May 23, 2024

>>> HELLO, EVERYONE, AND WELCOME TO "AMANPOUR & CO." HERE IS WHAT'S COMING UP.

>> YOU CAN'T SAY YOU'RE IN FAVOR OF A TWO-STATE SOLUTION AND NOT RECOGNIZE TWO STATES.

>> DIPLOMATIC PRESSURE RAMPING UP AGAINST ISRAEL.

I SPEAK TO THE ISSUE PRIME MINISTER SIMON HARRIS AFTER THE GROUNDBREAKING MOVE BY IRELAND, SPAIN, AND NORWAY TO SAY THEY WILL FORMALLY RECOGNIZE PALESTINE AS A STATE.

>>> AND GENERAL SECRETARY OF THE PALESTINIAN NATIONAL INITIATIVE MUSTAFA BARGHOUTI JOINS ME FROM THE WEST BANK.

>>> PLUS, OCCUPATION HAS CORRUPTED THE HUMANITY OF ISRAEL'S MILITARY.

THAT'S FORMER IDF SOLDIER AVNER GVARYAHU WHO TELLS ME WHY HE IS BREAKING THE SILENCE.

>>> ALSO AHEAD -- >> IT'S REMARKABLE THAT A JUSTICE IN THAT POSITION WOULD HAVE IN FRONT OF HIS HOME A VISIBLE SYMBOL INDICATING THAT HE BELIEVES IN FACT THAT THE ELECTION WAS STOLEN.

>> UPSIDE DOWN FLAGS, PARTISANS IN THE SUPREME COURT, AND REPORTS OF FINANCIAL FAVORS.

HARI SREENIVASAN UNPACKS WHAT ALL THIS MEANS WITH PROFESSOR AND AUTHOR AARON TANG.

>>> AND HOW SUPREME HUBRIS MAY BE DESTROYING THE COURT.

♪♪ >>> "AMANPOUR & COMPANY" IS MADE POSSIBLE BY -- THE ANDERSON FAMILY ENDOWMENT JIM ATTWOOD AND LESLIE WILLIAMS CANDACE KING WEIR THE FAMILY FOUNDATION OF LEILA AND MICKEY STRAUS MARK J. BLECHNER THE FILOMEN M. D'AGOSTINO FOUNDATION SETON J. MELVIN CHARLES ROSENBLUM KOO AND PATRICIA YUEN, COMMITTED TO BRIDGING CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN OUR COMMUNITIES BARBARA HOPE ZUCKERBERG ADDITIONAL SUPPORT PROVIDED BY THESE FUNDERS AND BY CONTRIBUTIONS TO YOUR PBS STATION FROM VIEWERS LIKE YOU.

THANK YOU.

>>> WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM, EVERYONE, I'M CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR IN LONDON.

DIPLOMATIC ISOLATION IS MOUNTING ON THE ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER BENJAMIN NETANYAHU.

THIS WEEK BEGAN WITH THE ICC SEEKING INDICTMENTS FOR HIM AND HIS DEFENSE MINISTER, ALONG WITH TOP HAMAS LEADERS.

THAT WAS FOLLOWED BY THREE EUROPEAN NATIONS -- IRELAND, NORWAY AND SPAIN -- FORMALLY RECOGNIZING PALESTINE AS A STATE, AND ISRAEL RECALLING AMBASSADORS FROM ALL THREE.

IN ADDITION, DEFENSE MINISTER YOAV GALLANT HAS AUTHORIZED ISRAELIS TO START REENTERING THE WEST BANK, PAVING THE WAY FOR NEW ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS THERE.

AND THE FAR RIGHT FINANCE MINISTER HAS CUT OFF TAX REVENUE FUNDS TO THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY.

NOW WHILE EUROPE REMAINS DIVIDED ON PALESTINIAN STATEHOOD, FRANCE SAYS THE TIMING IS NOT RIGHT, AND THE UNITED STATES, ISRAEL'S BIGGEST ALLY, ALSO CRITICIZED THE MOVE AND THREATENED SANCTIONS ON THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT.

I'VE BEEN SPEAKING TO THE IRISH PRIME MINISTER SIMON HARRIS ON HIS NATION'S POLICY AND THE INTRACTABLE ISRAEL-PALESTINIAN CATASTROPHE.

TAOISEACH SIMON HARRIS, WELCOME BACK TO THE PROGRAM.

THERE IS CLEARLY SO MUCH FALLOUT FROM WHAT YOU, NORWAY AND SPAIN ANNOUNCED THIS WEEK, AND THAT IS YOU RECOGNIZED PALESTINIAN STATE HOOD.

THE QUESTION IS WHY NOW?

WHAT WAS THE IMPETUS FOR YOU DOING IT NOW?

>> WELL, IT WAS MY GOVERNMENT'S PREPARED POSITION TO RECOGNIZE A TWO-STATE SOLUTION AS PART OF A PEACE PROCESS.

