The Munk Debates Podcast - Be it Resolved, Israel is committing genocide in Gaza

Episode Date: May 28, 2024

The world “genocide” was first coined in the 1940s to describe the Nazi slaughter of millions of Jews.  So it is in a sense surreal that the country created in the shadow of the Holocaust, Israel, is now accused of that same horrible crime.  Those who argue that Israel is guilty of genocide in Gaza point to three of the five acts listed under the UN Genocide Convention: killing members of a group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of that group; and deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.  Israel and its allies strongly reject the accusation. They say the civilian casualties in Gaza are not an intentional act of genocide, but are an inevitable, if tragic, byproduct of war. And they stress that the war is the result of the Oct. 7 massacre by Hamas, an organization that has often expressed a desire to exterminate Jews and expel them from the Holy Land – which itself would constitute genocide. Arguing in favour of the resolution is Penny Green. She is the Director of the International State Crime Initiative at Queen Mary University of London.  Arguing against the resolution is Arsen Ostrovsky. He’s a human rights attorney and CEO of The International Legal Forum. He is also a Senior Fellow at Misgav Institute. SOURCES: KLKNTV, PBS NewsHour, Sky News Australia To vote on who you think won this debate, go to our website www.munkdebates.com   The host of this Munk Debates podcast episode is Ricki Gurwitz Tweet your comments about this episode to @munkdebate or comment on our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/munkdebates/ To sign up for a weekly email reminder for this podcast, send an email to [e-mail].   To support civil and substantive debate on the big questions of the day, consider becoming a Munk Member at https://munkdebates.com/membership Members receive access to our 15+ year library of great debates in HD video, a free Munk Debates book, newsletter and ticketing privileges at our live events. This podcast is a project of the Munk Debates, a Canadian charitable organization dedicated to fostering civil and substantive public dialogue - https://munkdebates.com/ Senior Producer: Ricki Gurwitz Producer: Daniel Kitts Editor: Kieran LynchBecome a Munk Donor ($50 annually) to get 72-hour advanced access to the full length editions of Friday Focus and Munk Dialogues. Go to www.munkdebates.com to sign up. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

You don't help the poor by making everybody poorer. The media has a frame, and the frame is Israel is the oppressor, and the Palestinians are the oppressed. I shouldn't be forced to acknowledge my privilege unless I desire for that to be part of my interaction with somebody else. What I know to be true and what all of my fellow Gen Z know to be true is that this is the most talented generation yet. With respect to every indicia of disadvantage, there is still a racial hierarch. And though I am, of course, in Anglo. I'm certainly not a fucking Saxon. Welcome to the Monk Debates.

Every episode we provide you with a civil and substantive debate on the big issues of the day to arm you, the listener, with enough information to make up your own mind. I'm Rikigkeekirwitz sitting in for Rudyard Griffiths. Today's debate, be it resolved. Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. We are due with genocide.

The word genocide was first coined in the 1940s to describe the Nazi slaughter of millions of Jews in the Holocaust. So it is in a sense surreal that the country created in the shadow of the Holocaust, Israel, is now itself accused of that same horrible crime. Those who argue that Israel is guilty of genocide in Gaza point to three of the five acts listed under the UN Genocide Convention. that is killing members of a group, causing serious bodily and mental harm to members of that group, and deliberately inflicting on that group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part. Here's Kenneth Roth, the former executive director of Human Rights Watch. Israel has the right to defend itself, but the point is it has to defend itself lawfully within the Geneva Conventions,

targeting Hamas, not targeting the civilian population, certainly not committing genocide. Israel and its allies strongly reject the accusation. They say the civilian casualties in Gaza are not intentional, but are an inevitable, if tragic, byproduct of war. And they stress that the war is the result of the October 7 massacre by Hamas, an organization that has often expressed a desire to exterminate Jews and expel them from the Holy Land,

which itself would constitute genocide. Here's U.S. President Joe Biden. Contrary to allegations against Israel made by the International Court of Justice, what's happening is not genocide. We reject that. We will always stand with Israel. On this installment of the Monk Debates podcast,

we challenge the essence of these arguments by debating the motion, be it resolved, Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. Arguing in favor of the resolution, is Penny Green. She is the director of the International State Crime Initiative at Queen Mary University of London. Arguing against the resolution is Arson Ostrovsky. He's a human rights attorney and the CEO of the International Legal Forum. He's also a senior fellow at Meathgov Institute. Penny Arson, welcome to the Monk Debates. Thank you. Thank you.

So a really timely debate we're recording on this Wednesday, May 20th. Earlier today, the countries of Norway, Spain, and Ireland sought to recognize Palestinian statehood. And this comes just days after the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for three Israeli military and political leaders, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Joav Galant, and three Hamas leaders, including Yaya Sinwar. So the reason for this debate today is both timely and, I would say, crucial because a lot of the increasing isolation and delegitimization of Israel on the world stage is predicated on the notion that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, which brings us to our debate today. Penny, we're going to have you give your opening statement first. You're arguing in favor of our resolution.

