Speaker 1: Hey, guys, ready or not, twenty twenty four is here,
Speaker 1: and we here at breaking points, are already thinking of
Speaker 1: ways we can up our game for this critical election.
Speaker 2: We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade
Speaker 2: the studio ad staff give you, guys, the best independent.
Speaker 1: Coverage that is possible.
Speaker 2: If you like what we're all about, it just means
Speaker 2: the absolute world to have your support. But enough with that,
Speaker 2: let's get to the show.
Speaker 3: We're joined now by Professor Rod Stiegel, he who is
Speaker 3: the Associate Professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies an endowed
Speaker 3: Professor in the Study of Modern Genocide at Stockton University,
Speaker 3: where he also serves as director of the Master of
Speaker 3: Arts in Holocaust and Genocide Studies.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 3: Professor Siegel, towards the very beginning of Israel's response to
Speaker 3: Hamas's October seventh assault, published a widely read piece in
Speaker 3: Jewish Currents titled A Textbook Case of Genocide, which was
Speaker 3: controversial and debated at the time. We're now more than
Speaker 3: two months away from that piece and more than more
Speaker 3: than twenty thousand civilian or casualties away from that piece
Speaker 3: as well, so we wanted to check back in with
Speaker 3: Professor Siegel about what we're seeing, what's going on. So,
Speaker 3: first of all, thank you so much for joining us
Speaker 3: and lending your expertise here.
Speaker 1: Thank you, thank you for having me.
Speaker 3: And let me start by asking what does it mean
Speaker 3: to be a kind of professor of genocide studies? What
Speaker 3: is that field like, where did it come from and
Speaker 3: how did you get involved in it?
Speaker 1: Well, I mean my involvement in the field started actually
Speaker 1: from a master's degree in Jewish history with a focus
Speaker 1: on the Holocaust, and then I went on to do
Speaker 1: a PhD in history, again with a focus on Holocaust
Speaker 1: and genocide studies. And you know, the field. You know,
Speaker 1: we can talk about it a bit, a bit more
Speaker 1: in detail perhaps, but you know, these days, being I
Speaker 1: think working in Holocaust and genocide studies is maybe I
Speaker 1: would say, very confusing. The world in twenty twenty three
Speaker 1: was not supposed to look like it looks like for
Speaker 1: people working in this field for a couple a few
Speaker 1: decades now, and you know, people in this field definitely
Speaker 1: never imagined I think that we would be seeing what
Speaker 1: we're seeing now in Israel's genocidal back on Gaza. And
Speaker 1: that's why we're also seeing a major crisis in Holocaust
Speaker 1: and genocide studies today. I think there's the field is
Speaker 1: very divided between people who say that what we're seeing now,
Speaker 1: what we're witnessing this ISRAELI Attech on Gaza, requires that
Speaker 1: we really rethink perhaps various assumptions that we've had in
Speaker 1: the field, and then there are others who unfortunately say, no,
Speaker 1: you know, there's nothing here that requires any rethinking and
Speaker 1: basically business as usual. I mean, among the people in
Speaker 1: the first group, and I include myself in them, who
Speaker 1: think that this requires major rethinking, we can you can
Speaker 1: think about the statement of Scholars of sixty scholars in
Speaker 1: Holocaust and Genocide Studies that was published last week, which
Speaker 1: I coordinated and organized and helped draft the statement that
Speaker 1: we put together about Israel's genocidal assault on Gaza and
Speaker 1: its meanings and implications. And among the second group, there
Speaker 1: was a statement several weeks ago that was circulated primarily
Speaker 1: by scholars of the Holocaust, and that one for instance,
Speaker 1: did not mention any kind of crime but in Israel's
Speaker 1: attack on Gaza, not genocide, of course, but not any
Speaker 1: other crime, and also engaged in this dehumanization of Palestinians
Speaker 1: who appear in that statement by Holocaust scholars really only
Speaker 1: as quote unquote human shields. Right, So there their humanity
Speaker 1: is recognized, but actually not really recognized only when they
Speaker 1: appear as human shields. And it's actually in some part
Speaker 1: in response to that statement by Holocaust scholars that the
Speaker 1: second statement by Holocaust and Genocide studies scholars against sixty scholars,
Speaker 1: you know, some of the some of them really central
Speaker 1: figures in the field, very influential scholars for decades in
Speaker 1: the field, have signed our statement that you know, it's meaning,
Speaker 1: as I said, is that business as usual in Holocaust
Speaker 1: and genocide studies is not possible moving forward.
Speaker 3: And so a lot of lay people who hear the
Speaker 3: claim that Israel is carrying out a genocidal attack often
Speaker 3: respond by saying, that's that's wildly inflammatory. It does a
Speaker 3: disservice to the memory of the Holocaust. What are some
Speaker 3: what does that critique get wrong? What are some misconceptions
Speaker 3: about what genocide is?
