Latest / In These Times with Rabbi Ammi Hirsch / Natasha Hausdorff

Transcript

Natasha Hausdorff · In These Times with Rabbi Ammi Hirsch

0:01
I'm Rabbi Ammi Hirsch of the Stephen Wise Free Synagogue in New York, and
0:05
you're listening to In These Times.
0:11
Israel is fighting a war on many fronts, not only on the battlefield, but also
0:16
in the courtroom, where the Jewish state has been misrepresented, maligned,
0:20
slandered, and accused of perpetrating the worst crimes against humanity.
0:25
Isn't it beautiful?
0:26
Just mind boggling that we're sitting here having a conversation about whether
0:30
or not Israel is even guilty of genocide.
0:32
Natasha
0:34
Hausdorff is an expert on international law, a graduate of
0:38
Oxford and Tel Aviv University.
0:40
She was a fellow at Columbia Law School and now works as a barrister in London
0:45
and serves as the legal director of UK Lawyers for Israel Charitable Trust.
0:50
It is in that capacity that Natasha has been outspoken in her defense of Israel.
0:57
I asked Natasha to join me today to help us understand international law, how
1:01
it applies to Israel during this war.
1:03
and how the law has been weaponized against the Jewish state.
1:13
Natasha, this is a real honor to have you here as a guest.
1:17
I've been counting down the days.
1:19
I've admired you for so long, especially since October 7th.
1:23
So thank you for taking the time.
1:26
Uh, you're a practicing attorney, so this is pro bono from your perspective.
1:32
So welcome to In These Times.
1:35
Thank you so much.
1:36
It's really my pleasure to be with you.
1:38
I really, uh, I really meant it.
1:39
You're a hero of mine.
1:41
You're a real warrior in the media and in polemics and public debates,
1:47
and I want to talk to you about that.
1:48
But first, you're a leading expert on international law, and of course this
1:53
has become part of the battlefield.
1:56
Since October 7th, and you're one of our leading generals.
2:00
So I wanted to ask you what, just explain to us, what is this
2:04
concept of international law?
2:06
Do people respect international law?
2:08
Who determines what international law is?
2:11
When you take Israel into court, what does that actually mean?
2:15
Well, these are all entirely fair questions.
2:18
I studied public international law at university and was reliably informed
2:23
by my professors that it was a thing.
2:25
It did exist.
2:26
Uh, and the proof of that was that most states abided by most
2:31
international law most of the time.
2:34
That was, um, I think the common refrain.
2:37
International law is essentially the law that governs relationships between states.
2:42
So whereas, you know, a domestic legal system will regulate
2:46
relations between individual people.
2:49
In the context of public international law, it's the way states interact
2:54
with each other, their rights and obligations towards each other.
2:57
And much of the early international law was about international trade, uh,
3:02
aspects of life outside of the domestic jurisdiction of individual states.
3:08
Um, one of the key aspects of international law That is being
3:12
discussed now in relation to Israel is of course, the laws of armed conflict.
3:17
Um, they developed a little later on, but they are for the most part, embedded
3:22
in treaties, international conventions, uh, and also to an extent in what is
3:28
called customary international law.
3:30
So I think when we're looking at the international legal system, we need to
3:33
be particularly aware of two key sources.
3:36
Treaties or international conventions are written down, and
3:40
this is law that states opt into.
3:43
But customary international law is a very strange beast.
3:47
Um, and this develops over time out of the practice of states.
3:52
So it's a bit of a nebulous concept, but the core principles of international
3:57
law are often said to be subject to, you know, customary international law.
4:03
And in relation to the allegations that are being brought against
4:05
Israel in international legal fora, um, there are several of them.
4:09
In fact, um, the international criminal court, the international
4:13
court of justice included.
4:15
The real concern I have here is that so much of what we've seen play out, not
4:20
just in the last 12 months, but actually it's been the process of several years
4:24
of what I've called out as lawfare.
4:27
This is not the proper application of international law.
4:30
This is in fact, the.
4:32
politicization, the weaponization of international
4:35
law against the Jewish state.
4:37
And we've certainly seen that on full display in the context of
4:40
the recent proceedings at ICJ.
4:43
But it feeds into, I would suggest, a much broader misrepresentation
4:49
of international law.
4:50
It follows a process by which these legal terms like genocide, ethnic
4:58
cleansing, apartheid, colonialism, all of these are misrepresentations.
5:04
Well, until recently, had a pretty defined legal meaning, but the way in
5:09
which they've been consistently now deployed against Israel inverts that
5:14
legal meaning, and in fact deprives these terms of their previous essence.
5:19
And in that respect, And we've seen the politicization, both of these legal
5:25
terms, but also the legal processes which have played out in the wake of
5:30
the 7th of October and everything we've seen in terms of Israel being targeted.
5:34
So let me ask you, so in respect to the two courts that have been in the news
5:38
recently, the International Criminal Court, that's called the ICC, and then the
5:41
International Court of Justice, the ICJ.
5:44
You have to be a signatory in the ICC to actually have it.
5:47
to be bound on you.
5:49
And Israel's not a signatory and the United States is not a signatory either.
5:53
I don't know about the UK.
5:57
So why does that even bind Israel, let alone have a prosecutor issue
6:03
arrest warrants for Israeli leaders?
6:07
So this is a prime example of what I mean when I say these
6:10
institutions are being politicized.
6:11
You are absolutely right that Israel is not a signatory to the ICC,
6:17
specifically the, the contract, if you will, that the convention that
6:20
established the international criminal court, which is called the Rome statute.
6:25
The U S is also not a signatory.
6:27
I believe that both Israel and the United States saw Even at that early
6:32
stage, while the convention establishing the court was being drafted, saw the
6:36
trajectory, saw the direction of travel of the International Criminal Court, and
6:41
both decided they wanted no part of it.
6:43
The essence of the court's jurisdiction does come from the territorial
6:48
jurisdiction of those states that have signed up to the Rome statute.
6:51
So, uh, it's important just to understand that this is an international
6:55
court, it's a criminal court, and its jurisdiction is over individuals.
6:59
So not states, but the jurisdiction derives from the
7:02
states that have signed up.
