Obama, the Middle East, and the Prospects for Peace
Boston University
183K subscribers
Subscribe
1.8K
Share
174,476 views Apr 11, 2010
In a lecture reaching far beyond the designated topic of Middle East peace prospects, Noam Chomsky is sharply critical of Israel, India, Pakistan, President Obama, and the U.S. - which he calls a "rogue nation" and "the Godfather."
He accuses the U.S. of controlling Israel and undermining the two-state solution that would establish a Palestinian state.
Hosted by School of Education and Axis of Hope on December 8, 2009.
Chapters
View all
Transcript
Follow along using the transcript.
Show transcript
====
AU
Skip navigation
Search
Avatar image
0:00 / 1:29:19
•
Introduction
Transcript
Search in video
Introduction
0:02
my name is Carl hobbert director of axis of Hope based right down comav here at the school of
0:09
education Boston University and it's my pleasure to introduce our guest speaker this
0:15
evening Professor n Chomsky received his PhD in linguistics in
0:21
1955 from the University of Pennsylvania during the years 1951 to
0:27
1955 Professor Chomsky was a junior fellow of the Harvard University School
0:33
of fellows the major theoretical viewpoints of his doctoral
0:38
dissertation appeared in the monograph syntactic structure in
0:45
1957 this formed part of a more extensive work The Logical structure of linguistic
0:53
Theory circulated in 1955 and published
0:58
in 1975 Professor Chomsky joined the staff of the Massachusetts Institute of
1:04
Technology in 1955 and in 1961 was appointed full
1:10
professor in 1976 he was appointed Institute professor in the department of
1:16
linguistics and philosophy for over 30 years Professor
1:22
Chomsky has been a pathbreaking linguist as well as a provocative
1:28
sometimes controversial critic of American policies and politics he has lectured at countless
1:35
universities here and abroad and he is the recipient of
1:40
numerous honorary degrees and awards he has written and lectured
1:45
widely on Linguistics on philosophy on intellectual history on
1:52
contemporary issues on International Affairs and on US foreign
1:57
policy his most recent book include a new generation draws the
2:04
line New Horizons in the study of language and mind Rogue States
2:11
9911 understanding power on nature and language Pirates and Emperors old and
2:18
new Chomsky on democracy and education Imperial Ambitions failed
2:25
States perilous power interventions inside Lebanon
2:30
what we say goes conversations on us power in a changing world the essential Chomsky and Middle
2:39
East Illusions his forthcoming book hopes and Prospects will be published in
2:46
2010 this evening's lecture by Professor Chomsky is being co-sponsored by the Boston University
2:53
School of Education under the sage leadership of Dean Harden Coleman it's also Al being sponsored by
3:00
access of Hope a nonprofit organization collaborating with a school of education
3:06
and dedicated to improving the practice of international conflict analysis
3:12
management and prevention in public and independent high school and middle
3:18
schools in the US and around the world I was introduced to Professor
3:24
Chomsky Years Ago by a mutual friend as I studied and became pass
3:29
passionate about the ideas of Martin Luther King Jr and Gandhi and began to ponder the idea of
3:35
what I still to this day call educational civil disobedience in US
3:42
schools over the years Professor Chomsky and I spoke about the preventive medicine ideas of Paul Farmer and Jim
3:49
Kim and ailia doll at Partners in Health or the bricks and mortar of
3:55
schools that Greg mortensson was working on or the people's History of the United
4:02
States idea of mutual friend Howard Zen Professor chomsky's advice and
4:10
guidance have helped us at access of Hope to carefully craft inclass intellectual outward-bound
4:17
conflict resolution exercises to help us and foreign youth learn to prevent
4:23
rather than to instigate conflict this is what we now call it
4:28
access of Hope preventive diplomacy Professor Chomsky also taught
4:35
me to pursue what I believed in with passion in this case speaking out with a
4:40
diplomatically dissenting voice about the need to create the future the prospect for future Peace by working
4:47
tirelessly With You Youth specifically focused upon teaching them trust
4:52
compassion transparency empathy and humility AS Global Citizens one child at
4:59
a time to Professor Chomsky I am greatly indebted as I use many of his Sage ideas
5:07
in teaching a course called s214 here educating Global Citizens focusing on
5:14
International conflict management and prevention Professor chomsky's lecture
5:21
this evening being filmed by bu Productions and then placed in the archives for future reviewing purposes
5:27
is entitled Obama the Middle East and the prospects for peace he will speak for 30
5:34
minutes following this portion of his lecture we will open the floor to questions from the audience for 1 hour
5:40
until 7:30 during the question and answer there will be two Boston University
5:45
students roving the auditorium with microphones they will bring the microphones to you so that you may ask
5:51
your questions please wait until the microphone gets to you to ask those questions one suggestion if you're in
5:58
the balcony and you want to come down during that Q&A session please feel free to walk
6:03
down and have someone bring you a microphone Professor chamski it's an honored to welcome you here to Boston
6:09
University this
Preventive Diplomacy
6:20
evening uh well I think a reasonable way to approach this uh network of problems
6:27
is from the perspective of preventive diplomacy one of your main
6:33
concerns uh preventive diplomacy of course is also a primary concern of the
6:40
security Council of the United Nations and in fact it recently uh passed an
6:46
important resolution on preventive diplomacy in the Middle East uh the res
6:53
it was late last September the U 1887 if
6:58
you want to look it up on the internet uh the resolution was uh Hil here as a
7:05
major victory for President Obama and his ongoing conflict with u uh president
7:12
akad NAD in Iran and uh actually if you read the resolution you find that that's
7:19
not entirely accurate uh it had two Provisions uh one of them was a call for
7:27
all states to refr refrain from the threat or use of force in their
7:34
conflicts that merely reiterates uh the leading uh a leading element of the
7:41
United Nations Charter article 224 which says States should refrain
7:50
from the threat or use of force uh the second part of the resolution
7:56
1887 called on all states to resolve their conflicts within the framework of
8:02
the nonproliferation treaty uh well who is that resolution
8:07
directed at uh nothing in the resolution relates to Iran they are not engaging in
8:14
the threat or use of force and as far as anyone knows they're staying within the framework of the nonproliferation treaty
Resolution 1887
8:22
however the resolution is directly uh is directed explicitly
8:27
against the two states that consistently and regularly do resort to force and the
8:34
threat of force namely the United States and Israel those are the countries that
8:40
uh carry out aggression regularly and repeatedly that uh invade other countries occupy other countries impose
8:49
Terror and violence uh and they're unique in that respect furthermore they
8:54
are the countries that uh refuse to accept the nonproliferation treaty now
9:01
of course uh the United States is a member of the nonproliferation treaty
9:06
but it uh backs other countries that are not and supports them in their violation
9:12
of the nonproliferation treaty uh there are three countries that have never signed the nonproliferation treaty all
9:19
in the Middle East uh one is Israel one is India South Asia and the others
9:25
Pakistan in all cases they have developed their nuclear weapons programs with us Aid and support and continued to
9:34
and they all responded to resolution 1887 as did the United States
9:41
itself uh in the case of India uh uh it
9:47
responded to the uh resolution calling for states to settle uh to work within
9:54
the nonproliferation treaty by announcing quite publicly that uh it can
India
9:59
now produce uh nuclear weapons with the same power uh yield as those of the
10:06
great Powers as those of the United States and it's been able to develop its nuclear weapons program in particular
10:13
thanks to the uh Anglo the US Indian treaty which exempts India from the
10:20
provisions of US law and uh the nonproliferation treaty that uh had up
10:28
till the signing this treaty barred uh States developing nuclear weapons outside the npt barred them from uh
10:35
having gaining uh uh Aid in their nuclear weapons programs now the US of course says that its nuclear Aid to
10:42
India is out is for civilian programs but of course it can be transferred
10:48
immediately to nuclear weapons programs and doubtless that's being done uh the
10:53
treaty was signed pretty openly there was no secrecy about this in order to
10:59
improve the opportunities for us corporations uh to sell uh nuclear
11:06
equipment in to India uh jet planes other military weapons which would have
11:12
been barred under the provisions of preceding US law so that's India what
11:19
about of course if as India expands its nuclear weapons programs its offensive
11:25
programs Pakistan does as well can't keep up up but it uh devotes resources
11:32
to expanding its own offensive nuclear weapons capacity that was developed
11:37
primarily during the 1980s it's one of Reagan's Ronald Reagan's many gifts to
11:43
the world uh Reagan the most uh vicious of uh Pakistan's many military dictators
11:52
zel Huck was the president in the 1980s after a military coup and he was a real