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, there's one of the misconceptions about genocide is
Speaker 1: that it's about killing all the targeted all the members
Speaker 1: all the members of the targeted group immediately or very
Speaker 1: quickly and that's how genocide is supposed to look like. Now,
Speaker 1: this is just actually wrong. The only way that we
Speaker 1: can actually think about genocide is according to the UN
Speaker 1: Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of
Speaker 1: Genocide from December nineteen forty eight. And we'll come back
Speaker 1: to that in a second. But it's important to mention
Speaker 1: that this misconception about what genocide is is also based
Speaker 1: on a misconception of actually what the Holocaust was, because
Speaker 1: this misconception is basically based on the idea that genocide
Speaker 1: is supposed to look like the Holocaust, and for many people,
Speaker 1: the Holocaust is about just the Nazis killing all the
Speaker 1: Jews immediately, which was not the case the Holocaust. Actually,
Speaker 1: when you really look at the history of the Holocaust,
Speaker 1: it shows us that genocide is a process. The Holocaust
Speaker 1: was a process, and the process involved two and a
Speaker 1: half years actually of the Nazis experience attacking Jews, including
Speaker 1: killing Jews, but various forms of mass milids against Jews
Speaker 1: and experimenting mostly with forced displacement, with what we call
Speaker 1: more commonly quote ethnic cleansing, right that is, pushing as
Speaker 1: many Jews as possible out of German controlled territories, expanding
Speaker 1: told territories during the war. So from the fall of
Speaker 1: nineteen thirty nine, for two and a half years until
Speaker 1: the spring of nineteen forty two, this process of ethnic
Speaker 1: cleansing intensified in various ways in the context, primarily in
Speaker 1: the context of the war, so that by the spring
Speaker 1: of nineteen forty two, the Germans arrive at their final
Speaker 1: version of what this final solution of the German of
Speaker 1: the Jewish question, that is, to kill every Jew within
Speaker 1: German reach. But it takes two and a half years.
Speaker 1: It involves many other forms of mass violence, gatilization, starvation
Speaker 1: for slabor, but again mostly force displacement at nic cleansing.
Speaker 1: So it's important to say that this misconception about what
Speaker 1: genocide is is actually rooted in a misconception of what
Speaker 1: the Holocaust was. But when we look at the convention,
Speaker 1: at the Genocide Convention, it's also important to say that
Speaker 1: an international law, by the way, there is no hierarchy, right,
Speaker 1: So this popular idea that there is a hierarchy of
Speaker 1: international crimes is simply not true an international law, there
Speaker 1: are different crimes with different elements to them, and when
Speaker 1: we look at genocide, there are indeed a number of
Speaker 1: elements that differentiated from other crimes. One of them is intent.
Speaker 1: So the language of the convention is that genocide is
Speaker 1: a crime that has intent to destroy a group that's
Speaker 1: defined in national, ethnic, religious, or racial terms as such,
Speaker 1: meaning that the members of the group need to be
Speaker 1: targeted as members of the group, right and not for
Speaker 1: any individual region, for any other reason, right as members
Speaker 1: of the group, and certainly as the perpetrators imagine their
Speaker 1: group membership. And there needs to be an intent. Now,
Speaker 1: intent is a very high thrishold, right, and that's the
Speaker 1: reason that we don't have many cases of mass violence
Speaker 1: since nineteen forty eight that are recognized as genocide. We
Speaker 1: can think about the Randa genocide. Of course, in all
Speaker 1: the wars and violence in the former Yugoslavian the nineteen nineties,
Speaker 1: only Sir Bernitza is recognized as an act of genocide,
Speaker 1: But there's very few Why because perpetrators don't walk around
Speaker 1: pressing their intent explicitly and clearly. Here in this case
Speaker 1: they do again, we can think why. This is why
Speaker 1: we have such unashamed, clear, explicit, direct statements of intent
Speaker 1: that also happened. By the way, it's important to say
Speaker 1: over time. Right, It's not, as has been argued just
Speaker 1: in the first week after the seventh of October the
Speaker 1: hamas Led attack and massacre of about twelve hundred Israeli is. No,
Speaker 1: it's over time, and it actually also uses various mechanisms
Speaker 1: of expressing this intent and also dehumanizing Palestinians. Right. So
Speaker 1: intent is one thing that differentiates genocide from other crimes,
Speaker 1: but also very importantly in the UN Genocide Convention, so
Speaker 1: intent is explained an Article two where genocide is defined
Speaker 1: in international law.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 1: And another issue that differentiated genocide from other crimes is
Speaker 1: the legal obligation in Article one that once states recognize
Speaker 1: that there is a clear risk of genocide or that
Speaker 1: genocide is already unfolding, but it's enough that there's a
Speaker 1: clear risk of genocide, right, there's an obligation to intervene
Speaker 1: to stop it and to prevent it, which is very
Speaker 1: different than other crimes and international law. Another issue that
Speaker 1: again we can elaborate more on, perhaps is incitement, right,
Speaker 1: which is again a different crime in the Genocide Convention,
Speaker 1: that's Article three, but related so incitement to genocide, which
Speaker 1: usually happens actually in media discourses but also in political
Speaker 1: discourses or in just sometimes in public spaces, in various ways.
