Madeleine Cereghino  00:00

Welcome to this Americans for Peace Now webinar. I am Madeleine Cereghino, APN’s director of government relations. Since October 7th, the Israeli government has launched a massive annexation effort– displacing Palestinians, expanding existing settlements, and doubling the resources available to settlements– “legalizing” more than 70 illegal outposts along the way. Under Netanyahu and Smotrich’s governance, emboldened settlers have essentially been granted carte blanche for land seizure, crop and livestock destruction, and violent altercations with Palestinians– all with minimal consequences.

 

To discuss these alarming updates, we are joined by Lior Amichai, the executive director of our sister organization, Shalom Achshav (Peace Now), which has recently released a report detailing the recent annexation effort.

 

Let’s begin with the findings of the report. Can you give us an understanding of the situation in the West Bank? What do you see as the main drivers behind the significant increase in the establishment of new outposts, the advancement of construction plans, and the rise in settler violence? Can you shed light on the factors contributing to this, and are there specific policy changes or political dynamics within the coalition that may have influenced these troubling trends? And, following the 10/7 terrorist attacks, have you observed a further uptick?

 

Lior Amihai  03:09

So many things are going on while rightly so, the major focus is on Gaza and perhaps on escalation or things that could happen from who knows what Iran is, Hezboll and the things that are already happening in the north of Israel and South Lebanon, etc. Nevertheless, there is another drama that's happening, and that is what the Israeli policy towards the occupied territories is, and specifically its annexation efforts in the West Bank. And this report that we highlighted, or that we just published, sort of summarizes the most significant "achievements" of this government that is doing in the occupied territories in order to advance them. Is there background noise that's happening? We are just having in the parallel room just next to me, they are just finishing another conference of activists-- is the noise okay?

 

Madeleine Cereghino  04:07

you're coming through clearly. Thank you.

 

Lior Amihai  04:09

Okay, good. So if it does cut through, please tell me, and I'll ask them to be slightly quiet. I think what is really significant about this is in it, of course, it has implicate wider implications on Gaza in the on the possibility of ending this war and returning of the hostages. And of course, on the grander scheme of things, you know, the Israeli Palestinian conflict and possibly the Israeli Arab conflict, and, of course, the tensions with Iran. But nevertheless, this is a big drama, and it's happening in things that are going, many of them slightly unnoticed. Some are getting so little more attention, but nevertheless, this is a big drum now, since this war began, and I'm going to try to sort of highlight what we highlight in our report that. It's very short so you can read them, because it summarize all the key events. And each one of these, you can go and dig deeper, and we have like, small reports on each one of them. But what we've seen so this is since the war began, basically, is that settlers established 25 new settlements, as we term them as outposts, so unofficial recognized Israeli settlements. Now this is huge. This is 25 new communities have been established since the war began. So while Israel is at war, at efforts that settlers are taking action and establishing communities. And of course, the whole system is supporting this. So the military is not enforcing its law on it or its orders on it. They're not evacuating them in the country. They're protecting them, etc. Roads are on a massive scale. Have been opened up, have been paved. Dozens of miles of roads are being built and were built since the war began, and just these two things together, outposts and roads have, of course, what we put our focus on, severe political significances. They also have directly effect on Palestinian communities and livelihood and on the occupation levels that they feel. So once you have a road to an outpost, a new outpost, and a road to it that prevents Palestinians who work the land near to enter or Palestinian communities, it harms their freedom of movement and such. It leads to massive settler balance, which I'll also touch about, etc. So we've got these two major things that are directly on the ground. The government also declared 25 or 24,000 dunams of land as what they term state lands. State plans is public land. It means that it's taking land and saying, Oh, this land began belongs to the public, and the public is the state of Israel. And we know that these lands were, are or will be allocated for the use of the interest of settler and settler groups and settlements etcetera. This is just to give you. This is half of the amount that was declared since the Oslo Accords and to date, so half of the amount that the Government of Israel declared as state plans since the 1990s since 1992 to this day, 50% of it was during since the war. The government also advanced nearly 9000 housing units within existing settlements through the planning procedures, something that we systematically follow, again, very a large amount, it recognized five new settlements. Now, until a couple of years ago, the official policy of the state of Israel that it doesn't establish new settlements. Therefore, the phenomena of the outpost, we seeing the, you know, the the illegal settlements, or the unauthorized settlements, which are the outposts. Now, you know, just another government decision. Five new settlements are established. They're also in the process of recognizing unauthorized outpost as official settlements. They did that to three of them and and this is in the wider, again, the policy of the government, and is, by the way, preceding previous governments, but recent ones that all outputs this government has put significant, significant emphasis on this is that all the outposts are eventually going to be legalized some way or another, and they are in the process of this. And three of them, they did legalize as neighborhoods of existing settlements. This is one of the ways that they do that 70 of these outposts, the government is transferring funds to them. Now this is officially, now, you know, this is, I'll just say a word about this, because we argue and we prove and we show that the government is supporting, materially wise and financing outposts since they're established, basically through many ways, through regional councils and such. It never did so directly like this. Now the government made a decision to fund 70 outposts, unauthorized outpost by government funding. So now the ministry is funding an unauthorized or an illegal outpost, according to Israeli Law, directly, just because they're on a list that they make. So they wrote, okay, these 70 outposts, whatever, whichever outputs we put on this list, the government will now find--  this is law. And so this is what they did. This is This is unprecedented. This is the first time it happened. They also established settlements in Hebron, which is always dramatic. I won't go into that, but because Hebron is a Palestinian cities, apart from East Jerusalem, which a lot of things are happening there as well, which I won't deal with, unless you want me to, but Hebron is... so East Jerusalem and Hebron are both the only cities Palestinian cities where there are settlements within them directly. And so another settlement was established in Hebron. So. I'll just highlight a few more things. One finance wise, the government is exploding the settlements with money. Smotrich-- we showed leaked statements or speaking into his crowd, and we leaked this to the New York Times. We recorded it, and we gave them to them, where he says that 7 billion, this is nearly, let's say 8 billion would be about. So nearly $2 billion are now being transferred approved government funding to roads for settlements in a five year plan. So this is a lot of investment, and I'll say why this is so significant. This is also so what I said before, these unauthorized roads that they built, or the illegal roads that the they're building, have a significant effect on Palestinian livelihoods, etc, the seven, the $2 billion roads that the government is funding for settlements. This is sort of the heart of the or this is the, the core policy that needs to be done in order to to establish settlements, settlements because they're in an occupied territory, because they're deep in the West Bank, many of them, the you know, the Israeli public doesn't want to go there. When does the Israeli public goes? When do they go and live to the settlements? When there's a new road, a nice road, a highway becomes then settlements become suburbs. And the settlers know this, and we have published reports over this. In this history, like in we've several reports on this, showing that once you have a big highway, a new road, then the settlement grows significantly. They also established. You know, there's other funding that we can I can mention millions of dollars or shekels that going to settlements as such. The other thing, the last thing that I'll say before maybe I'll just, you know, I won't talk about settler violence if you want, because there's so much you can say, but I'll just say, in a sense, about subtler violence is that it's, it's, you know, the most cruel thing that you know one could imagine. And it's getting, I think, more international awareness to this one, due to the sanctions that are being posed by the United States and others on certain settlers, but also in the ICJ decision just from was it two weeks ago, or something like that? But also because they are a political tool, or a tool to achieve political ends, and they use such a violence in occasions where other mechanisms of taking control over Palestinian territories or the occupied territories is not at hand, and also to intimidate the Palestinian population. And this is just going, you know, it's, it's a regular routine in the most intensive way and in the place right now we're really since the October 7, it's not clear anymore how much you know the distinguish between settlers and the military is as hard as it ever was. Many of these violent settlers have are recruited by the military, are now officially part of the safeguarding community of these outposts or settlements. And of course, the scale and the violence is is as tough as it ever was. But lastly, what I want to also talk about is what I think most of you probably heard is, of course, the the annexation elements. Now, what I've said until now, these are all what we term, or the jargon terms de facto annexation, right? You build a settlement, it's you can argue that it's a de facto annexation. What this government is doing is doing it to your annexation, a legal annexation. And it's doing it by taking, basically by taking a building, a ministry for the settlements, and transferring authorities and responsibilities from the military to that ministry. And Smotrich is that minister. So he's the Minister of Finance. He's also minister of the settlements. And he established the settlement division. And the settlement division is responsible for settlers and land issues. And within this ministry, within this settler division, you have legal advisors, I think 26 who are civilians, who work for his ministry. And you have, so you're basically, basically established the ministry of settlements structure to the head of it, and you have the settlement division responsible for this. Now, why is this so significant because now you have, for example, two legal two different legal advisors for the West Bank. You have military legal advisors who are responsible for Palestinians, and you have civilian legal advisors who are responsible for settlers and land issues and such. So. And you know, when you talk to legal experts, they tend to highlight that, you know the occupation is, you know the mandate of Israel to occupy the territories is from international law. And even you know in the military that you know the Civil Administration, the military body that is responsible for Palestinian issues or civilian issues, knows that it has to regard that. It has to regard it, you know, it's, it's, it's, it's not a question. They know that they have to regard international law. And when they justify the their policies, which are, you know, settlement policies, and we argue, we, you know, criticize them, and we showcase them and we highlight them. We say how bad they are. They have to argue it in international law terms, and they justify it through this. When they take private Palestinian land, they say, Oh, well, it's for security issues. They need to take that into consideration. They can't otherwise. And in few places, it challenges them. Now it's much more severe than this, because now these civilians, these legal advisors, don't have to take any of this into account. They, on the contrary, their only interest, or their main interest, or their main obligation, is to fulfill the interests of the minister or of the Israeli public, because they're not committed, they're not part of the military occupation anymore. They're now a ministry of the State of Israel. Now I'll say that I'm turning this to ministry. Of course, Smotrich and the Israeli government spokespeople will say, Oh, it's not a military. It's not a new ministry. You know, peace now is is lying about this. But I will argue that what we revealed in The New York Times was that the Government of Israel knows that it can't today, in today's climate, annex the occupied territories. And so what they're doing is what they did since the start of the occupation, was to sort of Yeah, Israel bluff or will fool the international community. We're not building new settlements. It's an outpost, right? That's the argument, right? They're only outposts. They're small, they're insignificant, they're illegal, or even according to Israeli law. And then time comes and they retractably legalize them, and they become full settlements. What's happening now with annexation? They're doing annexation. They build this new ministry, but it's not a new ministry. It's a ministry within the minister of defense. And it's not a new department for settlement division. It's within, it's under the civil administrations. It's part of the military. But what was and but we know, and the people who are in the details, know that actually they have these authorities, which differentiates them from the military, and that it's, it's in in, in fact, a new ministry in, you know, in its essence, and what we revealed in The New York Times is that Smotrich said it in his words, which makes it much more easier for us to make This argument, because Smotrich basically said, or exactly said, Look, we couldn't annex it right now in today's climate, so we annexed it, and today it's annexed. And the other significant thing that he said, that the highlight, is that Netanyahu is fully on board. So Netanyahu is supporting this. And it's not just he's led by Smotrich. It's not just that. It's not just doing things and you can't and snow can't stop him. Sources is saying Netanyahu is on board, is fully on board, and he's supporting this full heartedly now. So these are, like, the major things that are happening on the ground. And of course, they have a lot of implications, and maybe we'll want to discuss them. I'll just say that they have a lot of implications on Palestinians and human rights issues first and foremost. And from our perspective on the political scheme is a force. It's a significant for the two state solution in Israel's relations to these territories, and, of course, in the prospering of ending this war, which seems much harder when Israel is arguing and making actions in order to say, well, the two state solution is off the table forever and will always occupy these these territories.