7:04
And there are two major problems with the court having absolutely no jurisdiction
7:09
over the Israelis that arrest warrants have already been sought in respect of.
7:14
That's prime minister BenjAmmin Netanyahu and defense minister Yoav Galant.
7:19
One is the fact that Israel is not a signatory.
7:21
And so the court has no jurisdiction over Israeli territory.
7:25
The other problem here is that essentially the court have sought to.
7:29
determine that they have jurisdiction on the basis of recognizing
7:33
supposedly territorial jurisdiction over the state of Palestine.
7:39
Now, this is a major controversy in the history of the court that it
7:42
is purported to accept a so called state of Palestine joining it.
7:47
There are innumerable problems with this, not least the fact that Palestine has no
7:53
status as a state in international law.
7:55
There's very clear, international law on this in the Montevideo Convention,
8:00
which is considered to be so important it is part of customary international law.
8:04
The attributes that a state must have, the Palestinian authority in
8:08
the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza do not meet the requirements of statehood.
8:14
And yet the court purported to say, okay, well, we accept that Palestine
8:17
has joined us and we accept therefore that we have territorial jurisdiction
8:22
as a result of, of Palestine signing up to the Rome statute.
8:27
Another major problem with that is, of course, under the Oslo Accords,
8:31
which established the Palestinian Authority, which has purported to join
8:34
the court, there was clear provision that there would be no jurisdiction,
8:40
criminal jurisdiction, over Israelis.
8:42
So the very agreements which constituted the origins of the entity
8:47
that purported to sign up to the Rome Statute exclude the jurisdiction that
8:52
the court is now seeking to exercise.
8:54
So, this is all obvious to you, why, do you, do you think the, the court wants
9:00
to have a certain outcome and is then working backwards and just applying and
9:05
distorting some of its own principles?
9:07
Or how does it work?
9:09
Like, if it just from a lay perspective, you know, to sit back and see that it's
9:13
the democratic leaders of Israel who have an arrest warrant issued against
9:18
them in a war where they're fighting IslAmmist terrorists who are anti Western.
9:24
How does that even happen in a court, in an international court,
9:29
presumably that stands for justice?
9:31
It's a, it's a fair question.
9:33
What is it that is motivating the court, and in particular now the office
9:38
of the prosecutor, to involve itself in an ongoing armed conflict, in a
9:44
situation where we have also, so I should indicate I'm extremely privileged to be
9:50
working Extremely gifted and dedicated lawyers at UK Lawyers for Israel.
9:56
And amongst other things, in terms of the submissions we've made to the
9:59
International Criminal Court on this issue, we have highlighted the slew of
10:05
false information that the prosecutor Karim Khan put forward to support
10:09
his arrest warrants application.
10:12
So when you take into account The false information, the lack of jurisdiction,
10:17
and the clear, I would suggest, political motivation behind, uh, these applications.
10:24
Um, it strikes me that the court must be seeking to rehabilitate itself here.
10:30
That the court has had an extremely troubled history.
10:33
Um, the amount of money that has been invested into the court, for
10:36
what I think are only ten, successful prosecutions that resulted in convictions.
10:42
I believe more or less exclusively against African defendants.
10:46
The court came under enormous criticism for being both ineffective and
10:52
coming across as rather racist in its approach and its focus on defendants.
10:57
Well, here is potentially the answer to all of those criticisms.
11:02
What better way of seeking to rehabilitate yourself in the context of, you know,
11:07
the international communities by going after essentially the world's
11:11
punching bag, the only Jewish state.
11:14
I cannot get over that as a key motivating factor, given all of the problems with
11:20
which the court is faced, and yet the prosecutor has launched into this.
11:25
And in particular, when we consider the very public nature of the announcement of
11:31
this application, unprecedented, entirely unprecedented in the court's history.
11:36
Most of these arrest warrants are applied for in secret so that
11:39
those subject to them aren't aware that they're liable to be arrested
11:43
when they travel internationally.
11:45
And here we had.
11:46
a press conference.
11:48
We had a celebrity panel of experts that was brought in supposedly to rubber
11:53
stamp the prosecutor's application and an interview given on Christiane Amanpour.
11:58
The fact that arrest warrants were applied for in parallel for Israel's leaders
12:04
and the leaders of the internationally prescribed terrorist organization Hamas
12:08
should fill any reasonable individual.
12:11
with horror, this obscene and repugnant moral equivalence, which
12:16
it seems the prosecutor was seeking to draw between Hamas and Israel.
12:20
And yet I think it's also reflective of deep misunderstanding by those
12:25
working in the office of the prosecutor.
12:27
This idea that they could be absolved of any criticism by
12:31
essentially going after both sides.
12:34
That's extremely problematic.
12:35
And I think reflective of a deep, Deep seated misunderstanding, one that has
12:42
undoubtedly been contributed to by a great deal of misinformation for several
12:47
decades, especially in the international legal community about what Israel is,
12:52
what its aims are, how it conducts itself.
12:56
And this is ultimately part of the factual misrepresentations that sit
13:00
alongside the legal misrepresentations.
13:02
And I believe we have to combat both of them in parallel.
13:05
And this is what you mean by lawfare.
13:07
Right?
13:08
By distorting principles of justice.
13:10
Can
13:16
I ask you just on the issues that are being litigated both in courts,
13:21
but also in the international media and in international discourse.
13:27
Is Israel committing genocide?
13:28
Is Israel even close to genocide?
13:30
Where does this idea even come from?
13:33
In particular, since I tell you, it's especially galling because of course
13:37
the concept of genocide arose after the attempt of genocide of the Jews.
13:44
So where does this even, one, where does it come from?
13:48
And two, set us straight.
13:50
What is genocide?
13:51
And is Israel approximating genocide?
13:53
I think the ICJ called it something about plausible genocide.
13:57
Where's all this coming from?
14:00
All right.
14:00
So there's a lot to unpack here, but isn't it?
14:02
Isn't it just mind boggling that we're sitting here having a
14:07
conversation about whether or not Israel is even guilty of genocide?