Speaker 1: And it's important to say that is real today and
Speaker 1: anyone who follows Hebrew language sources and they're all over
Speaker 1: social media today, and the Israeli media, Israel is, you know,
Speaker 1: very deeply immersed in a genocidal discourse. We see this
Speaker 1: in the media since in the Israeli media since seventh
Speaker 1: of October. We see this in politics, We see this
Speaker 1: in public spaces, and I'm talking about, you know, huge
Speaker 1: signs hanging on the bridges of the Tel Aviv Freeway
Speaker 1: right after the seventh of October calling to flatten Gaza,
Speaker 1: to destroy Gaza. Uh written on them directly that the
Speaker 1: image of triumph would be zero people in Gaza, so
Speaker 1: very direct, again, very explicit. Does not you know, you
Speaker 1: don't need a degree in comparative literature to interpret these
Speaker 1: kinds of signs and statements and so but in the
Speaker 1: media discourse and in the political discourse in Israel after
Speaker 1: seventh of October, we see clear incitement to genocide, right, clear,
Speaker 1: clear incitement to genocide. And all this has been widely
Speaker 1: published and I can repeat some of the quotes here
Speaker 1: if needed. But it's important to say that, you know,
Speaker 1: one of the cases that comes close to this kind
Speaker 1: of society immersed in a genocidal discourse perhaps is Rhonda
Speaker 1: and the Rwanda genocide in nineteen ninety four, that as
Speaker 1: the genocide was unfolding, right, we had journalists and radio
Speaker 1: people inciting for genocide for the murder of Tutsis in
Speaker 1: that case. And it's important to say that in the ICTR,
Speaker 1: in the post genocide trials in the case of Rwanda,
Speaker 1: there was also a media case where journalists indeed stood
Speaker 1: trial and were convicted for incitement to genocide. So that's
Speaker 1: another element that actually differentiates genocide from other crimes in
Speaker 1: international law. And again we see here like the issue
Speaker 1: of intent, which is an article too and refers to
Speaker 1: people with what's called command authority in international law. So
Speaker 1: state leaders, war cabinetmitterers, a ministers, and senior army officers.
Speaker 1: Also their statements are very clear, explicit and unashamed. Also,
Speaker 1: incitement in Israel is clear, explicit and unashamed. I mean
Speaker 1: just yesterday or the day before, just to give a
Speaker 1: recent example, a journalist at Zvirgraskelli on Channel thirteen on
Speaker 1: the TV in Israel just openly, outright said that he
Speaker 1: thinks that at the beginning, Israel made a mistake because
Speaker 1: it should have the Israeli attack on guys, it should
Speaker 1: have been much more actually violent and severe, and it
Speaker 1: should have killed one hundred thousand Palestinians. Right now, only
Speaker 1: the TV anchor there, you know, said are you sure
Speaker 1: that that's what you're saying? There was some exchange between them,
Speaker 1: you know, is this All the other people they're sitting
Speaker 1: had nothing to say, And the official response of thirteen
Speaker 1: of days Reelly to V to that was that it's
Speaker 1: you know that we're just expressing the plurality of you know,
Speaker 1: positions in Israeli society. Right, So this is outright, unashamed, right,
Speaker 1: It's very common today, it's in Israel, and it's something
Speaker 1: I think we should all be paying attention to.
Speaker 4: I mean, I want to pick up on that point,
Speaker 4: because I definitely don't mean this as a leading question.
Speaker 1: I'm generally curious.
Speaker 4: A lot of people in Israel are afraid that they
Speaker 4: live amongst other countries where it's not safe to be
Speaker 4: Jewish and where people engage in by this definition of genocide,
Speaker 4: arguably genocidal discourse and I wanted to get your thoughts
Speaker 4: on that, not to suggest that there's any justification for
Speaker 4: you know, sort of apples to apples in terms of
Speaker 4: military operations or anything like that. But is Hamas engaged
Speaker 4: in genicidal intentionality? Are they engaged in genocidal discourse? I
Speaker 4: know they're not a state actor in the same way,
Speaker 4: and maybe that's a sort of difference by the UN definition,
Speaker 4: I'm curious about that. But also countries like Iran in
Speaker 4: the way that they approach just Jewish people who live
Speaker 4: around the world, who live in Israel? Does that by
Speaker 4: the definition the UN definition in nineteen forty eight, does
Speaker 4: that sort of fit into it? How should we think
Speaker 4: about the way they discuss Jews.
Speaker 1: Well, I think it's important to explain also that the
Speaker 1: UN definition requires five acts, right, it lists five acts
Speaker 1: that are considered genocide. So there's intent, there is the
Speaker 1: dynamics on the ground, but it's not directly in the convention.