Be it resolved. Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. take us away. Thank you. Well, in some senses, I think it's astonishing that we are even having this debate today after eight months of a genocidal war in which at least 35,000 Palestinians have been killed, 15,000 of them children, another 10,000 under the rubble. And Israel has laid waste to the infrastructure of Gaza to the social, economic health and domestic infrastructure of the strip. So I think in genocide has, the crime of genocide has two components, two elements, that is intention to commit genocide and the execution of that genocide. Now, we have multiple, a plethora of

statements by Israeli officials, both political and military, as well as those in the public domain, in the media and so on, who have made explicitly genocidal statements in relation to the attacks on Gaza, and they continue to make those genocidal claims indicating intention, because intention normally has to be inferred. And I think we can talk more about that. But I think we have both an enormous amount of evidence that the execution of the genocide has taken place. We also have an enormous amount of evidence, particularly if we look at the law for Palestine database, which amassed over 500 statements of intent by Israeli officials and leaders of the Knesset, leaders of the defense forces. We have all of this documentation. We also have the recent UN Special Rapporteur's report, Francesca Albanese's report, Anatomy of Genocide, which documents in very clear detail that a genocide has taken place.

We had the ICJ determination that there is plausible evidence of a genocide taking place in Gaza. We have huge numbers of genocide scholars and state crime scholars who are saying, that this is a genocide. The state crime scholars who have made a statement saying that we have, in fact, in the annihilation phase of the genocide, it's a genocide which didn't begin on October the 7th. It began probably, if we go back to the Balfour Declaration in 1917, but certainly kicked off in 1948. So I think, yes, we are certainly witnessing, and in real time, the first genocide we have witnessed in real time taking place committed by the Israeli state against the Palestinian people, particularly in Gaza. Okay, Penny, thank you for that opening statement.

Arson, it's your turn now. You are arguing against our resolution today. Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. Let's hear your opening statement. I agree with the very first thing Penny said that it is astonishing that we're having this debate. It's also astonishing that she did not I'll mention, regrettably, the 128 hostages that are still being held captive in Gaza, nor the actions of the Hamas that precipitated what we're witnessing today. The very term genocide, and I think there was any introduction, was coined by Rafael Lemkin in the 40s, a Jewish jurist, Polish Jewish jurist. And it was specifically in the wake of the Holocaust and the systematic annihilation of six million Jews.

And yet here we are today and arguing that Israel is committing genocide after the single greatest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust itself. 1,200 people murdered. Children ripped apart from their mothers. Mothers ripped apart from their children tied. Families burnt alive. Young people fleeing a music festival massacre. Women raped so badly to some of their pelvises were broken. Grenades were in their genitalia.

the breasts were cut off and thrown around like a football, gang rape, execution, the most evil imaginable crimes you can think of. This is worse. This is worse. Those who accuse Israel of genocide are committing a gross perversion of justice and are demeaning the very meaning of the term genocide. If this is genocide, then nothing is genocide. This demeans what happened in the Holocaust. This demeans what happened to the Armenians, to the Sudanese, to what Assad is doing. I'll end with this.

Whatever claims one may have against Israel or IDF actions. And I agree with what Penny said here that the central element of the crime of genocide, the commission of genocide is the requirement of intent. And we can get onto some of the things she mentioned as well. But whatever criticism one may have of the idea of Israel, there is no genocide here. Israel has made clear that its intention is the defeat of the terrorist group Hamas and the return of our. hostages. So it is an absurd, quite honestly, proposition that it is Israel that is committing genocide

because it is not. It is Hamas that is committing genocide. In fact, here it is Hamas who is open about their intentions, that Charter says that actually very clearly, and it is Hamas that acted out on those attentions on October 7th, and then subsequently said, and I quote, we will repeat this time and time again until Israel is annihilated. So no, it is not Israel to be on trial here, but in fact, Hamas. Okay, thank you, Arson, for that opening statement. We're going to move to rebuttals. Penny, this is your opportunity to respond to anything you've just heard in Arson's opening

statement. Well, first I'd like to pick up on the issue of Rafael Lemkin, who coined the term genocide in the first instance. Lemkin built his ideas and his framing of genocide, not on the Holocaust. He built it on colonial genocides. He was interested, he looked at settler colonial regimes, and he looked at the way in which in countries like Australia, like Canada, like the United States,

and other colonial genocides in parts of Africa, he was concerned with the idea that native groups, indigenous groups, were being eliminated in the process of a colonial enterprise. Now, Israel is a settler colonial, state. And set the colonialism as Patrick Wolfe, another Australian, so clearly showed us that it requires the elimination of the native, the elimination of the indigenous. And that's what's happened in Palestine. In 1917, Lord Balfour, in the Balfour Declaration, effectively gifted Palestine to the European Zionists who were looking for a homeland.

