Speaker 1: Kyota.
Speaker 2: I'm Chelsea Daniels and this is the Front Page, a
Speaker 2: daily podcast presented by the New Zealand Herald. The government's
Speaker 2: decision on whether it'll recognize the State of Palestine has
Speaker 2: been put on hold until next month. It's despite our
Speaker 2: closest neighbor, Australia, following a sweep of countries moving to
Speaker 2: support Palestine. Seventy eight years since the United Nations resolution
Speaker 2: to create the State of Israel and a Palestinian state,
Speaker 2: Australia's PM Anthony Albanesi said the world can no longer
Speaker 2: wait for the implementation of that resolution to be negotiated
Speaker 2: between the two parties. So how should New Zealand proceed
Speaker 2: and if it's a matter of when not if, as
Speaker 2: David Seymour has said, then why are we so behind
Speaker 2: the April Today on the Front Page, University of Otago
Speaker 2: Senior politics professor doctor Leon Goldsmith is with us to
Speaker 2: unpack the complexities of this never ending conflict. Leon Winston
Speaker 2: Peters has said it's not a straightforward, clear cut issue
Speaker 2: and the government is still weighing up New Zealand's position.
Speaker 2: Is he right to wait it out?
Speaker 3: I mean I think he's right when he says that
Speaker 3: it's not a clear cut, straightforward issue, I think I
Speaker 3: totally agree with that, and we should also, you know,
Speaker 3: we should be mindful that we don't rush into sort
Speaker 3: of knee jerk reactions depending on the actions of our neighbors, allies,
Speaker 3: or the international community. I also agree that we have
Speaker 3: an independent foreign policy and we need to make our
Speaker 3: own decisions.
Speaker 1: So in that.
Speaker 3: Respect, I think it's correct. However, the situation is urgent
Speaker 3: and imperative, and if it is going to make any
Speaker 3: different to the humanitarian situation in Gaza, I think that
Speaker 3: the government needs to weigh up very carefully. Withether adding
Speaker 3: its voice in a sort of concert with others will
Speaker 3: help that, but I don't know if it's one hundred
Speaker 3: percent sure if it will. I think it's in terms
Speaker 3: of the way that the messages are being transmitted is
Speaker 3: really important at this moment, and there's a lot of insecurity,
Speaker 3: there's a lot of misinformation, and I think we do, actually,
Speaker 3: regardless of the situation, have to be very measured in
Speaker 3: the way that we react to the situation.
Speaker 2: In terms of so we're looking at recognizing the state
Speaker 2: of Palestine, what other options are.
Speaker 3: There well, I think, I mean that the imperative right
Speaker 3: now is to try to get a sustainable ceasefire and
Speaker 3: to try to alleviate the suffering of God and civilians,
Speaker 3: to get the hostages released, to find some way to
Speaker 3: de escalate the conflict between Hamas and the IDEF in
Speaker 3: the Gaza envelope. So I mean, the question of a
Speaker 3: two state solution is a very complicated one. It's something
Speaker 3: that hasn't been resolved in the seventy eight years until now.
Speaker 3: It's not something that can be achieved through a sort
Speaker 3: of a diplomatic stroke, And I think it's for the
Speaker 3: Israelis and the Palestinians once they can find some kind
Speaker 3: of stable platform to start to develop confidence measuring, confidence
Speaker 3: building measures which have happened in the past. But unfortunately
Speaker 3: we've got extremists on both sides who are not really
Speaker 3: interested in working towards that kind of situation. So I
Speaker 3: think New Zealand should be continuing to call for a ceasefire,
Speaker 3: continuing to call for some kind of hostage release in
Speaker 3: disarmament where possible, But of course it's not easy.
Speaker 1: It's not easy.