 

Madeleine Cereghino  19:13

Thank you, Lior, you've given us quite a lot to digest. I think I'd like to jump in to the legal elements that you touched on just now first, can you start before we really get into it? I had a question about from someone about where these kinds of settlements are occurring, whether it's area A, B or C, and I think if you could talk one where it's occurring, but also about the differences in the three areas and their administration, and what has changed from the administration under the guise of what Oslo envisioned it to now that we have this, you know, Ministry of settlements, as you say, and the kind of changes that have occurred under Smotrich. Much, yeah, if you could just give us a kind of a rundown there.

 

Lior Amihai  20:05

So look, I think you can get really nuanced and detailed about it, so, but I'll try not to do that. I'll try to be in the bigger picture. Because I think in the details it's, it's really difficult and hard to follow, but, but basically saying that until Oslo, until the 1990s then Israel had the direct occupation on the, you know, on the Palestinians. And also established the system where you know you, you know you, created the Palestinian Authority as an interim government, you know, before a Palestinian state. And this interim period, which was supposed to last for five years, decided that, you know, the Palestinians won't have a state immediately. It'll go through several stages, and throughout these stages they will receive more and more authorities on the ground. And the way they divided the territories, the the occupied 10 was to A, B and C, where areas a is full control of the Palestinian Authority. Area B was some control of the Palestinian Authority and full control of the Israeli security and security issues. And Area C was where, and that's where all the settlements are, and that's where 60% of the territories are, is where Israel still maintains full direct occupation now, the settlements and the outposts, and what we're seeing now, and all what I've talked to largely goes in Area C, like predominantly, it's all effective area C. Israel is terming this as you know, their fight for Area C. They're trying to take control over it and the and, and I'll say one more thing, you know, these settlements and outposts and these 25 you know, it's not like random, it's not, oh, there's an empty hilltop. Let's conquer that. It's really strategized, and it's in order to cut the West Bank into pieces. It's order to prevent development of Palestinian communities, and it's order to prevent growth of Palestinians like so community grows, then, okay, we'll block that, and we'll build a sub, an outpost there, and there'll be subtler violence, and we'll take their land and such. And this government took this a further step. And just think it was a couple of weeks ago or just recently, also decided to take authorities on demolition of Palestinian houses in quite a large portion in Area B. And again, you can go into the details, but this is a part of the Oslo Accords Netanyahu when he became prime minister back in 1996 installed this element into the courts where there was a a big portion, think it's about 40,000 acres. I'm reminding the that the Palestinian Authority had the authority to plan there, but Israel did not allow them to plan there, so something like that. And but throughout the years, Palestinian Palestinians still build there. And now they're saying, oh, Israel has the authority to demolish the Palestinian houses there the Palestinians built over the years. This is something that was never in Israel's authority to do. On the contrary. So now they're also taking control over areas a certain area B, that they didn't do so in the past.

 

Madeleine Cereghino  23:26

Thank you. So what we're seeing really is not just that kind of, like you said, creeping annexation, where we're seeing ongoing establishment effects on the ground, but now there's legalized elements to it coming. You know, not that annexation, not that the settlement construction and demolitions weren't coming from the top down, but now we're seeing it as like a really legally mandated structure. That's troubling to say the least. I did want to talk a little bit more about this kind of legalizing of outposts. And you mentioned that you know, settlements aren't chosen random, or aren't necessarily randomized. They're they're part of the larger strategy. Is that also how the legalization of outposts works, and what exactly you know goes into that.

 

Lior Amihai  24:21

Okay, so again, if we go really briefly, then the Oslo Accords, when Israel signed the Oslo Accords, Israel also said that it won't build any more settlements. And indeed it stopped. This was, of course, I know, officially Israel for a very long time, let's say like this, officially, Israel didn't build new settlements in the occupied territories. It just didn't, since they are still upwards. But then immediately after it said that two things happened. One is that the settler population grew dramatically, predominantly because of the roads and the bypass. Was in the highways that it built for these settlements as due to the Oscar cores. And the second is that dozens and hundreds of settlements were established, but were termed outpost and unauthorized. And for many years, the entire world was looking into these outposts, and the Government of Israel was saying, Oh, look, they're really small. They're insignificant. They're not official part of the State of Israel. They have no political significance for a two state solution. And don't mind them, like, let's go back to the negotiations and talk about the big picture. And don't mind these outposts, but they were being established like, you know, mushrooms after the rain, just happening constantly. Now and again over the years. Israel official statement was that these are illegal in at some point, I think it was 2017 or so, Israel changed its policy. They said, You know what? We're going to legalize some of them, and whoever we can, we'll legalize those that are not on private land, we'll try to legalize and and so on. And then what we're seeing now is sort of the peak of this policy, and what this government is doing now, which has never done before. It's one systematically trying to legalize all of these outposts, so they're building so now there's so all of these outposts are now saying our policy is to legalize all of them, and it's doing so by officially legalizing them and by contributing finances to those that are still illegal. And now they've established this big lease list of 70 outposts which we don't know, I think we don't know the the term that wasn't published with settlements, which outposts are on this list. But it's pretty much all dominant the or it's, it's almost all of the the community outposts. And now they're funding them directly, through millions of shekels through ministry governments. What they're also doing is establishing dozens of outposts that are also illegal but are known as agricultural farms. And these agricultural farms, why are they so significant? Because the settlers, the settler leadership, study this in their own words. And if you heard of Amana and their leaders, they've zambish. They basically said it look, in order to take over, to build an outpost or to build a settlement, you need a couple dozen people, a couple of dozen families. You need infrastructure. You need finances. We have another trick. Let's build these outbursts. Well, the purpose is to take over, control over the territory by just having one family there. And we'll take we'll build these farms, which are farms of one families, or of one family, or couple families or one individual with a few hilltop youth, and will throw them at certain places. And they'll not only take the hilltop that the the farm is built, but they'll also work the lands around them. And they're taking thousands of dunams of land, in practice, on the ground, and preventing Palestinian access to these territories and a huge contribution to settler violence and and friction between the populations is due to these out these outposts as agricultural farms. And the government, of course, is establishing them systematically and since 2017 but very much so in recent years and again, since the war. These of these 25 outposts, I think roughly 20 of them are agricultural farms.

 

Madeleine Cereghino  28:46

Thank you. I want to come back to the issue of agricultural farms and settler violence. But before we do, um, you know, you've mentioned a couple times now the government directly funding outposts. I know we've talked about the nearly 2 billion in roads for settlements and outposts that you guys were able to uncover, but what specifically Could you share about what the government is funding within the outposts?

 

Lior Amihai  29:14

So first of all, there's the business as usual, only on steroids, and this is government funding to settlements and settler issues and and settler ideology, which the government has, really, you know, built the ministries for this. So you have, for First of all, Minister Smotrich, who is the, you know, an ideologist, you know, from the heart of the settlement and settler sort of ideologist, you know, messianic sort of settlers. Who is worked on this for many years, indicated finance minister and the minister of the settlements. So now he's not only in charge of Israel's money, he's also very easily, sort of paved the way for it to cut to the settlement because he's also the the minister within the Ministry of Defense, or, you know, as what I said here. The settler minister. So that's like, something that, something that this government is doing, which was, you know, it's on the big level, and and the other thing that they're doing, so they've built this. So they got Minister Smotrich. They have other ministers like Stroke, who's in charge of this in other ministries, and that are funding them directly, on much severe scales. And what I said before, and I'll repeat it again, is that they're funding the outposts now. You know directly, you know it's so what if it's illegal, according to Israeli law? Let's fund them. And they're transferring money to that as well. I don't know if you wanted to go into further details about but I think this is like, the like. The message is that, you know, we're not, there's nothing like we're I'll say it this way. Minister stroke, who said it was, you know, published, said, this is a miracle. We are now living miracle. And it's true, because if you're now a settler ideologist, who you know the Israeli public doesn't care for and largely speaking, doesn't care for the outposts and messianic views, doesn't care for stopping them, but doesn't care for this ideology. They are now the government. They are now living the fantasy of doing whatever they they can, and that is to finance them, to establish them, and to change the legal practice. Now, there are them things that they can do. They can't fully annex the territories, right? They know international the community, can still say this is way too much. Smotrich said yesterday, right? I don't know if you saw that. "If we could, we would starve the population of Gaza, but we can't." So there are still limitations to what they want to do. And they want, of course, to annex the territories and to expel the Palestinian population and so on. This they can do, but they can go very close, and they're now annexing them without calling it official annexation, but they're actually annexing the territories and building as many settlements as they can, and financing them and doing whatever they want.

 

Madeleine Cereghino  32:18

So I have a question in the chat, why aren't these activities being challenged in the courts? And if they are, what are the courts doing about them? Look, get into obviously, you know the dual track of trying to annex the West Bank and also trying to undermine the judiciary, and perhaps why those are parallel goals for the right in Israel.

