conservative, finally uttered the word genocide. So, and there was a report of Human Rights Watch talking of not just war crimes, but crimes against humanity. Of course, there are war crimes and crimes against humanity. But what I'm saying is that the other UN experts are saying and Israeli genocide scholars are saying one needs to link the dots. All these crimes are supported by one and one intent only, which is a destructive one. I want to come back to your belief that Israel is committing a genocide here. And I will just note for our listeners that, of course, Israel denies that it is committing war crimes. It says that it is doing everything in its power to mitigate and minimize civilian harm. and its power to mitigate and minimize civilian harm. But let me just ask you about an editorial that the Israeli newspaper Haaretz wrote on Sunday. They argued that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is responsible for ethnic cleansing in northern Gaza. One of the things they cited were comments by an IDF brigadier general who reportedly said that, quote,

there is no intention of allowing the residents of the northern Gaza Strip to return to their homes. I'll just note that an IDF spokesperson later said that his words were taken out of context. But there was also an uproar in early September when several Israeli politicians, including Finance Minister Basil L. Smotrich, who is a highly influential member in Netanyahu's coalition government, called for resettling parts of northern Gaza. Smotrich called for, quote, clearing a specific area of northern Gaza and wrote, this is a territory we will never return to the Gazans. I know that ethnic cleansing doesn't have a specific definition under international law, but what do you make of that allegation? I agree that the ultimate goal is ethnic cleansing. emptying a land or a given nationality in order to establish homogeneous nationality or homogeneous ethnicity. There have been stages through which we got to here. And ethnic cleansing has been a constant of Israel's presence in the land

since the very beginning. In 1947-49, during the strife and then conflict that led to the establishment of the State of Israel, 750,000 Palestinians, Arabs of Palestine back then, were expelled from what is today Israel. And their 500 villages were destroyed. The remaining homes were taken and given to Jewish Israelis. And in 1967, the same happened. There was the occupation by Israel of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, and mass ethnic cleansing happened. 350,000 Palestinians were displayed from this land and the land taken by the Israeli army.

And progressively, it has been given to settlers. So this is why, you know, on the 14th of October, after Israel issued the mass expulsion order from northern Gaza, which forced 1.1 million out under the threat of considering anyone who would stay behind a terrorist or affiliated, associate to terrorism. I sounded the alarm because my scholarship is about Palestinian forced displacement. And I said, under the fog of war, this is what Israel does. It forces Palestinians out of their homes, out of their land, it destroys, it creates conditions that are unlivable. And it makes it impossible for the Palestinians to return.

Just before we move on, I just want to say the obvious for people listening. You know, much of what you said there about the history of the conflict, while there are many people who will agree with you, it is also incredibly contentious. And I just want to know, it's actually not what I want to get into with you today, because I want to talk about what's happening right now. For the benefit of the audience, I want to understand what is contentious. Yeah, well, I mean, obviously, the state of Israel has argued for decades that it did not forcibly displace all of these Palestinians from their homes and that the land is rightfully theirs, that they have a claim to the land. But this has been contested by Israeli historians for the past 20 years, the historians

who have had access to the Israeli archives. So excuse me, you might not want to talk about it, and I'm totally fine with it. But you cannot say that this is contentious. It's contested by Israel, but it's established by historical sources. I'm going to go. Capital Organization, empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. Hi, it's Ramit Sethi here. You may have seen my money show on Netflix. I've been talking about money for 20 years. I've talked to millions of people and I have some startling numbers to share with you. Did you know that of the people I speak to, 50% of them do not know their own household income? That's not a typo. 50%. That's because money is confusing. In my new book and podcast, Money for Couples, I help you and your partner create a financial vision together. To listen to this podcast, just search for Money for Couples.