Pakistan
12:00
Reagan favorite U was giving us was giving extensive Aid to Pakistan the
12:08
pretext was the war in Afghanistan the Russian invasion of Afghanistan however the U us the CIA
12:16
station Chief and Islam Abad made it very clear that the purpose of the aid
12:22
is not to liberate Afghanistan the US didn't care about that it was to kill Russians as he put it so in order to
12:29
achieve that objective meanwhile tearing Afghanistan the shreds and leaving it in the hands of radical islamist Fanatics
12:37
who Reagan unorganized and who proceeded to tear the place to shreds with such
12:42
violence that the population welcomed the Taliban uh in order to maintain this
12:48
uh Reagan and his administration pretended that they didn't know that
12:53
Pakistan was developing nuclear weapons although was completely obvious and they certainly knew but they had to pretend
12:59
that they didn't know because otherwise there would have been a barrier to providing uh Aid as uh uh zel hu carried
13:08
out his programs which included among other things the radical islamization of
13:14
Pakistan uh with sodi money uh and US
13:19
support uh they developed a network of madrasa radical schools which uh uh laid
13:28
the basis for what we're now seeing in fact uh radicalization and Islamic radicalization of substantial parts of
13:36
Pakistan so that's uh Pakistan India mentioned what about Israel well Israel
13:41
of course developed its nuclear weapons with the support and U of the United
13:48
States that's not controversial but right at the time of
13:53
the passage of resolution 1887 and the uh uh you know the furer about whether
14:00
Iran is concealing something from the international atomic energy agency as
14:05
they doubtless are uh right in the middle of that fur on the front pages every day still is uh the international
14:14
agency uh considered a resolution calling on Israel to U uh
14:22
join the nonproliferation treaty and to open up its nuclear weapons nuclear
14:27
facilities including weapons facilities International inspection well the United States and Europe tried to block the
14:33
resolution when they failed it was voted anyway uh and it was passed uh but then
14:40
Obama immediately informed Israel that they could be they were immune to it uh
14:47
he also informed India that they were immune from resolution
14:53
1887 so the resolution wasn't literally barred it was just barred from the site
14:59
of the American population thanks to the cooperation of the media which doesn't
15:04
report things of this kind uh you can read it if you read the Mexican press or
15:10
read AP reports or something like that but it didn't appear none of this appears here uh the uh how did the
15:18
United States respond to resolution 1887 well U right at the time that Obama
15:25
received the Nobel Peace Prize for his inspiring contributions to peace which
15:31
maybe somebody can find if they have a electron microscope in their pocket but
Iran
15:37
uh right at that time uh the Pentagon announced that it is U rapidly
15:44
accelerating the production of the most uh lethal weapons in the US Arsenal
15:50
short of nuclear weapons uh 13 ton bombs
15:56
uh to be delivered by be B2 B52 stealth bombers uh which are what are called
16:02
massive penetration ordinance they're designed to penetrate deep into the
16:08
ground through you know huge amounts of reinforced concrete uh
16:14
and Destroy whatever is down there these are huge bombs Way Beyond anything else
16:20
the plant everybody knows exactly what they're for they're one of the many threats against Iran uh the uh uh the
16:27
programs had actually been initiated under George Bush but kind of languished
16:33
however as soon as Obama came into office he called for Sharp acceleration of the programs and they are now
16:40
according to the Pentagon accelerated by three years and should be deployed within a few months that's a part of
16:49
Washington's uh radical violation of the UN Charter and of course the security
16:56
Council resolution uh which Bans any threat of force these are parts of the
17:01
over threat of force and Israel's case as well um is the US and Israel were
17:08
supposed to carry out uh air operations uh planning clearly planning
17:14
for posed as a threat for to Iran uh that was kind of undermined when turkey
17:21
pulled out of it refusing to join uh in the in these violations of international
17:27
law uh one of the reasons why turkeyy is being slapped on the wrist for its
17:32
Disobedience uh these days uh but those were the reactions of the three
17:38
countries to whom against whom resolution 1887 was directed
17:45
uh Iran has you know a rotten government
17:51
nobody doubts that and certainly nobody wants Iran to develop nuclear weapons or
17:56
anyone else for that matter uh but but it's easy to see why the world outside
18:03
the West just doesn't take seriously uh Washington's professions of concern
18:10
about these matters and the same is true of Washington's profession the West's professions of concern about human
18:17
rights in Iran I'm a terrible repression undoubtedly but by the standards of us
18:23
allies in the region not very bad so it's not as bad as say Saudi Arabia or
18:29
or Egypt Egypt has a brutal dictator uh president Mubarak and Obama
18:37
made clear his attitude towards human rights when he visited Egypt for his
18:43
famous Cairo speech for which he was magnificently praised he was asked U
18:49
what he had to say about President Mubarak and his answer was uh I don't
18:55
like to use labels for folks when a polit politician uses the word
19:01
folks you kind of get ready to shudder something awful's happening and he
Why the world collapses
19:08
continued I don't like to use labels for folks so I wouldn't call him authoritarian uh in fact he's a force
19:15
for stability and good in the region yeah can you wonder why the world
19:21
collapses and ridicule outside the West when they hear the United States talking about concern for human rights in Iran
19:29
uh and in fact it is most of the world outside the West we don't hear about it because we're carefully protected from
19:37
uh the events of the World by uh an information system designed for that
19:42
purpose media commentary and so on so very few people know that uh uh when you
19:51
read that the that Iran is defying the International Community by enriching
19:57
uranium very few people know that the term International Community means
20:02
Washington and whoever happens to agree with it so the majority of the countries
20:07
in the world the non- Align countries most of the world have repeatedly uh uh
20:13
and vigorously indorsed Iran's right to enrich uranium within the framework of
20:19
the nonproliferation Treaty of which it's a member unlike the US allies
20:24
Israel India and Pakistan uh in fact very few people know that uh the
Propaganda campaign against Iran
20:31
majority of the American people are excluded from the world too they also endorse that right or they did as of a
20:38
couple of years ago when the last polls were taken it's very likely different now because of the though I haven't seen
20:44
a poll because of the massive propaganda campaign to demonize Iran and portray it
20:51
as a major threat to World Peace uh that's been going on for the last few years uh the uh that's the world uh and
21:00
it in it's necessary to be very delicate in reporting things so for example one
21:06
of the most maybe one of the most or one of the most popular leaders in the world
21:12
is President Lula of Brazil and he's also Washington's fair-haired boy in
21:17
South America he's supposed to be the moderate as compared with the bad guys who are going farther left so it's been
21:25
necessary for some time to suppress the fact that Lula has been quite openly and
21:31
strongly supporting Iran's right to do what it wants within the bounds of the
21:36
law including develop U uh develop nuclear power enrich
Missile defense systems
21:44
uranium it became if Hugo Chavez says something like that you know huge uproar
21:49
what he expect of this demon but when Lula says the same thing even more
21:54
strongly you have to suppress it if any of you're going into journalism you've got to learn these lessons uh it became
22:01
pretty hard to suppress in the last few weeks when President akman Jad visited
22:07
Brazil so then yes you had to report it and admonish Brazil for stepping out of
22:13
line uh but in fact relations between Brazil and Iran in fact South America in general and Iran have been improving
22:21
trade relations and others uh because the world outside the West simply
22:26
doesn't follow us orders the way it's supposed to it used to because it was
22:32
terrified to do anything else uh but the world is getting more diverse and The
22:37
Godfather is losing his clout to some extent so it's necessary to kind of
22:42
suppress what's happening though it is happening uh there's a lot more like
22:47
this so take say the there was a lot of to remember a couple of weeks ago Obama announced that he was going to
22:54
reconfigure the missile defense systems in Eastern Europe Europe which were
22:59
regarded by the Soviet Union by Russia it's not the Soviet Union anymore regarded by Russia as a threat to its
23:05
security with Justice if you read us Arms Control journals you'll find that
23:11
us strategic analysts like say Theodore P postal over at
23:16
MIT uh recognized that uh these so-called missile defense systems would
23:22
have to be construed by the Russians as a threat to their security uh there's a
23:27
good reason for that missile defense systems are not for defense they're
23:33
First Strike weapons and that's understood everywhere I mean if they ever a work they're not going to stop a
23:39