 

Lior Amihai  32:49

Okay, so I'll start by the first thing question, and I'll go back to your point, which I think is super important. But look, it's like the the court system in Israel, first of all, they are being challenged and peace now, you know, we're the front line of challenge, trying to challenge these other human rights organizations are also doing this, of course. So the court is definitely a tool that we use and other groups use in order to prevent expose challenge government policies and actions, but it's, you know, we've learned something over the decades of doing this, and that it's, it's a very limited tool. There are few victories, or few successes, but at the end of the day, it's far from being a successful intervention in preventing settlement policies and actions that are being occurred. And there are several justifications for this, and of course, the government the courts, just don't want to go into this issue. It's such a harsh political or such a sensitive political issue for the courts to deal with. You know, they know that if they touch this issue, then you know the discourse of the government against them will be as harsh as possible. And again, the climax of it was, of course, what we've seen in the government attempts to weaken the legal system in Israel, which which is very good on some other things, just not on issues regarding to the occupation. And so the courts really don't want to do this. At some points, they do because, you know, and we can go to the several few success stories that there are two, but the largest Speaker This court doesn't want to do it. They don't want to deal with it. They find their own excuses. If it's security issues, if it's within the authorities of the government to do whatever they want, if it's to buy time, and then they allow the government to respond and not to respond, etc, and and they they really buy into, largely speaking, to the government arguments that you know that's trying to fool the system. So now. For example, the the settlement ministry. You know, they didn't build the settlement ministry, as I stated one thing, they built the ministry within the Ministry of Defense. And this whole settlement division that I talked about, which is the, basically the ministry of settlements. It's still under a military body. Now, the military body, or the military gave in a military order the responsibilities and authorities to that settlement division to do whatever they want. So the military does it. It took this response from it, but they did it under a military order. So for the courts to intervene and say that this is an illegal order is a very hard thing for the courts to do in Israel. If they'll do so, they'll be just undermined immediately. So it's so the courts, the message of the courts are very weak and very weak as sort of being understanding. So I would say they're not brave, to say the least, on this issue, and they're not taking it's not a stand that I think the courts, the courts in Israel, are willing to do these days. Now, again, we've been criticizing the Israeli courts on this issue for years, and over the years, our criticism gotten harsher and harsher, because we saw how the legal tool that we have some hopes for many years back, we saw how it's failing time and again, this is still not good enough for the settlers, and because at the end of the day, you cannot have a coherent system that disadvantages one group over the other or advances one group over the other and creates this discriminatory system where you have one Group as citizens, as the and the other as under occupation or inferior or whatever, and and some of these abnormalities are like private land rights. You cannot officially take Palestinian private land. In practice, a lot of privatizing land has been taken, but there's this. You can't do it officially. You have to find excuses in rodent for the settlers, it's not good enough. They want a coherent system where it all makes sense, where they can achieve their policies unapologetically, and they can do whatever they want. They don't need to build the settlement division under the military, but they'll say loud and loud and clear, we're building the set of the division for the settlements, and this territory is annexed, and we can do whatever you want. And yes, and if you're a Palestinian, you're not a citizen, and you'll be treated under military law or whatever, and we can be do this and this. So for this system that was so bad anyways, the settlers are trying to weaken, and this is sort of what we saw during, I want to say, last year, before October 7. But you know, it's still a big question mark, if it's not happening still to this day, and just a and just on different sort of ways, but, but, but if we won't into that, go into that, you can say, largely speaking, the the judicial changes that this government tried to do was very much so an initiative of the settlements in order that they could live or Create their fantasy of one system that enables and justifies their sort of vision for the State of Israel, which is one that is for Jews and a certain type of Jews, I would argue, not all Jews, and of course not Palestinians, will be still In their occupation.

 

Madeleine Cereghino  38:21

So I have a bunch of things that I want to talk about with you that have been raised. But let's, you know, talk about this idea of sellers wanting a very clear, you know, from the government, you know, ability to make these steps and to kind of prevent the formation of a two state solution. Because that brings me to something I did want to raise, which was, you know, the fact that a few weeks ago now, the Knesset passed a resolution rejecting the two state solution, the formation of Palestinian state, which is obviously, you know, just the embodiment of these, you know, long policies that they've been furthering on the ground. What has been the reaction in Israel to this, and do you envision other similar legislation going forward?

 

Lior Amihai  39:13

Well, on the one hand, first of all, it's it. On the one hand, it wasn't new, because this government's policy is that there will never be a Palestinian state. So in that sense, it wasn't new. I think what was, you know, what made us sort of listen to this and criticize this, and to say was one that it was also supported by the opposition, so it was supported by Parliament, who was not part of this government and and the second was that those who wholeheartedly want the different like who see the picture that Biden is seeing, and that the Americans are seeing that in order to end this war and to. The only way for Israel to go back to normalcy is through a two state solution. And if you want to end this war, if you want to return of the hostages, if you want to stop the escalation of this conflict with Iran and with Hezbollah, this is the only way out. Now, it's not a guarantee. It's not to say that. You know, if we'll have a two state solution, Israel will have this, you know, you know this. You know, all, all the problems solved. We're not there, of course, but it's an essential step in order to go to that direction. We have to have this if we want the slimmest chance to have a better future. And I would argue that, and I think Biden is arguing this. And you know, everybody who has, you know, who understands the big picture sees that, you know, yes, you know, Israel can still prosper and live in a democracy with security. You know, if we would have asked Israel in, you know, in 1949 or 1952 are you willing to accept a two state solution, and you'll have peace with all Arab states. And then Iran was not Iran today, of course, but a coalition with them to provide you with security and benefits with the United States. Who would would say no, and in today's Israel's political climate, Israel is saying no, and they're saying no, and they're doing it through Parliament, and no one, and maybe this is the third point why we got so frustrated about this. No one, largely, is opposing this. There's no opposition in Israel's government. In Israel parliament, in these are in the political system in Israel, the opposition is weak. It's an ideological and it's not challenging the government on these issues. It's challenging them on the hostages. You have to do more to return the hostages. It's challenging them on corruption. It's challenging them on the judicial challenge that the government had to do. But what is Benny Gantz vision for the State of Israel? Does anyone know what is Yair lapis vision for the State of Israel. How is he going to end this war? Does anyone know, how is so this, I think, is what's got us was in the business of the two state solution. Who sees, you know, who's fighting for Israel to go on the right path? Was so frustrated with this parliament decision to prove, you know, that saying that there will not be a Palestinian state.

 

Madeleine Cereghino  42:23

I want to inject a little hope into this conversation. I did have a question from someone in the chat, and I'm going to merge it with one of mine. You know, they asked, What are the most effective actions that peace now is currently doing? And that was kind of in response to our conversation around the courts not really being the right avenue. But before you answer that, I want to also take a minute to talk about President Biden's Executive Order, which was issued in February targeting Israeli settlers accused of perpetrating attacks against Palestinians and Israeli peace activists, and also against those who support or promote this violence. This order, you know, was crafted to have broader reaching implications, and it certainly has in subsequent sanctions that have been issued over the months. You know, they've targeted folks who not only commit these activities but farm outposts that host it, they've targeted, you know, organizations themselves, organizations that, have, you know, prevented communitarian aid from getting into Gaza crowdfunding sources. It really has been very broad reaching, and I think, troubled the government quite a bit, which is great to hear. Frankly. Do you see that having a chilling effect?

 

Lior Amihai  43:47

Okay, you started with hope, and then you asked, like a direct question, that I have to have a sincere answer. And I think that, I think that, I think that one of the most positive things, policies that the government of of the US, the American administration, took, are these sanctions. I think it's, it's long waited. I think it's and why I support it so much, because to have sanctions an individual, you can say is, is, is anti human rights, right? You know, the these settlers who who have sanctions on them, they weren't foot to try. But this is the problem, because what we're seeing is that this is a lack of confidence in Israel's legal system, in Israel's enforcement of the law and and the consequences are just too high. And when you have so much evidence, and when you see so much the settler violence, and you see that the Government of Israel is basically supporting them, encouraging them, not preventing them, not providing protection to the Palestinians, then I think it's the minimum step that could happen, and it's a big statement. And but the the lack of the problem is, or to yet, is that it hasn't had any effect on the ground. And I think it will have an effect if these sanctions are shifted significantly to settler organizations like Amana and recov or two very prominent individuals like Minister Smotrich, I will say that would also be more symbolic, because I'll say it this way, financial sanctions and individuals were willing to go to Palestinian neighborhoods and throw cocktail molotov bottles to burn houses or throw stones that risk like can kill or damage significantly Palestinian communities. Financial sectors won't stop them. They won't prevent them, if you so, that's why it's not preventing them yet. And I think much as well, he's not. He doesn't care about his finances, about his salaries, about that's he. That's not going to prevent them. It will be very symbolic that an Israeli Minister would get sanctions. It's very symbolic that the United States is sanctioning Israeli citizens. This is something that was didn't happen today, that the sentence of sanctioning Israelis has a lot of meaning in that sense, in that sense, but I think it could potentially have a much wider on the ground effect and actual material effect, if groups like Amana, reggae beam and others won't be able to have financial activities and will have to close down due To that, and then we'll actually think we'll see some and I would encourage American citizens to encourage their representatives to follow path on that avenue. But I do want to talk about hope, and because it started with hope, and I was happy you did that...

 

Madeleine Cereghino  47:02

Fair. I think you know having this mechanism that really does cut off crowdfunding. Like all you mentioned, Hebron settlement being retroactively legalized. There are violent settlers in Hebron. We know this so and we also know that American friends of Hebron funds a significant chunk of the activities there. So it's not inconceivable that sanctions could be implemented that would really undercut a major source of their funding. So I think it's helpful. But yes, please give me hope!

