Author Event: Noura Erakat



my name is Marco Manila I am the owner and minister of music for uncle bodies I am excited to welcome all of you here for another in a very what is becoming a long and really exciting set of author talks here uncle Bobby's we decided when we open that we want to not just sell coffee and books but really create a space for community engagement community education and does not let the universities have all good ideas of all the good minds and all the great books so while they are occupying the gentrifying our neighborhoods we're trying to take a little Big Bang and bring some of these brilliant minds into our neighborhoods and into our space this is the people sanctuary so that we can have great conversations and I've been waiting for this book for a very long time Lord I had a kind of a great friend and a brilliant colleague and scholar and she told me that she was going to write a book but was publishing a book it was coming out she sent me a copy of it and I read it right away and I got super geeked about what I've read and then when it came out I read it again and both times I was certain that you wrote something that was special something that was a major intervention in legal studies and at least studies palestine studies its etc but I also saw how much is yourself you put in this text and your work as an attorney you work as an activist or as a scholar your work is that wonderfully the biggest all in this text in I hope you are as proud of it as we are of you and that's why say thank you for writing me and thank you for sharing some time here no more bodies can people get caught justice for some law in the question of Palestine so let's get started people waiting to hear you not me let me ask you actually enjoying that cuz he read the books my closing minutes back that's true I didn't say much I was like oh we don't get to more light of your awesomeness throughout the night I guess the first question though that I asked office when they come here is this is why this book and why is my this moment sure that's a great question so I'll be honest I am in the Academy there's a lot of as Marcus discussing there's a lot of expectations in the Academy about what knowledge production looks like so for those of us who are researchers and in his study for the you know emancipatory purposes suddenly here place that wants to discipline you and tells you your value based on a completely different set of standards and freedom is not one of them right and nothing to do that and so this might not have been the first book I wrote and I'd not been in that setting I actually was much more interested check with the other book there's a lot in my head so it's small but there's a lot going on and I keep characters all the time but there was a book that I was really interested in about the relationship between southern colonialism EXCI blackness and women anyway women are doing in different sites in order to protect their lands and their people I couldn't write that either the first project this project however has also been with me it is it is born out of my food out of my resistance work it is born out of I think what a lot of people in this room are doing which is struggling in attention I was organized early students for justice in Palestine when we launched divestment in 2000 before or 2001 excuse me before PAC be launched it in 2005 as a global movement and I was so frustrated by all the work that we were doing and what it was not building that I had this crazy idea and I said oh I got it if I go to law school then it will just use the law and it just convinced them what be legal and what's wrong and of course you know being that 20 something-year-old first and I was arrogant enough to before I knew it I was gonna do the baby so that's not what happened I'm in law school my first realization is that it's a place where people get rich really fast and it's been annoying me just you catapult socioeconomically so am i doing a minute now looking around like this is where the circuit marshals here that's what this is supposed to look like but more importantly I gradually impossible and I couldn't work for the u.s. campaign then call to any Israeli occupation now the u.s. campaign for Palestine rang and I go to see BDS campaigns in an active nationally but also to sue Israeli officials I was like this is what this is the whole purpose I want to sue these guys in US Court and within the first year we got our opportunity Moshe Ya'alon who was responsible for the bombing of a UN compound in south Lebanon in 1996 as well as all exist sir who was responsible for the raising of 5,000 homes in Gaza in 2005 we're both in the United States at the same time and I was part of the team that served them and we had we filed lawsuits to the Southern District of New York and to the DC district court and the ideas that we were born in his being claims against them pursue under the Alien Tort Statute also known as the air the Alien Tort Claims Act and maybe not let me just tell you this was it this was wired to law school this is what we were gonna do was my lungs indicate all the haze that said this was crazy and in less than a year both federal courts dismissed the case our just to see which means that they dismissed it on on questions of either it's a political question or it's a foreign Sovereign Immunities act but claims that prevent the court from even looking at the merits we never even got considered they even asked the question right they still might immediately as an attorney my next project was okay well I'm going to start researching other jurisdictions where the court will be more favorable obviously the Southern District of New York and DC suck and they're just really conservative truly this works very differently if we go to different jurisdictions and that in that research is of course of doing that research I was like hold up they sued Chinese officials Guatemalan officials officials from Blackburn of Guinea these sued Filipino officials these two Serbian officials they sued anybody on Jacobs these prophetic warning officials went to the Deepika who brought this case on behalf of his son just died