first strike but they could conceivably stop a retaliatory strike so they're
23:45
effectively a first strike weapon and that's understood by strategic analysts
23:50
on all sides almost in the same words uh well Obama did agree to reconfigure
Irans missile threat
23:58
these uh uh systems and move them somewhere else and there was a big debate about whether that was a sellout
24:04
to the Russians or whether was as he said a better way to defend the world
24:11
against the threat of Iranian missiles and nuclear weapons
24:16
that was the debate does the debate make any sense I mean I suppose Iran had
24:23
missiles and nuclear weapons could it use them I mean if as much as loaded a
24:29
weapon the country would be vaporized and the ruling clerics have
24:35
not evidenced any wish for mass suicide and destruction of the country that they
24:41
pretty much own uh and in fact the US intelligence analysts on Specialized in
24:47
the Middle East consider the threat of an Iranian attack with
24:52
missiles as so small that you can't even evaluate it they if they're developing
24:59
which maybe they are it would only be as a deterrent an effort to deter a threatened very openly threatened us
25:07
Israeli attack the US is not quiet about this it's openly threatening attack
25:12
Israel even more so in fact Israel is uh ascending Israel happens to have
25:18
nuclear nuclear submarines capable of carrying uh nuclear tip Torpedoes a gift
25:25
of Germany and it's openly sending them through through the Suz canal with the
25:31
agreement of um the force for stability and good
25:37
president Mubarak uh sending him through the sus Canal into the Gulf as a threat
25:43
to Iran saying you know if you if we don't if we want to we can wipe you out
25:48
and you won't be able to do anything about it uh so yes the threats are constant and continuous uh and uh but
Threats from rogue states
25:56
those are coming from the Rogue States the only states that regularly resort to
26:01
violence and the threat of violence who else is uh occupying two countries in
26:07
the region and illegally occupying other territories who else constantly carries
26:12
out aggression in the region and other violence I mean Iran hasn't done it for
26:19
probably two centuries uh but uh at the United States and Israel do it constantly uh so yeah there's a good
26:26
reason for the security Council to be concerned with preventive diplomacy in the region and for others concerned with
26:33
preventive diplomacy to be concerned too particularly the ones here because we're right at the heart of it we're at the
26:40
heart of the uh use and threat of uh uh
26:45
the use of force and the threat of force in the region nobody else begins to compare just think it through uh these
26:54
it's kind of an intriguing feature of our intellectual cult culture that these
27:00
matters cannot be perceived I mean it's not that they're profound or hidden and they're right on
27:06
the surface you know completely on the surface but they can't be perceived uh
27:13
that uh is a revealing indication of the uh strength of the grip of Imperial
27:21
ideology which is comes naturally in the west it's history of the West for
27:26
hundreds of years so sort of second nature uh so much so that it literally
27:32
cannot be perceived though again there's absolutely nothing concealed about it
27:37
well let's turn to the other major trouble spot in the Middle East uh Israel Palestine what's President
27:44
Obama's contribution to that Obama has made actually one major
George Mitchell
27:50
speech about uh Israel Palestine it's when he introduced George Mitchell as
27:56
his negotiator now Mitchell is a good choice for a negotiator he was also George Bush's uh and he's got a good
28:04
record he was prominent in negotiating the uh uh the peace in Northern Ireland
28:13
which is no small achievement I happened to be in Northern in Belfast a couple of weeks ago and I had been there in
28:20
1993 in 1993 it was a war zone I mean you couldn't park your car you know
28:25
there were Security Forces all over the place people are afraid to go from one area to another because of the threat uh
28:34
literally a war zone and this time it's peaceful uh on the surface like for an
28:40
outsider like me it looks peaceful uh how and of course the people all look
28:45
alike you know so you don't identify the ones who are in Conflict however as soon
28:50
as you travel around a little bit and with the guidance of people who know Belfast you see that while it is a vast
28:57
Improv movement over what it was which is a tribute to George Mitchell and Bill Clinton and Tony Blair uh the uh the
29:06
division the problems still remain not far below the surface in fact there
29:11
still is a regular low level of Terror low nothing like what it was uh but uh
The Division
29:18
the divisions remain there's very little intermingling among the two
29:23
populations uh unionists and nationalists and you you see driving
29:28
through Belfast you know a wall of a building with a big painting on it
29:34
saying say loyalist area meaning don't enter here or enter at your risk unless
29:39
you're one of us uh the division kind of still there but they're not VI they're
29:45
much less violent in fact the when I went in 1993 I was my wife and I were
29:52
taken from Dublin to Belfast by a young woman who was a a Catholic uh
29:59
a peace activist in north in Belfast and uh she is now a minister in
30:05
the government uh on the way she had she managed to get us to visit with a an IRA
30:15
Hitman who was on the Run he'd escaped from British from British jail so it was kind of you know secret place and a lot
30:23
of security and so on I spent a couple hours talking to him basically asking one question
30:29
what do you think you're achieving by killing Protestants and his answer basically was basically I'm not
30:35
achieving anything uh he killed my cousin they killed my cousin I'm going to kill their uncle and then they'll
30:42
kill my brother and that's the way it is you know well a couple years later he was on the negotiating team now he's in
30:48
the government uh okay things can change you know and change for the better and
30:54
Mitchell had a substantial role in that the real reason it happened is because
31:00
the British finally recognized that if you want to deal with Terror an IRA
31:06
Terror was not a joke you better pay some attention to its roots the terror
31:11
is you know it's criminal but it's based on Grievances and a lot of those grievances are legitimate and they
31:18
should be dealt with Terror or not and if you do pay some attention to the Grievances you'll reduce the terror and
31:25
they finally agreed to respond to Terror not by more violence but uh by paying
31:31
attention to the Grievances and it worked and there's been a tremendous Improvement and that's an important
31:37
lesson of preventive diplomacy if you like uh well let's go back to the Middle
31:42
East so Obama introduced uh Mitchell and uh he made a speech and he said um um
31:52
the United States wants to bring about peace through diplomacy and negotiations
31:57
and he said fortunately there's a there's a very constructive proposal on
32:02
the table from the Arab League uh the propo and he was referring to the
32:08
originally the Saudi proposal which was adopted by the Arab League and then adopted by the organization of Islamic
32:15
states which includes Iran and the proposal calls for a a two-state
32:21
settlement on the international border which has been the international consensus for 35 years blocked only by
32:28
the United States and Israel but that's something else we're not supposed to know uh the uh so they endorsed the
32:36
international consensus and they went beyond it in the Arab League proposal by saying well uh in the context of
32:43
establishing a political of a political settlement establishing two states uh the Arab states should proceed towards
32:50
normalization of relations with Israel okay so Obama referred to the proposal
32:56
said very constructive Pat them on the head and then urged the Arab states to
The Proposal
33:01
live up to it by beginning to normalize relations with Israel well you know he's
33:07
an intelligent man he's literate he knows that's not what the proposal was
33:13
The Proposal called for normalization of relations in the context of a two-state
33:19
settlement kind of a corollary to it so Obama mentioned only the corollary
33:25
omitting the content which tells everyone who has a gry cell functioning
33:32
that he intends to continue with the US policy of extreme rejectionism that is
33:38
blocking a political settlement which the US has in fact been doing ever since it
33:44
uh clearly ever since 1976 when it vetoed a security Council resolution
33:51
calling for two-state settlement on you know full guarantees for the peace and security every state in the region and
33:57
so on put forth by the major Arab states at the time and continuing on I won't
34:02
run through the record but it's been a very consistent record of leading the rejection front of blocking diplomacy
34:10
and Obama was saying okay we're going to continue with that uh very clear that's his one major speech on the Middle East
34:17
there was also quite an important speech by John carry our Senator head of the
34:23
Senate Foreign Relations Committee who's been one of Obama's
34:28
um active agents in negotiating in in the region yeah and Carrie had something
34:35
it was at the Brookings Institute a couple of couple of months ago Carrie gave the usual picture the standard
34:42
picture virtual Party Line exceptionalist uh the United States is an honest broker but that's true by
34:48
definition no matter what's going on the US is an honest broker uh trying desperately to seek peace and human
34:55