And then, as I said, as I mentioned earlier, the idea that Palestine anyway was an empty land, you know, for a people without a land. It was an absolute nonsense. The Palestine was populated by Palestinians. There was a very small percentage of Jewish people. Jewish people and Palestinian Arabs lived very harmonious. together in that period. But in 1948, Jewish terrorist gangs, the Stern gang, the Ergun, committed what the Palestinians describe as the catastrophe, the great catastrophe, the Nakhva. And during the Nakhva, 750,000 Palestinians were forced to flee, their homes, thousands were killed. The Palestinians who were forced to flee were denied the right of return. And that is the

That is the origin of what we're seeing today. The genocide did not begin on October the 7th after the Hamas attacks. The genocide began decades earlier. And we witness it in the West Bank. We witness it in Israel, 48. We witness it in Gaza. Israel has created ghettos for Palestinians. The West Bank is an aparthe, effectively an apartheid state.

you know, the walls, the checkpoints, the watchtowers, Arson talked about the number of Israeli hostages. Israel has imprisoned thousands and thousands of Palestinians, many under administrative detention. They haven't been through a trial process. They haven't been charged. If we are comparing the number of hostages, then Israel has an enormously greater number of hostages,

Palestinian hostage. Okay, Penny, you know, I'm going to stop you here just because, you know, we are out of time, so we will have a chance to come back to these arguments. Arson, it's your opportunity now to respond to anything that you either heard in Penny's opening statement or in her rebuttal. I will try and be brief. First of all, Rafael Lemkin was a Polish Jew who escaped Europe in the 1930s. He was not talking about some kind of settler colonialism.

He was talking about his observations of what happened in the Holocaust. You're welcome to look at the website of Yad Vashem, the U.S. Holocaust Museum and others. Second of all, Israel, this country was not gifted to Israel, not by the Europeans, nor by Balfour, not by anyone else. The Jews have had an inalienable 3,000-year-plus connection to the state of Israel. We have been persecuted, discriminated, exiled, dispersed, suffered Holocaust pogroms, you take your pick. But at all points, at all times, through all chains in this link, there were Jews present on this land. In reference to the number of civilians killed, and I think that is a number of people killed, I think that is critical because it goes to the core of the allegation that Israel is committing genocide.

Now, we cannot look at these numbers in a vacuum. First of all, the number of 35,000 comes from the Gaza Health Ministry. Now, the Gaza Health Ministry, we have to be also very open and transparent and clear, is run by Hamas. It is a propaganda arm of the Hamas terror group. Even the UN itself, only a week ago, actually halved the number of women and children reportedly killed. So it's not 35,000 overall.

figure, but it's now 25, 26,000. Of that, roughly, is about half that we know are terrorists, combatants, and approximately half that are civilian. So you have a one-to-one civilian-to-combatant ratio. But again, you can't look at this even at numbers online, because you have to remember that for Israel, every civilian death is a tragedy. For Hamas, every civilian death is a strategy. For Hamas, every civilian death is a strategy, whereas Israel does everything possible in order to minimize. It has gone to unprecedented lengths to avoid harm to civilians. Hamas hides behind their civilians while shooting, targeting and indiscriminately slaughtering, raping, murdering, torturing, and abducting civilians in Israel. That is a difference that we need to remember because the numbers alone don't tell the full picture.

If I can just briefly touch on two more things, which Penny said, I think they're critical again because I go to the core of the argument. One, she made reference to the statements made by various Israelis, over 500 people, various supposed leaders. Not a single one of those is a member of the war cabinet. Not a single one of those is the chief of the defense force. Not a single one of those is in an operational or policy role. the Prime Minister, the Defence Minister, the Chief of Staff have made very clear. The goal of this war, the goal of this operation is the defeat of the terrorist reprimas and the rescuing of the hostages.

So all these other statements, as awful, as horrible and as rightfully we ought to condemn them, are not evidence of genocide and are not made by those individuals with a capacity for making operational, military or policy decisions. Hi, Monk listeners. I wanted to tell you about our upcoming Monk debate. on anti-Zionism. On June 17th, author and journalist Douglas Murray and UK-based international law expert, Natasha Halsdorf, will debate former MSNBC commentator and columnist Median San and Israeli journalist Gideon Levy on stage in Toronto in front of a live audience of 3,000 people.

The debate will be streamed, so if you can't make it in person, you can watch it from the comfort of your living room. Find out how to become a monk member. and get your live stream access to the monk debate on anti-Zionism. Visit our website right now, triple-w, monkdebates.com. We're going to move now to the moderated section of this debate, which is a chance for me to ask questions that are top of mind to our listeners. So, you know, first I think it's important to define genocide,

under the Genocide Convention Article 2, genocide is defined as a specific set of acts committed with the intent, to destroy in whole or in part a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. So, Penny, my question to you is you have, in a lot of your research, studied the Rohingya genocide in Myanmar. In 2012, there were between 1.2, 1.4 million Rohingya living in Western Myanmar and that figure is now below 300,000. Now, by contrast, in 2005 in Gaza, the population was 1.3 million. Now it's 2.2 million. So, you know, someone who would argue that genocide is not happening in Gaza would point to these numbers to say, look, this population has almost doubled. So Israel is not