two days ago that hike opens up the possibility of doing this in u.s. federal courts and I think this isn't about not just the ability we dismiss these cases because it was Palestinians suing history and so whatever with that strategic litigation research engine of being was becoming my first academic article as I I deleted those variants and I was able to demonstrate bias and that becomes my first academic article and that's a long way of saying that it was a series experience like that as an attorney kind of leading me to these dead enemies where we couldn't overcome the political realities that's meant to deceiving Mike a question in my head what is the relationship between international law and politics and what does it tell us about the struggle for freedom for Palestinians and that seed that has been born out of those many experiences culminated in this book my office isn't it brilliant I was talking about she just heated up they are actually two thirty this is you know the work of freedom the question of lucky talk a little bit more about the question well one of the things do the intro it's about homes but the insurance today as you begin to problematize for us what the law is you start to talk about that with your law school trying this idea that we accepted to prove that this is illegal back can you go underneath that analysis and talk a little bit about what the law is and what international law is because one of the points you raised in the second chapter is is also this point about sort of how along functions who has a power to enforce it and what does it need for a global someone in the global north or so on the global south yet to be in contravention of Internet so talk a little bit about what the international law is what its oranges are yeah and in what it means to even have that as a as the centerpiece of your struggle okay green so the diffusion is in there let me try to break that down first by starting by the enjoy definition of what international law in international law by definition is a theory explicit rules extinct treaties that I've been drawn up like was it consent with the consent of the parties as well as tactical things that are unwritten one is customary law those bodies together then regulate the behavior speaks with one another and the way that they treat people within their jurisdiction okay international law and its primary a state based framework keep individuals and the idea of human rights begins to crystallize in the aftermath of the Second World War and particularly the Jewish Holocaust in men men makes me clear that see these claims are not going to be sufficient in order to protect individuals and so that you have you know now individuals are now recognizing rights bearing agents in the aftermath of the Second World War and those rights are continuing to crystallize that's the overall okay the definition now this defeats there are different schools of thought about what the international law is the positivist will tell you that the law is what it says and that you need to interpret it and apply and it's a matter of you know we just need to adopt early the language attracting history and that's how you apply it the other extreme are the what I would call the apologists for power or the realists who say international law is a fiction it is a fiction there is no way to enforce it it is just used as a tool for the strong to legend the weak to achieve their political objectives under the veneer of some of the galinha okay you give an example that it's a suit absolutely don't worry careful when the US tells us that they're going to invade Afghanistan in order to protect women's humans right I mean that's our lady one right they just want to be completely going to destroy the infrastructure decimate generation contaminate the water and the land but they're going to see if you women any queer folks because of the bombs as they come down in just a week this way right there's a lot to be said about the sentences on the law and I share it obviously very different but I think that'd take you for granted in one of the nuances that I found in my own research is that but that's not true because the law is actually doing work on behalf of progressive causes as well and you see them we've seen how it ended into jury you know second Beach as a legal matter here in the United States we've seen how it led to you know women's suffrage here in the United States we've seen how its treated you know human rights you know apartheid is what criminalizes racial domination and differentiation in order to see legitimize apartheid in South Africa so the law does that too so you can't be a realist and you take for granted that it's doing this work so one of the things that I find and by the way this is all a learning journey for me what where this book started and where it ended was not like I can't like none of the planet would you talk about that meteorite injury okay but it suffice to say this that the way that I can make sense of it is to understand that the law is politics the law is politics and in order for it to be used on any other kind of progressive cognitive it must be using a sophisticated service of a political movement meaning that I think like a movement lawyer there's not lawyers welcome to his face and they say well this is what the law says this is what your strategy should be this is what the law says so this is what your horizon for freedom should be could be some equality out there right then the movement lawyers will come into the room and sit with the activist and they're like what do you want what are your expense okay now let's figure out what parts of the law support the project you want to accomplish and they will cater and shape the law in order to serve that progressive cause but it has to be led by the political movement so the analogy that I believe is that think of the law like a sale it is you need it to move but it can't the wind and the wind is the political movement so put it at the tail when the politics are you on your way to rob the sale when the politics are not impeding your favor and create a new sale when they're not possible just you know in order