rights and it's been sort of caught and this trying to get these two sides together and Israel has been Desperately
35:04
Seeking a legitimate partner for peace and it's never had one but Carrie went
35:10
on to say at last Israel may have a legitimate partner for peace namely the
35:15
Palestinian Authority and he then gave the reason the reason was that during
35:21
the attack on Gaza a year ago which we call an Israeli attack but that's a
35:27
mistake AK it was a US Israeli attack joint attack during the attack on Gaza
35:34
uh which is a violent brutal murderous attack uh there were no protests in the West Bank and the reason was that
35:42
there's an Army in the West Bank Run by a US general General Keith Dayton uh and
35:48
that Army was able to suppress any protests Okay so we've got enough uh
35:55
military control over the population of the the West Bank so they can't even protest when the other half of Palestine
36:01
is subjected to a vicious assault so maybe at last Israel has a legitimate partner for peace uh Dayton's Army is
36:10
trained with this with support of Israel and and Jordan uh uh and it's not the
Israel has a legitimate partner
36:20
most violent Army in the West Bank the most violent this Dayton's Army under
36:25
State Department control supervision ision so there's some constraints on what it can do kind of weak but not
36:32
non-existent but the CIA is running its own military forces there general
36:37
intelligence and the presidential guard and they have no constraints what the CIA does is anything you like U reports
36:45
from there are that those are the the worst state terrorist forces so at last we have Israel has a legitimate partner
36:53
for peace and we can proceed with the our plan for peace
36:58
now right now Obama and prime minister Netanyahu are calling for negotiations
37:05
and the Palestinian Authority is dragging its feet and so that shows maybe it's not such a legitimate partner
37:13
uh negotiations are f a good thing you know better than killing each other but
37:18
negotiations presuppose something what are the negotiations about know you
37:23
can't enter into negotiations if they're not about anything okay so what are they about in this case well there are two
37:30
views of that one view is that of the entire world outside the United States and Israel the negotiations are about a
37:38
two-state settlement on the international border okay which the US and Israel have been blocking for 35
37:44
years so that's one possible topic the other uh topic is the US Israeli
37:51
policies in in the territories maybe negotiate about them well what are they
37:56
well they're very clear here the policies first of all are to break Gaza from the West Bank there's no basis for
38:04
that in law or anything else they're just the two parts of what's left of Palestine but they're treated quite
38:10
separately now by the United States and Israel U and that's kind of important because that means if there ever is any
38:16
c Palestinian entity it won't have it'll be trapped it won't have any access to
38:22
the outside world which it would if it were in Gaza and Gaza was allowed to
38:27
develop could be have a Seaport and airport and so on uh so but if it's just
Israels siege of Gaza
38:32
the West Bank it's completely trapped uh in within hostile forces so first break
38:38
Gaza from the West Bank second turn Gaza into a prison in fact a Maximum Security
38:46
Prison uh where you just torture the population in ways which are really
38:53
sadistic like just a couple of days ago to tighten the siege Siege is of course an act of War to tighten the siege
39:00
blocks anything but just bare survival you know us Israel don't want the
39:05
population to die like flies that wouldn't look good so keep them alive somehow but uh make sure they can't
39:12
really survive uh so the Water Supplies are destroyed you know sewage is the
39:18
power is destroyed trickle of goods get in just a couple of days ago Israel
39:25
tightened it a little more by cling the entry point at nalo uh which is the
39:31
place where cooking gas gets into gazes so now no cooking gas uh Egypt
39:38
cooperated Yesterday by closing the terminal to at the Egypt end near Rafa
39:46
preventing diesel fuel from getting in so just continue to strangle the population meanwhile drive them away
39:52
from the borders so there constant bombardment and other terrorist acts by Israel along the borders which Drive the
39:59
population Inland depriving them of arable land and making the Maximum
40:04
Security Prison even worse and also driving away from the Sea Coast so the Israeli Navy in the last seven or eight
40:11
years has just been driving fishing boats uh out of gazin territorial Waters
40:17
and right up to the shore which essentially destroys the fishing industry because uh after the Israeli
40:24
destruction of the power and sewage and other facilities the pollution on the shore is
40:29
so outrageous that you can't fish there uh so just drive them Inland keep it uh
Israels West Bank policies
40:36
keep the keep it tightened make the uh situation worse and worse uh and just
40:42
we'll see what happens that's uh Gaza the prison in the West Bank the policies
40:49
are very explicit uh there's a wall snaking through the West Bank that's
40:56
called the separation fence it should be called the annexation wall it's about
41:02
far higher and much longer than the Berlin wall and its purpose is very explicit it's to ensure that Israel can
41:09
Annex the valuable territory in the West Bank uh the Water Resources which happen
41:15
to be behind the annexation wall arable land and the pleasant suburbs of T Aviv
41:22
and Jerusalem places kind of similar to where I live say Lexington the nice
41:27
suburbs of Boston which happen to be in the West Bank Hills so let them take that uh also take the Jordan Valley
41:35
which is about a third of the territory uh so that the rest is imprisoned and in
41:40
what's left the US Israeli settlement programs if you look at a map cut through what's
41:47
left with Sant at one east of Jerusalem which pretty much bisects the West Bank
41:56
and two others far farther to the north which kind of break up what's left what's called Jerusalem is actually a a
42:04
greater a great area Way Beyond Jerusalem and Israeli actions there which you read about every day in the
42:11
Press you know kicking out Arab families building and so on those are not only illegal but doubly illegal all
42:18
settlement in the West Bank is illegal all settlement that has been recognized
42:24
universally including by Israel since late 1967 uh as Israel began the settlement
42:30
programs and after the 67 War its highest legal authorities highly respected
42:37
International lawyer Tor May Ron it's attorney general and so on informed the government that all of this is in
42:44
violation of international law uh the um defense minister mosha Dian who was in
Moshe Dayan
42:50
charge of the occupied territories agreed he said yes it's in violation of international law but uh States violate
42:58
international law so we'll do it too which you can do as long as the Godfather says it's fine uh so those are
43:06
in violation of international law that's all the settlements uh and Jerusalem greater Jerusalem doubly because that's
43:12
also in violation of explicit Security Council resolutions barring any change
43:18
in the status of Jerusalem but as Diane said yes we can violate international
43:23
law freely as long as uh our Patron provides U military economic diplomatic
43:31
and ideological support that's us U and that will and then in the little
43:36
territory that's left the hundreds of checkpoints are put up mainly for
43:41
harassment uh to make it say impossible to go in an ambulance from one place to
43:47
two miles away to a hospital and just to make life impossible following a
43:52
principle that in fact mosha Dean stated explicit back in late '
43:58
67 minister in charge I said to we should tell the Palestinians that they
44:04
will live like dogs and whoever will leave will leave and we'll see where
44:09
that turns out so that's the US Israeli policy it's being implemented right before our eyes uh and uh meanwhile
44:17
Obama is talking about settlement expansion which is just a diversionary tactic doesn't make the slightest
44:23
difference whether they expand settlements or not they're all illegal and they all break everything up so if
44:29
you can focus on expansion maybe people forget the real problem namely the
44:34
settlements uh and all of this is designed to ensure that there can't be any uh political settlement that allows
44:42
any meaningful National self-determination to the Palestinians and the 22% of the ter of Palestine that
44:50
technically they're supposed to have under international law well those are the policies right before our eyes I
44:56
haven't talked talked about the the constant regular brutality and
45:02
sadism which is serious uh but that's the diplomacy and Mitchell is bound by
45:09
it uh there's he's not given any CH he maybe perfectly good negotiator he has
45:14
no opportunity to do anything as long as the United States remains committed to those policies well there are things
Amnesty International
45:21
that can be done in fact uh one good suggestion was made by amnesty
45:27
International it's now considered in the United States and Israel a kind of a radical left
45:33
organization uh but uh hope we don't have to talk about that uh in
45:39
the several human rights reports about the US Israeli War in Gaza they call it
45:46
an Israeli War but that's politeness in the uh there have been quite a few human
45:51
rights investigations and one of the most important of them hence the least publicized was an Amnesty International
45:59
report which uh went through the Weaponry that was used in the attack on
