therealnews--2020-01-06--How Soleimani’s Assassination Violates International Law and Puts Peace Further Out of Reach

All donations in the US and Canada are tax deductible .
To make a secure donation by credit or debit @ @ @ @ @ location , or select PayPal .

Phyllis Bennis says Congress must stop Trump from taking the U.S. to war without any justification or provocation.
Story Transcript
DONALD TRUMP: We took action last night to stop a war. We did not take action to start a war.
MARC STEINER: Orwellian speak dominates our body politic. Welcome to The Real News. I’m Marc Steiner. Good to have you with us.
We continue our coverage today of the escalation by the United States in Iraq; and with Iran, a potential war. The issues we face are both complex and straightforward. Trump’s actions, that from all reports were done without agreement or a major discussion with his own national security personnel, have heightened the prospects of a wider war in the Middle East. He told Israel and Saudi Arabia–but not the U.S.’s alleged ally, Iraq–that he was going to carry out an assassination or their soil. A divided Iraq and its parliament have asked the United States to leave Iraq. Tens of thousands of protestors that crossed every ethnic line exploded across Iraq before the assassination of Qasem Soleimani, demanding that both United States and Iran leave Iraq and the Iraqi government step down.
Now Trump has even declared he will break international law and bomb cultural sites if Iran retaliates in any way for the assassination. The roots of this as our guest has written are not just about this week’s events. But go back to Trump’s dismantling of the nuclear agreement with Iran in May 2018 and even further with the beginning of the invasion of Iraq 2003 or even further in the 1950s where the U.S. ouster of Mosaddegh, Iran’s elected leader.
But let me stop here and welcome Phyllis Bennis, who is a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies; serves on the board of Jewish Voices for Peace. And her most recent books include Understanding the Palestinian Israeli Conflict and Understanding ISIS and the New Global War on Terror. And her latest piece for The Nation magazine: Fascination with Soleimani Escalates the Threat of a War. And good to have you with us, Phyllis. Welcome.
PHYLLIS BENNIS: Great to be back with you, Marc.
MARC STEINER: One day we’ll have a conversation when we’re not under some threat of war. Maybe. But this particular move is probably one of the frightening moves in this entire administration. So let’s start there.
PHYLLIS BENNIS: It was indeed this notion that Trump claimed at his press conference that he acted to stop a war is completely a reversal of the reality. This act, this single act–the assassination of this particular individual, General Qasem Soleimani–was perhaps the most provocative, reckless move he could have made in relationship to Iran. This is somebody who was not just the top general for Iran’s–what’s known as the Quds Force, the Jerusalem force. That was mainly the Iranian military support for a number of militias in a variety of countries around the region, but he was also a very influential, very popular political leader.
In fact, in a recent poll a few months back conducted by the University of Maryland, inside Iran it turned out that he was, by a substantial margin, the most popular political leader in the country. So the notion that he could be assassinated without any consequence, that somehow this would make the United States safer, that this would make U.S. troops throughout the region safer, is a complete reversal of the reality. There is now an incredibly tense escalation process underway which could really lead to full-scale war there.
MARC STEINER: So let me come back to Trump here one more time to talk about what the response might be in our own country here. This is Trump on Friday at his press conference.
DONALED TRUMP: Soleimani made the death of innocent people, his sick passion contributing to terrorist plots as far away as New Delhi and London. We take comfort in knowing that his reign of terror is over. We do not seek regime change. However, the Iranian regime’s aggression in the region, including the use of proxy fighters to destabilize its neighbors, must end. And it must end now. The world is a safer place without these monsters.
MARC STEINER: So given the divided nature of our own country, Phyllis, I’m curious how you all were talking about what the political response to all this is because it’s complex. You see how the Democrats are kind of backpedaling and afraid to say anything that might look like Soleimani is a nice guy or whatever; frightened to kind of take that on a bit. So what should the political response be and what do you see happening?
PHYLLIS BENNIS: The political response has to come from the Congress to reclaim our constitution. The constitution is vague about all kinds of things, but it’s very clear about at least one thing, which is that only Congress has the right to declare war. This war that is threatening right now was not declared by Congress. There was no imminent threat. Despite these claims, we have seen no evidence that there was an imminent threat even being considered or talked about. And when General Soleimani arrived in Baghdad, reportedly on a commercial flight going through regular passport control, he wasn’t coming in covertly. It really begs the question whether he was in fact there for anything other than diplomatic potential conversations, which is what the Iraqi prime minister reported to the Iraqi parliament. The prime minister said that.
Soleimani was actually coming to Baghdad to discuss with him, the prime minister, an answer from Iran to a message that the Iraqi prime minister had relayed to Iran from Saudi Arabia. Which if true… and we don’t know if this is true, this is what the Iraqi prime minister says. If it’s true, it means that there was the possibility of a diplomatic solution being discussed between the longstanding competitors, challengers in the region–Iran and Saudi Arabia–with the Iraqi leader as the go-between; if that were true.
This is assassination not only represents violation of international law, a violation of U.S. law and immoral assassination that is specifically prohibited by a U.S. executive order that goes back to the 1970s, but it also undermined the possibility of averting continuing escalating tensions between the longstanding competitors Iran and Saudi Arabia. We don’t know if any of that is yet going to be proven, if any of that is true, but the notion that this is the story that’s being put forward by the Iraqi prime minister, a longstanding supporter of the United States, sort of goes to say that the claim that this was designed to avert a war is simply nowhere near reality.
MARC STEINER: Assume that it’s true for a moment; it would be something that the intelligence forces in the United States would have known about, something Trump should have known about it if in fact it was taking place. I mean, being unfathomable to believe that otherwise.
PHYLLIS BENNIS: Yes and no. The U.S. does have very good intelligence in the region. It doesn’t have very good intelligence in Iran. It does have very good intelligence in Saudi Arabia. The Israelis are known to have much better intelligence in Iran than the United States does. Whether they knew about it and didn’t share the information, we don’t know. There’s a lot of unknowns here. There’s a lot of unknowns. And even the claim by the Iraqi prime minister has to be taken with a very cautious understanding that he’s trying to survive politically at a moment when his government has been under enormous pressure to step down from these, these protests that have raged across Iraq, which are now being transformed into a campaign against the United States.
The parliament has now asked the United States to remove all its 5000 troops. So there’s a huge complication underway and who knew what… When we certainly don’t know yet. We won’t know that for quite some time. It is possible that the U.S. knew about this and that it had something to do with the timing because perhaps someone in the Trump administration did not want to see a rapprochement between Iran and Saudi Arabia. We don’t know. We simply don’t know. What we do know is that this was a reckless act and assassination that violated all kinds of international and domestic laws and that has made everything in that tense environment far worse, not better.
MARC STEINER: And from what I’ve read and talked to folks that the… What happened inside the parliament was also divided in Iraq for clear political reasons, but if this pushes ahead and Iraq asks the United States to leave even force them to leave, that sets up a whole other set of issues. I between Iraq, the United States and in Syria and Iran, I mean this is, it expands the potential conflict. It would seem to me,
PHYLLIS BENNIS: It absolutely does. It makes the conflict, again, an absolutely regional conflict. It raises the question of ISIS, which exists in small in Iraq as well as in Syria and elsewhere. It raises the question of would the United States abide by a decision of the Iraqi parliament, which has passed the resolution saying we want the all the U.S. troops out, but it has not yet been signed off by the prime minister. We don’t know how that’s going to play out if it does. Will the U.S. agree will or will they simply say, we’re going to stay? Trump has already threatened that if the Iraqis asked the U.S. to leave, that he will demand that they pay the billions of dollars to build the U.S. bases in Iraq that were built during the U.S. occupation of the country in the early years of the Iraq war. If they refuse to do that, what then he says they will impose sanctions that will be far worse than the crippling sanctions that he is imposed on Iran.