Speaker 2: What's the difference between recognizing the state of Palestine and
Speaker 2: supporting the two state solution in Palestinian self determination, which
Speaker 2: I think is our current standing.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean we've supported officially a two state solution
Speaker 3: ever since the Resolution one A one in nineteen forty seven. So,
Speaker 3: but recognizing the state of Polace oly So on twenty twelve,
Speaker 3: the General Assembly recognizing Palestinian as a non observer state
Speaker 3: to the Yun it's symbolic, it's a kind of a
Speaker 3: diplomatic move and as far as symbolic in terms of
Speaker 3: presenting these stants on different countries towards the rights of
Speaker 3: Palestine and also Israel. We said that we recognize that
Speaker 3: there could be some kind of state for the Palestinians,
Speaker 3: but we don't know what that state would look like
Speaker 3: in terms of its final shape. This has been the
Speaker 3: key sticking point ever since in nineteen forty nine. What
Speaker 3: is the final borders? Where will they be? What is
Speaker 3: the right of return not just for Palestinians who were
Speaker 3: pushed out of their homes, but also for Jewish people
Speaker 3: who are pushed out of Arab countries during that conflict
Speaker 3: period as well. So what is there compensation? Is there
Speaker 3: some way that some can come back?
Speaker 1: Is there?
Speaker 3: And the third thing which is really crucial is what
Speaker 3: is the status of Jerusalem? Is it the capital for
Speaker 3: two states? Is that can the Palestinians accept an alternative capital,
Speaker 3: which they say they won't, And that's really the key
Speaker 3: issues at the crux of an actual two state solution.
Speaker 1: And also it's become this kind of.
Speaker 3: The inability of the international community, starting with Obama and
Speaker 3: previous to actually get the Israelis to freeze the settlements
Speaker 3: has meant that there is no contigious territory for the
Speaker 3: Palestinians to create a state on anyway. Like the conditions
Speaker 3: on the ground, which is I observed firsthand when I
Speaker 3: was there in twenty twenty three are not conducive to
Speaker 3: a state. The political criteria that Foreign Minister, our foreign
Speaker 3: minister spoke about it not there as well. There is
Speaker 3: no unity on either the Israeli or the Palestinians. I
Speaker 3: both are deeply divided politically, with different visions about what
Speaker 3: each wants, and I think that has to also be
Speaker 3: taken into account.
Speaker 4: Australia will recognize the state of Palestine. Australia will recognize
Speaker 4: the ride up the Palestinian people to a state of
Speaker 4: their own predicated on commitments Australia has received from the
Speaker 4: Palestinian authority. We will work with the international community to
Speaker 4: make this right a reality. Australia is making this statement
Speaker 4: today following our cabinet meeting as part of a coordinated
Speaker 4: global effort building momentum for a two state solution.
Speaker 2: I know that when announcing Australia's recognition of the Palestinian State,
Speaker 2: Anthony Albernezi said he will officially recognize it at the
Speaker 2: United Nations Leaders Week late next month, and Winston Peters
Speaker 2: has said his waiting until then as well to announce
Speaker 2: our stance. What's the significance of waiting until that week.
Speaker 3: Well, I guess it's kind of like it gives him
Speaker 3: more time. It's kind of like stalling for time because
Speaker 3: I don't think that our government really does have as
Speaker 3: he's kind of eluded in their press statement that they
Speaker 3: don't have a a consensus around this even.
Speaker 1: Within the government itself.
Speaker 3: But the fact that they're talking about potentially acknowledging the
Speaker 3: Palestinian state that meeting is also could have an impact
Speaker 3: in terms of the international kind of pattern or the
Speaker 3: trajectory that the pressure that they're intending to put on
Speaker 3: Nefhan Yahoo to actually respond and to make some concessions
Speaker 3: and sort of like some of the you know what's
Speaker 3: happening right now in Gaza in terms of Gaza City
Speaker 3: and the humanitarian crisis.
Speaker 2: Middle Eastern conflicts are complicated, to say the least. It's
Speaker 2: not all black and white as some people want it
Speaker 2: to be. It's certainly not explainable through a twenty minute podcast.
Speaker 2: It's not explainable probably through a two hour lecture, etc.
Speaker 1: You've written before.
Speaker 2: The solution to untangle and diffuse the conflict is not
Speaker 2: to grab one thread and target hard, but to find
Speaker 2: all the threads that prepare to wait the crisis. I
Speaker 2: thought that was a really good way of putting it.