to get to where you need to go so how do we come in is that actually what I'm asking how if at some point we say the law is what we make it correct then the same push that comes from a fight for Palestinian rights can come from the political opposition who can also appeal to international here so then at what point does the person who's trying to get into the fight say screwing with the laws there's no point we can we can't we can't have any favor trust in the law itself I struggled with this very question I still struggle with it I still struggle with it because the other thing about the origins of the law but those are interested international law basically begins in order to regulate the relationship between colonial powers at sea how are they gonna navigate the Seas would you want to nobody yet right so this is how geographers are also thinking for sovereignty more and so this begins as a way to regulate colonial colonial you know holding it then also begins in America it begins as a way to justify the massacre of natives into a civilizational Franklin they're just not there it's not that it's not that they're not civilized so the law recognizes them as human and recognize that you cannot believe in Christ and God and still you know deserve to live but they still don't understand this law so they're going to use it allegedly to justify their massacre so you know you've got to grapple with that like this whole thing is active right but in lie and whites will do it because it's inescapable because it's inescapable it's like any other political reality that regulates our life like an economy like the disparity in military might like the political status quo like unless everybody unless there is a revolution and everybody isn't honest then I'm not the one to tell people don't use the law that's part of the problem we are the problem everything that we do is a living contradiction why would I leave people to that dead-end but use it cynically use it wisely use it with a lot of faith in like foresight taking it to a couple of moments in the struggle for Palestinian freedom I wanted to get a couple of moments where I think in a book you talk about the way the law is used I used seven to critical moments the first moment is is 19 the start of 1916 the summer six games but looks like to be going home tonight's election 16 is the sykes-picot agreement Nexus 7 is about four declaration when the Balfour Declaration is but the nicest like the Balfour Declaration comes a moment right where the the assumption of a Jewish homeland the very strong declaration 667 words right but it becomes a very big legal document of sorts right as a way of establishing or asserting the right teachers come in at to a state but if your homeland yes national home thank you that's the actual international prospect actually yeah so from there to 1922 will you talk about the Paris it will compact right that moment is a really interesting mix that you get in the book about the way that the law is invoked at times when it's to the benefit of the project and at moments with the international community saying hey wait a minute – thinking work slow down there's a very different response talk about that moment why it's important to help us understand is that the only narration cannot break down your question into a question you sure see this way what about you know the way that you narrate the story as one as you know a bulldozer and that was pre that basically said how to erase Palestinians remove them from the Getty with a conspiracy to begin with which is not true this was this was message this was half hazard so much of it as a colonial blunder and alack it was a British mystique that they didn't anticipate so I'm asked what in 1922 in the conflicts are and it complicates this idea that this was always going to happen it wasn't and the other one is about the colonial Eurasians which is a piece that then carrying us out the entire book this seminal moment at 1917 so let me start with that okay this will be a theme you are familiar with a Zionist myth that says Israel the Jews didn't take the land away from Palestinians it was a land for people for people without land that has 1969 coal from the Volta Magana yes it's really denied Minister okay and most of us that hear it you know the first thing that we understand there's this mythology that Palestinians weren't there but that's not it that is actually what goes back to this 1917 moment peoplehood is in international law doesn't refer to the people in this room it refers to a political community and a political community unlike a population has the right to self-determination or to self-governance okay in 1917 this is the aftermath of the First World War the British and the French are basically Victor's over the audience and the German and they have not distinguished empires and specifically the Ottoman Empire in the Middle East and there they have purposed all of these Arabs in what was formerly under you know an Imperial control Turkish history of control or Ottoman control they have promised them self-governance in Iran in Syria and Transjordan in Lebanon in Egypt they never intend on giving them that self control these people have to fight for they're also part of the fight Palestine it seems because there the British are interested in Palestine because this is going to be a significant Mediterranean port they want to build a pipeline of paper to Mosul do they want to be able to be know that they're at their time in Egypt in their presence in Egypt is short-lived so that they're going to have to leave they need a foothold in the Middle East accordance remain present so there are all these colonial calculations with what Palestine is right and at the same time they have also made a promise to European Jews the people establish of America a cultural mecca for Jews to have a connection and that is the Balfour Declaration when the colonial British colonial secretary writes a letter to Lord Rothschild and basically said that you can have health as a place to have a home but they didn't say you can have a Jewish see they never said you can have a degree C they don't want to statice they don't