Speaker 1: But it's very clear that genocide also requires capacity to
Speaker 1: carry it out, right, and if you don't have that capacity,
Speaker 1: so it's not intent itself is not enough, right, you
Speaker 1: have to show the dynamics of violence on the ground
Speaker 1: in order to show genocide, and I think that in
Speaker 1: Israel's attack on Gaza. Now we have, you know, enough
Speaker 1: evidence so far that the attack, as many experts now
Speaker 1: have said, is unprecedented, its intensity and its levels of
Speaker 1: killing and destruction unprecedented, that is since World War two. Right,
Speaker 1: we have, as you said at the beginning, more than
Speaker 1: twenty thousand Palestinians who have been killed so far. I mean,
Speaker 1: the north of Gaza is basically destroyed completely. And it's
Speaker 1: important to say that Israel's attack targets everything. They're schools, mosques, universities, churches,
Speaker 1: agricultural fields. Right, Israel has bombs from the beginning, agricultural fields. Well,
Speaker 1: there is nothing there except agricultural fields, which tells us
Speaker 1: something of course about the intention of the attack. The
Speaker 1: levels of destruction. More than half of all the buildings
Speaker 1: and Gaza have been destroyed, the infrastructure have been destroyed.
Speaker 1: More than two million Palestinians have been forcibly displaced. Right,
Speaker 1: specific groups are targeted. Right journalists, as we know very clearly,
Speaker 1: are targeted at least one or two on average a day,
Speaker 1: So that you know, so the very part for Palestinians
Speaker 1: to actually document the attack against them healthcare professionals and
Speaker 1: doctors are targeted. Hospitals specifically are targeted, which is very
Speaker 1: very important when we think about genocide and the total
Speaker 1: siege policy of Israel, so deliberately creating conditions of life
Speaker 1: calculated to bring about the destruction of the group and
Speaker 1: whole in part, which is one of the acts of
Speaker 1: genocide in the convention. Targeting of hospitals shows us that
Speaker 1: very clearly. But for all of these things you need capacity, right,
Speaker 1: and it's clear that the Hamas Ramas has no capacity
Speaker 1: to carry out a genocidal assault on Israel. D seventh.
Speaker 1: It's important to say that the Ramas led attack on
Speaker 1: seventh of October was a horrific and horrendous act of
Speaker 1: mass murder. It was a massive terrorist attack. It definitely
Speaker 1: involved war crimes and crimes against humanity that are also
Speaker 1: ongoing in the sense of hostage taking. Right, There's no
Speaker 1: doubt about any of this. But Ramas has no capacity
Speaker 1: to carry out genocide. And also we don't see in
Speaker 1: the case of Hamas this kind of the way that
Speaker 1: intention has been expressed and is being expressed in the
Speaker 1: case of Israel over time, using various mechanisms in an
Speaker 1: unashamed way. We don't see this actually in the case
Speaker 1: of Ramas. Yes, there are some statements in the case
Speaker 1: of Haramas about destroying Israel, absolutely, but do we see
Speaker 1: in a kind of systematic way as we see in
Speaker 1: Israel's attack, together with the dynamics of violence, together with
Speaker 1: the capacity to carry out genocidal assault. No, we don't
Speaker 1: see it in the case of Hamas. It's also very
Speaker 1: important to mention, by the way, that there is a
Speaker 1: military response that is genocidal, right, that is what Israel
Speaker 1: did after the seventh of October. Right, So a military
Speaker 1: response that is genocidal is illegal in any case under
Speaker 1: international law. Right, genocide is an illegal response under international law.
Speaker 1: Even if the Ramas attack would be considered genocide, and
Speaker 1: as I just explained, it cannot actually be considered genocidal.
Speaker 3: So one of the characteristics, as you mentioned, of meeting
Speaker 3: the the kind of genocide threshold is you know, attacking
Speaker 3: an ethnic group, you know, in whole and destroying them
Speaker 3: in whole or in part. So what what what does
Speaker 3: it mean by in part? Because you know Hamas's attack
Speaker 3: on October seventh, depending on the definition of in part,
Speaker 3: would seem to fit just as the IDF's attack on
Speaker 3: Palestinians and Gaza, which seems to fit with in part.
Speaker 3: So what does in part mean, especially.
Speaker 4: If you consider, for example, Iran potentially funding Hamas in
Speaker 4: this case. I think that's a fair.
Speaker 1: Question, right, right, Well, again, I think you know, it's
Speaker 1: important to as. I just said that that genocide requires
Speaker 1: that you have the capacity to carry it out, right,
Speaker 1: that there's a state capacity to carry it out, and
Speaker 1: there is no such capacity by Hamas. Right, that's first.