14:10
I mean, the fact that the Overton window seems to have shifted to such
14:13
an extent that that is a legitimate conversation to be having is mind
14:18
boggling and should be deeply concerning about how far the factual and legal
14:23
misrepresentations have come here.
14:24
By the way, I worry about the implications on the West.
14:27
I always felt that October 7th was really a war about Western values.
14:33
And I worry that the West can't.
14:37
distinguished between freedom fighters and terrorists and
14:40
between defending against genocidal maniacs and perpetrating genocide.
14:49
When we come to this, um, the, the, the term genocide itself, that is
14:55
the latest in a, in a long list.
14:57
I think of, legal terms that have been seized upon and abused in order to
15:03
promote hatred towards the Jewish state.
15:07
I consider this to be, uh, part and parcel of the modern blood libel.
15:11
If we think about how pervasive the ancient blood libel was, how
15:14
widely believed it was that Jews killed Christian children to use
15:19
their blood for religious ritual.
15:21
Uh, well, perhaps it's not so surprising in that context.
15:23
that the modern blood libels, you know, Israel targets children or shoots
15:27
them in the head or is ethnically cleansing or is committing genocide.
15:31
I mean, all of these are horrifically false allegations, but they
15:35
have plainly gained traction.
15:37
And yes, the origins of the term genocide make this very clear.
15:41
development, particularly pernicious.
15:44
It was Raphael Lemkin, a Jewish jurist who, uh, coined the term after the
15:49
Holocaust to provide some form of legal terminology to the experience
15:54
of the Jews of being targeted for extermination because they were Jews.
15:59
And subsequently it has been deployed in other contexts, but the core of
16:03
it is the intentional, targeting of a group by killing them or creating
16:09
conditions that make life impossible.
16:11
But it's the intentional targeting of a national, ethnic,
16:14
religious or racial group.
16:16
And it has to be with the intention of essentially eliminating
16:19
them in whole or in part.
16:21
Eliminating them I mean, killing them or expelling them?
16:25
Uh, well, creating conditions that make life impossible, targeting an
16:29
ethnic, religious, racial, or national group because of their identity.
16:34
That is the essence of the crime of genocide.
16:37
It, it is what distinguishes it from other crimes against humanity.
16:41
And in the case of genocide.
16:44
of what happened on the 7th of October and subsequently, we are seeing the victims
16:50
of genocide being accused of the very crimes that were perpetrated against them.
16:56
To my mind, there can be little debate that what occurred on the 7th of
17:00
October constituted acts of genocide by Palestinian terrorists against Israelis.
17:07
They were targeting Israeli Jews by virtue of the fact that they were
17:11
Jews, and they were targeting them with horrific acts of barbarity, of torture,
17:18
of gang rape, of victimizing them, and abusing them, and slaughtering them.
17:24
And there was no secret made.
17:27
of their desire to target Jews because they were Jews.
17:30
This is integral to everything the leadership had been saying.
17:34
This is integral to the testimonies or interrogations that we've
17:38
had of Nochba terrorists who have been taken into custody.
17:43
And the acts themselves are, of course, not disputed.
17:46
They were videoed by the perpetrators and celebrated and
17:51
transmitted around the world.
17:52
So the evidence of that has been well documented.
17:55
But isn't it telling?
17:57
That once again, the victims of this crime are the ones being accused
18:03
of perpetrating the very crime that was committed against them.
18:06
And we see this in fact, uh, across all of these abuses of this legal
18:11
terminology, the allegations of ethnic cleansing made against Israel.
18:14
Well, it, in fact, it was 850, 000 Jews that were ethnically
18:17
cleansed from the Arab world.
18:19
Allegations of colonialism.
18:21
Well, in fact, it was the Jews who were the indigenous people who had been
18:24
subject to colonialism for centuries.
18:27
Um, so allegations of, you know, apartheid, I'll tell you where the real
18:31
apartheid is in that part of the region.
18:33
It's in the West Bank that is controlled by the Palestinian authority.
18:37
Because if you see a Jew walking into Ramallah, the chances are you're not
18:40
going to see them five minutes later.
18:42
And we have, unfortunately, very tragic incidences.
18:46
The very famous Ramallah lynching in the police station where two off duty
18:50
Israeli reservists found themselves lost in Ramallah, went to the local police
18:55
station looking for assistance, and what was done to them was reminiscent of what
18:59
was committed on the 7th of October.
19:02
So, when we step back and we realize that there is a long history of the victims
19:09
of crimes here, necessarily, Israelis, Jewish Israelis being accused of the very
19:16
crimes that were committed against them.
19:18
I think we start to see this phenomenon in a slightly different context and it starts
19:23
to make more sense, the very concerted effort that is being conducted here.
19:28
And when we think about South Africa's application, Against
19:32
Israel, alleging genocide at the International Court of Justice.
19:36
We can see the impact that it's had, the shifting of the Overton
19:39
window of what is acceptable.
19:41
The day after the first provisional measures order, uh, was issued on the
19:45
26th of January this year, uh, I was on South African national television
19:49
discussing the implications of it.
19:51
And my counterpart, said, isn't it wonderful.
19:54
Now we can finally talk about Israel and genocide in the same sentence,
19:58
and nobody can tell us otherwise.
20:00
And therein, I think you had a full acknowledgement of what South Africa
20:04
was seeking to achieve and plainly what it ultimately did successfully
20:07
achieve in shifting the public debate.
20:09
And here we are now having this absurd conversation about whether
20:12
Israel is in fact guilty of genocide.
20:14
What politically do they want to achieve?
20:16
With the accusation of genocide,
20:19
well, it's the isolation of Israel, treating Israel as a pariah state,
20:23
the institution of sanctions against Israel, very similar aims, I would
20:28
suggest to those associated with the allegation of apartheid against
20:32
Israel, because there is a plane.
20:33
precedent for what happens once you establish apartheid
20:37
as a credible, uh, allegation.
20:39
South Africa was subject to sanctions, to boycotts, and it has been a central
20:44
plank of the BDS campaign against Israel to seek to legitimize its activities
20:49
with these, um, utterly unfounded and, uh, abhorrently false allegations.
20:56
And do you think that the aim is to create a Palestinian state or to
21:01
so weaken Israel as to eventually dismantle the Zionist enterprise?