have a singie status B do you want this to remain under some sort of equivalent control so it leaves you remain present in the Middle East all right and that they can continue to be pregnant why is this related to the erasure of Palestinians in order for them to build that national home in a place where the Arab population identifies as the political community and wants to govern themselves they have to deny that that population is a political community they have to say your veterans you're like under era and they say that right but they also say that this is holy land and it is significant to all of the all religions all the monotheistic faiths so it can't be under any single people's governance so it has to be under no control and instead what they do is they recognize the Arabs they're about a million of them Palestinian they recognize that they have civil and in any religious writings but no political rights and that's what they write in the Balfour Declaration is that you will establish a Jewish National home so long as it doesn't prejudice just writing the current and habit that's just crazy therefore the current habits that they're the minority today and it just woman 1917 is how many how many how many Jews within 100 that way you won't get 200,000 right so it's interesting in there 90 which is my name it's like you don't don't hurt the public people who are they always really like extraordinary majority and and that's very explicit everybody knows but they're there and in fact this is so this is when it not been so far up until nineteen nineteen seventeen so makes nineteen this is all British policies this is what the British they'li convince the rest of the colonial powers an imperial Helena is just eat their policy that happens the drafting that the Paris Peace Conference that begins a nineteen main team to basically divide up the English territories between negative 18 inmates in 22 that basically culminates in the mandate system where the Palestine mandate is recognized what does that mean all of the vanquished empires are placed under the mandate system which is overseen by the League of Nations they are entire America and civilizational framework a D&C a being the Ottoman territories that are their independence is provisionally recognized being see were African territories that we never said to be self-governing so already this is internal racialization that has created Arabs superior to their African counterparts so there are these civilizational frameworks that play in 1922 passed by mandated adopted and the Balfour Declaration verbatim into the text as the pre angular test and how to cover this territory right puffins are written out they're not even recognize everything habits they're not even recognized as the natives because the Zionists were at lava these power insists that they not use the word indigenous for needed because the Jewish people want to clean indigeneity so they recommend if there's people there be scattering people but they don't recognize there are eight people in the sense of international law and when you know it make it during the course of the debate I think it was Balfour who says again the Zionism right is political aspirations and establish a national home beat it rightly wrong is far more important and noble than the width the current whims of some 19 2001 2000 Arabs they know how many there are director extremes from me the British are calculating everything right and yet this marks the first colonial Eurasian path Williams no longer exists how Palestinian because one of the grandest horses ticket to the fact is that there was no people in my air mixes argument 69 there was no Palestinian state and no Palestinian people and so you know where you're talking to her you're talking greater Syria you're talking you know so the argument is not just things didn't exist is that if they did exist it was kind of homogeneous primero so don't necessarily to be here go to George we're gonna Transjordan you go to so now we're getting into the story of like a really significant story that informs our present which is the fact that right now organizers say ourselves within political communities within state-based frameworks but that this wasn't an ability our present is a reflection of a European model that we have any elated and tried to recreate what France Panola tells us in 62 you know if all we want is the feet you might as well let your abstain right it's their project and they're gonna do it far better than we can have her you know are there will be a botched up version of what America the ugliness that they're creating it was right we do this pretty this is pretty ugly what we've done but so what is but I've got current some when people say but there was never a Palestine we don't need to deny that to say that there isn't there wasn't the errors wanted to govern themselves as part of a greater Arab people that was connected to Syria that was connected to Lebanon that was connected to Jordan where we wanted a different model of self-governance that is what we thought forward and that was part of the great the constitutional experiment that the Syrians led where they are trying to prove their eligibility for self-rule they actually create by I forget the exact date right now but they actually create a constitution they have member and elected members of Congress the French then invade Syria and destroy it and inmates alone in one day and so it was in this context that nationalism as a nation-state model begins to crystal I not just for the Palestinians but for all everybody else so to the extent that anyone's gonna say what Palestinians never existed because they didn't identify as Palestinians in 1915 nobody else did this either wreck would be right but there's still one palace there was an emergent actually meaning marriage policy the newspaper it's created 19 different as part of you know on a minute what it like there is this land but the attachment is to leave the attachments a local attach it to the city its debris or Jerusalem it's agreed our guidelines you know it's a good guy it's like there's an attachment to the land but the framework the nationalist framework