Just for our listeners, because I do want to keep this conversation very much, Just for our listeners, because I do want to keep this conversation very much, I understand that it is informed by the past, but I do want to keep it very centered on what is happening right now. Can you explain the difference between ethnic cleansing, is not recognized as a crime per se, but it has been recognized internationally, referred to by international jurisprudence and including by the UN as a conduct, as a policy that might include other crimes, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and acts of genocide. While genocide is one of the following acts, acts of killing, infliction of severe bodily and mental harm, creation of conditions of life calculated to bring about the destruction of the group, or acts that wouldn't involve killing per se, like the transfer of children and the prevention of birth. I mean, other genocides, like in Canada itself, it has been perpetrated by destroying the indigenous nations through the separation of children.

Same thing in Australia. So genocide is a composite act. What is characteristic of genocide is the intent. So not only the crimes, but the fact that these crimes are committed with the intent to destroy a people in whole or in part. And let me be clear, the motives might be many. The motives might be because the leaders want to stay in power, because they want to defeat an insurgent group. But the intent is not the motive and shouldn't be confused with a motive. The intent is when there is the determination to engage in a destructive endeavor and a

destructive conduct. This is why I insist in my last report to look at the totality of conduct and crimes against the totality of the people, the Palestinians as a whole, the Palestinian as a group, because this is what genocide is about, is the intent to destroy a group in whole or in part. As such, in the totality of the land under Israel's control. And I just wonder if you could tell me a little bit more about why you believe that Israel is meeting that very high bar of genocide right now. If you could just elaborate a little bit more for me about what is in your report, why that why you believe that Israel is meeting that very high bar of genocide right now. If you could just elaborate a little bit more for me about what is in your report,

why that intent is there, that motivation is there, in your opinion. Absolutely. It's not just a belief. It's a legal assessment out of 12 months of investigation, six months first and 12 months now, where I've analysed what international jurisprudence in other cases, like in Rwanda or in former Yugoslavia, has described like the nature and scale of the conduct so as to believe that there is an intent that can be inferred as the only reasonable one that leads to a given reality on the ground and results. In order to have genocide, one looks at the statements, but the genocidal statement per se, for example, let's kill the other group in its entirety. This is genocidal incitement and reveals

genocidal intent, of course, but it's not genocide per se. Acts of genocide can be then derived or inferred from what I was saying and what I did in March, looking at the weaponry used, how the military operation has unfolded, the kind of measures that have been taken to avoid acts of genocide. But again, while in March, I was more cautious and I said there are reasonable grounds to believe that acts of genocide have been committed after one year. I think that there is no doubt. There is a simple fact that Gaza is destroyed. Gaza doesn't exist anymore.

destroyed. Gaza doesn't exist anymore. And as you and I speak, acts of brutal and sadistic acts continues against civilians. I mean, there are doctors who have been in Gaza and report to have received children shot in the head and in the torso at least two or three per day. We are talking of an army which has exploded, weaponry that is not even admitted in an area which is so densely populated. So clearly, destruction was an intended outcome of this operation. And otherwise, how would we explain the starvation imposed on Gaza? How would they explain the destruction of all hospitals, which apart from the 45,000 people killed and 17,000 children killed, but how do we explain the fact that people were left without medical care or without basic hygiene with the spread of disease across the Gaza

Strip. And also, I would like to point to the fact that while acts of genocide are identified, and again, this is not just me, 30 UN experts who say the same, another UN committee saying the same, Israeli historians of genocide saying the same for months now, but also similar conducts have been manifested and have been reported in the West Bank, where 9,000 people, 9,000 Palestinians, including children, over 600 children, were arrested and detained in squalid conditions, often tortured, including raped. There is evidence that has been produced by Israeli and Palestinian lawyers and

human rights organizations, Adala and most recently, B'Tselem, which has said that Israel maintains a network of torture centers across the occupied territory and Israeli territory itself. So we need to see what Israel is doing against the Palestinian people as all. And as you rightly said, Smotrich, among others, has been invoking and evoking the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians. So as in other contexts, genocide is being a tool in the hand of the power to achieve control over the land. And as the Canadian people, especially the indigenous people, know very well, for the Palestinians, like for any indigenous people,