Speaker 1: That's firstly. Now in part that's a good question, and
Speaker 1: there's there's a lot of discussion about this, but I
Speaker 1: think that we're beyond that in a way actually in
Speaker 1: the case of Gaiza, because Israel's aim there, the physical
Speaker 1: destruction of Palestinian society and life at Gaza now is
Speaker 1: total the idea. And actually you know from the from
Speaker 1: the very first days and the certain things of October,
Speaker 1: there was a document that was leaked by the Israeli
Speaker 1: Intelligence Ministry that outlined the complete ethnic lensing basically of
Speaker 1: Palestinians from Gaiza, so their removal to the Sinai Desert
Speaker 1: in Egypt. And of course there is repeated calls in
Speaker 1: Israeli politics and society and media. As I said about
Speaker 1: quote a second Knakba, right, referring to the nineteen forty
Speaker 1: eight Nakba, during the nineteen forty eight war, when Israel
Speaker 1: was created and seven hundred and fifty thousand Palestinians were expelled,
Speaker 1: fifteen thousand Palestinians were victims of massacres, hundreds of Palestinians
Speaker 1: towns and villages were destroyed completely and erased, so the
Speaker 1: Palestinian Nakba, and then of course the ongoing Palestinian nacua
Speaker 1: since then, in various forms of Israeli mass vilus an
Speaker 1: attack against Palestinians, including military occupation, siege and terment, torture,
Speaker 1: you know, ongoing since then, and now indeed, right, a
Speaker 1: second nakba as that has been called for from the
Speaker 1: seventh of October. And actually it's important to say that
Speaker 1: in many cases the statements about creating a second Nakba
Speaker 1: are calling for nakba. That quote will overshadow, right, the
Speaker 1: nineteen forty eight Knappa, which indeed is what we're seeing
Speaker 1: actually also in terms of numbers, but in terms of
Speaker 1: again the intensity of killing and destruction. So the destruction
Speaker 1: that we're now seeing in Gaza. Right, and again there's
Speaker 1: numerous experts who are telling us that the levels of destruction,
Speaker 1: this carpet bombing from the sky, from the ground, right,
Speaker 1: the levels of killing twenty thousand, more than twenty thousand people,
Speaker 1: and there are furse thousands buried under the rubble in
Speaker 1: a bit more than two months. Right. This takes us
Speaker 1: now into really we have to understand in the sphere
Speaker 1: of total destruction of Palestinian society and culture, because also
Speaker 1: cultural archeological sites are bombed, cultural sites are bombed. Right.
Speaker 1: The idea is to destroy and erase right Palestinian life
Speaker 1: and society and Gaza and remove Palestinians from there completely.
Speaker 1: And this is again expressed in various ways in Israeli
Speaker 1: media and culture and society in public space is unashamed. Right,
Speaker 1: this calling for a second Nakaba, and as I said,
Speaker 1: force displacement, as we're seeing now in Gaza about two millions,
Speaker 1: so virtually almost all the population in Gaza is forcibly
Speaker 1: displaced under conditions of total siege. Israel's ninth of October
Speaker 1: Israeli Defense Ministry i've Gone's total siege proclamation no food,
Speaker 1: no water, so starvation policies. There's no clean water. We've seen,
Speaker 1: we're already seeing the outbreak of infectious disease, right, So
Speaker 1: deliberately creating conditions of life calculated to bring about destruction
Speaker 1: of the group. So force displacement indeed, as in the
Speaker 1: Nazi case, by the way, right, in many cases, escalates
Speaker 1: into basically outright mass murder, right, so genocide. So we're
Speaker 1: seeing this now and unfolding in front of our eyes.
Speaker 1: But it's also important, by the way to say that
Speaker 1: the discourse about deporting millions of people into a desert,
Speaker 1: which is what we're hearing now in the case of
Speaker 1: Palestinians and guys, of deporting them to the Sinai desert
Speaker 1: is also should also raise all the alarms that we
Speaker 1: have because we know historically that deserts have been used
Speaker 1: as a weapon of genocide. Historically. We can think about
Speaker 1: the Armenian genocide, the deportations of the Armenians to the
Speaker 1: Syriani Rock desert, right, the massacres on the way, but
Speaker 1: the idea that they would reach the desert and they
Speaker 1: would die there. Right. We can think about the herero
Speaker 1: Inama genocide and German Southeast Africa in the early twentieth century,
Speaker 1: where the Germans put down by the way a rebellion
Speaker 1: by the colonized Herero by chasing them into the desert
Speaker 1: where they died of starvation and dehydration. Right, almost all
Speaker 1: the Herero actually were destroyed. Eighty percent of the group
Speaker 1: were destroyed in this case of genocide. So I think
Speaker 1: that in the case of Gaza, we have to be
Speaker 1: clear we're actually beyond the in hoole or in part.
Speaker 1: You are now witnessing right the destruction of Palestinian life
Speaker 1: and society and Gaza and whole.
Speaker 3: And to your point about the infectious diseases, we have
Speaker 3: new numbers from the Gods and Ministry of Health. This
Speaker 3: is three hundred and fifty five thousand people, which is,
Speaker 3: you know, approaching a quarter of the population are suffering
Speaker 3: from infectious diseases. At this point, that number is only
Speaker 3: going to continue to grow. But one of the interesting
Speaker 3: phenomena in this debate over the last two months has
Speaker 3: been the different way that the war has talked about
Speaker 3: here in the United States versus Israel. Oftentimes United States politicians.