So we’re looking again at a repeat of the years of sanctions against Iraq. Which if you remember, Marc, in the years between the first and second U.S. wars against Iraq–that is between 1991 and 2003–during those 12 years of absolutely devastating and sanctions that shredded the social fabric of the country, 500,000 children under the age of five were killed by U.S. sanctions. That was the moment when Madeline Albright, the secretary of state to Bill Clinton, said in 1998: “We think the price is worth it.” The price of 500,000 Iraqi children’s lives was somehow worth it to impose those sanctions. Are we looking at that being repeated?
MARC STEINER: I remember that all too well. And it also geopolitically pushes Iran and Iraq closely together, even though it seems like the majority of Iraqis were in the streets. What? Neither the United States nor Iran to be involved in Roth. They want their own nation back. So, that’s also a further complication to this. So, and if you read this tweet that Trump did, this is good here before we conclude because it’s pretty stunning. His tweet on the kind of bombings that would take, he would allow a to take place on what he would go after. So he, he wrote this tweet targeted 52 Iranian sites presenting the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many, many years ago. Some at a very high level and important to Iran and the Iranian culture and those targets and Iran itself will be hit very fast and very hard in calves. The U.S. wants no more threats. So he’s also talking about bombing cultural sites.
PHYLLIS BENNIS: He’s talking about planning a war crime and announcing to the world we are going to commit 52 war crimes. It is a specific war crime in violation of the Geneva conventions in violation of a specific UN security council resolution that the United States signed off on and it’s a specific part of the Pentagon’s own laws of war manual that attacking a cultural site is a specific crime of war and here is the president of the United States announcing to the world that our intention, if Iran dares to retaliate for our illegal assassination of its second most influential leader that our response will be to commit 52 war crimes. It’s an unbelievable thing and I don’t know whether Congress is going to take this one up.
We are at a moment when there are people in Congress, and it’s very important to recognize this, are already pushing for a war powers resolution that would restrict the president’s ability to maintain the new forces. He has sent 4000 new troops had been sent in the last 48 hours or so to the region targeting Iran and the resolution is pending in both the Senate and being introduced in the house by jointly by Barbara Lee and Ilhan Omar to parallel a house resolution, a house version of the same resolution that would say that within 30 days the president must have withdrawn all of those additional troops from Iraq, from the region and that there will be no more military action against Iran without congressional approval. If that passes, it would set up an immediate conflict between the two branches of government and how that would be resolved.
We don’t know would the Trump administration abide by the constitutional requirement that it listened to Congress. Would it abide by the terms of the war powers act that explicitly says that if there are troops fighting anywhere in the world where there has not been a declaration of war or a specific authorization by Congress, the Congress can order the president to withdraw those forces. It’s never been used. It’s never been attempted. Would this president go along with Congress? We don’t know, but it is very, very important that people demand of their members of Congress to pass these two bills in the house and in the Senate so that we can begin that process of holding this president accountable.
MARC STEINER: So let’s conclude with this: I think what you just talked about, in coupling that with… Clearly, Iran is pulling out of the nuclear deal completely though they’ve made some equivocations. But the question becomes in our own country here in the United States: what is our response to this? This is, again, our divided political world in this country–and it’s intense–that we were going through in America right now. So what is our response? How do Americans respond to this growing sense of war?
PHYLLIS BENNIS: Let me just say one thing first. It’s very important to recognize that Iran is pulling out, as you say, of a number of the components, the key components of the nuclear deal. However, it is allowing to remain the United nations inspectors throughout its set of nuclear facilities. That’s crucially important because it means that if Iran intended some point in the future to do what they have not ever done, which is to move towards building a nuclear weapon, those inspectors would be on the ground and able to see it. They have very specifically not demanded that those inspectors leave, which is their right to do. They have not done it. So that’s important to keep in mind. In terms of the U.S. response, the question is going to come back to Congress. Will people take up the demand that members of Congress hold up their constitutional duty to control the money, control our tax dollars?
We already are spending 53 cents out of every discretionary federal dollar directly on the military. Will we demand that Congress prevent this president from taking us to war without any discussion, without any agreement, and for no reason? There is no threat from Iran against the United States. This claim from the vice president that not just Iran, but Soleimani in particular was somehow involved in 9/11 and with Osama bin Laden; anyone who knows anything about those incidents, about those relationships, those organizations know that the only ties between Iran government and Al-Qaida was one of unrelenting hostility both at a religious level, at a sectarian level, at a national level, and at a political level. There was no connection between them. So they’re just creating lies here.
This is very much like what we saw with the Iraq war and the question is will we remember we just saw a month ago the so-called Afghanistan papers that are now proving what many of us knew all along that our political leaders, our military leaders are lying to us knowingly and directly and hoping we won’t remember, hoping we won’t notice. Well, we have noticed. And now the Washington Post noticed. Just as the New York Times did with Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers, the Post noticed with the Afghanistan Papers. We have noticed. We should stop listening to all those people who lied through the Afghanistan war and believe somehow that they’re going to now be telling the truth about a war in Iran.
So that’s one of the things we should be looking at, is who are we listening to on television? Who are we listening to in the newspapers? We should be focusing on Congress to say there must be an immediate vote on a war powers act aimed at holding the president accountable and preventing any further escalation that could lead to an absolutely catastrophic war.
MARC STEINER: Well, Phyllis Bennis, it’s always great to talk with you and for our viewers to hear what you have to say as we struggled with what to do next and how we stand up against this. Thank you so much for your work and thanks for taking your time today at The Real News.
PHYLLIS BENNIS: Thank you, Marc.
MARC STEINER: Always a pleasure. And we will be covering this every day and keep pushing on other things we know and what we want to find out. We’ll be bringing you voices from inside of Iraq, to folks who are involved, and the Iranian American community, and more. So stay with us for all of these reports we’ll be doing here at The Real News. And I’m Marc Steiner here for The Real News Network. Thank you for joining us. Let us know what you think. And take care.
Studio: Bababtunde Ogunfolaju, Adam Coley
Production: Genevieve Montinar, Adam Coley, Andrew Corkery
Related
Republish This Story Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.


therealnews--2020-01-06--Soleimani’s Assassination Brings US Closer to War with Iran

The United States ’ assassination of top Iranian General Qassem Soleimani in Iraq on Jan. 2 has drawn sharp international condemnation , with critics warning it moved the U.S. and Iran closer to war .
On Monday , Jan. 6 , as many as one million people mourned Soleimani ’ s killing in Iran .
The United States Defense Department said Soleimani was killed as a defensive action taken “ at the direction of the President , ” and alleged he was “ actively developing ” plans to attack Americans in the region .
The White House has defended its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , prompting comparisons to the claims of weapons of mass destruction that were used to justify the 2003 invasion of Iraq .