the land is not just where they live, it's who they are. So breaking the connection, severing the connection between the people and the land, or destroying the livelihood, the orchards, the traditions. This is, of course, considered in existing jurisprudence, additional elements that lead to conclude that genocide is ongoing. Okay. And I do want to move on because I want to talk about the United States with you. But first, I will just say before we do, I take your point, there are many scholars of genocide and international law who also believe that Israel is committing genocide. But there are also scholars that do disagree with you. And I just want to, for our listeners, just read a quote from UCLA poli-sci professor Dov Waxman from a few weeks ago. from a few weeks ago, he said that he believes that Israel's actions were too often brutal,

inhumane, and indiscriminate, but he did not believe there was clear evidence of intent to destroy the group in whole or in part, which is the key thing to prove in a genocide case. No, even any genocide, particularly the genocides that the genocide that has taken place in Europe, would have not happened if it was not for the indifference and incapacity to see the genocidal intent and the intent to destroy a people. The Palestinians have been so dehumanized. Look, I have no reason to insist on this point, other than I want to see justice and accountability. reason to insist on this point other than that I want to see justice and accountability. With all due respect for Professor Doxman, even the International Court of Justice, which is the supreme judicial organ of the United Nations, has concluded that there was plausibility of genocide without even looking at the merit, just based on the evidence that was produced by South Africa, like nearly one year ago. And again, we cannot now, I think that in the interest of time, it's not about me telling you what I think it is,

because I have investigated what has happened. And I know the history of that land. Genocide is a process, it's not an act. So I do respect all opinions, but not from people who have not been investigating this and expressed their thoughts freely without considering the implications for the people, and the Israelis in this story. I want to talk about the U.S. I think this is really an important topic that we tackle right now. So Donald Trump has named Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas, as his ambassador to Israel. Huckabee is an evangelical Christian and a longtime defender of Israel.

He's previously said that there is no such thing as a Palestinian. Basically, there really is no such thing as, and I have to be careful in saying this, because people really get it. There's really no such thing as a Palestinian. Before 1948, there was all Arabs. I have to be careful in saying this because people really get upset. There's really no such thing as a Palestinian. There's not. Before 1948, there was all Arabs. There was Arabs and Persians.

There's such complexity in that. There's really no such thing. And also, quote, There is no such thing as a West Bank. It's Judea and Samaria. There's no such thing as a settlement. They're communities, they're neighborhoods, they're cities. There's no such thing as an occupation. Trump also tapped Florida Senator Marco Rubio as his secretary of state. Rubio has

emphatically said he's against a ceasefire in Gaza. Senator Rubio, will you call for a ceasefire in Gaza? No, I will not. On the contrary. Senator Rubio, please. Are you filming it? I want you guys to get this. I want them to destroy every element of Hamas they can get their hands on. These people are vicious animals who did horrifying crimes. And I hope you guys post that.

And what about the civilians that are being killed every day? Hamas should stop hiding behind civilians. Obviously, this military campaign over the past year has been prosecuted under a Democratic administration. But how do you imagine it might look under Trump? Do you imagine, as a Canadian, saying something like the First Nations do not exist or the Métis and the Inuits do not exist? It's a denial of the existence of a people.

Do you imagine saying the Jewish people do not exist? It's very serious. And again, it's a fact that Palestine existed and has been dismembered. This is history. What can I say that the new government constellation looks ready to intensify the support to Israel as it erases Palestine. Yeah, it will probably continue. But again, the United States is one state among 193 members of the United Nations. And I do hope that states like Canada, like my own, like the European Union, together with the Global South and other former settler colonial states,

with the Global South and other former settler colonial states will react to this and be able to reckon with the past by putting an end to this brutality. I want to address your visit to Canada now. Last week, you were here to do a speaking tour in a few cities. You were also supposed to meet with Canadian officials, which didn't happen. And we'll get more into that later. But I first just wanted to talk about what brought you to Canada in the first place. What was the message that you wanted to convey to the Canadian government and to the Canadian public? Yeah, no, I came invited initially by Independent Jewish Voices and other universities, and then a broader coalition of organizations, scholars, students got together because I couldn't come last year and worked for many months to make my visit possible. As I do every time I travel to a country, I inform the authorities and I express an interest and of course my availability to meet. So before I tell you about the message, which is about the facts on the ground that I've investigated and the legal