actually eradicating an entire population, it's actually growing. What would your response be to that? Well, I think the question is, I mean, the reason that the Rohingya fled was because of the military, the genocidal military operation led by Aung San Suu Kyi and Minong Lai, that took place in northern Rakhine state. They fled across the border because they could flee across the border. Garzan's can't flee. They've been in a prison. But isn't that ethnic cleansing. I'm sorry, I just want to, I just want to confirm the terms we're using. Ethnic cleansing, it comes under the broad ambit of crimes against humanity. It's not a specific crime in and of itself. Genocide is something very different, as you have expressed,

that you defined Article 2 of the Genocide Convention. Genocide is more than that. If you look at the work of genocide scholars, genocide scholars look at and benchmark against historic genocides. Genocide isn't an act simply of spectacularized violence. Genocide is a process, and I think that's absolutely critical to understand. Lemkin understood it, and the scholars of genocide understand it. Genocide takes place. It begins with practices of dehumanization and stigmatization.

You know, it's very difficult, as Christopher Browning showed in the Holocaust. straightforward to kill your neighbor. It requires a good deal of, if you like, preparation, ideological preparation. You have to think of the people that you are targeting as less than human, as less than yourselves. We've seen tremendous number of expressions from Israeli leaders that Palestinians are less than human. They've been described as non-human animals by leading members of the Knesset. So Penny, just on that point, but are you, because I do, I want to that up with arson as well. And I know that that was a major point that the ICC prosecutor or the South African team presented as evidence at the ICC for genocide. But some of the

comments you are referencing are made in reference to Hamas. When Isaac Herzog, the president of Israel said there are no innocent civilians in Gaza, he was not referring only to Hamas. He was referring to men, women and children, the whole population of Gaza. Anybody who has witnessed the video clips that Gaza and journalists are managing to get out of Gaza couldn't think for a minute that the children who have been blown to bits, who are injured without surviving parents, the medics, I mean, they have been one of the key truth tellers of this genocide. That's where we've learned a great deal from the doctors. who have worked in hospitals like Al-Sheifa,

who have told us exactly what has been happening. These aren't Hamas operatives. They aren't, neither are they human shields. They are ordinary garrisons who are trying to live their lives. But I wanted to make the point that genocide is a process that begins with strategies of dehumanisation, which we've seen. It makes killing other people easier once they dehumanized. And it proceeds through a number of phases, often concurrent, but it ends with the notion of erasure.

And in between dehumanisation and erasure, we have the, if you like, examples of or periods of sporadic violence, litmus testing violence, which if the perpetrators get away with it gives a green light to more violence. That violence, as it did with the Rohingya, can very often then lead to ghettoization. or segregation, a siege was in place for 17 years before the imposition of the total siege that Yov Galant ordered on Gaza. So we have a systematically weakened population, which in 2012, the UN described by 2022, Gaza would be unlivable. Okay, I just want to stop you there and bring in arson because, you know, arson, Penny, makes an important point here that Gaza, for the most part,

to October 7th had become unlivable. And would that not constitute as under Article 2 of the Genocide Convention, deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in part or in whole? No, I would not agree. No, I would not agree to that as much as I might surprise you. Look, I mean, I think we're, what is, 30-something minutes half into this debate and I'm not sure, correct me if I'm wrong, if I've heard Penny mention the word Hamas, okay? We cannot look at this situation in a vacuum. Israel is surrounded by a terrorist organization Hamas that is openly sworn to its destruction. That charter says so very clearly, okay? We are not surrounded by Switzerland or New Zealand or Canada, but a ruthless terrorist enemy

that seeks our destruction that has fired tens of thousands of. of rockets that built tunnels that instead of investing millions of dollars on houses, on schools, on hospitals, on jobs, on welfare for the people, has invested that money in rockets. Okay, but Arson, the resolution today is not about whether Hamas is committing genocide. It's whether Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. So I just want to refocus it on that. I understand that. And you're asking me with respect to Israel's actions and the situation in Gaza.

and my point being that we kind of look at this in a vacuum, you know. Remember, Israel left Gaza entirely in 2005, every soldier, every citizen, everyone. Instead of building an infrastructure for a peaceful state, they built a terrorist infrastructure to annihilate the state of Israel and started firing tens of thousands of rockets. Israel, like any sovereign nation when faced with that threat, will take whatever, action necessary, not defendant citizens. Israel does not and did not preclude humanitarian aid from getting or food or medicine getting into Gaza. It only prevented weapons and items that could

be used for terrorist attacks. Okay, Arson, I just want to ask you about something that Penny mentioned before and I think it's worthy of going into greater detail, which is some of the comments that senior Israeli political leaders have made about Gaza. Because in 10, is an important factor in how we define genocide. So Itamar Ben-Gvier, who's the Minister of National Security, has openly advocated for the resettlement of Palestinians outside of Gaza. Deputy Knesset speaker Nisim Vaturi wrote that Israel had one common goal to erase the Gaza Strip from the face of the earth. Israeli Heritage Minister Amichai Eliahu. These, by the way, are all people with leadership

roles within the current coalition government, he suggested that Israel drop a nuclear bomb on Gaza and that there were no uninvolved civilians in the territory. So would you concede that there is some intent within the ruling Israeli government to erase the Palestinian presence in Gaza? No, because I'll explain why. The statements that you have said by these individuals are loathsome, are contemptible and ought to be unreservedly condemned. I'm not disputing that. I don't think anyone reasonable will dispute that. But you said that these are individuals in leadership roles.