Speaker 2: Explain that to me a little bit more sure.
Speaker 3: I mean, exactly like you said, it's not a black
Speaker 3: and white. These are the good guys and the bad guys.
Speaker 3: These are the ones who are right, These are the
Speaker 3: ones who have the rights and those ones that don't.
Speaker 3: A lot of the sort of zero sum ratract that
Speaker 3: we've had is actually, I believe, has been making the
Speaker 3: situation wise because it's increasing a sense of international rejection
Speaker 3: or a sense of the very genuine perceptions of racism
Speaker 3: or anti Semitism or xenophobic against Muslims or whatever. Unfortunately,
Speaker 3: we don't have this perfect rules based order that can
Speaker 3: basically come in and impose a solution. With the rules
Speaker 3: based kind of objective solution, you have to find out
Speaker 3: what is the political interest of all of the different
Speaker 3: parties within this Gordian not and try to find some
Speaker 3: way that they can find an interest based compromise. So,
Speaker 3: for example, on the Palestinian side, you have Fattah Plo,
Speaker 3: Palaestinian Authority and Hamas who have very different ideas about
Speaker 3: what a future solution looks like. One is resistance based,
Speaker 3: armed resistance based. The other one is negotiations trying to
Speaker 3: continue with the Oslo process. It's such like political negotiated
Speaker 3: confidence building. And also within the Israeli body politic you
Speaker 3: have people who have no desire to compromise with the
Speaker 3: Palestinians and they want to basically use any excuse like
Speaker 3: October seven provided a good excuse to be able to
Speaker 3: try to expand ethnically, clans, resettle, all of these things.
Speaker 3: But they're vast but that's actually probably a minority on
Speaker 3: both sides. So for example, this Sunday. I think that
Speaker 3: they're calling for massive strikes protests, hundreds of thousands up
Speaker 3: to a million protesting on Sunday against the war on
Speaker 3: the Israeli side. Whatever New Zealand says is a country
Speaker 3: should be actually trying to reach out to those groups
Speaker 3: to work with them, not make a statement which is
Speaker 3: kind of like can be interpreted as kind of fully
Speaker 3: pro Palestinian and not really taken into account Israeli interests
Speaker 3: as well. So the differences between the Orthodox Jews who
Speaker 3: won't serve in the army and are seen as a
Speaker 3: kind of a burden on Israeli society, there's actually quite
Speaker 3: a strong division between them and sort of secular Israeli
Speaker 3: Jews as well, the Israeli Arabs. What is their interest?
Speaker 3: And it's getting more and more complicated as we go
Speaker 3: in because a lot of them, if, for example, a
Speaker 3: unilateral Palestinian state was declared, what is their position in that?
Speaker 3: Do they want to surrender their Israeli citizenship? Will they
Speaker 3: be like forced pushed into a Palestinian state which has
Speaker 3: no and lose their jobs and their security and their
Speaker 3: status which a lot of them don't want to in
Speaker 3: a state which is going to be underresourced and almost
Speaker 3: under enormous pressure from external forces immediately. So that's what
Speaker 3: I'm saying, And it's not you say I can't explain
Speaker 3: everything in a twenty minute podcast, but being aware and
Speaker 3: being very careful to avoid blanket generalizations which actually can
Speaker 3: potentially make the situation worse rather than improve it.
Speaker 2: We do see protesters here demanding that our government do more,
Speaker 2: do this, do that. And this is something else that
Speaker 2: you've written about as well, that protest is by only
Speaker 2: speaking to one side of the crisis, are unintentionally playing
Speaker 2: into their part in polarizing the region. Is that because
Speaker 2: it's it is that want to innate human need to
Speaker 2: be like, well, these are the good guys, these are
Speaker 2: the baddies. It should be simple, but it's actually really not.
Speaker 3: I think that's unfortunately correct, And what you raised there
Speaker 3: is really important because for like an Israeli or even
Speaker 3: a Jewish person around the world, it's hard to know
Speaker 3: how they feel when they look at these protests.