Speaker 3: We had Ted cruz On here making this claim here
Speaker 3: that you know, nobody tries harder to protect civilian life
Speaker 3: than the Israelis. But then you follow the discourse in Israel,
Speaker 3: you don't see those claims being made, you know, you
Speaker 3: see claims to the opposite, that we need you know,
Speaker 3: damage is more important than precision, for instance. So I'm
Speaker 3: curious how that translates when it comes to the question
Speaker 3: of genocide. Is what is the debate like in the
Speaker 3: Hebrew language media and Israeli media over the question of
Speaker 3: whether the Israel is carrying out a genocidal attack? Does
Speaker 3: that does that get discussed? Is it rejected because it's
Speaker 3: it's saying now that that it's that that is outrageous
Speaker 3: and canning be discussed. Or are there people who are saying,
Speaker 3: you know, you know, yes we are and we ought
Speaker 3: to be because it's justified.
Speaker 1: No, I mean, we're in Israel, a society today almost
Speaker 1: in its entirety, is immersed in in a in a
Speaker 1: very destructive and indigenousidal discourse.
Speaker 3: Uh, would they agree with that claim? Like, would would
Speaker 3: they say, yes, that's what we're that's where we are.
Speaker 1: Of course not. But you know, it's very important to
Speaker 1: say historically, perpetrators of genocide and societies that we're engaged
Speaker 1: in the genocidal attack against another group almost always see
Speaker 1: themselves as the victims. Right. The Nazis actually understood themselves
Speaker 1: to be under acute danger and attack by quote unquote
Speaker 1: world jury. Right, So their attack against the Jews was
Speaker 1: merely a self defense, right against these evil forces conspiring
Speaker 1: to destroy Germany and attack them. Right, This is a
Speaker 1: very common mechanism. The Ottoman authorities in World War One
Speaker 1: saw them saw the state as under attack by Armenians
Speaker 1: who are actually agents of the Russian enemies during World
Speaker 1: War One. So deporting them to the desert was merely
Speaker 1: an active self defense of removing them from the front
Speaker 1: so that they don't collaborate with the Russian enemy. This
Speaker 1: is a very very typical mechanism of perpetrators and societies
Speaker 1: immerged in genocidal violence. There's nothing very special here. So
Speaker 1: of course that's what we're seeing. That's what we're hearing
Speaker 1: now in Israel, that this is basically just this is
Speaker 1: really in Israel, we're actually seeing a heightened sort of
Speaker 1: this kind of discourse. Right, this is actually war in
Speaker 1: defense of Western civilization. Right, this is a war of
Speaker 1: course against Ramas and so on and so forth. But again,
Speaker 1: so this would be in the social setting. And I
Speaker 1: do have to say that there is a minority of
Speaker 1: people in Israel still very committed to a different kind
Speaker 1: of discourse, including in the media. So if we think
Speaker 1: about nine plus nine seven two Jewish Palestinian media outlet,
Speaker 1: which I urge all your listeners and viewers to check
Speaker 1: it out plus nine seven two definitely publishes continuously a
Speaker 1: lot of critique, including discussions about the discourse of related
Speaker 1: to the issue of genocide. But there Israel, you know, media,
Speaker 1: mainstream media, and society and discuss across political device left right, center,
Speaker 1: whatever it is, right is very immersed in a discourse
Speaker 1: that this isn't this is self defense, right, This genocidal
Speaker 1: assault is self defense, even though we have and again
Speaker 1: just yesterday, I think there was an officer in the
Speaker 1: Israeli Army that outright in a public event, right, referring
Speaker 1: actually to a biblical story, which is important because one
Speaker 1: of the mechanisms of intent was, as expressed by Israeli
Speaker 1: Prime Minister Benjamintanielle, was the invocation of the biblical story
Speaker 1: of a maleek, right, one of the expressions of genocidal intent.
Speaker 1: So this officer in the Israeli Army spoke about what
Speaker 1: his unit did under his command right in Gaza as
Speaker 1: an act of genocidal revenge. Basically, he framed it as
Speaker 1: you know, the seventh of October attack was uh was
Speaker 1: an attack against the honor of the Israeli nation, and
Speaker 1: his acts in Gaza, his unit reacted as genocidal revenge,
Speaker 1: and he said that this should be extended to all
Speaker 1: of Gaza, right to restore this, you know, this the
Speaker 1: honor of the nation. So even though we have these
Speaker 1: kinds of things, and of course actually a lot of
Speaker 1: videos that Israeli soldiers and officers themselves have taken and
Speaker 1: posted on social media that mirror the language of intent
Speaker 1: by people with command authority in Israeli in Israel, and
Speaker 1: then the language of incitement in Israeli media. So we
Speaker 1: have soldiers talking about the fact that they understand that
Speaker 1: they're in Gaza to root out the seat of a
Speaker 1: Malek quote, or soldiers singing that there's the slogan of
Speaker 1: their unit is there are no innocent civilians. Right again, explicitly,
Speaker 1: I'm ashamed. We have all of this, right, it's in
Speaker 1: front of our eyes constantly, right, or we have so
Speaker 1: another video that was went very viral on social media,
Speaker 1: the soldiers burning the truck with food and water in it, right,
Speaker 1: and explaining as they're doing it right, that Palestinian children
Speaker 1: are all terrorists, right, for example, so one point one people,
Speaker 1: a million people in Guys under the age of eighteen, right,
Speaker 1: all terrorists, right, No innocent civilians, all these things. Even
Speaker 1: though we have all of this right, we still have
Speaker 1: a discourse which is basically a denialist discourse. And this
Speaker 1: is again very common. States and societies engaged in genocide
Speaker 1: usually deny it already as it's unfolding. They also deny
Speaker 1: it later, but the denial starts as the genocide unfolds.