Now, I don't think that's the lens that we ought to be looking at this, because we need to be, and for the purposes of whether Israel is committing genocide or not, and looking at intent, we need to be looking at those individuals who have operational, military and policy power. These individuals that you mentioned, for example, including to my benefit, including the deputies, including other members of Knesset, even if they are to be from the ruling coalition party, are not in these positions of power. The military operational decisions with this war are made by the war cabinet. The war cabinet has five or six

individuals, including Prime Minister, Defense Minister, Foreign Minister. These are the people that make the decisions with respect to the conduct of... But don't you think that the Israeli government has some influence over the country's war aims? No, because the ultimate influence and the policy decision is made by the Prime Minister, the Defence Minister and the War Cabinet. And by the way, some of the statements that you have alluded to have been condemned by the Prime Minister and these very same individuals. But if we're looking, and this is the question here, whether Israel is committing genocide and whether Israel has the requisite intent, we need to be looking at those individuals that are in the positions of power and have the capacity of influence

and making these operational and policy decisions with respect to the conduct of the war. And that includes those individuals only in the war cabinet, not the ones that you've mentioned, which is why it's loathsome as those statements may be and they ought to be condemned. And they have been condemned. These are not individuals in the necessary positions of influence and power. Penny, what is your response to that? I would say, I mean, that's nonsense. quite frankly.

Benjamin Netignar, who is on record as saying he wants to reduce Gaza to an island of rubble. We have Israel's defense minister, Yov Galant, when he ordered the total siege on Gaza, that is cutting off food, water, fuel, electricity and medical supplies to the strip. He followed that by saying that Palestinians were non-human animals. This is Yov Galand, the Minister of Defense. I'm sorry, but he is central to Israel's war cabinet. Did he say Palestinians or did he say Hamas? No, he said he talked about Garzans.

He didn't say Hamas, no. So on that note, because Arson did bring up something that I think is important, even though it's not necessarily central to the resolution, would you agree that Hamas is a genocidal organization intent on bringing about the destruction of Jews within its? Israel? I don't think it's intent on bringing about the destruction of Jews. I think we have to be really careful here. We cannot equate Zionism with Jewish people. We cannot equate the state of Israel with Jewish people. On the marches all around the world against the genocide of the Palestinians,

we have huge blocks of Jewish people who are appalled at what Israel is. No, no, but that wasn't my question. my question was Jews within Israel. So in Hamas' charter, they want to get rid of all the Jews in Israel. No, that is not my understanding at all of the charter, which was revised in 2017. They talk about the Zionist state, and that's something I think which is very different. So I think we have to be very careful here about terminology. Now, I'm not here as an advocate of Hamas, but we are arguing today about whether or not Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. I would say it absolutely is committing genocide in Gaza. It is

deliberately inflicting on the group, on the Palestinians of Gaza, conditions of life calculated to bring about their physical destruction. This is part of the definition of the genocide within the convention. And this is what is happening to Palestinians. And I would be very clear that it's not only a against Palestinians living in Gaza. It's a genocide against Palestinians living in the West Bank. The situation for Israeli Palestinians, Palestinians with Israeli citizenship is actually also very parlous at the moment. So I think we have to be very explicit here. Penny, are you suggesting that Israel is committing genocide towards the Palestinians living within Israel's pre-1967 borders? just want to confirm that that is what you're alluding to here.

I think that at the moment, they haven't been the explicit target, but Palestinians full stop. Palestinians are the indigenous population within that whole area, and they are the target. Now, I know Palestinians who work and live in Israel, who've had leaflets through their door saying, get to Jordan or you'll be killed. Palestinians everywhere are in an extremely vulnerable position.

So I think it is, yes, Palestinians who are our Israeli citizens are also in a very, very difficult position right now. Arsaint, did you want to respond to that? Not quite entirely sure where to respond to that. I'm not sure if Penny actually condemned Hamas' actions or sort of justify and explain some of them. if I'm correct to understand, according to interpretation, the killing of Jews is bad, but the killing of Israelis or Zionists is acceptable somehow?

Excuse me? I'm sorry, I did not say that. Okay, you said that Hamas's actions are not targeting Jews. They're targeting Zionists. By the way, if you look at their charter, which you said was replaced, it was not replaced, albeit there was an updated charter, though very explicit in saying that the original chart of 88 still remained. And that charter, by the way, very explicitly refers also to Jews and acquired Article 15. The day the enemies usurp part of Muslim land, jihad becomes individual duty of every Muslim in the face of the Jews' usurpation. It is compulsory that the banner of jihad be raised. So I don't think we should kid ourselves that Hamas is making any distinction here between Jews or Zionists.

The Charter is very clear in terms of what their intentions are. Their actions on October 7th were in reference to that, and they were very clear about their goals, which they subsequently repeated again in late October, when they said that we will do this again and again until Israel is annihilated. These are Hamas's words, not mine. These are Hamas's words. Now, we need to be very clear that Hamas is a bloodthirsty terrorist organization.