 

Lior Amihai  47:35

Oh yes, yes, absolutely. This is, I think, the most significant policy step that was taken that in my lifetime, apart maybe from before the Madrid Conference. And this is, I think, a significant step that the Americans took and led the international community, or parts of the international community, to follow. So this is really important. And this is really important, and this is hopeful. My only encourage, like I would also hope that this will they would go further down to those, to the organizations who are the most significant in creating this environment and system and structure that takes Palestinian land that prevents a lifted solution that leads to settler violence, etc, but going back to your hope, anyways, that you started with, it's your question. I'm not hogging the conversation on this. I think that there is, you know, it's, it's to be, to be fair and sincere. To be in Israel today is to be without hope. That is like if you're speaking to Israel, especially tonight, you know we are. This is, you know, very unusual for like, for me, to be out of the office these days. You know, we're, we don't know if Iran will attack Bucha, his ball will attack to do you know, and how far? So we're living like, direct like, these days, especially under, under fire, not to mention, of course, the north of Israel and the south of Israel, which are like, which are north, especially now, are constant attacks. And nobody in Israel knows how this will end. Nobody knows, and like some have, like we have, our vision for this will end, and most of Israelis don't follow this vision at this moment. So nobody really knows, how will this end and when and how will you return the hostages? And so to be in Israel today is to be a person without hope. The only people that have hope are those who are demonstrating to end this war because of the Israeli hostages, and their only hope is that the hostages will be returned alive and as soon as possible, and that's a very sad position for us to be as as a nation and as citizens. So this is a very despair situation that we're living in. And why? What is the hope? The hope is that there's no alternative. And. And this what we're seeing is the vision of the Israeli right wing, the settler vision, of the Messianic vision in Israel, is leading up. This is what their vision is. This is that living on the sword what it means. This is what their vision is. What does annexation look like? It's permanent occupation. What does living on the sword means? It means it means that there will always be people who are trying to resist it, and will give them excuse to fight back and fight back. And this is what they want. This is their vision of this place. They don't have a different vision. They don't envision peace with Arab states or or with Palestinians to, you know, to say, this is, this is we're living now, the secular fantasy and vision for the State of Israel. And I think we know, we see that this has immediate implications on the region, on the coast region, on Europe, on the United States, globally, etc. Of course, it has for and as Israelis support this war, for, I would argue, certainly some justified reasons. Clearly this there will be there is a fatigue, and at the end of the day, when this will be clear, this government has no vision and that this is just leading us to a dead end, people will oppose it. And now they're already opposing it in order to return the hostages, and they wanted to support and then the question would be, what next? And what do we have to do? And if we'll manage to sort of build on that and to create a fiercer opposition that will say, Look this way or the other way, we have to go to the other. We tried violence, we tried war, we tried annexation and occupation, we have to go to the other route. That will be, I think. And you know, it's, I was born in 1984 so it's before my my time. But you know, Egypt, right? It's different. But Israel's biggest enemy was in 73 and we made peace with Egypt, and there's a peace which hold on. And who would have imagined Israel today with a peace agreement with Egypt and Jordan? Just imagine the seventh of October if there wasn't peace with Egypt and Jordan, how would Israel look like? How would this war be like? How would the situation be? So I think, you know, it's it's hard to see it, it's hard to feel it, but there is hope. Is a political choice, and we don't have an alternative. And there's so much to do, you know. And you asked what we're doing now, at peace now, I think we're doing two of the most, hardest things that can be done. One is to document and provide analysis on what the government is all what the government is doing and the settlers are doing in regards to what we just briefed, you know, talked about in regards to annexation and settlements, and they're just so much to do. And we're working in a lot of fields, the word Parliament trying to analyze the finances the government is doing. We're on the ground where the legal actions, trying to see how we can challenge. We've talked about the legal challenges. We're looking into that as well. You know, how do we utilize the legal situation right now to expose and express the government so there's so much we're doing, and if you look at, you know, settler watch reports. We've never had two such established researchers in settlement watch, and they've never worked as hard as they're doing, as they're working since this government was established, and especially since October 7. And the last thing that we're doing is, I think that we have the most unappreciated and the most difficult work in Israel right now, and that is to fight for the Israelis who identify as Zionists, who identify as liberals, who care about the state of Israel, and also get and understand that Palestinians are just as equal and just as deserving. And this what we what this government is doing, and is is harmful as as it could be. And, you know, and this is a very unpopular choice to be right now, because we haven't given up on the state of Israel. We see here is our country where we want to live in, and to better be a better place. And yet we're trying to work with the public, who is in the military, who's frightened, who who doesn't believe in a two state solution, as clear as we do, it certainly doesn't believe in the settlements and this public, I would argue no one is speaking to no one because Yair Lapid is not doing this, and neither is Benny Gantz and and the more left groups that we're in complete solidarity with them always and we go and we support them physically and we know in their demons. Is an image. They're not approaching this group either. So I think we really took upon ourselves a very difficult challenge to go to this to represent these Israelis who are left, who are Zionists, who are liberal, and who just, you know, don't have a political camp at this moment. So this is what we're trying to do every day, basically. And I'll say another thing, you know, we just finished a course right now of high schoolers, you know, of nearly 20 individuals who, during the war, signed up to a Peace Now course to learn about this, I, you know, we had noise in the beginning. I don't know if you heard the noise in the beginning, because we had about 30 activists now, listening to a professor from Hebrew University on international law analyzing, you know, the ICJ decision and all the legal actions right now that are happening in regards to Israel. So there is so much we can do to work and encourage and yes, it's hard to see how this all will change. But you know, when I really think that we have, as long as we see so much value in our work, we just have to push forward and something will happen.

 

Madeleine Cereghino  56:18

Thank you, Lior, we're with you in this fight, and I can't think of a more, you know, beautiful way to close this conversation, as much as I know there's 1000 other questions in the chat that I know we could get to, but I think this is a really lovely note to end on. So, so thank you. We're with you, and I want to share the thanks from folks in the Q and A as well, who want to express their gratitude for the work you're doing.

 

Lior Amihai  56:41

And thank you. And, of course, thank you APN for all of this.

 

Madeleine Cereghino  56:44

Our pleasure. And thank you to everyone who joined us. This will be available as a recording. You can find it on our website.

Yossi Alpher is an independent security analyst. He is the former director of the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University, a former senior official with the Mossad, and a former IDF intelligence officer. Views and positions expressed here are those of the writer, and do not necessarily represent APN's views and policy positions.

Hadar Susskind  00:04

Hello, everyone, and welcome to this Americans for Peace Now webinar. I'm Hadar Susskind I'm the President and CEO of Americans for Peace Now, in a moment, I will introduce our fabulous guest. But as you know, it takes a minute or two for everyone to get into the Zoom. So this is the part where I partake in the time honored Washington tradition of filibustering. So I will smile and talk for another minute. Luckily for you, I won't read any entire books at you, because we don't have to wait for that long. We'll just give it a moment or two. As we are getting started, I'll remind everybody how these events work. If you would like to ask a question, I urge you to please use the q&a function at the bottom, not raising your hands, not anything else. You can type your questions into the q&a, we will get to as many of them as we possibly can. Please, as always try to keep them short and keep them related to the content of our conversation. Because of course, there are lots of questions and lots of things. But you know, we've got a, we've got a focus and a reason for coming here today. So again, please use the q&a button. We would love to get questions from you. I remind everyone that this is being recorded, and we will share the recording afterward if you can't stay for the whole time, if you want to share it with other people, etc. So once again as we kick it off. Thank you for joining us. I'm Hadar Susskind. I'm the President and CEO of Americans for Peace Now, I am joined today for this very timely conversation by my friend Rebecca Abou Chedid. Hello, Rebecca. I will give you all the short version of Rebecca's very long and impressive resume. She's on the board of the IMEU policy project of Anera of the Foundation for Middle East Peace and Seed for Change. For five years, she was co chair of the board of directors of Just Vision and other important partner of ours. She previously worked both at the US Department of Justice and was national political director for the Arab American institute. She is a close collaborator and a thought partner and somebody I am always happy to be with. So Hi, Rebecca, how are you?

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  02:15

Hi Hadar. Thanks for having me.

 

Hadar Susskind  02:17

Good, thanks for joining us. So we are here today to talk about what's really the topic of the week. I think for us, it's pretty much always the topic, but specifically, of course, Prime Minister Netanyahu is here. He has been in DC for a few days now, today meeting with President Biden and Vice President Harris. But yesterday, in many ways was really kind of the the epicenter of the event. Yesterday, of course, he spoke before a joint session of Congress, I'm going to take moderators prerogative here for a minute for a minute or two and just sort of tell you what we were up to yesterday. So can everyone can understand the framing of what my experience was yesterday. And then Rebecca, and I will we'll dig into this. You know, for many weeks, hopefully all of you have seen since since we knew that Netanyahu was coming to town, we were very clear that literally our little slogan is Netanyahu is not welcome here. We urge members of Congress to skip the speech not not to go not to participate in that. And then yesterday, we joined, I'm gonna go with for the moment alongside because there were a lot of different people outside the capitol yesterday and a lot of different protests. We took part in a few events, starting off with something that was organized by our colleagues at T'ruah which was actually a Shacharit morning prayer service, that then turned into a call to end the war, to bring home the hostages, to move past conflict, and peace. Some of you I know, were there, but was glad to see you hope maybe you watched it online. We also co sponsored and participated in an event with our colleagues from UnXeptable where I spoke along with others. And again, you know, talked about the fact that, you know, Netanyahu is here claiming to speak in the voice of all Israelis, when in fact, that's clearly not the case. And so many of the things that he said yesterday during his speech to Congress, and we'll get to that, you know, I think to be perfectly honest, would have been mocked and ridiculed by Israeli audiences who know better than at least so many Republican members of Congress. And then during the speech yesterday, because we had encouraged members not to participate. We partnered with a range of organizations with Center for American Progress, Center for International Policy, Win without War, and others to come together and host an event where instead of listening to Netanyahu, and you know his rehearsed lines and listening to him bask in the applause for the Israeli soldiers and others who were there with him. We gathered with members of Congress and with people who are really peacemakers people who are working toward these efforts, with Aziz Abu Sarah, a Palestinian and Maoz Inon an Israeli who some of you may have been on our webinar with them. And we've been working together for peace with our colleague and Nadav Weiman from Breaking the Silence and with so many others. And, you know, we spent that time talking about what can we both we as organizations, we as leaders here in the US, but also members of Congress, what can we actually do to get past not just this immediate moment of conflict? But this whole frame of conflict? How can we move from what has been Netanyahu is referring of we will just continue to live by the sword into a better future. So, apologies for my rambling. What we want to talk about now is really, you know, what did this visit from Netanyahu, the speech before Congress, the White House meetings, all the rest of it, the protests outside of which there were, as I said, both Israelis and Jewish Americans, but obviously, many, many Arab and Muslim Americans, and many others, you know, with an array of different meanings and messages. So, you know, how is this playing? What is this look like? What does it mean for US-Israel politics? What does it mean for the American-Jewish community, the Arab-American community, and also Rebecca's adorable dog, which I think is hiding just off screen, so might as well just show up? Because Rebecca has an adorable little dog. They've seen my dog on webinars before, on my lap. So with that, Rebecca, why don't you kick us off a little bit and tell us, you know, share some thoughts?