conclusions that I have produced. And I wanted to engage with the Canadian government on its own obligation in the face of a state which is plausibly committing genocide. And the ICJ has issued three sets of provisional measures, but also reminding member states of their obligation not to transfer weapons directly or indirectly to a state that is possibly committing genocide. So it was this that I wanted to engage the Canadian authorities with. And frankly, there was an immediate response, not by the Minister of Foreign Affairs herself, but by the ministry. And it was supposed to meet with state officials. We immediately replied with an invitation for a meeting that was withdrawn three weeks later, when the pro-Israel groups that are very active in Canada mounted a smear campaign against me.

And this probably created the circumstances for the Canadian government to withdraw its invitation, which was also followed by the withdrawal of the invitation of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the Parliament. Although I have met with a number of members of the committee and other members of Parliament who are very forthcoming and supportive. and other members of Parliament were very forthcoming and supportive. We reached out to Global Affairs Canada and asked for comment on this. I'll just note that we haven't heard back from them at this time. But I do want to get into with you more of why there was such a pushback to you coming here. Of course, you have spoken to rapt audiences who gave you standing ovations in

Montreal and Ottawa. There are many people here that are very supportive of the work that you were doing. But as you mentioned, there were pro-Israel groups, including the Center for Israel and Jewish Affairs that did call on the Canadian government to not meet with you and to waive diplomatic immunity for your visit. They're one of a number of Jewish groups and individuals, both in Canada, yeah, who have criticized comments and posts of yours, which they say are using anti-Semitic tropes. And I know that you have said before that you are really tired of talking about these accusations, but I do think it's important to engage in good faith with some of it. And

if you don't mind, I'm just going to talk for a little bit here just to give people some content text. So one is some comparisons you've drawn between Israel's conduct during said and then please respond. It's something that many Jewish groups, although not all, regard as anti-Semitic. And then to give an example, there was a post that you made last month that drew a comparison between Netanyahu's government and the Third Reich, and I'll read part of it. Our collective obliviousness to what led 100 years ago to the Third Reich's expansionism and the genocide of people not in conformity with the, quote, pure race is asinine. And it is leading to the commission of yet another genocide, yet another regional war, and potentially yet another global one. And just first, can I get you to explain what you meant in that post when it comes to what led to the Holocaust? What do you think we're oblivious to? Yes, yes. This is part of our history as Europeans, and we know very well that when Germany rose to power, it was not opposed as such. Germany had a huge hostility,

a huge anti-Semitism inside the country propelled by the Third Reich, but didn't want to kill all the Jews in the beginning. The quote-unquote final solution, that barbarity, happened during the expansion of the Third Reich to other parts of Europe, in particular where there were millions of Jews living. When it was impossible to expel them, the barbarous idea of the concentration camp was conceived. But the point was, there was an expansionist idea behind it and the elimination of anyone, particularly the Jewish people, but also the Roman Sinti and others, who were considered savages. This is the thing.

Now, the comment was made after Israel invaded Lebanon with many in Israel, particularly from the huge settler movement that is completely out of control in Israel, talking of occupying parts of Lebanon because Lebanon was part of the biblical land. And I said, you see the regional expansion, it's happening. And the same script that has been used in Gaza, everyone is killable, everything is destroyable, is being used here. So the comparison, I'm not using, I've never used comparison or Nazi quote unquote terminology because it's not about that. No genocide looks like the other, but there are certain common elements like the dehumanization of the other and always an idea of superiority over the other groups, which is frankly what