It's been designated as a terrorist organization by the U.S., Canada, Australia, Europe, Japan, dozens of countries around the world. There is no, whatever grievance one may have, there is no justification, none whatsoever to the actions which Hamas carried on October 7th, including the brutal massacre, rape, murder, burning, mutilation, and abduction, torture of Israelis. There is no lens or no vacuum through which these actions can ever be justified. So, Arson, speaking of use of force, the IDF have used in this war what is commonly referred to as dumb bombs. These are 2,000 pound bombs.

They are not very precise. They can take out entire apartment buildings and destroy anything within a wide radius. Don't you think that the use of this weapon is an inappropriate way to fight a war in such a densely populated region as Gaza? I would love for someone to come up with how the war in Gaza ought to be fought. We're not dealing with rational actus here. This is not someone, you know, someone that rapes children, burns people, is not someone that you can have a reasonable discussion with. It's not someone you can negotiate with.

And it's not someone that abides by any norms or rules. So we're dealing with a very complex and difficult climate here. Now, Israel has gone above and beyond to unprecedented lengths in the history of modern warfare to minimize civilian casualties, so much so to the extent of putting our own soldiers at risk. It's not just my words. These are the words of people like Richard.

But are they going to great lengths to minimize casualties because over 35,000 people killed, 35% of the buildings destroyed, 1.9 million people displaced. It doesn't feel like to the outside observer that this war is being fought in a precision-like way. The number of, for example, acts Israel has gone in order to avoid innocent deaths casualties. That includes making millions of phone calls, dropping thousands upon thousands of leaflets. literally telegraphing the enemy, Hamas, where they're going to strike and when they're going to strike, giving them that opportunity to leave so that they don't hit or risk hurting innocent

civilians, providing safe passage. Before Israel went into even ruffa, we spoke about it for weeks upon weeks and even provided safe passage and paths and routes. The Israelis have the military advocate division. Every commander on the ground must look at the proportionality of any potential incident. These acts that are then reviewed also by the Supreme Court by the Attorney General's Department. Now you have to remember that again we are dealing not with a rational actor but Israel is fighting Hamas. Hamas is someone and that has been proved. Look at the even the UN, even Tonya Guterres said that. the Biden administration, the UK, the European Commission,

have said that Hamas uses human shields. They hide behind innocent civilians in Gaza. Every single hospital, for that matter, has been turned into a control and command center. The idea of forces have found weapons in MRI machines and prenatal units. Right. I mean, Penny, how would you respond to that? The allegation that Hamas turned hospitals in Gaza into control centers,

which would effectively make them legitimate targets, this war. Israel claimed that the Hamas command was operating under our Shifa hospital. All of the evidence that has been shown demonstrates that that simply was not true. Israel lies. Israel lies time and time and time again. And when Biden repeats those lies, they tend to have some kind of sticking factor, but they are lies nonetheless.

And I think we have to be very clear about the evidence. Where is this evidence coming from? I remember those images that taken by IOS forces of planted a few items, a few weapons planted under Al-Shipa Hospital. There was no command centre, no Hamas command centre, under Al-Shepa Hospital. And it should be remembered that the Israelis themselves built the underground tunnels under our Shifa Hospital in the first instance. I would also want to comment on the points that arson made in relation to Israel, taking every care not to attack and murder civilians.

I mean, the evidence on the ground just proves that to be a nonsense. Israel has one of the most sophisticated AI defense systems, and they've been using something called the gospel AI system, which can generate targets more quickly than those targets, can actually be eliminated. And those targets, they are prepared. And Israeli whistleblowers have come out and said that they are prepared to sacrifice for one really low level, Hamas operative. They are prepared to sacrifice 100 people, 100 family members, 100 people living in the same building as this one minor operative.

So, Penny, that's an important point that I'd really like to have arson respond to. because we have seen a lot of civilian casualties in this war, people who perhaps are family members of Hamas, they might have nothing to do with this war or what happened on October 7th, but they are in proximity to a target. So, for instance, the attack on the World Central Kitchen Cars happened because Israel thought that there was one terrorist traveling within this group,

and that to them justified the killing, of seven people, even though it turns out that their target wasn't with the group after all. So, Arson, let's hear your response to that. First of all, I should say, Penny, it is the IDF, the Israeli Defense Forces, not the I-O-F. Israeli Occupation Forces, I think that's a perfectly reasonable designation for the Israeli. Oh, no, I mean, the Israeli Defense Forces, that's the name, and I think that's their proper name, and that's the name that we should be referring to, notwithstanding one's. opinions of views on that. Look, to answer your question, war is horrible, okay? No one's going to argue

against that. War is horrible. This is not a war of Israel's choosing. This is a war that Israel was forced to fight when Hamas, thousands of Hamas terrorists, and by the way, civilians from Gaza invaded southern Israel, people in their sleep, 6.30 in the morning on a Saturday, on a Jewish holiday, at that, by the way, too, and brutally committed the most heinous actions. Now, as I said before, for Israel, every civilian death is a tragedy. For Hamas, every civilian death is a strategy. Therein lies the big difference, okay? Regrettably, mistakes do happen in war.