21:08
And this is from South Africa's perspective, um, itself.
21:11
Um, well, they profess to be doing this on behalf of, um, the Palestinian
21:16
people, but it is Hamas that was celebrating, uh, their application and
21:20
in fact, thanking the South African legal team for their good work.
21:24
And no one can be under any illusions that Hamas and in fact, the Palestinian
21:28
leadership in the West Bank have no.
21:31
real aspirations to a Palestinian state alongside Israel, everything
21:36
they have said from the very inception of the PLO in the 1960s.
21:40
And of course, Hamas within its founding charter, makes it perfectly
21:43
clear they are dedicated to the eradication of the state of Israel.
21:48
in any borders.
21:49
And unfortunately, South Africa, and I would say much to the lamentation
21:53
of many ordinary South Africans, South Africa has thrown its weight
21:58
entirely behind that enterprise.
22:02
There was just one aspect I wanted to pick up, um, in, in the original question
22:06
about the ICJ and it, and it's, to do with what the court has actually found here.
22:10
Has it found Israel plausibly guilty of genocide?
22:14
And this is an interesting, uh, case study, I believe, of how these
22:19
international legal, um, frameworks, determinations are twisted in order
22:27
to advance a particular narrative, false narrative against Israel.
22:31
Because on the 26th of January, when the court issued its Provisional Measures
22:35
Order, what the order in fact said was that the court was asking Israel
22:39
to abide by the Genocide Convention.
22:42
Which Israel has been clear it has always abided by.
22:45
But the court was making that demand, if you will, in a provisional measures
22:51
capacity, having determined that the rights South Africa was claiming plausibly
22:57
fell under the Genocide Convention.
23:00
That South Africa was raising plausible rights.
23:02
Now, what does that mean?
23:03
The court did not consider the merits of the case at all.
23:07
It did not consider what Israel was doing.
23:10
It did not consider the evidence that Israel put forward.
23:13
It's a very, very basic question the court asked itself, which was essentially,
23:17
is the genocide convention engaged?
23:20
Is what South Africa is alleging something that properly falls for
23:25
the legal determination of the court?
23:27
That is as far as it went.
23:28
And yet, the world and his wife, after the 26th of January, was purporting
23:33
that Israel had been plausibly found guilty of genocide, or that there
23:36
was a plausible risk of genocide.
23:39
But every single report that I saw on the international media, and there
23:42
were many lawyers, and some respected former judges, even of the Supreme
23:46
Court in the United Kingdom, that were falling into this false narrative.
23:50
Narrative and this misrepresentation of what the court had said, and it was only
23:54
when the former president of the ICJ, as she'd retired since writing this very
23:59
provisional measures order, she came out on an interview on the BBC to clarify the
24:04
position, which is equally unprecedented that a retired judge would then speak
24:08
about an order that she had written and got her colleagues to endorse actually
24:13
said and actually meant, but these are extraordinary times and extraordinary
24:17
positions, and I think it's, it's extremely lamentable that despite that
24:23
unprecedented clarification coming from a judge, you still have people who are
24:28
misrepresenting the position and saying that South Africa has proven something
24:31
against Israel when it plainly hasn't.
24:34
Talk to us about proportionality.
24:37
Lots of people have been killed.
24:38
On the Palestinian side and now in the war in Lebanon, what is the
24:43
legal standard for proportionality?
24:45
And you hear all the time people saying they're not necessarily talking
24:50
legally, they're talking politically, but okay, the Hamas attacks were
24:54
horrific, but the counter attacks on Israel's part are way more horrific.
25:00
beyond proportionality.
25:01
They're completely disproportional.
25:04
This is a fundamental misrepresentation of what proportionality means.
25:10
Proportionality is not a comparison of casualty figures or of the
25:15
effects of military action.
25:18
And if they're using it in a non legal context, then they're going to have to
25:22
clarify what they mean by proportionality because it's utterly macabre.
25:27
even outside of a legal context, uh, in any other context, to
25:31
suggest that one should weigh up casualty figures and, and assess.
25:35
military action essentially on that basis.
25:37
It simply encourages Hamas to continue to pursue its appalling strategy of
25:44
increasing civilian casualties as much as possible through the use of human
25:47
shields and inflating casualty figures, which it is now a matter of public
25:52
record that the supposed ministry of health in Gaza and the figures that
25:57
they put out have in very many respects being entirely fabricated and inflated.
26:02
But As proportionality is not an assessment of casualty figures,
26:06
uh, we can pause the discussion on the fake and false casualty figures
26:10
that are coming out and talk about what proportionality actually means.
26:14
Because it's not an effects based analysis, it is based on intention.
26:19
And the rule of proportionality in the law of armed conflict requires that every
26:23
strike be weighed up and the balance that needs to be struck is by considering the
26:31
anticipated civilian or collateral damage.
26:35
and what is known in terms of intelligence to inform that assessment
26:40
of what damage will be anticipated.
26:42
Because there is a very tragic but accepted fact in armed
26:48
conflict that civilians do die.
26:51
And all of the laws of armed conflict are designed to keep civilian
26:56
casualties down to a minimum and so that law abiding states exercise
27:01
precaution wherever possible.
27:04
But they do not work.
27:06
to stop an army from defending itself or its people.
27:11
And they do not work to prevent a military, a law abiding military,
27:14
from being able to conduct strikes that target military infrastructure
27:20
that are necessary and that advance a particular military aim.
27:25
So,
27:28
if you have a, you have a hospital, actually, as we speak, there, there
27:33
are hospitals in discussion now with respect to Israeli military operations.
27:39
And there might be patients there.
27:41
There's a medical staff there.
27:42
And under the hospital, there's a underground Hamas military headquarters.
27:50
Is that a legitimate target?
27:52
The presence of a military command center, military infrastructure in what would
27:57
otherwise be a protected or civilian building absolutely has the effect
28:04
of changing the status of that unit.