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  06:18

Yeah, thank you Hadar. Look, I mean, one of the things that I thought was so interesting, watching a bunch, particularly so many Democrats kind of standing up and applauding. Netanyahu, for me is really just the Israeli version of Donald Trump was that he came to Washington and got a reception that he never could have gotten in Israel. Right. So the way that people responded to this speech, totally ignored the fact that for months, and not, not just since October, but for months, even pre October, there were 1000s and 1000s of Israelis in the streets calling for this man to resign, saying that he is a threat to Israeli democracy. And now more recently asking for a ceasefire so that the hostages can come home, I cannot imagine what it would have felt like to be the family of a hostage member, watching American members of Congress who talked about wanting to bring home the hostages and to end this genocide in Gaza, standing up and applauding him when he was lying. I mean, he lied about so many things. And we'll kind of talk through those. But really kind of as an overarching response to that was my first response, just how strange it was to kind of watch that. And I know that, you know, many, as you said, that there were many members who boycotted. And then there was one soul member who sat there silently, the only Palestinian member of Congress Rashida Talib on her birthday. And I think, clearly terrible way to celebrate terrible way to celebrate your birthday. But I think to make clear that, like, I think she wanted to speak for, an her guest was Hani Almadhoun much one who has lost over 100 members of his family, including his brother and his nieces and nephews. But But I think her point in being there was was so that he had to see her to see her face. And so that the thing that we have been so upset about as a community for the past nine months is just how invisible Palestinians have been in the US kind of conversation and debate over not just what's happening in Gaza right now. But, you know, the the entire conflict, and for decades Palestinians have been, it's so strange to say, but have been absent from the cover station, happen to their lives. And I think having Rashida there was really important, as difficult as it must have been, to be there. I think it was really important. So you know, that was my first. You know, my, my first kind of reaction was just that he came there because he can't get that reception in Israel. People are people he's too well known in Israel. And, you know, even now, they're said he's the worst leader that the the State of Israel has had. And so you would never have been able to get a reception like that. And so he came here to gaslight, the US Congress, and the US people about what's going on right now. I also think that you didn't hear you know what we all know what it sounds like when you hear a leader who's trying to find peace. That's not what we heard yesterday. We didn't hear a leader who, as Secretary Blinken said is on the 10 yard line of a ceasefire. We didn't hear any plan for how to end this conflict, how to bring the hostages home. We didn't hear any plan for how to actually come up with a peace deal afterwards, because we all know that there is no military solution to this conflict. In the end, Palestinians and Israelis are going to be sharing this land, they're going to be living side by side. And and you know, I thought it was really so interesting the moment where he acknowledged a Bedouin soldier and really kind of made made it clear to everybody that he was Muslim and It seemed important to Netanyahu to kind of say that we have a Muslim fighting for the State of Israel. And what it said to me was oh, which is not what I think he meant, not that message I think he meant for, which is that like, oh, so I guess there's no kind of ingrained Muslim animus towards the Jewish people, that you're always trying to convince us that there is no kind of in read anti semitism here, that people in the end might be able to actually live side by side and fight for each other's security if we were in a different situation than the one that we are stuck in right now, in large part because of leaders like him. So, you know, all I heard was total victory. And I think his version of total victory is total annihilation of the people in Gaza. And that is not going to be a victory. And that's not going to bring security to the State of Israel. You know, and there have been a lot of fact checks on there, he lied about a lot of things. And I think we'll have a chance to talk about them, like he, he was not honest about the number of trucks that have made it into Gaza. He was not honest. And we heard from the beginning of this conflict, we have heard Israeli leaders, and as you know, members of his cabinet, say exactly what they were going to do and exactly what they did, which is a total ban on food and water getting into Gaza. And so, you know, during different times there has been increases up and down. But in general, it has been a strategy not to allow food and water and other humanitarian assistance into Gaza. And so, you know, like, I don't think Vons, what's going on, that it's going to convince anyone to say that there's 3000 calories a day making their way into Gaza, and the only reason that Palestinians are hungry is because Hamas is stealing it. I just don't think that's credible.

 

Hadar Susskind  11:53

You know, he didn't, was interesting, because I was I was watching again this morning again, you know, I didn't watch the speech in real time, right? I was at the counter event, but I was watching this morning, and he talked about those numbers. And he said, that's enough for 3000 calories for every man, woman and child and Gaza. He didn't say 3000 a day. And so I actually just wondering, and I don't know the answer, maybe over nine months? I don't know. I don't know the answer of whether he actually literally meant that which is totally conceivable that that amount of food that, you know, Israel has allowed in, like, maybe that number is true. And he didn't say a day, or maybe he, like many other things was anywhere from twisting, misrepresenting or lying. I think, you know, I wrote a piece, also this morning about the many different things. I mean, his talk about how he was doing everything possible to bring the hostages home, and his greatest commitment was bring the hostages home, when seven members of hostage families got arrested, arrested. Yeah, because they stood up, the only reason they went I spent a lot of time with them, they stood up with signs that said, seal the deal in our with shirts, which, you know, I was at an event with them the night before and with other hostage families that day, they seal the deal explicitly. And unfortunately, it's not great messaging, frankly, because it doesn't say this, but they said it when they speak, they may end with the war and bring the hostages home. And so they were willing to get arrested for that. And he was standing up there claiming and like you said in a claim that no one in Israel would give any credence to that he's doing everything he can to bring the hostages home.

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  13:22

Yeah, I mean, look, it should be shocking to American members of Congress, many of whom, thanks to organizations like yours, met with a lot of these hostage families. But it shouldn't be shocking to people that hostage families have to fly from Israel to the United States to get the attention of the Prime Minister of Israel. And that's what they had to do. I mean, they had to like it's, that is shocking to me. I mean, I can't imagine the you know, that if something like that were to happen in the United States, and the American president just ignored the families of people going through this. I just think that that would be that should be completely unacceptable. I mean, if nothing else that should have meant he never got a, an invitation to speak to a joint session of Congress.

 

Hadar Susskind  14:08

So one of the things that I thought was fascinating. And you know, Rebecca, I know you remember last time he was here. Also, there were there were organizing efforts to tell members of Congress not to go, many of them didn't last time actually was more explicitly partisan, because of course, he was knighted by the Republican Speaker without the veneer of bipartisanship that this this one brought because Schumer and Jeffries signed on. But, you know, according to report, about half of the Democrats skip the speech, about half went, but both House and Senate members, it's really just about 50%. And that is shocking. And the fact that Netanyahu has always presented his self in Israel, as you know, I'm the person who can manage America. I'm the one who can always build bipartisan support. I know how to do Do American politics? I think he thinks because when he speaks in English, he pronounces Israel, like he's from Kentucky says Israel, which I always think it's very weird. It's my little pet peeve. But, you know, the fact that he has so broken, what, for good or for bad, and people have different opinions on this, obviously, but what has for many years been largely bipartisan support, even, you know, with tweaks around the edges, but he's completely broken that, and I think the, the state of the US Israel relationship today is very different than it's ever been.

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  15:37

Yeah, look, I think he's a particularly bad leader for this moment. I mean, he's not a courageous leader. He's, you know, I will let the Israeli courts if they ever get the chance to actually adjudicate it likely a criminal, you know, like he's corrupt. And so there's also intertwined in all everything that he's doing is just like Trump, again, a very personal effort to keep himself out of courts and out of prison. And so that's what's driving. I mean, when that's what's driving your leader, you know, that you're in a bad place. But I also think

 

Hadar Susskind  16:14

He only been indicted three times to Trump's 34.

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  16:18

But I also think just like, America's problem is not Trump alone, it's Trumpism. If you remove Netanyahu, that wouldn't solve a lot of the problems. And so I think the same members of the caucus who didn't attend his speech, are the same members that you've seen starting to kind of speak out. And what they're speaking out against is what looks now two for all to see is a permanent occupation is an apartheid system is right, like nobody could credit you know, people still talk about two states in the US without acknowledging that the Israeli Knesset voted to say there will not be a Palestinian state. And the Israeli Prime Minister keeps saying there will not be a Palestinian state. And so we keep holding on to this, because it's the only thing that we can kind of conceive of in this moment, ignoring kind of what's on the ground. And I think that that's really dangerous. And I also think that the way that the United States like elected officials in the US have related to Israel is as if Israel doesn't have internal politics, the way the United States has internal politics. And so one thing that I remember from the last time Netanyahu came, was a friend who's now back in Israel, and was B'Tselem's US director at the time, Uri Zaki. He said to me, I don't understand why you're Democrats, like why you Liberal Democrats in the United States, who say that they love Israel don't understand what they're doing to the Israeli left, when they welcome. Remember that, and it's, it's a really important point to me that we have, we have not, on the American left, spent enough time thinking about how we can support and make common cause with the left in Israel. And because we haven't done that we've actually harmed them over the years.

 

Hadar Susskind  18:07

I think it's a really good point. And, you know, we talk about the US-Israel relationship, we talk about what American politicians, you know, whichever ones or party we're talking about, what they think of Israel. And again, it's, you know, it's, it's exceedingly unsophisticated. And there's a very polite way I can think about it, you know, Israel has, as we all know, very intense domestic politics. And right now, 72% of Israelis want Netanyahu to resign immediately, all these other things. So he, of course, does a good job of presenting himself. As you know, he is Israel, he speaks for Israel. But we all need to do a better job of not only understanding the difference ourselves, which I think probably the folks on this on this Zoom do, but helping our elected officials understand that. And one other thing I want to pick up from what you said, you know, the conversation about two state solution. So again, another thing that Netanyahu was very happy to tout is, this is the fourth time he's spoken to a joint session of Congress more than any other world leader ever more than Winston Churchill, you know, so he's, he's very excited. In previous times, he talked about a two state solution. He claimed support for a two state solution. Now, lots of people could, obviously correctly argue that he never meant it. But the fact is, he used to say that that used to be his policy and the policy of the State of Israel, even under we could and specifically his leadership, and like you said, it is explicitly not anymore. This government that came into power at the beginning of 2023. Has in their coalition agreement, plans for annexation. It has in its coalition agreement statements that say we will not allow a Palestinian state and like you said they just had this Knesset vote, which was, you know, one more horrific state It meant, including the fact that Benny Gantz and his party voted for it. So, you know, everybody, I shouldn't say everybody, but everybody here, most likely, and, you know, was waiting for new elections calling for new elections. The assumption among most people because of the polling is that Benny Gantz will be the next prime minister, and, of course, will lead a much, you know, a center left government as opposed to a far right government. But it's worth noting that he and his party voted for this. And so, you know, just continuing on, like you were saying of like, oh, this is how we relate to Israel as if that doesn't change. It's, frankly, a failure on the part of American politics.