That is sad, that is tragic, okay? However, the question of genocide relies one of intent, specifically intent to annihilate, destroy a population, whether in whole or in part. Now, mistakes do happen. Mistakes are acknowledged by Israel. That is a difference. When Israel makes mistakes like they did with the World Central Kitchen, they point up to that, they admit it, they investigate it, and they take action. Senior Israeli officers and officials were dismissed from their positions.

Investigations are ongoing. When Hamas kills civilians, they hand it. out candy, okay? When Israel kills civilians, that pains us, okay? Therein lies the difference. Hamas is committing a double crime of hiding behind their civilians. They have no interest, no care for their own people, nor for the Israelis. The Israelis have actually gone above and beyond to help the Palestinian people, including providing aid. But Hamas are the ones that keep shooting and destroying humanitarian crossings and passages. So yes, mistakes to happen. However, that is not the intention of Israel.

Okay, so Penny, I want to compare what's happening in Gaza to previous conflicts and wars where mass civilian populations were killed in the fighting. I'm thinking about Dresden in World War II. There was no war industry in Dresden, and yet the Allies killed approximately 35,000 civilians in their bombing campaign. The U.S. killed approximately 50,000 civilians in Afghanistan, and there were over 100,000 civilians who were killed in Iraq. So is what happened in Dresden, in Afghanistan, in Iraq? Are those, in your view, instances of genocide? No, they're appalling instances of state violence.

And they are state crimes, then. They're war crimes. But genocide has a very specific meaning. And that is, as Lempkin made very clear, it's the idea that people are, a people, a group are targeted and eliminated, and they can be eliminated in a range of ways. It's not always mass killing. It can be through mass sterilization. It can be through mass forced eviction. It can be a combination of all three and other forms as well. So I think that genocide has that

specific element that it is a crime that is designed and based on intention to destroy in whole or in part a people on the basis of their nationality, their ethnicity, their race or their religion. And that's what distinguishes genocide. It's a specific form of crime. There are a range of international crimes and the ones that you've alluded to largely come under the the realm of war crimes or crimes against humanity. Genocide has a very specific... And yet no one was prosecuted for those crimes. And I'm not suggesting that's a good thing.

But would you say that Israel is singled out for criticism compared to many other countries who have far worse human rights records? I think one of the things, one of the extraordinary things about Israel is the impunity that it enjoys and it enjoys that impunity because it has the support of where Western governments, powerful Western interests. Israel could not do what it does today. It could not commit genocide against the Palestinians if it was not supported by the US. If it was not given the enormous amount of military aid that it is given by the US, it could not do this. Okay, Penny, let's play that scenario out. So if Israel did not have the support and cover of the US, and it was

increasingly isolated on the world stage, which does seem to be happening. If they ended up, let's say, losing this war in the long term, which to them is existential, what do you see as a future resolution here? I mean, where would the Jews in Israel go? And if they stayed in Israel, how would they live alongside a Palestinian majority? The only solution that I can see is a one-state solution where Jews and Muslims and Christians, Palestinians, Israelis all live together, but under a situation where everybody shares equal rights. But do you really think that's realistic? I think it's a very difficult ask right now, to be perfectly honest, but I think it is the only solution. I think the only solution is to create a society in which everybody has equal rights,

the same freedom of movement, the same freedom of expression, the same ability to live a meaningful life that doesn't exist in Israel-Palestine at the moment. Palestinians are worse than second-class citizens. And I think it's really, really important that we aim for something which is just and singular. I think that the future has been immensely complicated by this genocide. But I think that it's something that I know that there are various groups who are trying to build these bridges, to try to build a society, which isn't as a Jewish supremacist society, which is basically has been the organizational goal of Israel. And if you are aiming for a Jewish Zionist supremacist society, if that's the organizational goal of the state,

then those who do not belong to the chosen race, the chosen religion, are cast out. And that's But wouldn't you say Hamas is trying to build that? Hamas is not a state. No, no, but Hamas would be trying to build an Islamic state within Palestine that favors Muslims? That doesn't, we haven't seen evidence of that. At the moment, it's very difficult to speak about what any Palestinian leadership would do if it was free, if it shared equal rights, if it's shared the kind of liberties and freedoms that those in Israel enjoy. So I think it's very, it's speculative.