that we are kind of singing is what crystallizes but it crystallizes for everyone right it's nothing particularly to them let's start let's give it a little bit to resistance in the relationship between international law and resistance okay I want to talk about it during the mandatory period and I want to talk about it now because of the book you people you talked me tickets to the you take us to all the kind of rebellions I really did you today just through the rebellion thanks in 29:21 that's a 29 degree football 36:39 you take us through all these periods an angel of the emergent white paper that comes in 1938 for the from April of 36 to October of 36 there's this general strike in Palestine and then from there you begin to see other forms of result of resistance until 1939 then this white paper comes up which becomes the next major piece of legislation after the Balfour Declaration we just say wait you need to hold up there's one before that yet the last major when it's a one-man prompted some of the sort of big World War two challenges you're right thank you you present this and then you talk about how the the British is particularly as well as the science respond to be to Arab resistance right because Mapuche paint it as a kind of moment of triumph right they resisted you could get just white paper of 1939 as we need the whole column of reason we need to reimagine slant transfer thing we need to think about partition you know the old commission comes out and makes is different for comes up in it that next year 37 so the report right so but then it didn't work out the way we expected to now could you be justice both sexes and now where we think about Palestinian resistance and what international law says about it is there a consistent thread about how colonial power and in state power broadly responds to Palestinian this with regard to the law change so your vote you need to say something that is really central which is the fact that this book is about Palestinian freedom struggle okay but there is no reason anybody wants to come out and say gee fight like damn straight there is a significant disparity power the Zionist movement was alive first with British Empire it is now like US Empire it has been a significant military power there's no reason that this is a conflict between two parties we need to break bread and get along okay this is a policy of freedom struggle and one of the things that I emphasize and try to do it to highlight our resistance we have been fighting forever forever today 66 week today of avid value marches return in Gaza 66 feet of Palestinians who are living in the most dire situation right when you're siege since 2006 under systematic war we know three major Wars but there's been 22 between 2004 and 2014 of aerial bombardment of living a humanitarian crisis and people keep wanting to talk about where is your garden right they've been you know what or last year last year during the embassy move from US Embassy were from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem bunch of people wanted to have all the Palestinians are just not trying because now there are protesting no that you haven't been paying attention they can protesting for a hundred years that's what we've been doing even fighting and struggle for freedom and that's one of the things I wanted to this up so I actually be given my first chapter in the revolt because we know oftentimes we think of the First Intifada in 1987 which means uprising in Arabic and then the second 50 falta in 2001 when Ariel Sharon walks onto the Temple Mount but the First Intifada is actually in 1936 during this great rebels so what Palestinians get it done they are now do not their people under international law and everything they do they're brilliant everything they do to use legal arguments over to overcome their erasure are basically overcome with what I call the sovereign exception right so if they say to the British look you're the Palestine mandate is null and void because if you look at the League of Nations Charter it says and if you make a commitment it is in contravention to the local will of the people then the will of the people overcome that commitment so the Balfour Declaration is null and void and the British basically say yes but now that we've made this commitment this momentum it needs to override there's a special purpose and then this is shorthand for telling you they refer to the palace by campaign as exceptional they refer to it something known in law as sweet generous which means unlike anything else so he generates and law refers to something that has no legal precedent that you can apply or analogy that you can prepare it to it is of its own and it is what powers use with a phase of sweet generous situation you basically my argument right at Camino Mike theoretical contribution is that this is what allows these powers to create a new law in order to fulfill their colonial ambitions and they call them and a sweet generous and Israel continues now calls the occupied territories sweet generous and they called Gaza so he generates this argument is contemporary and it's one that you know it's the threat all predicated on this colonial region so Palestinians can't overcome this legal argument and finally finally and invite weight within Palestinian society there's there's an Arab form of governance and then there's the grassroots in the Arab you know the Arab elite want to continue to play game with the colonial powers according to prove there's of themselves eligible for self-governance this should sound familiar to the credit and it's the grassroots and young people the young men named after wake up who's a journalist who is like they stopped doing this they need to be as resistant as Gandhi is for I know people pratik advantage under the same in so far as you can see clone y'all they were trawling online and so they launched a boycott the boycott and a boycott of the British that because at times boycott but then it becomes and all-out armed reports and it is so successful it is so successful that they take over Jerusalem for eight hours from British Empire which now has to deploy 25,000 troops in East Palestine