Israel proclaims in the region, not just in Palestine. And this is why, again, we can debate about that. But how can we say that these, I mean, the defamation against me has been one of the extreme, both in the US and Canada. But what I find interesting is the pushback from Jewish scholars, Jewish organizations, and how much Jewish people themselves have come forward to defend me and saying, I mean, she's speaking truth to power. And it continues to happen wherever I go, being it in New York, in Canada, or in the United Kingdom. Of course, of course, the pro-Israel groups will defend Israel. I understand what they're doing,

but I also want the attention not to be missed. It is to remain on Gaza and what we are trying to stop in Gaza, the killing of children and adults every day in the tens and in the hundreds. As you've just mentioned, there is debate within the Jewish community about whether all comparisons between the Holocaust and Israel's contemporary policies are anti-Semitic. Of course, I think you said earlier that you were invited here by independent Jewish voices to Canada as well.

Sorry, I made that point. But just the World Jewish Congress, their point is that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a territorial and political one, whereas the Holocaust was the attempt to systematically annihilate European Jewry. And I don't want to make you repeat yourself too much, but I just want to give you an opportunity to respond to that. Our special envoy combating anti-Semitism, Deborah Lyons, has accused you of Holocaust distortion. I've never denied what you said, that the Holocaust resulted in the annihilation, the genocide of European Jews. And I say the Holocaust was the last part of it, but for centuries, Jews had been

discriminated and Jewish people had been deprived, stripped of their civil and political rights. They had been kicked out of their professions, including in my country. My country in the late 30s passed the racial laws which forced Jewish people, our fellow Jewish citizens, into segregation and to full discrimination. This is why I insist we need to see the dehumanization of the other as leading to the normalization

of crimes against the dehumanized groups. And I understand the sensitivities. Yes, it's true that the United Nations in the post-Holocaust, instead of protecting the Jews wherever they are, because after the Holocaust, the Jewish people continue to endure discrimination and be pushed out. Yes, they went to Palestine. Palestine was the land that had already been identified among, together with Uganda or Argentina, as the land where the Jews could live as a state. But the other part of the story is that Palestine was inhabited. So yes, the state of Israel was created as a safe home for the Jews. It happened at the expense of

the non-Jewish people in the land, which were the majority. I often point to a brilliant piece of literature that has been produced in recent years, primarily by professors Amos Goldberg and Bashir Bashir, that discuss the Holocaust and the Nakba as two tragedies carrying an immense trauma, but they are at the crossroad. And that interjection cannot be hidden. It needs to be understood if we want to move forward. Let me bring up another example with you.

It was when French President Emmanuel Macron called the October 7th attacks the biggest anti-Semitic massacre of our century. And you responded on X. No, Mr. Macron, the victims of 7-10 of October 7th were not killed because of their Judaism, but in reaction to Israel's oppression. Both French and German government accounts on X condemned that as anti-Semitic. And how would you respond to that? Yeah, yeah. Actually, what prompted the reaction was the debate that was ongoing among scholars. And I'm very, very close and very inspired by, I mean, we are talking of Holocaust scholars like late Professor Alon Confino or again, Amos Goldberg, Ras Sigal,

who were questioning and they were contesting the anti-Semitic label attached to October 7. Because there is no question that crimes were committed against Israeli civilians. This is documented. Brutal crimes. Yeah. Horrendous crimes. Horrendous crimes, vile crimes. Of course they were committed because heinous crime, awful crimes had been committed for 75 and 57 years against the Palestinians. Now, I'm not the one who pushes for comparison among crimes, but I say saying that October 7 was prompted by antisemitism is not only false because it dehistoricizes the question of Palestine and de-responsibilizes Israel.

How do we talk about the over 5,000 Palestinians who had been killed in Gaza during 17 years of blockade, including 1,200 children? Was it not brutal? Was it not heinous? Of course it was, because killing civilians is always heinous and brutal. So the point is, why do you have to use the anti-Semitic label which they historicize, which desir responsabilizes Israel and creates this sense of existential threat upon Israel that in fact doesn't exist.