United States Secretary of State Mike Pompeo commented on the killing : “ We made the right decision to take out this terrorist .
We watched him—we watched him continue to actively build out for what was going to be a significant attack .
That ’ s what we believed and we made the right decision.
” On Sunday , Pompeo claimed on CNN that the U.S. ’ s assassination of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ I saw there was dancing in the streets in parts of Iraq , ” he said .
“ We have every expectation that people not only in Iraq , but in Iran , will view the American action last night as giving them freedom , freedom to have the opportunity for success and prosperity for their nations.
” Tens of thousands of Iraqis have taken to the streets of Iraq in protest .
Many , including opponents of Soleimani , have expressed anger at Washington for killing him on Iraqi soil and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conflict .
The Iraqi parliament voted on Jan. 5 to order the U.S. to withdraw troops from the country , prompting the U.S. to threaten renewed sanctions against the country .
In the 1990s U.S. sanctions killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children .
U.S. President Donald Trump tweeted an image of the American flag to announce Soleimani ’ s assassination , and has doubled down on threats to bomb 52 locations if Iran retaliates , including Iranian cultural sites , which would be a war crime under international law .
Trump said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ practice of announcing policy decisions through his Twitter account , tweeting out “ These Media Posts will serve as notification to the United States Congress that should Iran strike any U.S. person or target , the United States will quickly & fully strike back , & perhaps in a disproportionate manner .
Such legal notice is not required , but is given nevertheless !
” On Jan. 5 , Iran announced it would not limit itself to the restrictions imposed by the historic 2015 Iran nuclear agreement .
Iran ’ s foreign minister @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency .
The Trump administration withdrew from the accord in May 2018 and imposed harsh sanctions claiming Iran had violated terms of the deal , but UN nuclear watchdogs reported Iran was in compliance .
On Jan. 5 , U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the House will introduce and vote on a war powers resolution this week to limit President Donald Trump ’ s military actions regarding Iran .
Senator Tim Kaine will introduce a parallel war powers resolution in the Senate .
Over the weekend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were detained and interrogated at the U.S.–Canada border , according to the Council of American Islamic Relations .
Protests were held in the streets of cities like New York and Washington over the weekend to demand U.S. troops withdraw from Iraq , and against the possible war on Iran .
Answer Coalition Member Eugene Puryear told Reuters , “ The strike on , and the assassination really , of Major General Qassem Soleimani was designed to box in Iran , to try to create more of war and danger ; a drastic escalation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after the wake of 25 years following the 2003 invasion that ’ s been so destructive , certainly in the Middle East , but also for many people here in the United States.
” This story will be updated .

The United States’ assassination of top Iranian General Qassem Soleimani in Iraq on Jan. 2 has drawn sharp international condemnation, with critics warning it moved the U.S. and Iran closer to war. On Monday, Jan. 6, as many as one million people mourned Soleimani’s killing in Iran.
The United States Defense Department said Soleimani was killed as a defensive action taken “at the direction of the President,” and alleged he was “actively developing” plans to attack Americans in the region. The White House has defended its actions but failed to provide any evidence, prompting comparisons to the claims of weapons of mass destruction that were used to justify the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
United States Secretary of State Mike Pompeo commented on the killing: “We made the right decision to take out this terrorist. We watched him—we watched him continue to actively build out for what was going to be a significant attack. That’s what we believed and we made the right decision.”
On Sunday, Pompeo claimed on CNN that the U.S.’s assassination of Soleimani would be celebrated in Iraq.
“I saw there was dancing in the streets in parts of Iraq,” he said. “We have every expectation that people not only in Iraq, but in Iran, will view the American action last night as giving them freedom, freedom to have the opportunity for success and prosperity for their nations.”
Tens of thousands of Iraqis have taken to the streets of Iraq in protest. Many, including opponents of Soleimani, have expressed anger at Washington for killing him on Iraqi soil and potentially dragging their beleaguered country into another conflict.
The Iraqi parliament voted on Jan. 5 to order the U.S. to withdraw troops from the country, prompting the U.S. to threaten renewed sanctions against the country. In the 1990s U.S. sanctions killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children.
U.S. President Donald Trump tweeted an image of the American flag to announce Soleimani’s assassination, and has doubled down on threats to bomb 52 locations if Iran retaliates, including Iranian cultural sites, which would be a war crime under international law.
Trump said he wouldn’t be changing his practice of announcing policy decisions through his Twitter account, tweeting out “These Media Posts will serve as notification to the United States Congress that should Iran strike any U.S. person or target, the United States will quickly & fully strike back, & perhaps in a disproportionate manner. Such legal notice is not required, but is given nevertheless!”
On Jan. 5, Iran announced it would not limit itself to the restrictions imposed by the historic 2015 Iran nuclear agreement. Iran’s foreign minister Javad Zarif tweeted that Iran will continue cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency. The Trump administration withdrew from the accord in May 2018 and imposed harsh sanctions claiming Iran had violated terms of the deal, but UN nuclear watchdogs reported Iran was in compliance.
On Jan. 5, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the House will introduce and vote on a war powers resolution this week to limit President Donald Trump’s military actions regarding Iran. Senator Tim Kaine will introduce a parallel war powers resolution in the Senate.
Over the weekend, over 60 U.S. and Iranian nationals were detained and interrogated at the U.S.–Canada border, according to the Council of American Islamic Relations.
Protests were held in the streets of cities like New York and Washington over the weekend to demand U.S. troops withdraw from Iraq, and against the possible war on Iran.
Answer Coalition Member Eugene Puryear told Reuters, “The strike on, and the assassination really, of Major General Qassem Soleimani was designed to box in Iran, to try to create more of war and danger; a drastic escalation that could spill over into many countries after the wake of 25 years following the 2003 invasion that’s been so destructive, certainly in the Middle East, but also for many people here in the United States.”
This story will be updated.
Related
Republish This Story Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.


therealnews--2020-01-03--Iraqi Protesters Storm the American Embassy in Baghdad — But There’s More to the Story

MARC STEINER : Welcome to The Real News .
I ’ m Marc Steiner .
Good to have you all with us .
And Happy New Year , everybody .
Now , we ’ ve all seen the news and footage of Iraqi protesters storming the American embassy in Baghdad .
What do we know from our government and mainstream media ?
Well , we know that some Iraqi militia attacked a military base , killing a U.S. contractor and a number of Iraqi soldiers .
Then in retaliation , the United States bombed the militia sites in Iraq and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the storming of the U.S. embassy compound by protesters and militias .
The U.S. government and our major media outlets are framing this as a sectarian pro-Iranian Shiite attack .
That may be true in some cases , but what does it really mean ?
All this is occurring in the midst of massive antigovernment , anti-U.S. , and anti-Iranian demonstrations that have shaken Iraq , leading to over 500 people killed and 25,000 wounded .
What really happened last week ?
And what is our media missing ?
We ’ re now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s chair of the history department at York University in Toronto .
As well , Thabit was a leader of the opposition activists in Iraq against Saddam Hussein ; fled the country .
And while opposing Saddam , he also opposed the U.S. war in Iraq and has stayed part of the struggles his whole life .
At the moment , Thabit Abdullah and I are working on a project for Real News that you ’ ll see next week that tells the story the media here are not telling us about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of leaders of those demonstrations that I just spoke about .