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  20:37

Yeah. Yeah, I think I agree with that. And then I, I think one other point that it's important to dig into, especially because of the response that we're seeing today. From US protests. I mean, you mentioned that you were out there. And were clearly, you know, bad actors out there. Like, there were clearly and I don't know who these people were, like, you know, I don't know who's burning an American flag, which is not something, you know, I condone, but it's protected free speech. You know, I don't like I don't know who was out there. I don't know, if they were in good faith. I don't know if they were meant to, you know, I don't know if just nine months in to this, people have started to just kind of snap and are so frustrated. They don't know how to be productive anymore. But it's it's really important to me, and I cannot believe that a foreign leader would come and criticize American protesters, Americans exercising their First Amendment rights, say that they're paid by Iran, call them Iranians useful idiots and then get a standing ovation from members of Congress, like those are your constituents. And this is their right. And that's what the United States is about. And, you know, it's just like, I don't I'm not asking anybody to condone these, like the small number of people who, you know, said whatever they said, like, I haven't actually seen it, but I've just heard about it. I haven't I saw it. And I'll tell you a little in a minute. Yeah, I mean, I'd like I'd like to hear but but the point being that there were also bad actors during the BLM protests. And as collectively, we didn't allow ourselves to say this delegitimizes the whole movement, that this characterizes the whole movement. And we didn't allow ourselves to take our eyes off the ball, which was that George Floyd was murdered, and that we have a problem with police brutality in the United States. And I think similarly, we have to hold our friends and our opponents accountable for the same thing, which is the same standard, which is to say, we should not allow, I mean, I don't want the protests that you organize to be ignored. I don't want right like, there's similarly to not seeing the complexities in Israel. There are also many people who don't see that the nuances within the Jewish community here in the United States and think, right that like there's the Jewish and Arab American. Yeah. So like, there's the Jewish community and on one side, and the Arab American community on the on the other side, ignoring the fact that for nine months, there have been protests across this country that have been overwhelmingly peaceful, and that have included both Jewish and Arab Americans within the that coalition. Yeah, I think that's just really important. Yes.

 

Hadar Susskind  23:27

And I'll tell you yesterday, yesterday was interesting. So again, like I said, I started out the day, at something organized by T'ruah, it was rabbis, there were, you know, 100 people were in kippot and talit and literally doing morning prayer in Hebrew. So it was very obviously visibly Jewish. There were a lot of protesters, you know, walking by in groups. A lot, just walked by that was, you know, the most common was like, okay, they looked and they kept going fine. There were a few who stopped and engaged in really good, interesting conversations, you know, people who had because getting people everyone's looking at everyone else's side. So folks are walking by with their Palestinian flags and free Palestine signs. And, you know, there were some people who yelled Free Palestine when they saw the Jews. And then there are other people were like, wait, no, no, look at what they're signed, say, Look at what they're saying. And we had some really interesting conversations.

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  24:19

I think that's okay, like, that's the point of being there is to have the chance to have conversation.

 

Hadar Susskind  24:24

Sure, for sure. We had a little I, I experienced what I would call a small scuffle. There was one of the protests that was set up by UnXeptable. They put sort of around the area, they had to protest for probably 100 Israeli flags up and they put them up interspersed with the yellow flags representing the hostages and the hostage families, but I'm pretty confident that 99% of the people who walked by didn't know that about the yellow flags. Anybody who wasn't there for that protests, anyone who's not part of, you know, the that movement and people came by and said they're things that was fine. At one point. You know, a young woman tore down one of the Israeli flags, kind of I say violently, I mean, she didn't assault anyone. But she's, you know, kind of ripped it down. And, and then one of the Israeli, one of the Israeli men who was part of the UnXeptable, grabbed it back and the two of them started pulling, and it got an immediately a crowd came on both sides, and people were screaming, and people were yelling, and I and a couple of others, like, kind of got in the middle. And there were police there. There were no, there was no, you know, no punches, no violence, but it was it was very tense. That was the worst things so to speak. I saw in the morning, again, along with a lot of like, totally good conversations and engagement. I will say I'm in the afternoon walking back after the congressional meeting, we walked by Union Station, which is where the big

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  24:24

Yeah, that's where.

 

Hadar Susskind  24:26

I think that's where, you know, the, quote, bad protest, like the bad actions happened. I got a little, just just a little whiff of the tear gas that had been used, we were far enough away that we were just kind of got a little, a little cough and a little runny nose. But you could see on the fountain at Union Station, they're completely, you know, graffitied and deface. It's said in big letters, you know, Hamas is coming, you could see many things had been burned. So, again, I don't think that that that does not reflect the many people who I had conversations with throughout the day.

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  26:25

But, it was nine months of protests that we've seen.

 

Hadar Susskind  26:27

More than nine months of protests. But it was definitely, but it happened. And, you know, and the police response. You know, I don't know what I was not in that. So I don't know, kind of what escalated how it escalated. But I mean, I saw the 200 riot police in full gear, pushing toward the crowd. And you know, in whatever country, we know how that goes. Yeah. So it is it was a difficult part of yesterday, like it's not, you know, this is this issue is hard for all of us. And how to respond to it is hard. That's not the right answer. But it was difficult. I want to ask you, and I want to like put a period and move because it's not in response to that. You know, I spent most of my day with Jewish Americans, with Israelis talking to people with Palestinians. Also, you know, and I've been spending most of my day talking to people within my community about how this visit is being seen how these meetings and all the things are being seen, you know, what is your takeaway on the kind of 30,000 foot of like, again, it's a mass mass generalization, but like, how's the Arab American American community, its leaders, it's organizations, you know, seeing and responding to the engagement of Netanyahu here this week?

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  27:41

Well, you're asking about like organizationally?

 

Hadar Susskind  27:45

Yeah. I mean, it was a poor question. Apologies, like, look at what the Jewish, you know, the American Jewish community doing there are those leaders who chose to go meet with Netanyahu. There are people obviously, you know, cheering him on, but there are many of us, it's not happily, it's not just APN saying like, No, this is not right. What you're saying isn't true. You know, what do you what are you seeing in the, how's the Arab American community looking at, I would say, our own American political leaders and how they're, you know, how they're relating to Netanyahu.

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  28:18

Yeah, I mean, I think there was a lot of effort similar to yours, which was to ask people not to attend, to kind of send that message that the invitation itself was the wrong thing to do and was offensive. And a lot of efforts to kind of have conversations. Because what I can say, again, is just that the community has felt invisible during so much of this. Right. So a lot of like, the conversations that we've had with our leaders, with members of Congress with the administration is an effort to say, we know you can see the full humanity of the Israeli people and the way that you talk about the hostages, why can't you see the full humanity of Palestinian people? Right, like, why is the only answer to a Palestinian when a senator calls a Palestinian constituent, a Palestinian American constituent, was lost 70 family members? Why is the only thing that they can think of to say to her is, well, Trump would be worse? Like that? That's that's not an answer. Like, that's not an answer that shows that her family has as much value right as anybody else's family. And that's been, you know, deeply upsetting to kind of see from our own leaders. And I'll say look, I mean, I won't be too partisan here, but I am a Democrat. And you know, a lot of President Biden's campaign for president was about his decency, and his empathy and his ability to kind of connect. And that's who he has been, as a public figure, his entire, unfortunately, because of the great loss that he suffered. But it's been really shocking and really jarring to us. That that that ability seems to have just been turned off, like that empathy has just seems to have been turned off when it when it comes to the loss of Palestinian life in Gaza. And that has been surprising, frankly, to see and really disheartening to see. And so, you know, it's something that I think we've really struggled with the last nine months and something I know, Rashida, as the only Palestinian in Congress has really struggled with, like, how do you know, with all of the hateful things that have been said, in in Congress in the last nine months, the only member who has been formally censured is the one Palestinian member of Congress. So you know, that that's just been a hard, you know, and so they're friends of mine who have, you know, everybody now is part of many chat groups, right. And so you'll be in a chat group where a friend will tell me, I lost 15 members of my family last night, and I'm meeting with my senator this afternoon. Right. So it's like people who don't even have time to absorb the loss of members of their family, and are still just like doing whatever they can from an advocacy perspective to try to make a difference. And that's been the existence of the of their American and Muslim communities the last nine months.

 

Hadar Susskind  31:45

Yeah, I mean, even just yesterday, seeing, you said, Congresswoman Talib brought a guest who lost many family members in Gaza, I presume, you know, many, many, many of the members of Congress, members of Congress brought hostage families as guests, or, you know, Israelis who had lost lost family members. And even in the event we did in the afternoon, with Aziz and Moaz, you know, they start off talking about how they built their relationship and about empathy. And, you know, I'm not gonna, I'm not gonna spend all the time telling you their story. But the quick version, as you know, as he's lost his brother, who was taken and tortured, and ultimately killed by the Israeli military 25 years ago, Maoz lost both of his parents on October 7, and I think it was the eighth, the eighth or the ninth, as these reached out to us, who they did not really know each other. So they were, you know, Facebook friends, but not really friends in real life, sent a Facebook message, you know, expressing his sorrow and his empathy. And he said, I didn't expect him to answer me, I figured he'd be, you know, dealing with his own grief with his own trauma and Maoz immediately reached out to him and said, Yes, you know, the only path forward is understanding each other's pain and empathy and finding a way to use this to move past, you know, constant conflict, and the way that they talk about it, and I've been with them a number of times in the last, you know, bunch of months, and many of you who are with us today, probably were on the webinar that we did with them. But it is, it's shocking to me how rare that is to actually talk about empathy, and to talk about understanding each other's pain and understanding each loss of lives between Israelis and Palestinians. And in the American political system. We're so used to people expressing, very rightly, their, you know, sorrow and horror and sadness at the loss of Israeli lives. And it's true that you basically never hear that about Palestinian lives.