46:04
Gaza uh found of course that almost all of it comes from the United States including white phosphorus and other
46:10
high-tech weaponry and it called for an arms embargo on both sides
46:16
well can't call an arms embargo in Kamas because no State publicly at least provides them
Arms embargo on Israel
46:23
with arms uh but you can call for and of course most overwhelmingly that means
46:28
Israel so they called for an arms embargo on Israel uh for good reasons because its actions violate
46:35
international law and US shipment of arms to Israel violates US law the US
46:41
law is quite explicit that arms cannot be sent uh except for the purpose of
46:47
Defense uh and of course this is I might say a word about that Israel of course
46:52
claims that all the actions I described are in self-defense but you know that claim is meaningless
47:01
everything that a state every state when it uses Force reflexively says it's for
47:07
self-defense like when Hitler invaded Poland it was to defend Germany from the
47:13
wild Terror of the poles and so on if you can find an exception to that in history I'd kind of be interested so to
47:20
say it's in selfdefense is like saying 2 plus 2 equals 4 you have to ask is there
47:25
any Merit to that claim well is there I mean let's take the separation fence going through the West
47:31
Bank and what does that have to do with self-defense I mean if Israel wanted to
47:36
build a war that would keep wall that would keep it secure it would build it on the border it would make it
47:41
impregnable you know Mile High you know tanks on all sides uh this is an
47:47
annexation wall has nothing to do with defense take the attack on Gaza it's
47:52
uniform in the United States including the human rights reports to to say yes
47:57
Israel had the right to attack it has a right to defend itself against Hamas
48:03
Rockets there is no there is a right of self-defense that's true everyone agrees
48:08
that a state has a right of self-defense but that's not even the issue yeah the issue is that which is never discussed
48:15
did it have a right of self-defense by force okay that's different from a right of self-defense now international law is
48:22
quite clear on that as his common sense you have a right to use Force and self-defense if you've exhausted
48:28
peaceful means that's a precondition well the US and Israel not only didn't exhaust
48:34
peaceful means they refused to try them and they refused to try them because they knew they were going to work there
48:41
were clear peaceful means that could be used in fact there had been a ceasefire
48:46
it was called in June 2008 and uh Israel concedes publicly that during the cease
48:52
fire uh there wasn't a single Hamas rocket uh so okay and Israel broke the
48:59
ceasefire in November by sending troops into the Gaza Strip and killing a bunch
49:05
of Hamas activists and then Rockets started in response but then Hamas
49:10
continued to offer to renew the ceasefire and the Israeli cabinet
49:16
considered it we have the public record and decided not to and the US of course never mentioned it well that alone
49:23
completely undermines any claim to the youth to the right of force if they fired one bullet into the gas
49:30
would have been a crime quite a but the discussion is all about disproportionate
49:35
use of force which is again an evasion uh you don't talk about disproportionate use of force unless there's a right to
49:42
the use of force in the first place which there wasn't and if you go Case by case there are no security issues there
49:48
of course there are security issues but they're largely self-generated because there are opportunities for peaceful
49:54
settlement uh well the United States has been blocking them and continues to
50:00
block them and so does Obama and that's another good case for preventive diplomacy I'll
50:18
stop as we get microphones out I'd like for people to think about
Questions
50:24
questions they have for Professor Chomsky again focusing on the Middle East focusing on the first term of Barack
50:31
Obama focusing on George Mitchell's role there also focusing on the role of Hillary rodm Clinton who's playing an
50:38
interesting role in this whole quote unquote peace effort do we have
50:44
microphones one right there do we have a second right there please raise your
50:50
hand if you'd like to ask a question and please make certain that once you get
50:55
the microphone you you speak right into it so we can hear your question please raise your hand first let's start right
51:01
down
51:07
here start thank you very much Professor terrific speech um it seemed after 911
51:14
that um Bush's policy with Israel largely fell under the the war on terror
51:20
and there was a lot of support with it kind of fell into the aess of evil scheme and all that how would you relate
51:25
that to the now of the Obama Administration in terms of how they relate to Palestinian self-determination
51:32
Israel's response to Terror what not it's about the same um it's
The War on Terror
51:39
hard the war on terror is kind of an interesting concept uh what we are
51:44
supposed to think is that George Bush declared a war on terror in after
51:51
September 11th that's not quite accurate he redeclared a war on terror the war on
51:57
terror was declared by Ronald Reagan in 1981 as he came into office uh he
52:05
announced and his administration announced that uh International state- directed International terrorism is the
52:11
plague of the Modern Age return to barbarism in our time it's going to be the core of our policy and then they
52:18
proceeded to deal with it by carrying out massive terrorist Wars which
52:24
practically destroyed Central America you know killed over a million people in southern Africa and then sported the
52:31
invasion of Lebanon just a massive terrorist War so that's kind of out of History because we're not supposed to
52:37
talk about our terrorism uh so therefore that Terror that war on terror is kind
52:42
of submerged uh what about Bush's war on terror about the
52:48
same it has almost nothing to do with reducing ter I terror is real you know 9/11 happened it's bad it was a real
52:56
crime actually if you try going to Latin America you may find that people call it
53:01
the second 911 the reason is there was another 911 September 11th
53:08
1973 in Chile which by any objective standard was much worse I can go through
53:14
the details if you like uh and we know who was responsible for that people like Henrik kinger and others uh so yes there
53:21
was massive Terror uh 911 R 911 was another one and if you want to if when
53:28
there is a case of Terror a major crime there are ways to react to reduce the terror and they were understood so in
53:35
the case of what we call 911 second one uh if you wanted to reduce if your goal
53:42
was to reduce Terror what you would have done is use the options that were available so for example the Jihadi
53:49
movement which is a broad movement was highly critical of Obama Osama Bin Laden
53:56
uh and 911 I there were fatwas coming from the you know the radical clerics
54:02
and Alazar University kind of you know the main Islamic Center uh condemning uh
54:09
Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda for this and if you wanted to reduce the threat of Terror what would have been done is to
54:15
exploit the opportunity to break up the Jihadi movement you know to separate uh
54:21
this violent militant element from its base of support okay that's the natural
54:27
way to reduce the threat of Terror that's in fact what Mitchell succeeded in doing in Northern Ireland instead the
54:34
US decided to escalate the threat of Terror by welding the Jihadi movement
54:40
back together first by attacking Afghanistan then by attacking Iraq and it's exactly what happened so for
54:47
example invasion of Iraq uh it was predicted by just about every
54:52
intelligence agency that it would increase the threat of Terror first very simple reason ter Terror doesn't come
54:58
out of nowhere you know it's not because people decide I want to blow myself up there's there's a background for it and
55:05
the background are Grievances and sometimes the Grievances are legitimate as in Northern Ireland uh so if I mean
55:13
one of the uh leading about Terror in Iraq I'll come
55:19
back to this uh intelligence agency predicted it would the invasion would increase the threat of Terror as indeed
55:25
it did far beyond what was anticipated so using qu governmental statistics uh
55:32
Terror increased by a factor of seven it's a big jump the year after the
55:38
invasion of Iraq of Iraq as anticipated but more and we can go through other
55:43
cases a protection of a population from Terror or other violence is usually a
55:48
low priority of States not a high priority uh and that's true of the United States as well so yeah sort of
55:56
down there somewhere but not a major PRI U priority that's easy to show uh
56:01
furthermore what do he do about 9911 itself well was criminal act uh when uh
56:07
there's a criminal act the first thing you do is try to figure out who who perpetrated it wasn't so simple in this case about
56:14
eight months later the head of the FBI after the most intensive International
56:20
investigation and history said that uh the FBI was still unable to really pinpoint to blame they said we believe
56:29
it's the word that was used that the plot may have been hatched in Afghanistan but was probably implemented
56:35
in the United Arab Emirates and in Germany okay so that's what they believed eight months afterwards well
56:43
okay if you're trying to carry find perpetrators of criminal act you go beyond your beliefs until you're pretty
56:50
confident who carried it out uh and then you work to apprehend them if it's an