And he joins us now to parse us through the madness of the headlines and what ’ s really happening with the attack on the U.S. embassy .
And Thabit , welcome .
Good to have you with us here on The Real News .
THABIT ABDULLAH : Thank you very much .
Good to see you , Marc .
MARC STEINER : Good to see you too .
So let me begin with this , just to start here .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attack on the embassy and the U.S. attacking the militia sites .
DONALD TRUMP : Well , I think it ’ s been handled very well .
The Marines came in , we had some great warriors come in and do a fantastic job .
As you know , this will not be a Benghazi .
Benghazi should never have happened .
I also want to thank the Iraqi government , they really stepped up .
MARC STEINER : So Thabit , that was the headline that we saw .
And we ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is being kind of framed as this Shiite militia attack on the U.S. embassy .
Talk to us about what you think is missing .
THABIT ABDULLAH : What ’ s missing is the whole discussion of the incredible uprising that started in Iraq on the 1st of October .
This is a mass popular uprising .
You alluded to it when you mentioned that 500 have been killed ; 25,000 have been wounded .
That ’ s massive .
And it has been going on daily , shaken the establishment in Iraq @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must be seen in that light .
Actually , the pro-Iranian militias have launched several attacks for the past two months against U.S. bases .
I believe that there ’ ve been at least 11 attacks in the past two months .
All of which is really designed to try and export the internal crisis .
This is an age old tactic , of course , to export the internal crisis of the regime in Iraq to a broader conflict between Iran and the United States .
One of the things that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the fact that Iraq has lost its sovereignty and has become an arena for Iranian-American conflict .
And this is yet another example of this .
The storming of the U.S. embassy has had the effect of energizing and even increasing the anger in the Iraqi street , because it ’ s yet another demonstration of how the country has become a simple arena .
What the protesters often say is that Iran and the and the U.S. are fighting and spilling the Iraqi blood .
And this is something that is really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s been happening .
MARC STEINER : So if you look at this montage of what the U.S. media has been saying , I ’ m going to come back and talk about this in context , what you were just saying .
SPEAKER : It was a sudden and brazen attack .
Thousands of Iranian backed demonstrators chanting , “ Death to America ” as they stormed the U.S. embassy in Iraq .
SPEAKER 2 : This is in retaliation for that missile strike on five locations of the militia .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ although affiliate with Iraq .
SPEAKER 3 : The mob setting fires , scaling the walls , breaking through the outer barricades .
Protesters smashing doors and windows , U.S. military choppers overhead firing flares to protect Americans on the ground .
SPEAKER 4 : Videos show the protesters chanting “ God is great , America is the greatest devil ” and “ down with the USA.
” And here is the bigger picture : Iran and the U.S. are vying for influence in Iraq , a country that is fractured and inured @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. invasion .
SPEAKER 5 : A lot of analysts expect that now Iran will probably increase efforts on the ground through protest and other things to try to push the U.S. completely out of Iraq .
MARC STEINER : So in seeing what they were saying , Thabit , I mean it seems to me that one of the things that… Even if you do not accept the simple narrative , this was a Shiite attack on the Americans and sectarian warfare .
The reality is that there must also be this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ between some of those militias , who are also against the demonstrators , and also there are opposition to the Americans , that they ’ re trying to push the Iraqi government to make the Americans leave .
So how does that fit into all of this ?
I mean , it sounds a great deal more complex than we give reason to .
THABIT ABDULLAH : Look , on the 1st of October as a result of the combination of many years of protest… And I ’ m glad you mentioned in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a larger program on this extremely important uprising .
It ’ s very important , not only for Iraq or not only for the Middle East , but in terms of a new global phenomenon of popular uprisings that seem to emphasize a protest against corruption , a protest against the incredible gap between the rich and the poor .
In Iraq this flared up on the 1st of October , it became intensified even more than the 25th of October .
And basically , the protestors have demanded four things that they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ end to corruption .
And by this they have pointed to a demand for the resignation of the government and more of transparent oversight .
Secondly , more democratic reforms .
And here , they have called for a revision of the electoral process to make it much more democratic .
Thirdly , they have emphasized the issue of patriotism , as opposed to any kind of sectarian or quota based systems .
And also , as part and parcel of their emphasis on patriotism , they have raised the banner of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presence of both Iran and the U.S. Now , the protesters have tended to emphasize more of the Iranian presence , because it ’ s more direct .
The Iranian presence is felt much more on the street in the form of militias that have attacked the protesters .
In the form of the flooding of Iraqi markets with Iranian goods at the expense of national produce .
But the protesters have not lost sight of the importance of sovereignty in general .
Fourthly , they have emphasized the importance of building what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which means , basically , a separation of religion from politics , equality of all citizens of Iraq regardless of their religion or their political affiliation .
And fourthly , a commitment to social justice , which actually means the redistribution of wealth .
So this uprising , again , which began on the 1st of October , has been all encompassing , incredibly powerful .
It has achieved already a lot of the demands .
They ’ ve succeeded in forcing the prime minister to resign , they ’ ve succeeded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and to reestablish a new commission , they are in the process now of negotiating for an interim government .
Now as this is going on , the Iranians have especially felt threatened because so much of the anger of the demonstrations has been directed toward Iran .
As I said , Iran has made itself felt in this , in Iraq through the use of really horrific militias .
There are three , especially , that that were implicated in the storming of the U.S. embassy that have … One could say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iranian regime in Iraq .
And because of this , Iran , I think , is really itching for some sort of a conflict with the United States on Iraqi territory , as a way to create a broader crisis and would then lead to the end of these protests .
What I want to emphasize here is that the protests are in no way sectarian based .
The protesters have used only the Iraqi flag , no sectarian symbols .
Their primary slogan has been , “ We want a country ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that you and I are working on .
One of the activists says , “ Nobody is saying we want a Shiite country or a Sunni country.
” They say , “ We want a country for all Iraqis.
” And this has really shaken the regime and the Iranian backed groups in Iraq .
To be honest with you , I think that this is an opportunity for the West .
The United States record in Iraq or in the Middle East has not been really glorious one .
This is yet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States have to play a positive role .
MARC STEINER : So coming back for a moment , before we conclude , just very quickly , to the attack on the embassy , the militias that are involved in this attack .
But I mean , as you said though , the root of the crisis in Iraq is the American invasion of Iraq , that you and I have covered a lot over the last two decades .
And that is the root .
And the demonstrators , what I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ve been doing , are equally upset with United States as they are Iran .
MARC STEINER : So what does this particular attack mean in that context ?
THABIT ABDULLAH : Look , the roots of the current crisis in Iraq are quite deep .
They go back to 40 years of fascist rule , to three of the most destructive wars of the 21st century , including a horrific eight year war with Iran , 13 years of the worst and most severe sanctions ever placed on any country .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ it all off is the 2003 American invasion and complete destruction of institutions of the Iraqi state , without any sort of a meaningful commitment to build something in its stead .
Basically , the Americans came in , they destroyed the country , both physically and in terms of institutions , and then basically just left it to rot .
It left the situation open for the proliferation of gangs , of all kinds of criminal groups , and of course , of the interference of regional countries like Iran , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iran has been the most forceful in entering Iraq .
The various militias that have emerged were essentially organized criminal groups in the absence of any kind of state .
So yes , the United States bears an enormous responsibility to what is happening there .