in order to suppress the revolt and the uprising and fight and then they're also recruiting Jewish militia to support them which is how also to resign this are being trained in British colonial powers and significantly in this is really significant they apply something that they can apply throughout their empire in malai and Jamaica and India which is known as emergency powers to basically say that they must suspend civilian law and applied martial law I'm gonna tell you why that's super significant in in three seconds more MORE but let me see they're using that they apply an unprecedent amount of force twenty-five thousand British servicemen squash the rebellion end up like an exile imprisoning or murdering ten percent of the Palestinian male population by 1939 so by 1948 path unions don't have the capacity to resist and overcome Zionists militias which is part of the story what about the submergence laws significant and I'm gonna get back to answers the white paper I know I'm long-winded but the emergency lost significant because of Israel's first act of government they actually adopt the entirety emergency laws and they apply it just the Palestinians who remain who didn't flee an amend in 67 they apply it to the territories and in today's still applies this colonial reality is our present for you talking about the present in terms of this question about the white people in my argument in the Palestinians were not able to change the reality on the ground until they took up arms and until they changed the situation the political balance of power the military balance of power the peel report basically suggested partitioning Palestine into his era and a Jewish state in Palestine when I – I split the baby we're still the majority why would you do this and the revolt is in response to the peeled report and the white paper that comes in 39 says okay we were wrong no partition no unfettered Jewish immigration we're going to cast that we're gonna cap plant cells to Jewish immigrants and said we're gonna let you come to a referendum and decide on half of the Palestinian see and then World War two happens and in the aftermath of World War two the entirety of the question of Palestine is transformed into the question of Jewish refugees which then should sec situation that's just yeah 200 horses and then I want to help in Lebanon come back to you a little bit and I want you to really listen she'll open up yep whatever it is she's got we do we should so occupation I think it's a key point again it cuts through but also I think it's many people here even if they don't understand the nuance that you understand this idea of occupation from a legal framework how can we make sense of the occupation I'm convincing it's all occupations but I mean specific evaluation of the West Bank and Gaza from from the 1967 war until now she is literally the biggest variant of a man right now she gets excited over footnotes really weird so talk to me about this idea of occupation and again maybe even the Selective invocation of the law both my colonial power and others-image offensive notes though one of them Maria see you know how hard it is story about Palestine after hundred years you know how many people are bringing about this you don't how many people think they're expert continent and to all of a sudden come up and be like I'm going to the Bahamas I'm like what else are you gonna say on the thing everybody thinks they know and I've written about that's like been done possibly what made it interesting for me most of what's been written about this certain certain that all of the Academy but certainly in the legal Academy has been written from an Israeli perspective all of all of our knowledge production you know I don't think about what knowledge is power that's not like the video that's real if you can write damn history something else would you who you aren't here not and what you can become so the pay for me about footnotes professor that part of my work was to unearth the Palestinian archive which didn't exist which happening and I mean obvious I'm not the only wanted to do this and I learned this from dr. Shipman thankfully who was I in her book event of capital starts the book by seeing me to write a history of Palestine outside the shadows I'm only but that means we have to know or our people and frankly there isn't a lot so a lot of my work had to be to go to the region and chief living people down and document their stories and put down the oral histories and say this is my source and I recorded it during their life that's what these books outside and so I [Applause] you know how important salsa to it say you know there is a felony and archives still to be on earth and I come just part part of this filmmakers artists are all part of that creating new archives movements like that archive we've created a new archive of delegation anyway but the occupation occupation occupation so okay I don't know how much folks know I don't coming but on the cover of the book you get the book you should there are many different lines they're not the 1967 lines they're also the 1947 lines the proposed partition right there are many lots that are ready what we have come to know in the question of Palestine at the present is what the 1967 lines told us which is what Israel didn't all violent forty-eight of observe jurisdiction over and when they come talk like an aftermath of 1967 war which is not just the West Bank in Gaza but the Golan Heights and the Sinai Peninsula of Egypt's okay Israel wanted the territories that was there in addition when the big guy in the aftermath of the 1948 war was more than one partitioning them in 47 and what UN resolution 181 Asia which was only 55 percent of the land thinking to acquire 78% but they wanted all of it and even more than this right and in 1967 and of course succeed they come to they become an empire they become an empire all its holdings and the way that is negotiated immediately with you and the Security Council is that you must give these lands back to their rightful owners and so there's an entire to be at the Security Council between June and November 1967 about how these lands back and