tv Inside Story 2017 Ep 355 Al Jazeera December 22, 2017 8:32pm-9:01pm +03
ousted catalan president. for the two of them to meet following thursday's election in the region but he's left the door open to possible future discussions. russia iran and turkey have announced deals covering prisoner exchanges on team mining in syria after talks in concert russia and iran bought me syrian government where while turkey supports some major rebel groups have agreed to meet again in the russian city of sochi on the twenty ninth perris president of an impingement vote in congress over corruption allegations pedro pablo kaczynski is accused of receiving illegal payments from the brazilian construction giant bresh a company that's been at the center of a massive barbarous scandal across latin america u.s. president donald trump has signed his government's tax reform bill into law the one point five trillion dollar bill was approved by congress on wednesday making it the
biggest overhaul of the u.s. tax system in thirty years is charles first major legislative victory of his first year in office and phone with chief strategist steve bannon has been asked to testify at a congressional investigation into russian meddling in last year's election about the full news hour in just over twenty five minutes now inside story. every view for washington from both allies and adversaries with the un's vote on jerusalem and the us president but in nations who didn't support him over his well the vast majority didn't so what if that will this have on diplomacy in the middle
east and beyond this is inside story. hello and welcome to the program. it was a stinging rebuke one hundred twenty eight countries voting against the united states only eight standing with it the subject was present trends recognition of jerusalem as israel's capital both from the u.s. ambassador to the u.n. nikki haley issue threats ahead of thursday's vote presenting it as a lawyer to test for america's allies and those countries receiving u.s. eight will begin with mike hanna of the u.n. and the two thirds majority is comfortably reach this vote to a sweeping repudiation of president trumps unilateral action in recognizing
jerusalem as the capital of israel the result heralded by the apparent isolation of the u.s. delegation in the chamber and the enthusiastic welcome given to the palestinians. whose foreign minister addressed the assembly and insisted that jerusalem would be the capital of a palestinian state mr merrill young we meet today not because of any animosity towards the us but because of its decision which constitutes an aggression on the genuine and natural rights of the palestinian people to the city of jerusalem the israeli ambassador holding up a two thousand year old coin as evidence of israel's claim to the city. it proves the ancient connection of the jews to jerusalem and togo one dearest sent guatemala to join the six nations that had voted against a similar resolution affirming jerusalem status last month has been completed and the number of abstentions increased from nine to thirty five the special ops the
result of the threats made by the us to retaliate financially against those who voted in favor this is bullying and this jumble will not go to the uk it is unethical who think that this works and dignity off member states are for sale let me put it in these three we will not be intimidated you can be strong but if this doesn't make you right dismissive u.s. reaction during the turkish foreign minister speech. and the ambassador once again adopted a threatening tone in her response the united states will remember the stay in which it was singled out for attack in the general assembly for the very act of exercising our right as a sovereign nation. we will remember it when we are called upon to once again make the world's largest contribution to the united nations where there are questions now about the future of u.s.
led attempts to renew negotiations particularly as the palestinian leadership insists it will not talk to u.s. representatives in the light of president trump's decision the u.s. ambassador claimed the vote could determine the way in which u.s. citizens view the united nations in reality though the result reflects a global condemnation of president trump his strategy and his policies mike hanna united nations. the reaction to the vote was swift and it highlights how the issue became not just jerusalem but america's well in the world in a statement turkey's president said the world is bigger than five and much bigger than one a reference to the u.s. veto of a similar resolution earlier this week in the security council palestine's ambassador to the u.n. summed up events saying the administration made the issue about them not about
israel they used unprecedented tactics including blackmail and extortion they in my opinion of fended the entire international community. let's bring in our panel from washington d.c. robert hunter former u.s. ambassador to nato in black been in the u.k. simon election in international relations and government at lancaster university also in washington d.c. phyllis bennis the director of the new internationalism project of the institute for policy studies welcome to you all my first question to mr hunter i would like to ask you this was it worth to take the fight to the united nations when everyone knew that this is going to end with an embarrassing outcome for the united states of america well apparently the president didn't care nor does mrs faily the u.n. ambassador care they're both appealing to a domestic u.s.