56:56
International case you get International support which been very easy in this case and then bring them to a fair trial
57:03
it doesn't mean Guantanamo or buam well that's the way to deal with criminal acts assuming you
57:09
want to reduce Terror okay if reducing terror is not your concern or a very low
57:15
concern then you do the kinds of things that were done you use force and violence to achieve your other
57:21
objectives uh that's uh I could go on with other examples so as you may know
57:28
there was a 911 Commission that was formed over the objections of the Bush
57:33
Administration but was formed to high level commission to recommend means to
57:39
reduce the threat of Terror and if you look over the recommend they reconstituted themselves
57:46
later uh because they were quite angry that none of the recommendations weren't be car being carried out and if you look
57:54
yes they weren't being carried out so for example one of their recommendations was to U uh fortify the uh border the
58:02
Canadian border that's the poorest border for the United States I mean you
58:07
and I could cross the Canadian border with a suitcase with a small nuclear
58:13
weapon in it you just go through the forests you know it's an basically unguarded border so one recommendation
58:20
was okay reinforce the Border well the Bush Administration responded by reinforcing the Border a namely the
58:26
Mexican border which was not considered a threat because the threat that uh the
58:33
people who are fleeing from the effects of NAFTA and the US Terror in Central
58:38
America the the need to keep them out is far higher than the need to protect the
58:44
people in New York from a nuclear explosion and it it goes that way step by step I mean governments are not the
58:50
benevolent agencies they're Power Systems and they carry out policies in the interest are those who dominate and
58:57
control them and protecting populations is a low priority Israel is a case in
59:03
point could have security but prefers expansion thank you another
59:11
question yes sir right here uh do we have a microphone right down here
59:17
please right up
59:22
there what worries me is what's going to happen in this
59:28
country Obama raised such exaggerated expectations Such Great Hopes in people
59:35
precisely because he wasn't unknown I recall reading that approving peasant was asked why he voted for a particular
59:41
candidate for presidency he said because I know nothing about him and I'm afraid that's what happened in this country
59:46
people voted for Obama because they knew nothing about what he really was going to carry out and it's a very dangerous
59:52
situation when you raise exaggerated High Hopes And then you dash them down we know what happened in France after
59:58
1968 the gold came back to Power with a Vengeance the labor party disappointed
1:00:03
people in England the 60s and the Thatcher regime came in hard of disappointed people of this country and we got Reagan what's going to happen uh
1:00:10
as seems to be starting right now when this exaggerated hopes are dashed down do we have real dangers here and how can
1:00:16
we fight that yeah I you're quite right and in fact his uh Obama and his
1:00:22
campaign managers made sure you would know nothing about him or very little about him I mean if you look back at the
1:00:29
campaign uh the slogans were hope and change what hope for what you know what
1:00:36
change well at that point it kind of evaporates uh why hope and change well
1:00:42
you know campaign managers are intelligent enough to read polls and they knew that 80% of the population
1:00:49
thought the country's going in the wrong direction okay hope and change in fact
1:00:55
those were mechan slogans too except he didn't do it as well uh Obama made it primarily because
1:01:03
the financial institutions who are have enormous power in the country mainly thanks to Reagan and Clinton uh they uh
1:01:12
they preferred him to McCain so they poured money into the Obama campaign Way Beyond McCain and that's the core of the
1:01:20
funding and yes uh he managed to make it you know over to win the election and it
1:01:27
shouldn't come to as a surprise to anyone who knows anything about American political history that they're being
1:01:34
paid off just take a look at the front pages every day I the big problem for
1:01:39
the big Banks now is that the profits and the bonuses are so high that they're
1:01:46
getting a bad press you know so they have to figure out some way to conceal It by Say taking them in stocks instead
1:01:52
of money so you're kind of borrowing money from the public instead of
1:01:58
stealing it you know uh so sure they're they're getting paid off for having put Obama in office uh but the other
1:02:05
programs are well you know what's happening to them U he's probably a nice man I don't know but there shouldn't
1:02:12
just as you said there should be no surprise uh they were very careful to keep it quiet and that's characteristic
1:02:20
of us elections the US elections are a fa OD I mean they are run by the public
1:02:28
relations industry who Market candidates the same way they Market toothpaste and
1:02:35
lifestyle drugs I mean when you see an ad on television you know you're not
1:02:40
supposed to believe it you know it's not an attempt to inform you the way it would be in a market system it's a way
1:02:47
to create uninformed consumers will make irrational choices exactly the opposite
1:02:53
of what you're taught in an economics class about markets but business spends huge amounts of money to undermine
1:03:00
markets by constructing uninformed consumers who are supposed to make irrational choices
1:03:07
and the same institutions PR institutions run the campaigns and they Market candidates the same way they want
1:03:14
an uninformed electorate that'll make irrational choices uh and in fact as
1:03:20
maybe you know uh Obama won an award from the advertising industry for the
1:03:25
best marketing campaign of 2008 he beat out Apple computer and if you read the
1:03:31
business press Executives were euphoric they said you know best we've done since
1:03:37
we since Reagan when we start were able to Market him now we have an even better
1:03:43
achievement it's going to change the atmosphere in corporate boardrooms you new ways
1:03:49
of Behaving and portraying ourselves and so on yeah that's the case and one
1:03:57
technique is if you really want to create an uninformed electorate you have
1:04:02
to keep issues off the agenda and there's a second reason for that on issues both of the political parties are
1:04:10
commonly well to the right of the population so it's important to keep issues off the table make sure people
1:04:18
don't know what they are so yeah you're quite right and what will the result likely be and my well my suspicion is an
1:04:25
erosion of of the base for the Obama campaign because people will be
1:04:30
disillusioned they shouldn't be but they will be and it's understandable and u a
1:04:35
very significant backlash there's a major group of huge group of people in
1:04:41
the country who feel they have serious grievances the Grievances come back go
1:04:47
back to the 1970s uh the shift of the economy from
1:04:54
production to finance which is a huge shift that took place primarily under Reagan and then Clinton
1:05:01
uh and of course Bush even more extreme and that's left a lot of people out in the cold uh majority of the population
1:05:09
have seen their wages and incomes stagnate for 30 years their benefits
1:05:16
decline you know Services decline infrastructure collapse and so on and
1:05:21
they're not happy about it and they want to know why is this happening to me if you listen to talk radio you get a
1:05:28
good sense of it I me which I do I drive I listen uh the the the standard person
1:05:36
is saying something like uh you know I'm I've done everything right I'm a
1:05:41
hardworking decent white Christian uh
1:05:46
done everything right why is this happening to me well who's going to give him an answer uh they're not going to get an
1:05:53
answer from the Republican Party he saying yeah that's the policies we designed to shaft you and enrich a
1:06:00
couple of rich people and they're not going to get an answer from the Democratic party saying well that's pretty much our policy too except maybe
1:06:07
not as extreme so they get an answer from Rush limbo and Glenn Beck who tell him well I
1:06:13
got an answer it's the rich liberals who own the banks and run the government and
1:06:20
own the media and don't care about you people the fly over people they only care about the rich fol in the on the
1:06:27
two coasts they want to give everything away to illegal immigrants and you know the Unworthy poor and so on so yeah
1:06:34
that's your problem well you know if that's the only answer you're going to get people are likely to believe it and
1:06:40
we've seen we had experiences like this it's unfortunately reminiscent of late
1:06:45
viar Germany where there were also were people with Grievances and they were
1:06:50
getting an answer crazy answer horrible answer but uh happened to take over with
1:06:57
consequences we know about I'm not saying that's going to happen here but the similarities are not
1:07:05
insignificant we had a question in the back yeah hi uh as it becomes more apparent that our leadership is
1:07:12
complicit with uh Israel and its occupation by sending $3 billion a year in military aid and as the the
1:07:19
demographic in East Jerusalem is is changing more rapidly with housing evictions in shik Jan and silan and
1:07:24
other neighborhoods and like the Israeli left is is shrinking and shrinking and getting gradually smaller um do you find Hope in
1:07:32