And as I said , the demonstrations now , the demonstrators have repeatedly stated that they don ’ t want either Iran or any other foreign power to interfere in internal Iraqi affairs .
There was one slogan that was raised which stated that Iran and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coin .
But nevertheless , it is Iranian based militias that are on the ground killing people right now .
It is Iranian companies that have bankrupted Iraqi factories .
So here is an opportunity for the West to try and play a role in which they will be seen in a positive light .
It will be difficult .
The last thing that anybody in Iraq wants is American troops pouring in or any more bombings .
But at least in terms of moral support , in terms of putting pressure on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ influenced from Iraq .
If the West can play this role , I think it can regain a little bit of its credibility in the region .
MARC STEINER : Well , Thabit Abdullah , I do appreciate you taking the time with us here on The Real News today , and look forward to seeing you many more times in our work together here .
MARC STEINER : It ’ s my pleasure .
I think that all of our viewers here can see from the work we ’ ve been doing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strangle Iran on the one hand , and the contradictions inside of Iraq with Iran pouring in and the U.S. using that as maybe a possible theater of war , that these things are very serious and very complex .
And it ’ s the complexity here that we try to tackle on The Real News , not just the simple news headlines .
So once again , Thabit Abdullah , thank you so much for joining us .
Always great to have you .
MARC STEINER : And I look to seeing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ve been producing .
And I ’ m Marc Steiner here for The Real News Network .
Thank you so much for watching .
Take care .

Tens of thousands of people in Iraq are demonstrating against the government there, the United States, and Iran. York University’s Thabit Abdullah explains that at the heart of the story is Iraq torn asunder by the United States.
Story Transcript
MARC STEINER: Welcome to The Real News. I’m Marc Steiner. Good to have you all with us. And Happy New Year, everybody.
Now, we’ve all seen the news and footage of Iraqi protesters storming the American embassy in Baghdad. What do we know from our government and mainstream media? Well, we know that some Iraqi militia attacked a military base, killing a U.S. contractor and a number of Iraqi soldiers. Then in retaliation, the United States bombed the militia sites in Iraq and Syria. And that was followed by the storming of the U.S. embassy compound by protesters and militias. The U.S. government and our major media outlets are framing this as a sectarian pro-Iranian Shiite attack. That may be true in some cases, but what does it really mean? All this is occurring in the midst of massive antigovernment, anti-U.S., and anti-Iranian demonstrations that have shaken Iraq, leading to over 500 people killed and 25,000 wounded. What really happened last week? And what is our media missing?
We’re now joined by Dr. Thabit Abdullah, who’s chair of the history department at York University in Toronto. As well, Thabit was a leader of the opposition activists in Iraq against Saddam Hussein; fled the country. And while opposing Saddam, he also opposed the U.S. war in Iraq and has stayed part of the struggles his whole life. At the moment, Thabit Abdullah and I are working on a project for Real News that you’ll see next week that tells the story the media here are not telling us about the leaders, and from the voices of leaders of those demonstrations that I just spoke about. And he joins us now to parse us through the madness of the headlines and what’s really happening with the attack on the U.S. embassy. And Thabit, welcome. Good to have you with us here on The Real News.
THABIT ABDULLAH: Thank you very much. Good to see you, Marc.
MARC STEINER: Good to see you too. So let me begin with this, just to start here. This is Donald Trump in response to the attack on the embassy and the U.S. attacking the militia sites.
DONALD TRUMP: Well, I think it’s been handled very well. The Marines came in, we had some great warriors come in and do a fantastic job. As you know, this will not be a Benghazi. Benghazi should never have happened. I also want to thank the Iraqi government, they really stepped up.
MARC STEINER: So Thabit, that was the headline that we saw. And we’ve seen people storming. And this is being kind of framed as this Shiite militia attack on the U.S. embassy. Talk to us about what you think is missing.
THABIT ABDULLAH: What’s missing is the whole discussion of the incredible uprising that started in Iraq on the 1st of October. This is a mass popular uprising. You alluded to it when you mentioned that 500 have been killed; 25,000 have been wounded. That’s massive. And it has been going on daily, shaken the establishment in Iraq to its core. And these attacks must be seen in that light. Actually, the pro-Iranian militias have launched several attacks for the past two months against U.S. bases. I believe that there’ve been at least 11 attacks in the past two months. All of which is really designed to try and export the internal crisis. This is an age old tactic, of course, to export the internal crisis of the regime in Iraq to a broader conflict between Iran and the United States.
One of the things that the protesters have been truly angered by is the fact that Iraq has lost its sovereignty and has become an arena for Iranian-American conflict. And this is yet another example of this. The storming of the U.S. embassy has had the effect of energizing and even increasing the anger in the Iraqi street, because it’s yet another demonstration of how the country has become a simple arena. What the protesters often say is that Iran and the and the U.S. are fighting and spilling the Iraqi blood. And this is something that is really missing in the whole discussion of what’s been happening.
MARC STEINER: So if you look at this montage of what the U.S. media has been saying, I’m going to come back and talk about this in context, what you were just saying.
SPEAKER: It was a sudden and brazen attack. Thousands of Iranian backed demonstrators chanting, “Death to America” as they stormed the U.S. embassy in Iraq.
SPEAKER 2: This is in retaliation for that missile strike on five locations of the militia. They are backed by the Iranians, although affiliate with Iraq.
SPEAKER 3: The mob setting fires, scaling the walls, breaking through the outer barricades. Protesters smashing doors and windows, U.S. military choppers overhead firing flares to protect Americans on the ground.
SPEAKER 4: Videos show the protesters chanting “God is great, America is the greatest devil” and “down with the USA.” And here is the bigger picture: Iran and the U.S. are vying for influence in Iraq, a country that is fractured and inured to bloodshed nearly 17 years after the U.S. invasion.
SPEAKER 5: A lot of analysts expect that now Iran will probably increase efforts on the ground through protest and other things to try to push the U.S. completely out of Iraq.
MARC STEINER: So in seeing what they were saying, Thabit, I mean it seems to me that one of the things that… Even if you do not accept the simple narrative, this was a Shiite attack on the Americans and sectarian warfare. The reality is that there must also be this internal conflict going on inside of Iraq between some of those militias, who are also against the demonstrators, and also there are opposition to the Americans, that they’re trying to push the Iraqi government to make the Americans leave. So how does that fit into all of this? I mean, it sounds a great deal more complex than we give reason to.
THABIT ABDULLAH: Look, on the 1st of October as a result of the combination of many years of protest… And I’m glad you mentioned in your opening remarks that we are preparing a larger program on this extremely important uprising. It’s very important, not only for Iraq or not only for the Middle East, but in terms of a new global phenomenon of popular uprisings that seem to emphasize a protest against corruption, a protest against the incredible gap between the rich and the poor. In Iraq this flared up on the 1st of October, it became intensified even more than the 25th of October. And basically, the protestors have demanded four things that they’ve emphasized. First, an end to corruption. And by this they have pointed to a demand for the resignation of the government and more of transparent oversight. Secondly, more democratic reforms. And here, they have called for a revision of the electoral process to make it much more democratic.