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  33:51

And look, the reason that empathy is important and humanizing people is important is because if Palestinians had not been dehumanized in this country for decades, there is just no absolutely no way this would have continued this long. There's just no way we would never accept it. We would collectively as a as a, we would never accept it if we fully absorbed. I mean, I've never even heard the president or any of his senior advisors talk about Palestinian Americans who are stuck in Gaza. Right, I've never heard it like we know that there are American hostages, but we don't think about the fact that there are Palestinian Americans who are stuck in Gaza who couldn't get out people who were like, you know, trying to get to Rafah and trying to get out and they have to pay $5,000, and you know, a lot of these people are trying to reach out to the State Department and weren't getting any help and, and while all of the attention has been on Gaza, it's also been the most deadly year in the West Bank. Right. So I mean, I, I was introduced to a family, a Palestinian family based in Georgia whose mother was arrested. She was arrested because of Facebook posts. She's an American citizen. And for weeks, we tried to get we were pushing every day for weeks. And the answer from the State Department, we don't know, we don't have any information. We don't have an answer. We have no idea. We're trying. I just, I cannot imagine that would be good enough as an answer. For, you know, for other American citizens and other countries, I just don't understand why that's good enough. And, and I really think that I mean, so what's amazing about Aziz and Maoz isn't just that, like, empathy is not important for the sake of like feeling good, or like the kumbaya moment. It's not, you know, like, there were there were so many, I think, during the Oslo, yours, like, conversation groups, discussion groups, between Israelis and Palestinians. And, and those have, since I think people kind of look at them and derived them. But the point of them was not just that individual people, can we become friends and get to know each other like it was so that if you actually humanize these other people, you would never allow this level of violence against them in this collective way. You would never allow a 2000 pound bomb to be dropped. And what is supposed to be a safe zone, where children are playing soccer. You know, like, I just, I think that that's what's really important about it, too. It's not just about getting members of Congress to say, like the nice words, those are important, but it's because the policy should flow from that.

 

Hadar Susskind  36:47

Yeah.

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  36:47

I'm glad we have empathy for Israelis, I have it too. And I want us to maintain it. I just want people's humanity like I just want human beings to be deserving of it, regardless of you know, where, where they are living where they were born, or or who they pray to.

 

Hadar Susskind  37:04

Yeah, absolutely. So with that, I want to go back to the policy discussion a little bit, actually, one of the things Netanyahu said that, you know, got got big applause yesterday. I mean, as you said, rightly, he didn't present any plan for, you know, as people often talk about, you know, the day after, right, what's the plan? How is this gonna work? He did have some line, and I'm paraphrasing here about, you know, a demilitarized Gaza, ruled by Palestinians, which was surprising to hear him say, but you know, Palestinians who don't want to see Israel's destruction from what he said, right, so not not Hamas, I believe it's the implication there. I mean, again, it's clear that

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  37:47

With Israel's Israel maintaining some kind of security presence.

 

Hadar Susskind  37:53

Right, he wasn't necessarily clear about that yesterday, but he's always better than that. Yeah. I mean, I'm not you feel free to talk about what you think of his non-playing if you'd like. But yeah, I think that's probably pretty clear. I guess the one of the questions I'm interested about is like, when we start thinking about what are the policy things, and we did this in our conversation with the members of Congress yesterday, like, what are the actual policy things that the United States could do? And what are the things that you would want to see? You know, we're talking about Congress taking actions because, again, we know, you know, there's the administration to do certain things Congress, what are some of the things that you would actually want to see them taking up? You know, once we assume let's, we assume that empathy and say, Okay, now we're ready for action? To go?

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  38:37

Yeah. So I think, for me, if I got to kind of write the letter that they all signed off? We would, until there is a ceasefire, we would end and it's now the administration is now willing to say I mean, in the beginning, they said, Oh, Hamas is the one like stopping this, if they are now willing to say that Netanyahu keeps moving the goalposts on a ceasefire, we should stop offensive weapons to Israel period. Our our policy is a ceasefire. And so if our policy is a ceasefire, we should not be giving offensive weapons to a party that is dropping them on civilian populations. And we should and by the way, we saw what it looked like when the administration was very serious for that brief moment after the World Central Kitchen bombing. There was I think it was clear to Netanyahu and others in Israel that the United States was very serious about this being a problem. It shouldn't have taken that, by the way, but that was a moment right? I mean, Jose Andreas is a beloved figure and and people really responded to what happened to his workers as they should have, but it shouldn't have gotten there, but we need to surge food and aid to the people of Gaza. I mean, I can tell you statistics as you mentioned, I'm on the board Anera but, you know from I got this this morning from our from our Palestine Country Director I'm not speaking on behalf of Anera, obviously. But from for the in the first 15 days of, of July, there were 1288 trucks. So that's about 86 a day. In June, the average was 76, a day in May, it was 94 a day, that is just nowhere near what's needed. We had the average before October was 500 a day. And so we need massive amounts of food and aid. And look, I mean, we built that pier and the pier never worked. And we, you know, had to dismantle that. It's like, sadly, the perfect metaphor for our policy, which is, we say that we believe in things, but we're just not willing to actually see it all the way through. So if we think that when Russia uses food as a weapon of war, that that's a war crime. And that's deplorable, we should just, we cannot allow our allies to do it either. And if we continue to allow them, we are complicit in that. And so those two things to me are the easy and the obvious ones, which is we need to end offensive military aid. And we need to surge food and medical supplies immediately. And then I think like for the long term, we need to get really serious, we can't just like, again, the mantra of like two states, two states, two states is just not going to cut it. Like we know what people will say, during a campaign season. That's not what we're talking about. We really need to get an End If it's get our European allies together, if it's get the and I hate the term, moderate Arab states, because all we mean when we say that is states who are willing to sit down with Israel, that's it that way, they're not in no other way or they moderate Arab states. But we need to get those Gulf States, we need to we need to invest the region, in something that is real about what comes next. Because, again, Israelis and Palestinians are going to be living together in that land, that there's just, that's it. That is what this looks like. And we we need to get really serious about that. And I haven't seen that to date. But if you're asking kind of what I would want to see, that's what I would want to see.

 

Hadar Susskind  42:09

You know, I think that some of those particular pieces that you were talking about, of course, are things we have been advocating for, among others. And it's really interesting, because everything you just said, I think, you know, certainly taking the beginning points, the no offensive weapons and the need to surge aid. That's just glaringly obvious. Yeah, that we should be doing those, not just because I think those are the right thing. But because those are consistent with our policies, those are consistent with our laws, right. And the problem that we run up against is the United States when it is dealing with Israel, and it deals with each country differently. So I'm not comparing it to everything, but it doesn't apply those things equally. And we have these conversations with people, both, I'll say, for me, within the Jewish community and others, but also folks in Congress and folks in the administration, you know, we three and a half called Getting close to four years ago now came out talking about conditioning aid, right. And so stopping offensive weapons, you could do it lots of different ways. But it also falls into the category of conditioning aid, right, you're using our our aid for things that are opposed to our policy, as opposed to our values, you can't do that we're not going to give it to you. And when we did that, when we came out with that was not the policy. There's never been a bill in Congress to do that. It was not the policy. I'm sure there were some folks who agreed with it. But it's not the stated policy of any members of Congress. And people just looked at us like, you know, you're insane. You can't do that. And now, like you said, it has, I mean, for horrible reasons. But it has happened, to some extent, the concept of conditioning aid, and not enough, but it is certainly a very mainstream part of the political conversation right now. And I think that so, so much of what we, as an organization, and as a community, and all of us, as allies need to do is help push our elected officials past the oh, well, that's how we do it. Or like, oh, that's the, you know, that's the safe piece to do and say in in this particular moment of crisis, but also in this crisis situation of, like you said, you know, seemingly endless occupation, right. It's not just about the the nine months and, you know, October 7th, and the war in Congress and the war in Gaza, it's this whole issue is breaking out of what is simple, easy, accepted, and following things that are not radical, but just actually our laws and applying them across the board so that they do meet with our policies and our values.

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  44:41

Yeah. And look, and also just being honest about the fact that like, I understand why Netanyahu would come here and talk about Iran, I understand that. I mean, that that's where, again, you know, China and Iran are where we have bipartisan consensus on foreign policy in the US and so I understand why that would be smart from his perspective. But the fact is that the threat to Israel is the occupation, the existential threat to Israel is not Iran, it is the occupation. And for a bunch of American elected officials who are always kind of professing their love for Israel, that's that's a message that they haven't kind of loved Israel enough to send very honestly, to say, cannot continue this.

 

Hadar Susskind  45:29

Sorry for the bad. just interject there, even the ones who claim they stand very clearly for two states, right? I mean, you've got a bunch of them who their love of Israel is just whatever Netanyahu says, but even those for whom they say, you know, standard resolutely by the idea of two states seem to often forget that one of those states is Palestine, like two states is not Israel and Jordan, two states is not Israel and Sweden, Uruguay, right? It's Palestine. And to do that, it means you have to end the occupation. Sorry. Okay.

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  45:59

No, no, I mean, that's where I just think. And, look, I mean, that this is not today's topic. But I think two states is like one version of what could work, you could also have like an Confederation that has two states of one bucket, like there's different that we are all in agreement, that the human beings living from the river to the sea, deserve equal rights, and freedom and dignity, regardless of their religion. That's it. And if you agree on that, and if that's the bedrock, and if all negotiations flow from that agreement, then you can come up with different versions, and what do you figure out and, you know, did the settler state but there's citizens of Israel and like, you can figure things out that solve the, the problem is not the logistics of where you draw the line, and the settlers. And that's not the problem. The problem is this core, like inability to mean it when we say that Palestinians deserve freedom and equal dignity. And I see that I mean, that's just that's been the core, I think, from the beginning of the conflict, but through now, and until that changes, there will not be a solution. Because if you're trying to kind of come up with some solution that draws lines of blah blah blah like, but but without acknowledging the humanity and the dignity of half of the people in the conflict, then clearly, you're not going to like if they're invisible to you, and you don't hear them, and they're not an equal part of the conversation. Like you're not going to solve the conflict between Palestine and Israel by talking to the Saudis. You're just not.

 

Hadar Susskind  47:39

That's called Managing the conflict. Right?

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  47:42

I mean, and that's what we've done over decades. But.

 

Hadar Susskind  47:45

Netanyahu has pushed is.

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  47:47

Yeah, yeah. I mean, we've managed the conflict for decades. And I guess what is the most frustrating to me is I would like people to see that equal dignity of both peoples. But even if you don't, and all you care about is the Israeli people. You're not doing them a favor, either.