in the bocott investment and sanctions movement that's been growing in the world or do you feel that that there's
1:07:38
other ways of assisting in ending the occupation and and other uh problems in
1:07:43
the region well I think the the development of the sanctions movement
1:07:49
reflects uh an an understandable and uh
1:07:54
you know many ways appropriate reaction to what's going on but it has some problems that we ought to Think Through
1:08:01
the sanctions movement is directed against Israel okay that absolves the United States but the United States is
1:08:08
the prime actor in this Israel can go just as far as the US permits it to and
1:08:15
as far as the US provides the essential support So tactics are supposed to be
1:08:22
educational and this one is miseducation it's direct it's in fact a a gift to the
1:08:29
United States saying yeah it's those terrible guys over there uh now a a
1:08:35
sanctions program can be effective and sensible uh but it has to be formulated
1:08:43
properly BDS as it's called boycott the vestment sanctions that's a pretty blunt instrument you can use it effectively
1:08:50
you can use it badly uh to be used effectively first of all it ought to be directed against the the right Target
1:08:57
and it ought to be done in a way which the population which can be which is defensible which the should take the
1:09:04
high moral ground not be indefensible for example it shouldn't be obviously
1:09:10
hypocritical for example if you boycott say an Israeli dance group may make
1:09:15
Israelis feel bad but uh it's totally hypocritical why not boycott a US dance
1:09:21
group say us has a far worse record of violence and aggression you're
1:09:26
boycotting an Israeli dance group because you can get away with it they're they're weak you can't do it against the United States too strong and tough but
1:09:33
anybody can see that that's just total hypocrisy on the other hand something like say the Amnesty International
1:09:39
proposal that makes a lot of sense uh calling for the US to follow its own
1:09:45
laws you know and stop sending arms to Israel first of all it's directing it
1:09:51
against the right target namely us and we should always be primarily concerned
1:09:56
with ourselves uh and that happens to be the appropriate Target anyway and it's completely defensible the US ought to
1:10:03
live up to its laws uh and that opens the door to an educational program in
1:10:09
making it clear that uh the US is violating its own laws and international
1:10:14
law by sending arms to a country that's engaged in direct aggression not using
1:10:20
it for defensive purposes this is the first time a human there have been cases in the past where human rights groups
1:10:26
like Human Rights Watch have suggested that the US live up to its own laws by
1:10:32
not sending arms to Israel because there are laws that bar sending arms to laws
1:10:38
that engage in systematic torture as Israel does but this is much more extensive this is calling for an overall
1:10:45
arms embargo and it's coming from an impeccable Source Amnesty International
1:10:51
and they have a very good reason and a defensible reason and one that can be
1:10:56
you know can be justified and can be used to as a wedge to get people to
1:11:01
understand the situation so that's a sensible BDS program uh others are too
1:11:07
so for example a boycott of say arms manufacturers or caterpillar which is
1:11:12
just create destroying the occupied territories yeah that that makes a lot
1:11:18
of sense uh but you just have to craft these things so that they're sensible it
1:11:24
can be done um actually the case of South Africa is a very interesting one
1:11:29
that's usually suggested as a model but you should really pay some attention to it um the BDS program against South
1:11:37
Africa really took off by around 1980 that was at a point where nobody
1:11:44
was defending a part height I Congress was passing legislation against uh
1:11:50
supporting it you know Mayors were getting arrested the Press was against it and so on and it was after Decades of
1:11:57
educational programs that got people to oppose apartheid okay at that point u a
1:12:04
BDS program made a lot of sense and it was effective the Reagan Administration which was a criminal Administration
1:12:11
beyond the norm had to evade Congressional legislation in order to
1:12:16
continue to support its South African allies and that was no small business as I mentioned it led to the killing of
1:12:24
probably over a million people people in the neighboring countries uh well that was important uh uh and in fact to
1:12:31
finish up on South Africa a lot of the a lot of analogies are made between Israel
1:12:36
and South Africa I don't think many of them hold up very well one reason they don't hold up is that South Africa
1:12:43
needed its black population its African population badly they were its Workforce
1:12:49
Israel doesn't want the Palestinians it be happy if they would disappear that's
1:12:55
one crucial difference and it's a difference in the policies that are followed uh but there is something to be
1:13:01
learned from the history in South Africa by the early 1960s South Africa was beginning to
1:13:07
become a pariah State you there wasn't a boycott campaign but there's a lot of
1:13:14
condemnation of AAR heite and there were votes in the United Nations you know overwhelmingly against the part heite
1:13:20
and so on as that was the South African nationalists reacted pretty much the
1:13:25
same way Israel is reacting uh we're right the world is wrong they don't understand us all we need is an
1:13:31
information campaign to explain to the world that everything we do is wonderful and perfect and that's pretty much
1:13:37
what's happening now and it went on for a long time uh but a South African the
1:13:42
South African foreign minister made a very interesting comment astute comment
1:13:47
to the American ambassador this is must be close to 50 years ago he told the
1:13:53
American ambassador yes the un is voting against us but it really doesn't matter
1:13:58
because you and I know there's only one vote in the United Nations yours okay
1:14:03
and as long as you're backing us it doesn't matter what the rest of the world is saying and he was right uh and
1:14:10
the history showed it as long as the United States continued to back them they could get away with whatever they
1:14:16
wanted doesn't matter if the whole world objected didn't matter if Congress passed legislation against them and as
1:14:22
late as 1988 the Reagan Administration condemned the African National Congress Mandela as
1:14:30
one of the more notorious terrorist groups in the world that's 1988 actually as you may know Mandela
1:14:37
was just removed from the terrorist list a couple of months ago that's 1988
1:14:42
within about two years the United States changed its position uh for reasons we could debate
1:14:50
but anyway it did change its position Mandela was allowed out of the prison at robt
1:14:55
Island uh there were moves towards overcoming a part and with a
1:15:01
couple of years the system was gone all it takes is that one vote which happens
1:15:07
to be the only vote there is in the United Nations that's what it means to have overwhelming power uh and that's a
1:15:13
hopeful sign it's not the only case there are other cases like that too and it means we can really do something if
1:15:19
we want to but we're going to have to focus tactics on what the United States does uh not what somebody else
1:15:27
does another question yes right here hi um I have a sort of two-part
1:15:35
question uh the first is with the increasing uh fear-mongering towards the
1:15:40
Iranian regime it seems like an Israeli air strike could be quite possible and
1:15:46
if that happens I think the United States stands to lose more just because we have our troops in both Afghanistan
1:15:53
and Iraq if that happens didn't understand the first could you repeat the first part I didn't understand it um
1:16:00
it seems as though there's an increasing chance of an Israeli air strike on Iran an increasing oh an air a threat of an
1:16:07
air strike on Iran right yeah um and if that happens I think the USA can lose
1:16:13
more than Israel would just because our troops are far closer yeah how do we stop an Israeli air strike when they
1:16:21
claim that they're fearing for their existence and my second question is is our negotiations with Iran have
1:16:28
consisted so far of us demanding that they stop um how can we expect this to
1:16:33
be a negotiation if we're not willing to budge on our is on any issue if we're not willing to budge on any of the
1:16:40
issues if we haven't offered or we haven't asked them what they want in return and all we're doing is demanding
1:16:45
that they stop well as far as stopping an Israeli air strike is concerned that's fairly
1:16:51
straightforward the US just has to tell them you're not going to do it okay uh then there won't be an Israeli
1:16:57
air stay uh and put teeth into that statement which of course the US can do
1:17:03
us is providing the armaments providing the has to allow for Transit you know so
1:17:10
in fact it's happened like last summer for example uh summer 2008 so year and a
1:17:17
half ago right in the midst of the presidential campaign you know the most sensitive moment uh uh APAC these main
1:17:25
Israeli Lobby was trying to get Congress to pass a resolution calling for a
1:17:31
blockade on Iran well that's an act of War you that could have led to a war uh
1:17:38
and and they had gotten a lot of support a lot of Congress people were lined up and signing all of a sudden the campaign
1:17:45
ended there was no indication of why but it must have been that they just got a
1:17:51
message from the White House saying we don't want a war now so call off your boys uh and the campaign ended it's