Thirdly, they have emphasized the issue of patriotism, as opposed to any kind of sectarian or quota based systems. And also, as part and parcel of their emphasis on patriotism, they have raised the banner of the importance of sovereignty, especially regarding the presence of both Iran and the U.S. Now, the protesters have tended to emphasize more of the Iranian presence, because it’s more direct. The Iranian presence is felt much more on the street in the form of militias that have attacked the protesters. In the form of the flooding of Iraqi markets with Iranian goods at the expense of national produce. But the protesters have not lost sight of the importance of sovereignty in general. Fourthly, they have emphasized the importance of building what they call a ‘civil state’, which means, basically, a separation of religion from politics, equality of all citizens of Iraq regardless of their religion or their political affiliation. And fourthly, a commitment to social justice, which actually means the redistribution of wealth.
So this uprising, again, which began on the 1st of October, has been all encompassing, incredibly powerful. It has achieved already a lot of the demands. They’ve succeeded in forcing the prime minister to resign, they’ve succeeded in getting the electoral commission to resign and to reestablish a new commission, they are in the process now of negotiating for an interim government. Now as this is going on, the Iranians have especially felt threatened because so much of the anger of the demonstrations has been directed toward Iran. As I said, Iran has made itself felt in this, in Iraq through the use of really horrific militias. There are three, especially, that that were implicated in the storming of the U.S. embassy that have … One could say that really they are representatives of the Iranian regime in Iraq. And because of this, Iran, I think, is really itching for some sort of a conflict with the United States on Iraqi territory, as a way to create a broader crisis and would then lead to the end of these protests.
What I want to emphasize here is that the protests are in no way sectarian based. The protesters have used only the Iraqi flag, no sectarian symbols. Their primary slogan has been, “We want a country” as we shall see in the program that you and I are working on. One of the activists says, “Nobody is saying we want a Shiite country or a Sunni country.” They say, “We want a country for all Iraqis.” And this has really shaken the regime and the Iranian backed groups in Iraq. To be honest with you, I think that this is an opportunity for the West. The United States record in Iraq or in the Middle East has not been really glorious one. This is yet another chance that the West and the United States have to play a positive role.
MARC STEINER: So coming back for a moment, before we conclude, just very quickly, to the attack on the embassy, the militias that are involved in this attack. But I mean, as you said though, the root of the crisis in Iraq is the American invasion of Iraq, that you and I have covered a lot over the last two decades. And that is the root. And the demonstrators, what I’ve seen, all this stuff we’ve been doing, are equally upset with United States as they are Iran.
THABIT ABDULLAH: Yeah, absolutely.
MARC STEINER: So what does this particular attack mean in that context?
THABIT ABDULLAH: Look, the roots of the current crisis in Iraq are quite deep. They go back to 40 years of fascist rule, to three of the most destructive wars of the 21st century, including a horrific eight year war with Iran, 13 years of the worst and most severe sanctions ever placed on any country. And then of course, what tops it all off is the 2003 American invasion and complete destruction of institutions of the Iraqi state, without any sort of a meaningful commitment to build something in its stead. Basically, the Americans came in, they destroyed the country, both physically and in terms of institutions, and then basically just left it to rot. It left the situation open for the proliferation of gangs, of all kinds of criminal groups, and of course, of the interference of regional countries like Iran, and Saudi Arabia, and Turkey.
But Iran has been the most forceful in entering Iraq. The various militias that have emerged were essentially organized criminal groups in the absence of any kind of state. So yes, the United States bears an enormous responsibility to what is happening there. And as I said, the demonstrations now, the demonstrators have repeatedly stated that they don’t want either Iran or any other foreign power to interfere in internal Iraqi affairs.
There was one slogan that was raised which stated that Iran and the U.S. are two sides of the same coin. But nevertheless, it is Iranian based militias that are on the ground killing people right now. It is Iranian companies that have bankrupted Iraqi factories. So here is an opportunity for the West to try and play a role in which they will be seen in a positive light. It will be difficult. The last thing that anybody in Iraq wants is American troops pouring in or any more bombings. But at least in terms of moral support, in terms of putting pressure on Iran internationally to withdraw it’s influenced from Iraq. If the West can play this role, I think it can regain a little bit of its credibility in the region.
MARC STEINER: Well, Thabit Abdullah, I do appreciate you taking the time with us here on The Real News today, and look forward to seeing you many more times in our work together here.
THABIT ABDULLAH: It’s my pleasure Marc, it’s my pleasure.
MARC STEINER: It’s my pleasure. I think that all of our viewers here can see from the work we’ve been doing on how the U.S. is trying to strangle Iran on the one hand, and the contradictions inside of Iraq with Iran pouring in and the U.S. using that as maybe a possible theater of war, that these things are very serious and very complex. And it’s the complexity here that we try to tackle on The Real News, not just the simple news headlines. So once again, Thabit Abdullah, thank you so much for joining us. Always great to have you.
THABIT ABDULLAH: You’re welcome.
MARC STEINER: And I look to seeing what you all think about what we’ve been producing. And I’m Marc Steiner here for The Real News Network. Thank you so much for watching. Take care.
Related
Republish This Story Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.


therealnews--2020-01-03--The Top Five Most Ridiculous Arrests of 2019

Stephen Janis is an award-winning investigative journalist whose work has been acclaimed both in print and on television .
As @ @ @ @ @ the now defunct Baltimore Examiner , he won two Maryland DC Delaware Press Association Awards @ @ @ @ @ number of unsolved murders in Baltimore and the killings of prostitutes .
His…

Host & Producer
Stephen Janis is an award winning investigative reporter turned documentary filmmaker. His first feature film, The Friendliest Town was distributed by Gravitas Ventures and won an award of distinction from The Impact Doc Film Festival, and a humanitarian award from The Indie Film Fest. He is the co-host and creator of The Police Accountability Report on The Real News Network, which has received more than 10,000,000 views on YouTube. His work as a reporter has been featured on a variety of national shows including the Netflix reboot of Unsolved Mysteries, Dead of Night on Investigation Discovery Channel, Relentless on NBC, and Sins of the City on TV One.
He has co-authored several books on policing, corruption, and the root causes of violence including Why Do We Kill: The Pathology of Murder in Baltimore and You Can’t Stop Murder: Truths about Policing in Baltimore and Beyond. He is also the co-host of the true crime podcast Land of the Unsolved. Prior to joining The Real News, Janis won three Capital Emmys for investigative series working as an investigative producer for WBFF. Follow him on Twitter.


therealnews--2020-01-02--The Year in Palestine and Israel: Part Two

MARC STEINER : Welcome to The Real News .
I ’ m Marc Steiner .
Good to have you all with us .
And this is another one of our continuing stories of the end of the year wrap-up to see what ’ s been happening in the past where it may take us in the future .
It ’ s also a good time to wish you all a happy holidays .
We are once again with Shir Hever , who is our correspondent who lives in Heidelberg , Germany , joining us for the second part of our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Israel and Palestine and focusing now on the corruption charges against Netanyahu and what that might mean and the annexation of Jordan Valley .
If that happens in the next year , what could that explode and how is it connected to the world populace ?
Shir , as usual , good to have you back .
MARC STEINER : Let ’ s start with your favorite person , Benjamin Netanyahu , and talk about these corruption charges that have been part of the news for a while .
But then now they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the battle over who ’ s going to be the next prime minister and who ’ s going to head the Likud Party .
So give us a little bit of the background .
But looking through a crystal ball , what do you think is going to happen ?