Speaker 1: Are they saying from the river to the sea? Is that?
Speaker 3: What does it mean exactly? Because previously when yesa Arafat
Speaker 3: said it, he meant it was reconquest completely what does
Speaker 3: the Palestinian flag mean when you look at it, it
Speaker 3: means it actually comes from Arab nationalism, which is an
Speaker 3: ethno nationalist ideology, which is this is all Arab land.
Speaker 3: So it's kind of like a competing ethno nationalist ideology
Speaker 3: with Jewish nationalism, which is also toxic. And the sense
Speaker 3: is that this land was never Jewish or fully only
Speaker 3: Jewish or only Arab. But if political actors in Israel
Speaker 3: like Nathania, who who's very skillfully trying to manipulate the narrative,
Speaker 3: can use some of these protests which seem I know
Speaker 3: they're not, but they see one sided as a kind
Speaker 3: of political fodder to be able to show that people
Speaker 3: who are on the fans, look, we're actually very insecure internationally,
Speaker 3: we have to stick together, we have to be instead
Speaker 3: of feeding into that siege mentality. They use that, and
Speaker 3: especially the ones on the hard right are using this
Speaker 3: as evidence that we have to actually be tough Bizill
Speaker 3: or Smitritch and it might Ben Gevere who are genuine
Speaker 3: extremist fundamentalists, and so they're looking to use any kind
Speaker 3: of imagery and narrative and international kind of this course
Speaker 3: that they can filill towards their propaganda purposes. So we
Speaker 3: should take the wind out of their sales and say
Speaker 3: very clearly, we're not against Israel, We're not against Palestine,
Speaker 3: We're for both. And now it sounds crazy. It's hard
Speaker 3: for people to actually try to get their heads around
Speaker 3: that because we have internalized, you know, this sort of
Speaker 3: colonial occupation narrative where there are elements of that. But
Speaker 3: we also have to remember that sixty percent of Israeli
Speaker 3: citizens are from the Middle East, whether they are Misiaki,
Speaker 3: Jews or Arab citizens of Israel. So it's yeah, just
Speaker 3: being a little bit more careful and not beating the
Speaker 3: fire trying to help to douse it somehow as what
Speaker 3: we need to be trying to do.
Speaker 5: I'm just acknowledging that this is an issue that has
Speaker 5: been young.
Speaker 1: We've had a long.
Speaker 5: Standing position since partition in nineteen forty seven to recognize
Speaker 5: both Palestine and Israel. And clearly, you know, our focus
Speaker 5: has been you know, as we've said, when, not if,
Speaker 5: And as a result for us, we've got to work
Speaker 5: through this rather serious issue.
Speaker 1: We've got to do it properly.
Speaker 5: As a complex issue, there are strong feelings on all
Speaker 5: sides of this debate in the public, as you've seen,
Speaker 5: and it's important that we make the right sitsum.
Speaker 2: In terms of so the government, our government is not
Speaker 2: disclosing what the conditions or criteria for us joining the
Speaker 2: recognition of the state of Palestine. They're not disclosing that yet.
Speaker 1: What do you think.
Speaker 2: I mean, one of them is obviously her Maas releasing hostages.
Speaker 2: What could be some others?
Speaker 3: I mean, I think that we may join with the
Speaker 3: Arab States and asking Hamas to disarm. They won't do that,
Speaker 3: of course, I mean, we could find ourselves like they're
Speaker 3: talking about a UN force coming in to try to
Speaker 3: do that. We'll end up in the same situation of
Speaker 3: the idea. And now I think that the hostages, of
Speaker 3: course are complete cease fire, but of course the current
Speaker 3: government in Israel doesn't want that to happen. They don't
Speaker 3: want a ceasefire, and of course smart Rich and Ben
Speaker 3: Giberta continuously threatening to collapse Nethania, Who's government. Interestingly, I
Speaker 3: think like if you look at the the idiosyncrasies of
Speaker 3: the Israeli electoral system they are currently out of that
Speaker 3: has finished the summer session, so in technical times, his
Speaker 3: coalition partners can't collapse his government. So this might explain
Speaker 3: why there's a pressure being applied to Nathan now who now,
Speaker 3: But unfortunately he doesn't seem to be responsive to that,
Speaker 3: and he's doubling down looking at the long game as well.