the energy from the third world is saying give it all back without preconditions you can't steal something and then tell people that you know what so all of our history in the history of conflicts that begins to come in to illegal and illegitimate and nation states are now you know and sovereignty is acquiring for me and my 1945 and the UN Charter is being drawn says the first two articles of the UN Charter have basically made the territorial acquisition by forests absolutely illegal you can't take territory and you can't confine the information technically okay in 1960 national liberation movements the world over successfully passed the UN declaration that basically declared colonialism as an illegitimate system of governments and justifies the use of force in order to open it okay in 1962 Algeria and and French settler colonialism and it moves the French and a new life into this anti-colonial movement when Israel says now that wants to take these territories by org they there was absolutely no global context where they can get away that was just not the global context so they can't take the land so that is the negotiations are over even their primary allies the US and the British say you can not take the land but the defeat between the u.s. British and the rest of the world all right this is what it it the US wants this relates to be able to retain the land as barter they'll keep it and they'll give it back when the other can't win in Syria Egypt and Jordan I'm determined to permanent peace with Israel that would negotiate the other option one is you started with 67 or more the gym is legitimately not a self defense tactic in the back and then ago she but I'll you know how the contents those negotiations this who I feel is alone the final text of the Security Council resolution 242 basically recognizes the US market okay these really is prevail but these really think it's not enough they have no intention of giving it back even if there's permanent peace there's no intention of giving it back so then here's my occupational I figure out about this because so much is what we try to there's no confusion this is occupation law Israel has to lead but Israel has created a sweet generous generic framework that basically says one the Palestinians are not a people so there is no rightful sovereign to give the land back to their spouse rules don't exist so we don't have to give it back occupation doesn't apply the matter of law an appreciative the Security Council resolution the final text of it doesn't include a definite article preceding occupied territories it says this bill must withdraw from occupied territories and Israel throws his hands up and says you didn't say which one is that now there I like the Empire after the 67 war that u.s. really realizes which is high and it's Vietnam you know war it realizes you know they had an a filming policy to pivot to basically place the Arabs against Israel to maintain a peace without peace right I'm not peaceful that is full but when they realize that Israel can do this work on its own as a military power they realize this is this cold war accent and the US now established new policy of inaugurating Israel's qualitative military edge which is providing military aid to his village the Johnson administration and enough military a weapons support logistic intelligence to be able to defeat singularly in an Arab country or collectively all of them if they decide to attack so those three pieces together are precisely why Israel now actually is able to speak the lyrics incrementally because of occupational not despite without this framework they would have had to leave that's great I have one question I wanted to go to the audience let me just say something really quick which is so if you notice the footnotes in this book are extraordinary and they're rich in it deep and they take it into the nuances of the argument but also what you want to know that this book is extraordinarily well written and it's well now reading and each chapter gives you a big rich account of these historical moments so if you're entering the conversation about Palestine right now you don't feel like you're going to get lost because she walks you through these steps you walk you through the Balfour Declaration she walks you through the the 1967 war she walks you through all of these moments with rich historical context you're like a classic historian too and then she gets into some of the leads in the nerdiness of policy and law and so I think this book has a lot of context a lot of richness for everybody looking for them it's really a special world and you have a rare gift of being able to eat those two things together in ways that make this text takes both academic but also accessible to a broader public a new zero gift you have questions from the audience but anywhere can talk about its importance something that all supposedly part is these surgeries you're not just a Palestinian assistant but we have speak you is how it was about coalitional collaborative resistance of oppressed peoples all over the world that she's right the legal possibilities that certainly forced their services also as it's why I love to hear from your perspective from your analysis what burr flashpoints from the global south we can you know will be much accessory last week of the Google style that also changed or affected the legal framework and house yeah that's a good question things in a great question can I also say that so much of what I write yes it's about Palestine but it's really about the world and about other people's so this colonial erasure that I'm describing to you is not unique to pass it's actually the story of every indigenous people everywhere they have all been erased in the same way that denies their political community and we've done that in a series of Supreme Court decisions in the United States and it's all done in the language of law so this is the this is an international story this is a global story but the question is about flashpoints what what are the flash points from the global South the most significant ones are as a history as our Revolutionary period and it is a revolutionary period where in