SHIR HEVER : Well , I think Transparency International , they found that 40 % of all populous leaders around the world have charges of corruption pressed against them .
In some ways you need to have a corruption case in order to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s how you can get into a fight with the judicial system , with the police and the media and claim that they ’ re all conspiring against you .
And without that , you ’ re not a real populist .
So Netanyahu obviously needed those corruption cases against him , and he used them and squeezed them for the last drop .
But at some point , the judicial system has put it ’ s foot down and now it looks like the charges are going to be pressed and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the jail time that he could be facing is up to 10 years in jail .
But in every likelihood , it ’ s going to be less than that .
But even one day in jail means that he ’ ll have just not be the prime minister anymore .
And so that ’ s probably what we ’ re facing .
And they ’ re delaying the charges again and again , and now they ’ re probably going to delay them until after the elections of March .
But once @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a clear majority , then he will have to ask the Knesset for immunity .
The Knesset might not give it to him because he might not have enough of a majority .
In that case is his political career is pretty much over .
MARC STEINER : Make this connection for us .
I mean there ’ s a huge difference between the Israel right wing moves and what ’ s happening in the countries we talked about in the last second for a moment , in Brazil and Eastern Europe , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , there ’ s a difference .
I mean Israel also has an occupying force .
There ’ s other things going on there as well .
What ’ s the connection for you with Netanyahu in this world ?
One of the things you said in the past is that Netanyahu is almost like a pioneer in terms of moving this worldwide populous movement right wing movement ahead .
Talk a bit about that .
SHIR HEVER : Netanyahu became a pioneer by selling an asset that maybe a lot of Israelis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have , which is that the state of Israel can pretend to be the representative of the Jewish people around the world .
And when Netanyahu goes around the world he doesn ’ t present himself just as the prime minister of Israel .
He says , “ I ’ m the leader of the Jewish people.
” Even though the Jewish people never elected him and never wanted him to be their leader , that doesn ’ t matter .
For world leaders from the far right part of the political spectrum @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they can make deals with Netanyahu and say , “ We ’ re going to say that we ’ re pro Israel .
We ’ re going to oppose the BDS movement .
We ’ re going to support you in the UN or in the European union , and so on .
And in exchange you ’ re going to do a little photo opportunity with us , come and visit us and legitimize us even though we are representing parties that have deep roots in antisemitism and racism and so on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to say we ’ re not really antisemites because we support the state of Israel.
” That ’ s what we hear constantly from Trump , from [ inaudible 00:04:10 ] , from Orban , from Modi , that their support of the state of Israel is cover for the racism that they want to have in their own countries .
The difference of course , is that in Israel this racism is legally entrenched on a much , much deeper level than in any other country in the world because you have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ different levels of representation that don ’ t even have the right to vote and that don ’ t have the right of freedom of movement .
That ’ s the reason that Netanyahu ’ s populism in the end can only galvanize at a very certain part of the population .
Only the people who are in his ethnic national religious group can actually support him .
And because of that , I think there ’ s also a limit to how much power he can gain through populism while in countries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ able to galvanize the majority of white Christian Hungarians , well , they are already pretty much the overwhelming majority of the country .
And then we ’ re looking at the beginning of old fascism , which in Israel we don ’ t see .
That also explains in some ways what we saw here in the United States a few weeks ago when Trump was talking to the American Israeli committee which is made up of mostly Israelis who now live in the United States , where when despite his antisemitic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were chanting 12 more years for Trump .
I mean those connections are really becoming exposed .
I think what you ’ re describing describes why that happened here in this country when he was talking to that group , when Trump was talking to that group .
Well , the people who cheered don ’ t really represent American Jews .
MARC STEINER : No , they do not .
They do not .
SHIR HEVER : They do not .
The thing is that a lot of Israeli journalists and a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are saying Netanyahu ’ s policy ’ s ruining the ties between the state of Israel in Jewish communities around the world , especially in the United States .
He has humiliated them , abused them , and they no longer support the state of Israel because of what Netanyahu did .
Netanyahu ’ s response to this is who cares ?
I don ’ t care about Jewish communities around the world .
I care about governments like [ inaudible 00:06:28 ] scenario or Donald Trump that can support me , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world ’ s Jews .
MARC STEINER : One last final question here .
The annex , both major parties in Israel , the blue and white pentagons and that the [ foreign language 00:06:42 ] all support the annexation of the Jordan Valley .
If that actually happens , if Israel actually officially annexes the Jordan Valley , the most kind of fertile region in the entire of Israel Palestine , this could cause a huge reaction internationally as well as internally in Israel .
So again , go to your crystal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do you think is going to happen when this happens , because I think it is going to happen ?
SHIR HEVER : The international criminal court of justice in the Hague actually held a discussion specifically about this question .
They said that this would actually warrant the pressing charges against senior Israeli officials in the military and also in civilian institutions for the war crime of illegally annexing occupied territory .
That ’ s the consequence .
And as a result of that , the state attorney office of Israel has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t fulfill your campaign promise and don ’ t annex that territory because we as lawyers working for the government may not be able to travel to Europe anymore .
We could be arrested .
I think that ’ s where we talk about the consequences .
But we have to say that on the ground that Jordan Valley has already been annexed .
That ’ s the reality .
It used to be a place where a quarter of a million Palestinians lived until 1967 producing food for the whole region @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Palestinians living there , 53 years later , after a very slow but methodical ethnic cleansing .
There are only about 9,000 Israeli colonists in that area , but they have taken over virtually all the water , the best fertile land , access to the Jordan river , and they get government subsidies and they produce agricultural products that are then labeled falsely as if they were made in Israel and exported into other countries around the world .
This is also actually something that is causing a lot of controversy and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not going to allow that anymore .
But how are they going to enforce it when the companies are lying , the Israeli government is lying ?
The Jordan Valley is already under very heavy boot of the Israeli military and officially annexing it , isn ’ t going to change very much except to signal the fact that all of this talk about two states solution is something that the Israeli government is not even paying lip service to anymore and that is an important step .
MARC STEINER : Another day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I think the two state may be dead on arrival at this moment .
But we ’ ll explore that in another day .
I think they ’ re looking again in a deeper way at the Jordan Valley would be a story that needs to be told because it ’ s emblematic of the entire occupation .
It ’ s at the heart of it .
So Shir , thank you so much for joining us here and giving us a review of what ’ s been happening over the last year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ future .
MARC STEINER : Have a happy New Year and we ’ ll talk to you soon .
MARC STEINER : We ’ ll talk to you soon .
And a happy New Year to everyone out there .
I hope you ’ re enjoying your holiday season .
And I ’ m Marc Steiner here for The Real News network .
Take care .
Have a great year .

The Real News Network’s Marc Steiner and Shir Hever discuss corruption charges against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the far right, and more.
Story Transcript
MARC STEINER: Welcome to The Real News. I’m Marc Steiner. Good to have you all with us.
And this is another one of our continuing stories of the end of the year wrap-up to see what’s been happening in the past where it may take us in the future. It’s also a good time to wish you all a happy holidays.
We are once again with Shir Hever, who is our correspondent who lives in Heidelberg, Germany, joining us for the second part of our conversation where we’re looking at Israel and Palestine and focusing now on the corruption charges against Netanyahu and what that might mean and the annexation of Jordan Valley. If that happens in the next year, what could that explode and how is it connected to the world populace?