Speaker 1: So even though we have these now we live in
Speaker 1: this media age and the social media age, even though
Speaker 1: everything is in our face right, we're still in this
Speaker 1: common mechanism of denying what is in our face. We
Speaker 1: should start facing this real reality.
Speaker 4: And my last question just kind of goes back to
Speaker 4: what we were talking about initially, the disconnect between the
Speaker 4: reality of the un definition that was established in nineteen
Speaker 4: forty eight and how a lot of people look back
Speaker 4: or compare contemporary genocides unfolding in front of their eyes
Speaker 4: to for example, the Holocaust and even misconceptions about the
Speaker 4: Holocausts that have sort of been passed down through simplified
Speaker 4: narratives that you get taught in history class and all
Speaker 4: of that. There's a not insignificant portion of the Israeli
Speaker 4: population that is Muslim, and I think a lot of
Speaker 4: people and probably a lot of people in Israel who
Speaker 4: look at what they're doing is primarily self defense to
Speaker 4: your point, would say, well, that's kind of the difference
Speaker 4: here is that we're not trying to eliminate our own
Speaker 4: Muslim population outside of these contested territories outside of Gaza
Speaker 4: and the West Bank we protect. And we could have
Speaker 4: a whole conversation about the difference in rights between Muslim
Speaker 4: Israelis and Jewish Israelis, but the bottom line is that
Speaker 4: question of dominating the sort of lives of Muslims who
Speaker 4: live in Israel. Is that part of the disconnect here
Speaker 4: that the UN definition functions in a different way than
Speaker 4: a lot of people who maybe are in Israel or
Speaker 4: defend Israel here in the US and say it's not
Speaker 4: if it we were a genocide Israel would be, you know,
Speaker 4: putting Muslim Israelis in you know, the same that they
Speaker 4: would be attacking them in the same way.
Speaker 1: Is that part of this I think that you're offering
Speaker 1: first of all to Israel Palestinians, and there are there
Speaker 1: is a not insignificant part of Israel Palestinians or Christians,
Speaker 1: not only Muslims. That's absolutely true. Yeah, Israel by the way,
Speaker 1: has completely destroyed the Christian community and Gaza as well
Speaker 1: in this attack. It's another thing. So you're talking about
Speaker 1: Palestinian citizens of Israel, that's what you're talking about, almost
Speaker 1: two million people. So again it's important to say that
Speaker 1: genocide is a process, and what we're seeing now this
Speaker 1: process of the attack in Gaza, and especially in the
Speaker 1: frame of incitement, the acute incitement in Israel. It's definitely
Speaker 1: part of the genocide Convention is a convention of the
Speaker 1: prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide. If we
Speaker 1: think about prevention. Yesstinian Israelis are in raved danger now
Speaker 1: and we see it, by the way, in the West
Speaker 1: Bank with an unbelievable intensified attack. In any case, twenty
Speaker 1: twenty three, even before the seventh of October, by the way,
Speaker 1: was the most lethal year for Palestinians in the West Bank. Right,
Speaker 1: Amass does not control the West Bank. By the way, right,
Speaker 1: we still see unbelievable ethnic cleansing in the West Bank.
Speaker 1: I mean Area C, which is sixty percent of the
Speaker 1: West Bank is basically all of it is now under
Speaker 1: Israel settler control and full of Israeli settlements. Right. Israel
Speaker 1: has killed now hundreds of Palestinians only since the seventh
Speaker 1: of October. There's also hundreds in the West Bank and
Speaker 1: East Rulism have been killed before the seventh of October
Speaker 1: in twenty twenty three, but hundreds thousands have been arrested,
Speaker 1: sixteen whole communities and probably war have been completely forcibly
Speaker 1: displayed in the West Bank since the seventh of October.
Speaker 1: Again no Jamas, right. So in the West Bank and
Speaker 1: East Jerusalem we definitely see a very quickly escalating right
Speaker 1: violence which was already intense against Palestinians. That's one thing
Speaker 1: if we think about genocide as the process that it
Speaker 1: always is, also in the case of the Holocaust, but
Speaker 1: with Israel Palestinians we also see very very worrying signs.