28:06
So it becomes a legitimate military target, but it's important to note that
28:10
that doesn't mean that Israel has been willy nilly targeting hospitals despite
28:17
The number of civilians and human shields that have been collected there by Hamas
28:22
in order to get to the terrorists and their infrastructure, even though that
28:27
is as a whole, a legitimate military target, Israel takes into account the
28:32
presence of civilians in the context of its proportionality analysis.
28:36
And it also takes into account another principle of the law of
28:40
armed conflict, the principle of precaution to seek to navigate.
28:46
this impossible situation that Hamas and Palestinian IslAmmic Jihad and other
28:50
Palestinian terrorist organizations there have orchestrated by embedding
28:55
themselves in civilian infrastructure.
28:57
In terms of the precautions that Israel takes, well, the warnings
29:00
that it issues, the evacuation that it seeks to facilitate,
29:04
um, I've certainly seen reports.
29:06
So the whole point of Israel seeking to evacuate hospitals, seeking to target
29:24
the terrorists around them, uh, One instance I remember in the context of
29:29
Al Shifa, Israel went in with Arabic speakers and with medical staff into
29:35
the hospital in order to seek to provide for legitimate patients, civilians, etc.
29:42
that were in there and distinguish them.
29:44
from the Hamas terrorists that they were targeting.
29:47
I remember that in particular because the news report, uh, I think that was put out
29:51
by the Associated Press suggested that Israel went into the hospital targeting
29:55
Arabic speakers and medical staff, uh, which was of course completely false.
29:59
Um, so it all essentially comes down to the proper application
30:01
of the proportionality analysis.
30:03
And what we have seen throughout this last 12 months in Gaza is
30:07
that Israel is consistently not attacking where it can avoid that.
30:13
And it took a long time before it ultimately went to grapple with the
30:18
Hamas presence at Al Shifa or many of the other hospitals in the Gaza Strip.
30:22
And when it ultimately did that, it wasn't bombing these hospitals
30:26
from the, from the skies.
30:27
It actually went in.
30:29
And by all accounts, sacrificed many soldiers in an attempt to comply
30:34
with another rule of international law, which is distinction.
30:36
To distinguish between the terrorists and the civilians they were hiding behind.
30:47
You appear in the media a lot.
30:49
I think you probably consider it, if I can assume your intentions, that
30:53
it's part of your responsibility is.
30:56
Somebody who cares about the truth and about the Jewish condition
31:00
and the defense of Israel.
31:03
I would also add that I also see it as part of my
31:06
responsibilities as a barrister.
31:08
We are an independent profession with a very long, proud history of
31:12
standing up for the rule of law.
31:13
And I'm an officer of the court.
31:16
Uh, I have a duty, I believe, um, to stand up and say something if I see the
31:21
law being so resoundingly misrepresented on such a seemingly universal basis.
31:29
That's really admirable.
31:30
I deeply respect that.
31:32
Can you give us some intellectual and emotional response to your frequent
31:38
interactions with members of the media?
31:40
Do you think it's generally fair?
31:42
You know, we look over here on this side of the ocean and we have our, criticisms
31:47
with the media, but it's nothing like the BBC, for example, or even Sky News.
31:54
So tell us something that you think we need to know about your
31:57
interactions with the media.
31:59
Well, I would perhaps start by saying, unfortunately, it's nothing new.
32:03
And yes, the scale and the level of coverage over the last
32:08
year has been unprecedented.
32:09
And, you know, some of the individual examples of the false reporting, I
32:13
mentioned the reports of the Associated Press of the hospital that were
32:16
repeated by many other news outlets.
32:18
The, the immediate, uh, allegation that Israel had struck the Al Akhli
32:22
hospital already in October last year.
32:25
There are countless individual examples.
32:28
I think this is the work of decades.
32:30
I remember 10 years ago, reading Matty Friedman's, uh, series of essays about
32:36
his experiences being part of the Associated Press in the Jerusalem area.
32:40
Bureau and the editorial lines that everyone was subject to
32:45
and what needed to be reported.
32:47
And there was a, you know, received wisdom that Israel was bad and the
32:51
Palestinians were good, and stories had to conform to that logic, whether
32:56
or not it had any bearing on, Uh, the factual realities on the ground.
33:00
There is that.
33:01
There is also the fact that now when one comes to look at the commentators
33:05
that are being booked, and I suppose this goes to my, you know, individual
33:08
experiences over, over the last 12 months.
33:11
I mean, the bookers themselves are extremely young and it seems
33:16
to me that they seem to get their knowledge of international affairs,
33:21
perhaps international law and certainly history from TikTok.
33:24
So this interplay between social media and the so called mainstream
33:29
media is very much more significant than I think many people realize.
33:33
Um, and it's shameful.
33:35
It's abysmal, especially when one thinks about, you know, hitherto
33:39
respected institutions like the BBC.
33:41
It still has a lot of respect around the world, and people turn to it
33:45
as a source of trusted material.
33:47
It has completely abused that position.
33:50
I mean, even if we consider the Al Akhli hospital, and this was a personal
33:53
experience of mine, because I was, you know, Due to be interviewed that evening,
33:58
I was in fact on the line with the BBC when the deputy editor of the channel
34:05
called me and said, I'm so sorry, Natasha, we're going to have to bump you again.
34:09
I think this was the third time that had happened to run with the rolling
34:11
coverage of this breaking news.
34:14
And I said to him, what are you talking about now more than ever?
34:17
You need me because you're, you're calling this an Israeli airstrike.
34:20
I was already then looking at reports that this was a Palestinian
34:24
IslAmmic Jihad rocket that had fallen short in the Gaza Strip.
34:28
He told me I hadn't seen that on any of the wires, but they didn't even exercise.
34:33
The, the most basic journalistic integrity.
34:36
They didn't send one of their stringers, they have many on the ground in Gaza.
34:39
They didn't send anyone down to, to walk to the end of the street and actually
34:44
look at the hospital because if they would have done so, they would have
34:47
seen not only was the hospital still intact, but that the rocket which had
34:52
come from Palestinian IslAmmic Jihad had fallen in the car park of the hospital.
34:55
created a small crater, but that there was no way that the 500 casualties that
35:00
Hamas were claiming as a result of this, uh, supposed Israeli strike could have
35:05
been caused as a result of this PIJ rocket that fell in the hospital car park.