Shir, as usual, good to have you back.
SHIR HEVER: Thank you Marc .
MARC STEINER: Let’s start with your favorite person, Benjamin Netanyahu, and talk about these corruption charges that have been part of the news for a while. But then now they’re really tied up because of the battle over who’s going to be the next prime minister and who’s going to head the Likud Party. So give us a little bit of the background. But looking through a crystal ball, what do you think is going to happen?
SHIR HEVER: Well, I think Transparency International, they found that 40% of all populous leaders around the world have charges of corruption pressed against them. In some ways you need to have a corruption case in order to be a populous leader because that’s how you can get into a fight with the judicial system, with the police and the media and claim that they’re all conspiring against you. And without that, you’re not a real populist.
So Netanyahu obviously needed those corruption cases against him, and he used them and squeezed them for the last drop. But at some point, the judicial system has put it’s foot down and now it looks like the charges are going to be pressed and the evidence is overwhelming. I think specifically the jail time that he could be facing is up to 10 years in jail. But in every likelihood, it’s going to be less than that. But even one day in jail means that he’ll have just not be the prime minister anymore.
And so that’s probably what we’re facing. And they’re delaying the charges again and again, and now they’re probably going to delay them until after the elections of March. But once the election doesn’t give Netanyahu a clear majority, then he will have to ask the Knesset for immunity. The Knesset might not give it to him because he might not have enough of a majority. In that case is his political career is pretty much over.
MARC STEINER: Make this connection for us. I mean there’s a huge difference between the Israel right wing moves and what’s happening in the countries we talked about in the last second for a moment, in Brazil and Eastern Europe, in Hungary and in Modi and India, there’s a difference. I mean Israel also has an occupying force. There’s other things going on there as well. What’s the connection for you with Netanyahu in this world? One of the things you said in the past is that Netanyahu is almost like a pioneer in terms of moving this worldwide populous movement right wing movement ahead. Talk a bit about that.
SHIR HEVER: Netanyahu became a pioneer by selling an asset that maybe a lot of Israelis didn’t quite realize that they have, which is that the state of Israel can pretend to be the representative of the Jewish people around the world. And when Netanyahu goes around the world he doesn’t present himself just as the prime minister of Israel. He says, “I’m the leader of the Jewish people.” Even though the Jewish people never elected him and never wanted him to be their leader, that doesn’t matter.
For world leaders from the far right part of the political spectrum, that’s wonderful because then they can make deals with Netanyahu and say, “We’re going to say that we’re pro Israel. We’re going to oppose the BDS movement. We’re going to support you in the UN or in the European union, and so on. And in exchange you’re going to do a little photo opportunity with us, come and visit us and legitimize us even though we are representing parties that have deep roots in antisemitism and racism and so on. But then we’re going to say we’re not really antisemites because we support the state of Israel.”
That’s what we hear constantly from Trump, from [inaudible 00:04:10], from Orban, from Modi, that their support of the state of Israel is cover for the racism that they want to have in their own countries. The difference of course, is that in Israel this racism is legally entrenched on a much, much deeper level than in any other country in the world because you have an official apartheid system with people of different levels of representation that don’t even have the right to vote and that don’t have the right of freedom of movement.
That’s the reason that Netanyahu’s populism in the end can only galvanize at a very certain part of the population. Only the people who are in his ethnic national religious group can actually support him. And because of that, I think there’s also a limit to how much power he can gain through populism while in countries like Hungary, if Viktor Orban is able to galvanize the majority of white Christian Hungarians, well, they are already pretty much the overwhelming majority of the country. And then we’re looking at the beginning of old fascism, which in Israel we don’t see.
That also explains in some ways what we saw here in the United States a few weeks ago when Trump was talking to the American Israeli committee which is made up of mostly Israelis who now live in the United States, where when despite his antisemitic tirade, he was cheered and they were chanting 12 more years for Trump. I mean those connections are really becoming exposed. I think what you’re describing describes why that happened here in this country when he was talking to that group, when Trump was talking to that group.
Well, the people who cheered don’t really represent American Jews.
MARC STEINER: No, they do not. They do not.
SHIR HEVER: They do not. The thing is that a lot of Israeli journalists and a lot of American journalists like Peter Beinart are saying Netanyahu’s policy’s ruining the ties between the state of Israel in Jewish communities around the world, especially in the United States. He has humiliated them, abused them, and they no longer support the state of Israel because of what Netanyahu did. Netanyahu’s response to this is who cares? I don’t care about Jewish communities around the world. I care about governments like [inaudible 00:06:28] scenario or Donald Trump that can support me, and even if it means alienating all the world’s Jews.
MARC STEINER: One last final question here. The annex, both major parties in Israel, the blue and white pentagons and that the [foreign language 00:06:42] all support the annexation of the Jordan Valley. If that actually happens, if Israel actually officially annexes the Jordan Valley, the most kind of fertile region in the entire of Israel Palestine, this could cause a huge reaction internationally as well as internally in Israel. So again, go to your crystal ball. What would happen? What do you think is going to happen when this happens, because I think it is going to happen?
SHIR HEVER: The international criminal court of justice in the Hague actually held a discussion specifically about this question. They said that this would actually warrant the pressing charges against senior Israeli officials in the military and also in civilian institutions for the war crime of illegally annexing occupied territory. That’s the consequence. And as a result of that, the state attorney office of Israel has issued a warning to Netanyahu, don’t fulfill your campaign promise and don’t annex that territory because we as lawyers working for the government may not be able to travel to Europe anymore. We could be arrested.
I think that’s where we talk about the consequences. But we have to say that on the ground that Jordan Valley has already been annexed. That’s the reality. It used to be a place where a quarter of a million Palestinians lived until 1967 producing food for the whole region. And today there are about 50,000 Palestinians living there, 53 years later, after a very slow but methodical ethnic cleansing.
There are only about 9,000 Israeli colonists in that area, but they have taken over virtually all the water, the best fertile land, access to the Jordan river, and they get government subsidies and they produce agricultural products that are then labeled falsely as if they were made in Israel and exported into other countries around the world. This is also actually something that is causing a lot of controversy and the European union decided that they are not going to allow that anymore. But how are they going to enforce it when the companies are lying, the Israeli government is lying?
The Jordan Valley is already under very heavy boot of the Israeli military and officially annexing it, isn’t going to change very much except to signal the fact that all of this talk about two states solution is something that the Israeli government is not even paying lip service to anymore and that is an important step.
MARC STEINER: Another day we’ll talk about that. I think the two state may be dead on arrival at this moment. But we’ll explore that in another day. I think they’re looking again in a deeper way at the Jordan Valley would be a story that needs to be told because it’s emblematic of the entire occupation. It’s at the heart of it.
So Shir, thank you so much for joining us here and giving us a review of what’s been happening over the last year, what may be happening in the future.
SHIR HEVER: Thank you, Marc .
MARC STEINER: Have a happy New Year and we’ll talk to you soon.
SHIR HEVER: Thank you, Marc .
MARC STEINER: We’ll talk to you soon. And a happy New Year to everyone out there. I hope you’re enjoying your holiday season. And I’m Marc Steiner here for The Real News network. Take care. Have a great year.
Studio: Will Arenas, Bababtunde Ogunfolaju
Related
Republish This Story Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.