Speaker 1: So just a couple of minutes on this, because you
Speaker 1: asked and it's actually very, very very important. We have
Speaker 1: to remember that historically, the one hundred and fifty six
Speaker 1: thousand Palestinians who survived in k Band remained within what
Speaker 1: became Israel in nineteen forty eight, were immediately placed under
Speaker 1: a military rule until nineteen sixty six, so almost twenty
Speaker 1: years of military rule. That is, they were immediately seen
Speaker 1: as potential enemies basically, and the most dangerous kind of enemies,
Speaker 1: because the enemies within right like Armenians in the Yanoman
Speaker 1: Empire during World War One in that sense. Now this
Speaker 1: is very important because in twenty eighteen, Israel enacted a
Speaker 1: new basic law, the Jewish Nation state law. Israel doesn't
Speaker 1: have a constitution, so basic laws replaced a constitution, and
Speaker 1: that basic law explicitly relegated Israeli Palestinian so twenty one
Speaker 1: percent of the citizens of the state to second class
Speaker 1: citizenship within an explicit framework of settler colonialism. By the way,
Speaker 1: and it's important to say that three years afterwards, in
Speaker 1: May twenty twenty one, the events of May twenty twenty one,
Speaker 1: when Israeli Palestinians came out to protest and in support
Speaker 1: against Israeli violence in East Jerusalem, in the Palestinian neighborhood
Speaker 1: of Cherjerra, but also against yet another attack on Guiza.
Speaker 1: Right because in these sixteen years of siege of Israel
Speaker 1: on Gaza, before the seventh of October, there were repeated attacks, right,
Speaker 1: Israeli Palestinians came out in support. The response of the
Speaker 1: state this time was unbelievably violent, a lot of violence,
Speaker 1: a lot of oppress across Israel. But this time also
Speaker 1: Jewish citizens of the state joined the police in attacking
Speaker 1: Palestinian citizens, in some cases as in Haifa, even breaking
Speaker 1: into the houses of Palestinian citizens in Haiphen, attacking them
Speaker 1: in their houses. This is May twenty twenty one. So
Speaker 1: we have the nation state line twenty eighteen. We have
Speaker 1: this in twenty twenty one. We have the background of
Speaker 1: how the state looks at Palestinian citizens right from the
Speaker 1: beginning as basically potential enemies. And now we have unbelievable
Speaker 1: media incitement right against Palestinians as a whole. Right, So yes,
Speaker 1: if we think about prevention and if we think genocide
Speaker 1: is a process, Israeli Palestinians, certainly Palestinians in the occupied
Speaker 1: West Manganese Jerusalem are in grave, brave danger. This in
Speaker 1: no way makes things better in the case of Israel,
Speaker 1: as some people might say, quite the contrary, It makes
Speaker 1: the urgency of talking about genocide right of forefront of
Speaker 1: the genocidal assaulting Gazza in order to think about, as
Speaker 1: I said, incitement, the obligation to intervene and to prevent, right,
Speaker 1: and what's going on in the West Bank and East
Speaker 1: Jerusalem and what is going.
Speaker 3: On, And that actually leads that leads to my last question,
Speaker 3: which is, what does it matter if we determine that
Speaker 3: what we're seeing as a genocidal assault, what are the
Speaker 3: international mechanisms that could be deployed to prevent it, and
Speaker 3: what are the mechanisms that can come about to provide
Speaker 3: some measure of accountability if there are either.
Speaker 1: Yeah, So I mean it matters. It matters greatly because
Speaker 1: as I said, there's an obligation to intervene and prevent.
Speaker 1: So it matters in terms of arms deals because actually
Speaker 1: states that continue to provide arms to Israel. So all
Speaker 1: the Western powers that continue to support Israel are actually,
Speaker 1: if we recognize the crime of genocide, right, are actually
Speaker 1: working against their legal obligations in the Convention of course
Speaker 1: not to aid in a bit genocide, but they're actually
Speaker 1: supposed to be working to prevent genocide. And then if
Speaker 1: we think about the international legal framework, right, of course
Speaker 1: there's issues of accountability. That's not only for genocide, by
Speaker 1: the way, that's for the very well documented war crimes
Speaker 1: now in this case, and crimes against humanity. And yes,
Speaker 1: should the Hamas perpetrators and planners for the seventh of
Speaker 1: October should be put on trial as well. Absolutely, international
Speaker 1: law should apply to everyone, but should apply to everyone, right,
Speaker 1: so also to the many many israel Is now involved
Speaker 1: in israel genocidal attack on Gaza. So there are definitely
Speaker 1: very important applications right in terms of prevention, in terms
Speaker 1: of stopping the violence, in terms of holding the perpetures accountable,
Speaker 1: and then also in terms of thinking how we got
Speaker 1: to the seventh of October, right, So, as I said,
Speaker 1: the larger context of Israeli mass violence from the nineteen
Speaker 1: forty eight Nakoba until today, Israeli settler colonialism, and how
Speaker 1: we move forward right from here, all this is also
Speaker 1: very important.
Speaker 4: Did you have anything No, I was just gonna say
Speaker 4: the only I just want to clarify the only reason
Speaker 4: I specifically invoked the faith in the last question I asked,
Speaker 4: just because I meant it in the context of the
Speaker 4: UN definition. I didn't mean to overlook this ethnic Palestinian question.
Speaker 4: I just spent it in the sort of broad context
Speaker 4: of the UN definition.
Speaker 3: Anyway, I just wanted to clarify, well, Professor Siegel, he's
Speaker 3: the Associate Professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies at Stockton University.
Speaker 3: I really appreciate you joining us.
Speaker 1: Thanks so much, thank you, thank you so much.