35:09
It's interesting to note that I don't think that 500 casualty
35:12
figure has ever been revised.
35:13
So that's still part of the inflated casualty figures that the media are
35:17
parroting this Hamas propaganda.
35:20
And ultimately, Albeit, I sought to argue with the editor and I, I, I
35:25
sought to ask him to apply, you know, basic journalistic principles, consider
35:30
what he knew, what he didn't know.
35:32
Israel doesn't target hospitals.
35:34
Israel was providing warnings of everywhere it was striking at the time.
35:38
Hamas and Palestinian IslAmmic rockets do fall short in the Gaza Strip.
35:42
Hamas kept weapons caches in hospitals as we knew.
35:44
You know, all of these, you know, Aspects of the context and, you know, a
35:49
little bit of critical thinking needed to be applied to the situation, but
35:53
no, immediately they were off on one.
35:55
And the real indictment is that after it became perfectly apparent that
35:59
this was a Palestinian IslAmmic Jihad rocket, there was no acceptance of
36:03
responsibility for essentially the blood that the BBC had on its hands.
36:07
There were riots across the Middle East as a result of this false reporting.
36:12
There was a breakdown of international negotiations.
36:16
as a result of this false reporting.
36:17
And when Jeremy Bowen was asked about it, he said he didn't regret.
36:20
Jeremy Bowen is the correspondent of the BBC on the ground, who reported.
36:25
He's the Middle East editor, and I think much of The absolute travesty
36:30
of the reporting of the BBC, uh, rests very much on his shoulders.
36:33
Do you think that the, the, the standard has deteriorated over,
36:38
say, the last 10 or 20 years?
36:40
And is it unique to Israel, or is the BBC still the BBC?
36:44
You know, and it's, it's kind of the gold standard of international
36:47
media, or it used to be, at least.
36:49
So I know about Israel and the Middle East, and I know what the realities are.
36:54
And I, I follow this extremely closely, so I know what it is
36:57
that they are reporting as false.
36:59
I'm not in a position to judge the veracity of the reports that they put
37:03
out from other parts of the world.
37:05
And I'm deeply, deeply concerned when I see how badly wrong they
37:08
get it in the case of Israel.
37:11
No other examples that I'm aware of, of, um, you know, states being so resoundingly
37:17
targeted with misinformation, with abuse.
37:21
You know, when one looks at the UN resolutions passed against Israel, which
37:25
are more numerous than those passed against the rest of the world combined,
37:30
when one looks at all of the NGOs that propagate all of this misinformation
37:36
about Israel, then I think You know, it's fair to say that this is a unique case.
37:41
Israel is the Jew among the nations and therefore subject to
37:44
that sort of defamation slander on, on a far more frequent basis.
37:49
But given the complete, you know, renunciation of responsibility, given
37:55
the dire state of journalism that we see with respect to reports coming out of
37:59
Israel, and I think we really do need to question what it is that we're being told
38:02
about all the other parts of the world.
38:04
That's an example of what I was talking about before.
38:06
that this, if there's a specific obsession with Israel, it clouds your judgment
38:14
and it distorts the very values and principles that supposedly you stand for.
38:18
So we saw that post October 7th with international legal bodies.
38:23
We saw it with feminist groups.
38:25
We saw it with so many social justice partners with whom we were.
38:29
Allied for years and even decades here, civil rights partners.
38:34
That's what I mean when I say this has deep rAmmifications.
38:39
100%.
38:40
Yeah.
38:41
And I think it's important in that context that we also see this for what
38:45
it is, which is a civilizational war.
38:48
Israel is not just fighting IslAmmist terrorism on its own behalf.
38:53
It is doing so on behalf of the West more generally, on behalf
38:57
of all liberal democracies.
38:59
And it's about time, I would suggest, that its allies wake up to that
39:05
reality and start supporting it in the, the appropriate and robust fashion.
39:11
I mean, the rhetoric that we have seen coming out of our countries,
39:15
out of the United Kingdom and the United States, is just that.
39:19
monstrous.
39:19
And by all accounts, it, it has clearly had significant effects.
39:24
I mean, Iran has consistently sought to attack Israel via its proxies, via Hamas,
39:31
Hezbollah, Palestinian IslAmmic Jihad, the Houthis, and others in Iraq and Syria.
39:40
We saw as a result of weeks of American rhetoric that was critical
39:47
of Israel in an extreme sense.
39:49
that was even suggesting that Israel was acting, you know, disproportionately or
39:54
indiscriminately.
39:55
Indiscriminately.
39:55
I mean, that word I think was walked back pretty quickly.
39:58
Yeah,
39:58
but it did a huge amount of damage.
40:00
Huge amount of damage.
40:01
And it's plainly had an impact on Iran's calculus.
40:06
I don't think we would have dreamt of seeing Iran striking Israel directly in
40:12
the manner in which it has done now on two significant occasions, were it not
40:16
for this extremely troubling rhetoric and ultimately the mixed messages that have
40:21
been sent, in particular, unfortunately, I have to say by the United States.
40:26
Uh, talking about threats to Western institutions and civilization, uh,
40:30
so one of the jewels in the crown of Western civilization, without which
40:34
we really don't have a future in the West, are universities, of course.
40:39
You're a graduate of some of the great universities in the
40:42
world, uh, you've studied in Columbia, you studied at Oxford.
40:46
Do you go to universities and speak to students and what do you know about
40:50
universities both here as well as in the UK and their approach to some of the
40:56
issues we spoke about and specifically about their understanding of Israel?
41:00
I speak at universities a lot and I have done so, say for the 10 years.
41:05
I mean, I mean, I've been inclined to say certainly the situation has worsened.
41:09
Uh, over that period, but the essence of the misinformation, both coming
41:15
from student groups and faculty is of significant longstanding.
41:20
I mean, it's apparent to me that even the, you know, the Zionism is racism
41:24
events, movement resolutions at the United Nations that we saw in the 1970s were
41:30
ultimately born out of academic discourse.
41:33
All of this has essentially started in the academy and filtered through elsewhere.
41:38
So it makes sense then that the academy has got to an, an absolute extreme, which
41:43
is probably going to foreshadow where other institutions follow through to.