The Palestinians, like many Israelis, want to live in peace in their land without being oppressed, without being under an apartheid regime where the Palestinians are under military law and enforced, including upon children. And this has happened for 57 years, and the Israelis in the occupied Palestinian territory, who shouldn't be there because their presence is unlawful. And this is not my opinion, my assessment, and my belief only. This is the conclusion of the International Court of Justice,

which has said that Israel has no right to be in Gaza, in the West Bank and in East Jerusalem, needs to withdraw unconditionally and totally as rapidly as possible. This is the reality. The reality in the face of this is that Israel for 57 years has maintained a military rule over the Palestinians, including forced mass displacement, mass arrest and detention, brutalization of the Palestinians, destruction of homes and livelihood. And do you expect that in the face of this, the Palestinians respond with a smile and a laughter? Of course, there was rage. Of course, there was hatred. But the cause is not hatred against the

Jews, it's hatred against the Israeli regime as an oppressor. And I agree that the civilians should never be touched. I agree with you. This is why I said those responsible for the crimes of October 7 should be arrested, investigated and prosecuted. What Israel didn't have and doesn't have is the right to wage a war against the people it maintains under occupation and again this is also the conclusion of the

international court of justice yeah and just of course israel denies that they have been occupying the the gaza strip come on come on but. No, no, no, no. Just a second. There is a court of justice advisory. I want to say, you know, that they will argue. They will say that they pulled out of the Gaza Strip in 2005.

Can we agree that the International Court of Justice has declared that the occupation is unlawful? Yes. Of course Israel says no. Because Israel wants to take the land of our people.

I will say for our listeners, our language is to call it an occupied territory. And Israel says no. Of course Israel says no. And here at the CBC, I will say for our listeners, our language is to call it an occupied territory. And Israel says no. Of course Israel says no. But what does it add to the discussion? This is my question. Everything I say, you say Israel says no. Of course Israel says no. Meanwhile, Israel has killed 45,000 people in Gaza, 70% of whom are women and children. Of course Israel says no, because Israel says that these are human animals that need to be killed and punished for the 7th of October. This is the reality.

Yeah, it's all been easy. Look, there's so much furor over that comment that you made on X, and I'll just note 10 years ago you made a comment about the Jewish lobby. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. You don't go there because it has been assessed. This is something that I wrote. First of all, it's not anti-Semitic because I was referring to AIPAC, which is called Jewish lobby by many. Two weeks ago, I was in the United Nations press conference and one American Jewish journalist asked me about the Jewish lobby. And I said, don't say that because it's anti-Semitic. So please, shall we go till my daycare to prove whether I'm anti-Semitic or not? I've answered your question.

Now let's go and talk about Gaza and the responsibility of member states in the face of the current disaster. I'm not going to ask, I'm sorry, I'm not going to answer any other question for things that I've said and done prior to my mandate, which is you can ask me anything I've said after the 1st of May 2022. 2022. Final question for you. It's been more than a year since October 7th. It does not seem like we are any closer to a ceasefire than we were even six months ago. And I think many would argue that we're further away. And what impact do you think the duration of this conflict has on the ability to get a peaceful outcome to stop the suffering of the Palestinian people? Oh, it's hard. It's hard to imagine peace. So there should be an end to the hostilities and an end to the atrocity. having all member states complying with their international law obligations, not to aid and assist a state which is committing crimes,

including by stopping the transfer of weapons, economic and financial transfers. And again, as I was in Canada, I mentioned the fact that Canada has particular responsibilities, particularly because some of its citizens not only live in the occupied territory, not only sell occupied land in the occupied territory from Canada territory, which is appalling, and also have citizens fighting in the Israeli army right now. So let's start by recognizing that the only way to stop this starts with making justice at home. All right. Ms. Albanese, I want to thank you very much for being here today and for engaging in this conversation with me in a really respectful way.

I really appreciate it very much. Thank you. It was an interesting one. And I thank you for having me. All right. That is all for today. I'm Jamie Poisson. Thanks so much for listening. We'll talk to you tomorrow. For more CBC Podcasts, go to cbc.ca slash podcasts.