 

Hadar Susskind  48:03

Right. So I want to remind everyone, if you've got questions, please use the q&a function. And with that, I'm going to ask one of them, Rebecca. Well, I'm going to ask you, maybe I'll answer it too. But I say this to you. You know, the question is actually pretty simple. One is, is a viable, sovereign Palestinian state, so possible? I say, simple, you know?

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  48:27

Yeah. Simple. Sure.

 

Hadar Susskind  48:29

Short question. More and more accurate. It's not really simple. But

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  48:33

Look, anything's possible. Right? Like, it's not a question of like, can we figure out how to do it is the political will there. And again, for me, like, I don't know that it needs to be like that. We remove all the settlers, and we do this and we move all these people and we like, and we put a border, it could be something else. It could be, as I said, like two states, like we have many 50 states, it could be two states in one country and a joint, like, it could look different ways. But it's something where Palestinians have their civil and political and human rights still possible. Yes. And can that be separated from the Israeli policy? Yes. So the question to me is not whether we can figure it out.

 

Hadar Susskind  49:21

I lost you there for a second? I don't know if it was you or me. But I'll but I got that. Look, people ask me this often, right, especially every time there's an announcement of you know, Israel has, you know, taken x number of dunams as state lands and, you know, legalized 1 million new settlements, and all of these horrible things that, as you said to happen more this year than any year in history, as you know, the eyes of the world have been focused more on Gaza. And there are lots of people I hear from say, oh, you know, there's just like, we missed it. It's done. Which first of all, I'm not sure what their conclusion is they're like, so does that mean we're just supposed to say okay, or like, I don't know what they think we're supposed to do with that. But I also absolutely don't think that's true. And it really is, because of what you were saying the, the settlements are horrible as they are, are a challenge, they are not something insurmountable. And all of those other things, again, where the line is, what the what the configuration is, politically, as well as geographically, all of those things can be solved with the political will. And, you know.

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  50:31

I would also say, though, that I, I don't have like, so I'm not going to live in whatever configuration there is. So it's also like, not my decision to make. But my family is from Lebanon, and my grandmother grew up in a neighborhood that was Jewish, in Beirut, and almost like overnight, that community, you know, was emptied out almost completely. And, in my opinion, we lost a lot when we lost our Jewish community, you know, like there is still a very small Jewish community, and they've rebuilt the historic synagogue in Beirut. And right now, Lebanon, still if we have problems, like any country, but like, I'm very proud of the fact that we have 17 different religions living more or less with each other in that country. And so to me, it's also just not impossible to imagine that within one generation, it would just seem fine for Israelis and Palestinians to be living together in one country where they each have their their rights like that just to me. Right, like, that's not scary to me. I know it can be it's feels scary to a lot of people. But I think that's not a scary thing. And I think it's very possible.

 

Hadar Susskind  51:49

Yes, I'll tell you, Somebody just wrote something about this in the questions, but also, actually, I literally spoke about this at the protests yesterday, one of the things I did I talked about was quoting, you know, there's a very famous quote from Theodore Herzl, when he's talking about the creation of a Jewish state, right, the Hebrew the interior, to and Zaga da, right, if you will it, it is not a dream. That's his famous statement. That is like the idea of Zionism of creating a Jewish state, when and when he said, that was 1892. Right? People thought that was crazy. It was totally fantastical, it was inconceivable, it was not like, it wasn't about to happen thing. And there was no particular way to imagine that it would. And yet he and many, many, many people who eventually gathered behind that idea, kept working toward that goal and ultimately achieved that goal in 1948. So one of the things that I tell all the people who say right now, that peace, whether it's to states or configuration or whatever, whatever combination, like you said, the people who live there want to see it end up in that, as difficult as that is to imagine right now as far away as that feels to so many people when they see October 7, and settlement expansion and everything else, that it is no further away, and no more fantastical than Herzl's idea was, and saying, if you will it, you know, it was no dream, because the next part of that sentence was saying, but if you don't, it will remain a dream. Like if you don't do it, it will remain a dream. And I think, you know, that's why we do this every day. And I know for you, that's why you spend so much time with so many people who like want to see that better future for Israelis, for Palestinians, for everybody in the region.

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  53:29

And I think bringing it back to kind of the American context. What I think if we are ever going to be serious about this is we just have to we have to match our policies with our what we say our policies, our with our actual behavior. So if we say that we that to states is our policy, then there have to be consequences when there is continued land seizures and settlement building. Right? It's not just like, we've talked earlier about conditioning aid, because of Gaza, but there are many ways in which we have levers that we can we and we just refuse to use them. And again, if we believe in these policies, then we should like we would with any other country, we should say you are doing something that is against US policy. And so we will not accept it. And we will behave differently based on your behavior. Right. And our behavior never seems to change based on the behavior of you know, of the Israeli government. And I just don't understand that. Yeah, the message that I would get if I was the Prime Minister of Israel is I can do whatever I want.

 

Hadar Susskind  54:38

I, I think that's clearly the message he's gotten. But when we when we first again came out with that, that position, you know, it was years ago, it had nothing to do with Gaza. It was primarily about settlement expansion and occupation. And you know, also when we talked about the need to surge aid, food, medicine, water. That to me is in some ways the most remarkable that the United States has not been willing, because it's not able, it's it hasn't been willing to insist on that. And to say, like, No, it can't be 82 trucks or 74 trucks. And I know, you know, I had the chance to meet with Jose Andres who talked about one of the things that even though it's numbers of trucks is not that useful, because oftentimes now those trucks are not completely filled, they send them when they're not full. So the fact that the United States has been unwilling to just insist on that, and you know, the people, I'm sure you've heard it, I hear it all the time. Like, why are you pressuring Israel as a sovereign nation, they can do what they want. America can't tell them to do what they want. Put aside real politics, like, we're not even insisting that America must force Israel to do something. What we're talking about here is what America should do. And America is not required to send billions of dollars of aid or weapons or any of these other things. So yes, Israel is absolutely a sovereign nation and can and should make its decisions. But this conversation happens in this like bizzare world, where it's as if the United States is not a sovereign nation, like Israel will decide the United States has to keep doing the same thing. Right. Yeah, some little work done. But we're coming to the end of our time here. We're wrapping up. I guess the last thing I want to ask you, and then, you know, add any other kind of closing comments in, we talked kind of at the beginning about the empathy deficit? And how do we, you know, how do we deal with that? So I guess I would ask you like, what do you think? What are the things that we specifically as a general answer, as an American Jewish community, like, what do you think we can be doing more to help?

 

Rebecca Abou-Chedid  56:42

So look, I think I can tell you then in all of the different groups that I'm in, when we started to see those protests that were like shutting down the Brooklyn Bridge, and Grand Central Station, and it was beautiful, like we were really the community was incredibly moved by that, like that solidarity that has been there for the past nine months saying not in our name, and we're with you has been incredibly meaningful to the Arab and Muslim community. And I think one of the things that we can start to do, and anyone who is on here, Hadar can tell you how to find me, like find me, I really think it would make a difference if we start, like, smaller meetings within our local communities, and then bringing those conversations to our members of Congress to say, like, here we are, right? The people who care about there's been a real effort to kind of say this is a fringe issue. Not a lot of people care about it. And I do not. I mean, I think obviously, to me, it's obvious that that's not true. Right? Young people care about this, progressives care about this, the Black community cares about this, other minority communities care about this. And so the more we could kind of have the communities that care about this, and that, like care deeply about this be the ones that go and have these conversations with members, I think it will start to look very different, they will start to relate to this issue very differently. They will not look at this as, oh, am I going to upset the Jewish community or the Arab American community, but I guess I'll pick the Jewish, right like, it's been falsely fed to them, as you have to choose between these two communities. And there may be political implications to that. I do not believe that is true. And particularly with the younger Jewish community, I just don't believe that's true. And so what we need to do is start building those coalition's within our local communities, and then bringing those to our elected representatives and saying, Look, all we're asking for is for a policy, it is for us to actually enact policies that match what we say we stand for, we say we stand for a rules based order, we say we stand for a two state solution. And we say we stand for all of these things. And we need you to go to Washington and stand for those things and stand up for those things on behalf of all of the people in this room. Because that's really what we've seen in the last nine months is that none of our communities are alone. You guys are not alone. We are not alone. And that's been, frankly, a quite pleasant surprise. But I think we need to now take that energy and mobilize it and really start having those conversations.

 

Hadar Susskind  59:17

Yeah. All right. Rebecca, I want to thank you for joining us today and you know, sharing your insights, sharing your views, even more than I just want to thank you for you know, always always being a partner. Thank you everybody who joined us again, this has been recorded, we will share it and we look forward to seeing you all again.

Our Director of Government Relations, Madeleine Cereghino, sat down with Lior Amihai, the executive director of our sister organization, Shalom Achshav. Our colleagues there recently released a report detailing what they call the Israeli government’s “Annexation Revolution.”

Produced by the Foundation for Middle East Peace. Views and positions expressed here are those of the writer, and do not necessarily represent APN's views and policy positions.

Yossi Alpher is an independent security analyst. He is the former director of the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University, a former senior official with the Mossad, and a former IDF intelligence officer. Views and positions expressed here are those of the writer, and do not necessarily represent APN's views and policy positions.

By Madeleine Cereghino (Director of Government Relations)

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to Congress yesterday was marked by significant political tension and notable absences from key figures. Traditionally, the Vice President presides over joint sessions of Congress, but Vice President Harris did not attend the speech (though she will be meeting with Netanyahu privately today). In the absence of the Vice President, the role typically falls to the president pro tempore, Senator Patty Murray (D-WA). But she too declined to attend. Ultimately, Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, agreed to preside.

Dear Friend of APN, When Speaker Johnson invited Prime Minister Netanyahu to speak to a joint session of Congress,  we quickly made it clear that we would, in solidarity with our Israeli sisters and brothers, be protesting, and calling on members of Congress to skip the speech altogether. And half of House and Senate Democrats did just that! And even among those who went to the speech, many issued statements clearly opposing Netanyahu and demanding that he prioritize ending the war and the return of the hostages.

Larry Gellman currently serves on the national boards of Americans for Peace Now, J Street, and CLAL. Over the last 40 years he served as a founding member of the AIPAC board in Tucson and was a national leader and honoree of Israel Bonds, a founder of the Milwaukee Jewish Day School, and named Jewish Man of the Year in both Milwaukee and Tucson after chairing Federation annual campaigns in both cities. He spent his career as a widely recognized financial advisor and won awards as a television news reporter in Ohio and Wisconsin.