41:49
I didn't quite study at Columbia, but I was there as a researcher in
41:53
the national security law programs.
41:55
I was, I was a visiting fellow.
41:57
Um, and ostensibly, you know, part of the faculty there, I spent a lot
42:00
of time with members of faculty.
42:02
And I saw that this was not just a bottom up phenomenon,
42:05
but it was very much a top down.
42:08
When were you at Columbia?
42:09
2018.
42:11
So not all that long ago.
42:13
So looking back, do you understand now what's, what resulted, what
42:19
erupted post October 7th at say, Columbia, an institution that, you
42:23
know, from firsthand, uh, experience?
42:27
Yes, uh, it didn't surprise me at all, I'm sorry to say.
42:30
Um, I certainly saw, saw it on full display when I was there.
42:35
It probably didn't surprise me that Columbia has very much led the way
42:39
on the extreme chaos, violence even that we have seen, rhetoric certainly.
42:46
But as I say it, it's not just come from the students.
42:49
Um, it has been very much been encouraged by faculty.
42:52
You know, all of this is interrelated, especially in the context of international
42:56
law, because the academy plays such a significant role in, in discussion about
43:00
it and it's even it's in its development.
43:02
I mean, one of the sources of international law is considered
43:05
to be the, the statements of the most well respected jurists, you
43:08
know, academics on the subject.
43:11
Uh, so I think, you know, The backlash that we have seen, the realization of
43:17
what has happened is the only encouraging thing that I can take out of this debacle.
43:25
I consider it to be a significant indictment though on us.
43:29
on, you know, society more broadly because it is not just as a result of, you know,
43:34
questionable Qatari funding of these institutions and, uh, the establishment
43:39
of chairs in studies that are designed specifically to demonize the Jewish state
43:45
and the development of, uh, teaching materials that propagate blood liables.
43:50
I mean, all of that is, is essentially a significant problem that has to be
43:54
addressed, but so much of this is.
43:56
has caused these institutions really to become rotten to the core.
44:00
There is another aspect of this, which has meant that the material
44:05
has fallen on such fertile ground.
44:08
And that I think is the lack of purpose that the generation that
44:13
is currently going through these institutions unfortunately has.
44:17
They have been welcomed with open arms.
44:21
into groups that support terrorism.
44:24
They have camped out and felt as though they were part of something because
44:28
they have been given no understanding and no pride in the Western liberal
44:35
democratic values that the causes they have thrown their weight behind are
44:40
seeking to harm and essentially tear down.
44:44
And that I see as an indictment on us because, um, if we are to
44:48
have pride and a sense of purpose.
44:51
in what we have achieved and a recognition that democracy, democratic
44:56
values, and the freedoms that we enjoy are fragile and need to be protected.
45:03
And that actually the most important purpose one can have is in picking up
45:08
the baton when the younger generation tire of that fight to protect
45:12
those values that we hold dear.
45:14
It is up to that younger generation to pick up the baton and continue that fight.
45:18
And that is, I think, where the disconnect has erupted.
45:21
And instead we have seen these people in seeking purpose, these
45:25
young people, throw themselves into the cause of internationally
45:29
prescribed terrorist organizations.
45:31
I don't know how we come back from that.
45:33
Well, that, I wanted to follow up on that.
45:36
Are you optimistic?
45:38
Uh, you think there could be enough pushback so as to dramatically change
45:44
the condition of Western universities?
45:49
Yes, and I hope so.
45:51
If I thought it was an entirely lost cause, I wouldn't be continuing
45:54
to, to travel and to, to speak.
45:57
But the fact of the matter is that we have the truth on our side, um, and
46:01
there is something even more important, uh, I would suggest that gives me.
46:05
great cause for optimism.
46:07
Uh, and that is the state of Israel and its people and its army.
46:12
You know, there are many have called the IDF the most moral army in the world.
46:16
And I think that is very much reflective, not only of its ethos,
46:18
but of its track record in grappling with the most powerful people.
46:23
Barbarous terrorism and in protecting Palestinian civilians,
46:27
as well as Israeli civilians.
46:29
But the progress that Israel has made in Gaza, which I witnessed in September on
46:34
the ground with my own eyes, The manner in which young people in Israel have
46:39
risen to the challenges, the Unimaginable challenges and the horror that followed of
46:44
the 7th of October and the progress that has been made, as I say, on the ground, I
46:49
mean, the way in which the army has risen to these challenges indicates that, you
46:53
know, if anyone was in any doubt, Israel will win with or without the backing of
46:59
the United States and the United Kingdom, the proper and appropriate backing that
47:02
I think should be given and the battle Uh against the misinformation and the false
47:07
narrative is something that will need to be picked up And I think israel will
47:11
probably have to come to terms with that devoting more resources to fighting that.
47:16
It is not.
47:16
It has left that battlefield entirely vacant for many,
47:20
many years, unfortunately.
47:22
But the most important thing is the safety and the security of the state
47:25
of Israel and the people of Israel.
47:28
And that I think we can have great confidence in maintaining.
47:33
And everything else we'll work on.
47:35
With that, Natasha, I, uh, I want to thank you very much.
47:39
That's a beautiful way to end.
47:42
Just to sit back and to listen to you, honestly, is a pleasure.
47:46
I, uh, I mentioned to you, uh, I studied law at the London School
47:50
of Economics a long time ago.
47:52
If I had a professor like you, I would take every class, just sit down and listen
47:59
and, uh, remember it for a lifetime.
48:01
So on behalf of the truth, on behalf of your commitment to the law and
48:08
on behalf of the Jewish people, thank you for everything you do.
48:12
Thank you.
48:12
I'll just say one final word if I may.
48:15
Um, I am tremendously grateful to have this purpose.
48:18
I have always valued it enormously.
48:21
It has been the work of somewhat over 20 years, but, um, I certainly do it out of
48:26
a sense of, of duty, but I'm, as I say, extremely grateful to have this purpose.
48:32
And I hope that, um, through having these sorts of conversations, we may
48:37
both be able to inspire many more people, uh, to pick up that similar purpose.
48:42
I'm main to that.