And I think it's dangerous to make those kinds of speculations. I think the best we can do is to try to work towards a single unified state. And I think it will be very hard. I, you know, quite frankly, given what we have seen. but where everybody enjoys equal rights, where everyone can live together with the same rights and the same privileges and not under an apartheid state and not under an occupation. Okay, Arson, this is a bit off topic because we're not talking about genocide anymore, but would you say there is a case to be made that there should not be one ethno state

that gives privilege to one religion, in this case Jews, over the others? I think when you talk about one-state solution as being the only solution, you may as well talk about the final solution. Because when you call for a one-state solution, what you are doing effectively is calling for the genocide of Israel as a Jewish state. Okay? If you have a one-state, that essentially will mean that Jews will no longer have the rights, the privileges that we enjoy as a state, as a democracy, that all citizens here enjoy. If you believe in the rights or determination of Palestinians, which I do,

then you ought to also believe in the right of Jews to solve determination in their ancestral homeland as well, Israel. Now, you might believe in a two-state solution. That's up to you. But if you're calling for a one-state solution, I'm sorry, but that is delusional. When you're saying that we don't know what Palestinian leaders would do, well, actually, we do know very well

because they're very open and transparent and clear about what they would do. The Hamas leaders say themselves, we'll do this over and over again. The Palestinians calling for a Udenrhein state that is devoid of Jews. So I'm sorry, you cannot have a one-state solution that is an absolutely non-starter

because it denies Jews, their inalienable rights of self-determination, and effectively is the calling for the genocide of Israel as a Jewish state, the annihilation of Israel's existence in its current form. Okay, we've gone really over time today, but it has been a fascinating and illuminating conversation. We're going to go now to closing statements. I'm going to ask you both to be brief. As a reminder, the resolution today is be it resolved. Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, and we're going to flip the order in closing statements. So, Arson, you're arguing against the resolution. Let's hear your closing statement.

I'll try and be brief and thank you again for the opportunity to speak. In January, I was in the Hague during the ICJ hearings. And before I went then, I try to try to be. I'm sorry. explained to my daughter, who's barely seven years old, why I was going. She asked me, why am I going for so long? And I told her as much as one can tell your child without going to too many details. And she said to me, she's seven years old. She turned around to me and said, Abba, daddy, you know what? They don't have to like us, but they just shouldn't say things that are not true. A seven-year-old. I wish we all had the wisdom and innocence of a seven-year-old like that. Because that exactly goes to the core of this resolution. When you say that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza,

you're saying that the intention of Israel is to destroy whether in whole or in part of the people of Gaza. That is not Israel's intention, not at all. And quite frankly, to say so is abominable and grotesque and flat out lie. Israel has been explicitly clear time and time again that Israel's goals is the destruction and defeat of Hamas, the terrorist enemy Hamas and the rescuing of Israel's hostages, 128, of which still remain and have been in the dungeons captivity of Gaza for almost the last eight months. Israel, like any sovereign nation in the world, is entitled to take whatever necessary steps it must, and it has within the confines of international law in order to carry out that mission

to claim that Israel is perpetrating genocide. It's quite frankly offensive, grotesque, and a weaponization and subversion their own meaning of the term genocide. Okay, Arson, thank you for that closing statement. Penny, you're going to have the last word on this debate. You're arguing in favor of the resolution. Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. I would just add that as an occupying power,

Israel does not have the right of self-defense when the threat emerges from the occupied territory itself, which is Gaza in this case. Israel is committing genocide against Gaza. It's committing genocide, as I've argued, not only against the Palestinians inside Gaza, it's committing a genocide against the Palestinian people. It's a genocide that has gone on for decades. And the important thing I would like our listeners to understand is that genocide is a process. It doesn't simply begin on October the 7th. Genocide is not only a spectacularized act of mass violence.

It has an attritional impact. It begins with, as I said, these ideas of dehumanizing the other, dehumanizing the target population, attacking it sporadically so that, you know, we've seen the settlers in the West Bank, attack with absolute impunity Palestinians. Once you have people who are in these ghettoized situations, And we consider the 17-year siege on Gaza before the total siege, which was imposed on October the 9th, 2023, we have populations that have been absolutely weakened, weakened in terms of malnourishment, weakened in terms of access to electricity, to water, to proper education.

And now we have a situation in which all of the infrastructure of Gaza has effectively been destroyed. Every hospital has been attacked. there are almost no functioning hospitals now out of 36 in Gaza. There are no functioning universities. Gaza has been destroyed. The people have been forcibly evicted from their homes, forced into the south of Gaza. They've been attacked en route.

And what we are witnessing, I think, is what we would call the denouement or the annihilation phase of genocide. Okay, Penny, thank you for your closing statement. Thank you both for participating in what is a contentious and highly charged topic. On behalf of our Monk Debates audience, we sincerely appreciate it. Thank you for joining us. Thank you. Thank you.

Well, that wraps up today's debate. I want to thank our participants, Penny and Arson. You've given us a lot to think about. A reminder that you can vote on who you think won today's podcast debate. go to our website, www.munkdebates.com. All you have to do is become a free member, and you will be able to cast your vote. If you have feedback or reflections

on what you just heard or of any of our other podcasts, please send us an email at podcast at monkdebates.com. Thank you for helping us bring back the art of public debate and dialogue one conversation at a time. I'm Ricky Gerwitz. The monk debates are a project of the Oriya and Peter and Melanie Monk, Charitable Foundation. The Monk Debates podcast is produced by Ricky Gerowitz and Daniel Kitts.

Karen Lynch is the editor. Be sure to download and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. And if you like us, feel free to leave a five-star rating. Thank you again for listening.