audience which is composed both of. number of leaders of the american jewish community and a number of leaders of the of the christian. evangelical community they don't really care about world opinion in this or in most other things so you have to see it i think almost entirely in u.s. domestic terms misspent is from an purely american perspective i mean i can see the rational here for a president to take a decision based on an attempt to appeal to a domestic base when the outcome could be devastating for the u.s. foreign policy that's been absolutely consistent for this administration the notion i think robert hunter is absolutely right that this was very much and at a u.s. domestic audience the concern is not what happens in the united nations but how to
use the united nations and antagonism to the united nations to whip up support from these right wing constituencies that they are trying to build here in the united states it's a very dangerous game that they're. saying the opposition was not simply opposition to the u.s. move around jerusalem it was a much broader expression of outrage towards united states bullying of the un and un member states the trumpet ministration is not the first in u.s. history to do this kind of bullying some of the language was very reminiscent to similar threats and bribes and punishments that were issued by the bush administrations both both president bush's when they could not get the support they wanted for wars against iraq in one nine hundred ninety and then again in two thousand and three but the difference here was the blatant nature of it the when president trump was willing to say we don't care specifically those were his words we don't care about the impact of cutting aid on these impoverished nations if they
dared to vote against the united states that's a real expression of absolute disdain for the rest of the world and i think there will be retaliation that will go beyond this particular vote speaking of the retaliation is a bit melbourne do you think that trump will be able to move forward and deliver all the threats against the nations the voted against his decision to recognize jerusalem as israel's capital i think you'll probably try to do it i think both he and his ambassador to the united nations have been very explicit in their desire to do so and for them not to follow through would would be seen to be weak to those domestic audiences but i think internationally there has been this show of disdain for member states of the united nations but it also comes across with a real arrogance this sense of the u.s. just doesn't care what happens it's got its own agenda and the real arrogance will have a massive impact on how other states and gauge with it and the types of relations
that that a whole host of other member states who had been engaged in positive relationships with the u.s. but will now i think think carefully as to what type of relations it wants. to serve as a member. so the data we know that trump is not a big fan of global governance is that you should like the united nations all day to do you think that this is. the deep and the tension between trump and the u.n. which has always considered as an efficient social club well there has long been a feeling among a number of americans not the informed americans that somehow the united nations which is located in the united states is not pro america and there is so trump as appealing to that particular view i think one has to also see this in perspective this is not a terribly important vote in terms of america's standing in the world most people here and most people in the world want even pay attention because it's it comes on
top as the other speakers are already said of other things the united states has done under the trumpet ministrations show distain for institution distain for countries that believe in the rule of law distain for people who have long looked up to the united states to use the phrase that so often used here being a shining city on the hell so this is the tip of a very big iceberg and if it happened on its own that to be one thing but this merely confirms in the minds of a lot of people that mr trump just doesn't care miss then is the reason why i ask you this question is basically because post second war world the international order was based on this idea of internet's local place and where all the those institutions with come together like the nature like the un. do you see that trump is trying to challenge this whole international establishment well i think that
there's no question that the trump goal is a very broadly defined america first this notion that only american interests matter and that as he said yesterday we don't care what happens to the rest. the world i do think it's important to recognize that the this post world war two structure that you speak of was not exactly designed for the whole world the vast majority of the worlds population in the global south in africa in latin america in most of asia were not included in the united nations originally nato was not designed to bring in the whole world it was designed to keep the russians out the germans down and the americans in as people used to say so it was very much a cold war product as was the united nations in many ways so i think that we do have to be not naive about how we view the u.n. but certainly this is the administration that despite years of antagonism and domination of the u.n. carried out by the united states and was after all madeline albright clinton's and
massacre to the u.n. who said the famous words the united nations is a tool of american foreign policy so this goes way back but there has never been an administration that took it as far as this that was as a rude and as overt as this no other president said the words we don't care in talking about the rest of the world that's profoundly important in how the rest of the world sees the united states and disability was also interesting to see both from haley saying that we would be watching both so then we would take decisions accordingly we've seen yesterday the reactions from pakistan from turkey from different countries lashing out of the united states of america for what they consider to be very humiliating. threats is this something which is likely to damage us by lots of relations with many countries some of which have very important roles in the world quite possibly yeah i think that what this what this decision this rhetoric has done is really brought relations out of the fore to the
to the fore to the really important point where they can be renegotiated on the basis of trust mistrust calm certain as to what the real. spiration czar amongst the various parties and particularly with regard to some of these really key actors such as to just pakistan they now have heard the president of the united states saying that they don't care about about their issues about international affairs and of course the u.s. has played a long negotiating position within the the so-called peace process many would take issue with this is not really going anywhere not going anywhere quickly but now the u.s. is taking a side on the i'm not too well have a massive impact on u.s. relations with a number of states who have already recognize palestine as a state miss the target hunter i mean would like to move just beyond what happens of the united nations general assembly now if you look at the reactions from countries in latin america europe including beijing u.s.