1:17:58
right in the middle of a campaign very sensitive and that's happened over and over I mean Israel and its lobbies here
1:18:04
know that they can go only so far they can go as far as the US lets them if
1:18:12
they tried to do something that the US really opposed they'd be in serious trouble and they understand that you
1:18:18
they're not suicidal either uh so yeah we can stop it by putting an end to our
1:18:25
support for it or our own threats for that matter uh you can't it's not 100%
1:18:31
guarantee but pretty pretty safe Prospect as for the
1:18:37
negotiations you know it's not very clear what they're about actually um are we going to try to prevent IR Iran from
1:18:45
uh uh exercising the rights of Aigner of the nonproliferation treaty as we're
1:18:53
insisting well we can insist on that but we certainly can't expect the world to go along with us except for Europe which
1:19:00
you know follows obsequiously behind but uh uh outside Europe the world doesn't
1:19:07
accept it that's why you have the kind of statement I quoted from president Lula Brazil and the non-lined countries
1:19:15
which continue to support that right uh if we want to negotiate with Iran we got
1:19:21
to offer them something uh and what we should should offer them is first of all that they should have their rights but also that
1:19:29
the we'll put an end to the uh effort to exclude them from the world which is
1:19:35
serious it's quite serious like uh we now have laws in the United States which bar uh International Banks from dealing
1:19:44
with Iran well you can't legally do that but uh again when The Godfather says it
1:19:50
it happens uh so the banks don't want to lose under the Patriot Act for example
1:19:56
if a bank is violating us sanctions it can be barred from action within the United States
1:20:03
that's pretty serious uh risk for some International Banks so sure they follow
1:20:09
well okay we could U offer opportunities for Iran to enter into the world system
1:20:15
which I think would also be a help to the Iranian reformers I mean it's just the harsher
1:20:22
we are in our treatment of Iran the easier it is for the ruling clerics
1:20:28
to uh get the population to huddle Under the Umbrella of power for you know for
1:20:35
defense I we know that perfectly well you know after 9/11 okay everybody was
1:20:40
willing to accept harsh restrictions you know support the government and so on yeah
1:20:45
other others react that way too so I think there are steps that can be made they're not guaranteed to succeed uh but
1:20:53
we should at least begin by putting an end to the hypocrisy I mean you cannot
1:20:59
praise uh president Mubarak of Egypt as a force for stability and good and then
1:21:07
in the next sentence condemn the Iranians for the harsh treatment of protesters and expect people not to
1:21:14
crack up in laughter uh outside the highly disciplined West which of course
1:21:19
you know does what it's told so so there's there steps that could be made if there were serious
1:21:25
diplomatic interests we have time for just one more question from this
1:21:33
side yes hi um my question is early in your
1:21:38
talk you talked about the threat of Iran being exaggerated and how it's not as big of a threat as the world and the
1:21:44
Middle East is making it seem to be and then later you talked about how no one is admitting to supplying arms to
1:21:50
terrorists in Gaza and Lebanon um but you also that somebody Iran is doing so
1:21:57
so and they have admitted it so how is that not a threat to the Middle East and to the world how is it not a threat if
1:22:05
Iran violates say International agency resolutions and so on how is it not a
1:22:12
threat they suring terrorist organization oh surprising terrorist organization well that's an interesting notion too uh according to the United
1:22:20
States and its uh obedient allies the United St Iran is supporting terrorist
1:22:26
organizations okay well ask yourself is that true I mean which are the terrorist
1:22:31
organizations I mean they're Pro presumably they're providing arms to healah and to Hamas are they terrorist
1:22:38
organizations well I mean hasbalah is called a terrorist organization because
1:22:44
it drove Israel out of Southern Lebanon okay maybe it carried out other
1:22:49
terrorist acts maybe not but the main uh charge against has
1:22:55
is it drove our Ally out of an illegal military occupation of Southern Lebanon
1:23:01
where our Ally was there in violation of Security Council resolutions that went back 22 years yeah they did drive them
1:23:08
out uh they also defended Lebanon when Israel invaded its sixth its fifth
1:23:15
invasion in 2006 okay terrorism from one point of
1:23:21
view not from others we can't expect the world to accept our condemnation of that
1:23:26
as terrorism what about Hamas yeah Hamas say the Hamas Rockets are criminal acts
1:23:34
no doubt but we're not going to you can't expect rational people to accept the charge that charge if they know as
1:23:42
we prevent ourselves from knowing that there's a very simple way to stop those acts namely accept the
1:23:49
ceasefire and in fact there's a more General way was pointed out by uh
1:23:55
near Rosen who's one of the best reporters of in the in the region very fine reporter he was asked he was on Amy
1:24:03
Goodman's show of democracy Now a couple of weeks ago and she asked uh you know what can we do to stop Muslims from
1:24:10
killing us well stop killing them you know okay stop killing them maybe
1:24:16
they'll stop killing us uh not a bad answer uh so sure the Iran is
1:24:22
undoubtedly supporting Hamas and uh hasbalah but uh you know as compared
1:24:28
with what we do it's like a toothpick on a mountain I mean whatever you think about Hamas that carry out nothing like
1:24:35
the violent murderous acts of Israel and Egypt which we strongly support and the
1:24:41
same with hasbalah they've defended Lebanon I you may like him or hate him it's really irrelevant but and you know
1:24:49
maybe they've involved in some like for example they one of the charges against hbal is that they uh carried out a
1:24:56
suicide bombing in 1983 at which against the US Marine base
1:25:02
in Lebanon well actually probably wasn't hisbah which you look at experts on
1:25:10
the topic they point out hisb barely existed then was probably somebody else
1:25:15
but whoever it was was it a terrorist act I mean the US military base in
1:25:21
Lebanon was being used to bomb and attack Lebanon that was the time when
1:25:27
the US Navy right offshore uh was bombarding the hills over uh in Lebanon
1:25:34
uh in support of our our allies in a civil war you know a response to that
1:25:39
action is hardly a terrorist act uh so you really have to ask yourself who are the
1:25:47
terrorists yeah they're not nice people I don't I wouldn't ad I don't but in
1:25:53
fact they happen to be pretty popular in Lebanon here again is some you have to
1:25:58
be very careful not to believe what you read in the American Press crucially like right right after there was an
1:26:04
election in Lebanon uh couple of u a couple of months ago and if you read
1:26:10
people like say Thomas fredman or everyone else they were just Overjoyed
1:26:16
fredman was the most extreme as usual he said you know tears come to my eyes when I hear about free elections and on and
1:26:23
on and he said the Lebanese people had a free choice and they voted for Obama and
1:26:29
against akmad andad of course the US backed Coalition won the
1:26:36
majority of votes in the parliament what he didn't tell you and what the American Press didn't report is that the majority
1:26:43
vote went to the hasbalah backed Coalition they got 54% of the vote of
1:26:49
roughly half of the population have voted and because of the SEC Arian
1:26:55
system in Lebanon which is a residue of French colonialism the Shiite population
1:27:00
is very much under representative under represented so you believe in free elections the Hezbollah back Coalition
1:27:07
won in fact won pretty handily uh but if you really hate free elections which is
1:27:13
standard here then they didn't because the way of manipulating the vote put
1:27:18
them in the minority of the legislature so you know you you can't really say that they're an unpopular group in
1:27:24
Lebanon in fact the legislature just recently authorized their retaining
1:27:30
arms well makes some sense I mean if Lebanon has a right of self if Lebanon
1:27:36
has no right of self-defense yeah then of course they shouldn't have arms but if Lebanon does have a right of
1:27:42
self-defense then who else is going to defend it against the next Israeli Invasion I mean not the Lebanese Army
1:27:48
they can't do it not only can do it but did do it so okay
1:27:54
it's nothing to do with whether you like him or hate him but you should be a little cautious about using the notion
1:28:00
terrorist organization particularly when we happen to be in the state which is
1:28:05
guilty of far more terrorism than anybody else you can think of
1:28:10
practically
1:28:25
before we finish I'd like to offer a couple of gifts to Professor Chomsky the
1:28:31
first gift is a beautiful bookmark thanks to our wonderful dean of
1:28:37
the school of education who's sitting in the back cardan Coleman a true Visionary
1:28:43
a true what I call entrepreneur who be you was lucky to get from the University
1:28:48
of Wisconsin this is from Dean Harden Coleman and the school of education thanks very much
1:28:58
second you already have a few for your grandchildren but one more this is from axis of Hope and on the back you'll see
1:29:06
that it says teaching youth for peace beginning today that's for you also
1:29:12
thank you all for coming
====
====
====
No comments:
Post a Comment