Speaker 3: I mean, of course, officially New Zealand's criterias that there
Speaker 3: should be political economic security criteria mat but it's very vague.
Speaker 3: What does that actually mean. I think that they'll probably
Speaker 3: interpret that liberally depending on what does the situation come
Speaker 3: September for that leader's meeting.
Speaker 1: At the UN.
Speaker 2: What should New Zealand do then to make us better informed?
Speaker 1: I mean, I.
Speaker 2: Suppose it would be easy now, especially given Australia, Australia's
Speaker 2: recognition to just follow the herd so to speak. How
Speaker 2: should we treat the situation differently?
Speaker 3: I mean, considering the nature of the current Israeli government
Speaker 3: and in Hamas as the sort of de facto governing
Speaker 3: body and Gaza at least, I think that we should
Speaker 3: be looking to put together some kind of urgent thing tanks.
Speaker 3: I know, there's a lot of crises around the world.
Speaker 3: To be able to gather data and information and intelligence.
Speaker 3: I mean, for example, I spend a lot of my
Speaker 3: time talking to people on the Palestinian side, on the
Speaker 3: Israeli side, Syria, on all of that, and what I've
Speaker 3: noticed there are really good people, some of them with
Speaker 3: more or less levels of influence, who have good pragmatic solutions,
Speaker 3: but they're not reaching.
Speaker 1: Policymakers.
Speaker 3: So Track two non governmental outreach to potential future for example,
Speaker 3: parts of the Israeli opposition and the NGOs and civil society,
Speaker 3: parts of Israeli society, I mean Palestinian society who are
Speaker 3: increasingly furious with Hamas and what they've dragged them into,
Speaker 3: instead of some I don't think we're going to get
Speaker 3: a solution out of the current leadership, but some kind
Speaker 3: of parallel discussions or trying to bring people together as
Speaker 3: a neutral, objective arbiter rather than someone who's pursuing seemingly
Speaker 3: an agenda on one side or the other.
Speaker 2: What's been nearly eighty years since the world pushed for
Speaker 2: a two states solution? Will it take another eighty to
Speaker 2: make it happen? I mean, what is the end goal here?
Speaker 2: When do we say enough is enough?
Speaker 3: I think it's been enough for a long time. I
Speaker 3: think there's genuine will to find some kind of solution.
Speaker 3: If you can separate the messianic element and the kind
Speaker 3: of authoritarians out of the picture of contain them, you'll
Speaker 3: see that there's more desire to solve this situation in
Speaker 3: Israel than there has ever been in They became a
Speaker 3: little bit infatuated with military success through forty eight, sixty seven,
Speaker 3: seventy three, and so they believe that a military solution
Speaker 3: could work long term to provide security. But I think
Speaker 3: a lot of people realizing that can't. So therefore that's
Speaker 3: an opportunity. And the same applies on the Palestinian side
Speaker 3: that sort of like acts of terrorism or like want
Speaker 3: on on violence is not going to actually lead them
Speaker 3: to a solution that's just going to continue to spiral.
Speaker 3: So while there's so much dark, kind of gloomy outlock,
Speaker 3: there's also some potential there. But we need to have
Speaker 3: our eyes open, I think, to see it, and our
Speaker 3: he has opened as well.
Speaker 1: Thanks for joining us, Leon, You're most welcome. Thank you
Speaker 1: for having me.
Speaker 2: That's it for this episode of the Front Page. You
Speaker 2: can read more about today's stories and extensive news coverage
Speaker 2: at enzidherld dot co dot nz. The Front Page is
Speaker 2: produced by Jane Ye and Richard Martin, who is also
Speaker 2: our editor. I'm Chelsea Daniels. Subscribe to the front Page
Speaker 2: on iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts, and tune
Speaker 2: in tomorrow for another look behind the headlines.
Speaker 4: Four