allies like france and the u.k. the middle east and asia you get this feeling that people are now having questions about the u.s. leadership do you see that this could be a change in the way people perceive of the u.s. influence in the in the in the world well i think that's already been happening over the last a year this to use a metaphor is all of the icing on the cake what i think needs to be done now in the united states is finally finally to get some kind of coherent policy towards the middle east which simply doesn't exist this is only one element of incoherence secondly let's let's recognize in the in the peace process that one of the outcomes that has always been understood is that israel would have its capital in jerusalem but also understood is that there would be a palestinian state with its capital in jerusalem frankly i can see
a virtue for various countries in the world rather than doing what they just did you can jam the united states which we obviously know this was an expression of displeasure going way beyond this this beyond. sure i think there are also be a number of countries are say well jerusalem will also be the capital of a palestinian state and we were recognizing right now one of the interesting things about this if this entire jerusalem issue or left just to the people who live there then figure it out and do it and forget this twenty thirty years ago i have to come up with two capitals and two to two capitals in one city they can work it out but this but this again says very confusing messages on a good note to mr bennett i mean so this is a move that comes at a time when the americans are saying we have been working to was what we consider to be the ultimate deal in palestine the way i see it this is this is going nowhere
it certainly is going nowhere there is no peace process underway and there hasn't been all year there have been some negotiations between jared cushion or and the crown prince of saudi arabia and that little bromance between jarryd and mohamed is mainly focused on building a region wide coalition against iran and the hope has been that they will be able to figure out a way to normalize relations between saudi arabia and israel to bring israel into that coalition in order to do that to pacify arab public opinion and even arab governments that are concerned about the their population being outraged at such a thing as long as israel is occupying palestinian land they needed to show that there were peace talks of some sort under way that the palestinians are ok they're going to be taking care of israel is no longer a problem we can normalize against the big enemy which is iran that has now been made much more difficult by this move around jerusalem which goes again to the internal domestic politics of the trumpet ministration but i think that we have to
see this in the context of twenty five years of failure of us suppose that leadership on this issue that leadership has led to nothing and there now is i think for most analysts who actually looked. conditions on the ground there is no way a two state solution is going to happen and it's not about who wants it it's not up to me to say whether there should be one state or two states wednesday blue state that's not up to me i'm from the united states i don't live there but with israel having now sent six hundred fifty thousand illegal settlers into palestinian territory there is no contiguous territory available to create a state so the notion that there is going to be a state there's going to be two capitals for two states is simply not such a given it's one of many possibilities and it's by far not the most likely right now so i think that we have to go back to international law that says jerusalem is a separate body it's not part of either it's a final
a palace started in this you it is a corpus separate i'm mr moving status issue exactly mr melbourne i mean if you look at the situation right now i mean if there's been this attempt to create a deal a conventional way led by. but you see of the backlash in the abandoned muslim world people now no longer believe the americans are honest brokers there is a new dynamic in the region there is turkey which is seen as spearheading first to save the palestinians isn't this something which is likely to pose massive challenges for the americans in the near future yeah i think so i think that if we look at the peace process this is sort of twenty five years after the oslo accords after the the so-called road map was being put into place to bring about a peace between the israelis and the palestinians this is going nowhere but the main mediator within this within all of the talks within the dialogue is the u.s. and the u.s.