48:43
Thank you, and keep up the brilliant work.
48:50
I can't tell you how much I admire Natasha Hausdorff.
48:53
First, she's brilliant.
48:56
It's rare to encounter a person so highly intelligent.
49:00
And demonstrating such mastery over the material she addresses.
49:04
Just to sit back and listen to someone like that is an unusual privilege.
49:09
But second, she's brilliant for all the right things.
49:13
She has the right values.
49:14
As she said, part of her motivation is to defend the dignity
49:18
and integrity of law itself.
49:20
She despises lies, hypocrisy, and deception.
49:24
She is ferocious in upholding truth, honor, and decency.
49:29
And, she is a proud Jew, never retreating, never skulking, and never intimidated, no
49:36
matter the personal or professional cost.
49:39
This, more than anything, is what makes her a role model and an
49:43
exemplar for young people in the West, and especially young Jews.
49:49
High intelligence is a tricky thing.
49:51
You might be a genius in one field, But that does not necessarily
49:55
translate into other areas of life.
49:58
Sigmund Freud once wrote about his conversation with
50:00
fellow genius Albert Einstein.
50:02
He understands as much about psychology as I do about physics,
50:06
so we had a very pleasant talk.
50:08
Plenty of people are truly brilliant.
50:11
They are described as the best and the brightest.
50:14
But turn out to be the best at what is not bright, and bright at what is not best.
50:20
We might be smart, doesn't mean that we'll make smart decisions.
50:24
Stalin was smart.
50:25
Chamberlain was smart.
50:27
Napoleon was smart.
50:29
Smart people often make dumb decisions.
50:31
There are all too many brilliant scientists who design viruses that kill.
50:36
Many exceptional lawyers pervert justice.
50:39
Courageous warriors often inspire legions of followers to
50:42
commit horrendous atrocities.
50:46
The most learned professors in the most elite institutions can
50:50
defend the most outrageous evils.
50:53
They convinced themselves that massacring 1, 200 men, women, and
50:56
children in their beds, rampaging through a concert, kidnapping babies,
51:00
children, parents, grandparents, was legitimate and moral resistance.
51:05
The most brilliant people in the world could no longer distinguish between
51:09
terrorism and freedom fighting, democracy and dictatorship, decency and degeneracy.
51:15
And once so convinced, nothing could bring them out of the spell they were under.
51:21
The very people who supposedly cherish nuance, evidence, and reason,
51:25
Themselves became impervious to reason.
51:29
We can think ourselves into practically anything.
51:32
Reason can easily lead us astray.
51:35
We can reason ourselves into the most unreasonable positions.
51:40
Most of history's evils were not accidental.
51:43
They were the product of deliberation.
51:45
Intelligence can lead to catastrophe.
51:49
It's a shame that the most evil are not the least intelligent.
51:53
Some people attended the best colleges in the world but did the worst deeds.
51:57
I've twice visited Wannsee in Germany, the lakeside villa outside Berlin
52:02
where the final solution was planned.
52:04
Half of the participants in the Wannsee conference had advanced
52:08
degrees and carried the title.
52:12
They reasoned and convinced themselves into the final solution.
52:15
And with them, much of the population of Germany, the most technologically
52:20
advanced and intellectually gifted civilization of the era.
52:24
They were educated.
52:26
They were cultured.
52:27
At one and the same time, they were refined and savage.
52:33
In our technological age, refined savages are the most dangerous of all.
52:40
Alas, the sad history of the human species teaches that there
52:44
is no correlation between high intelligence and high morality.
52:48
When radicalism hijacks liberalism, and prejudice imprisons reason, even
52:54
the most dazzling intellects darken.
52:57
The mind still sparkles.
52:59
But in subjugation to a corrupted heart that gradually
53:03
takes possession of the soul.
53:06
The world is becoming increasingly perilous, especially for Jews.
53:11
I often think of the 1930s.
53:14
How was it so few people even saw, let alone mustered the will to
53:18
act upon, the looming threats that in retrospect were so obvious?
53:24
I do not think our condition is equivalent to that of mid century Europe, but I do
53:29
think that we are entering what Winston Churchill described as a corridor
53:33
of deepening and darkening danger.
53:36
Whatever you think of Netanyahu, whatever harsh criticism of his
53:40
policies or personality you harbor, the ICC arrest warrants for Israel's
53:45
Prime Minister and former Defense Minister was another warning.
53:49
Like in previous preludes to darker times.
53:52
People are losing their minds and their long held values.
53:57
As in the past, Western legal standards developed through centuries of blood
54:01
and tears are being manipulated and corrupted before our very eyes.
54:06
Not only against the Jewish people, but the West itself.
54:09
Hamas praised the court, proclaiming that international justice is with us.
54:14
Hamas!
54:16
That's the thing about hatred generally, and especially anti Semitism.
54:20
It so overwhelms reason that it ends up corrupting the very
54:24
principles we think we are upholding.
54:27
Educational institutions devoted to the free exchange of ideas
54:30
end up shutting down debate in a fit of intolerant certainty.
54:35
Feminist organizations devoted to upholding the dignity of women who betray
54:39
the very principles they claim to uphold.
54:42
Legal systems that distort and corrupt justice, making a mockery
54:46
of the very concept of law.
54:49
Anti Semitism ends up weakening?
54:52
and eventually destroying societies and organizations that tolerate it.
54:57
Which is why I have been warning since October 7th that this war against Israel
55:02
is a test for Western civilization itself.
55:06
Do we still know what we believe?
55:08
Or have we become so confused, so lost, and so anchorless?
55:13
That liberty itself is now imperiled.
55:16
In 1935, Churchill addressed the House of Commons with these words.
55:23
It would be folly for us to act as if we are swimming in a halcyon sea,
55:27
as if nothing but balmy breezes and calm weather were to be expected.
55:32
It is not only the supreme question of self preservation, but also the
55:37
human and the world cause of the preservation of free government
55:41
Civilization against the ever advancing forces of authority and despotism.
55:48
It has fallen to us to fight these forces with all our powers.
55:52
And Natasha Hausdorff is one of our most courageous warriors.
56:01
Until next time, this is In These Times.