is now taken sides seemingly within the the whole negotiating process so it's going to be incredibly difficult for the u.s. to move forward with any type of formal negotiations because for for many of the palestinian factions the u.s. is now pick to sign. it's moved its embassy or it will move its embassy to jerusalem which changes facts on the ground in east jerusalem will see that there is a us embassy there it will be a symbolic status and it will have a massive impact on the ability to mediate to transform conflict and to actually bring about some kind of resolution and that of course will have a massive impact across the world arab populations arab civil society groups are largely against israelis against the state of israel the quantity of surveys done by the hour brahma to human development report all suggests that arab populations are staunchly against the state of israel ok and so this will have a massive impact and states such as to the states such as iran have become empowered by this and that the narratives of resistance the narratives of
challenging the us challenging israel have only been empowered by this move ok now mr hunter as the general consensus is on the rise in the arab and muslim world america's no longer seen as a reliable partner we've seen countries like the french france were. stepping in visiting saudi arabia the gulf region he met with palestinian leader mahmoud abbas other fronts trying to take advantage of this situation position themselves as sort of replacement or substitute to the americans in the region well it used to be said that these countries were irrelevant because all of the united states was going to have strong enough and engaged enough to be able to do something i think the united states has were saying here has kind of marginalized itself in this an entire process but that doesn't mean anybody else can do it a fundamental issue here is whether israel and is prepared to see
a major portion about all of the west bank to an independent palestinian state the answer is no now it is. it's true that there are six hundred fifty thousand whatever the number is of settlers but some of those are within territory which in all the negotiations would become part of israel and land swaps but the idea that any israeli government and certainly not this one would be willing to have those other settlers who are illegal by any standard and would be illegal under a final settlement to remove them that's also nonsense and i think your point was well put that what is really going on here is an effort by the crown prince of saudi arabia and a number israelis to forge a coalition against iran and in the process to crush the palestinians yes but you
don't see hundreds of the problem with the syrians or whatever happens there are the big losers yeah but the you know the problem with this is that the arab world of now is not the arab world twenty years ago i mean now you see the reaction on the streets i mean this is absolutely no way they would tolerate anything which is seen by the muslims on the out as a betrayal. benny's now for the last sixty or seventy years the americans were very instrumental in any major peace did in the region don't you think that this could be now it tell you for other countries to step in russia the u.k. all fronts. i think that there's very much a possibility if there were political will i think we should be clear that despite the the positions of arab governments people in the arab world have long understood that the u.s. was never an honest broker in these talks it was never an honest broker that's not new and it's understood to be not new across the region certainly for palestinians but for people across the region as well one of the us longtime negotiators said in his book we acted as israel's lawyers and most of us knew that it wasn't
acknowledged it still isn't acknowledged the problem for the arab regimes is that they want to consolidate their relations with the united states they mostly want to normalize relations with israel if they thought they could get away with it so the question is who else might move into this breach in that moment and the question then becomes which of the major powers it could be russia in the sense that russia has played a more active role in the middle east not always a good one it could be the the european union as a whole which has enormous economic pressure it could bring to bear on israel because of massive trade relations it could be the united nations will be the both the venue and the major player for these kinds of and this brings the question of it may go to the mobile whatever happens whatever the outcome of the new whoever will take over don't you think that the peace process which was more a bond for quite some time not to take advantage of the changing dynamics in the
weald and become of the forefront of the international diplomatic flurry chill sort of this problem very briefly please i certainly hope that it does take on the prominent role but i fear they will be sacrificed much stronger geo political trends this rising framing of iran is the greatest existential threat to peace in the middle east to a domestic pressures in the u.s. the u.k. has not got the political capital of the desire to get involved because. the crisis the russians have got invested in syria and they're particularly concerned with that so i fear there although there is a great deal of anger a great deal of concern as to the palestinian cause as well there should be it's going to be again a political football to be kicked around different peoples who want to gain a bit of political capital to capital at a particular time and it's the palestinian people the people of east jerusalem the palestinian jerusalemites who are going to be paying the heaviest price a settlement buildings both legal and illegal in israeli law but fully illegal in
international law continues to happen we'll have to leave it there mr may burn mr hunter and his bennys thank you very much indeed for your time and thank you too for watching you can see the program again any time by visiting our web site as you know dot com and for further discussion go to our facebook page that's facebook dot com forward slash a.j. and say sorry it also join the conversation on twitter handle is a.j. inside story from the house and the whole team here bye for now.
setting the stage for a serious debate up front at this time on al-jazeera. al-jazeera . where every. news has never been more available but the message is a simplistic and misinformation is rife that the listening post provides a critical counterpoint challenging mainstream media narrative at this time on
al-jazeera i really felt liberated as a journalist was. going to look for those as an eyewitness that's what his job. scene is a holy city by the three major monotheistic religions jerusalem has been contested for centuries al-jazeera brings you a special program about the status of jerusalem and its importance with our correspondents across the palestinian territories and opinions from around the world we explore the reality on the ground and the impact the u.s. is intention to move its embassy to jerusalem will have on the peace process the holy land on al-jazeera. this is al-jazeera.