BUT SADLY, UNFORTUNATELY, SUCH A COMPREHENSIVE SETTLEMENT SEEMS IN MANY WAYS FURTHER AWAY THAN IT'S EVER BEEN.

WE THEREFORE BELIEVE THAT IT IS SO IMPORTANT THAT WE TRY TO INJECT A DEGREE OF MOMENTUM THAT THE FACT THAT THE ONLY WAY TO BRING PEACE AND STABILITY TO THE MIDDLE EAST IS A TWO-STATE SOLUTION, WHICH IS A POLITICAL PROCESS.

YOU CAN'T SAY YOU'RE IN FAVOR OF A TWO-STATE SOLUTION AND NOT RECOGNIZE THE VERY EXISTENCE OF TWO STATES.

SO WE WORKED VERY INTENSIVELY WITH LIKE-MINDED COUNTRIES WITH NORWAY, WITH SPAIN AND INDEED WITH OTHERS WHO MIGHT EXPECT TO RECOGNIZE PALESTINE IN THE COMING WEEKS.

AND OUR JUDGMENT WAS YESTERDAY AND IS TODAY "TODAY" AS OF NOW IS THE RIGHT TIME, AND THERE WAS NEVER A WRONG TIME TO DO THE RIGHT THING.

WE CAN VERY CLEARLY DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN HAMAS, WHICH IS A DISGUSTING, DESPICABLE ILLEGAL TERRORIST ORGANIZATION AND THE PEOPLE OF PALESTINE, THE CHILDREN OF PALESTINE, THE CIVILIANS AND THE MOST HORRIFIC HUMANITARIAN CATASTROPHE THAT'S UNFOLDING.

>> CAN I ASK YOU TO TELL ME WHAT YOU MAKE OF THE ISRAELI MINISTRY YOUR AMBASSADOR IN ISRAEL, PLUS THOSE OF NORWAY AND OF SPAIN.

I'M GOING READ YOU WHAT THEY WERE TOLD, YOUR AMBASSADORS.

FIRST OF ALL, THEY WERE REPRIMANDED FOR THE MOVE THAT YOU'VE MADE.

THEY BASICALLY CALL IT A TWISTED DIVISION OF YOUR GOVERNMENT'S, A REWARD FOR HAMAS.

HAMAS CONGRATULATES YOU ON IT.

THIS IS A STATEMENT.

"THE DECISION WILL HAVE ADDITIONAL SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES FOR OUR RELATIONS WITH YOUR COUNTRIES."

AND THEY ACTUALLY ALSO SHOWED YOUR AMBASSADOR, SHE HAPPENS TO BE A WOMAN, BUT NONETHELESS, THEY SHOWED HER THIS REALLY TERRIBLE VIDEO THAT THE FAMILIES OF CERTAIN FEMALE HOSTAGES HAVE RELEASED TO SHOW HOW THEY WERE TREATED.

IT WAS BODY CAM VIDEO.

AND IT'S VERY SICKENING.

NOW YOUR AMBASSADORS WERE DIRECTLY SHOWN THAT.

AND IT WAS ACCOMPANIED BY THIS REPRIMAND.

WHAT IS YOUR REACTION TO THAT?

>> WELL, THE FIRST THING TO SAY IS IRELAND HAS AN EXCELLENT AMBASSADOR IN ISRAEL, AND SHE IS DOING A WONDERFUL JOB REPRESENTING THE VIEWS OF THE IRISH GOVERNMENT AND THE IRISH PEOPLE, AND I THANK HER, AND THANK THE TEAM.

OF COURSE, IT'S ANY FOREIGN MINISTRY CAN CALL IN ANY AMBASSADOR.

BUT WHAT I WILL NOT TOLERATE IS ANY COUNTRY MISREPRESENTING THE POSITION OF THE IRISH PEOPLE.

I AM THE LEADER OF THE IRISH GOVERNMENT.

I SPEAK ON BEHALF OF IRELAND.

AND WE HAVE BEEN CLEAR AND UNEQUIVOCAL THAT WE CONDEMN HAMAS, THAT WE CONDEMN THE MOST HORRIFIC, MASSACRE THAT ISRAEL EXPERIENCED.

WE CALL FOR THE UNCONDITIONAL AND IMMEDIATE RELEASE OF ALL HOSTAGES.

BUT IT IS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE TO SAY WHAT I HAVE JUST SAID AND ALSO SAY THE NEXT BIT, WHICH SADLY SOME REFUSE TO SAY, THAT WHAT IS HAPPENING IN PALESTINE, WHAT IS HAPPENING IN GAZA IS A HUMANITARIAN CATASTROPHE, THAT CHILDREN ARE BEING STARVED, ARE BEING DEPRIVED OF FOOD, AND THERE ARE CHILDREN WHO WILL GO TO SLEEP IN GAZA TONIGHT NOT SURE IF THEY WILL WAKE IN THE MORNING.

THIS SITUATION IS NOT SUSTAINABLE.

IT NEEDS TO STOP.

AND I HAVE NO INTENTION OF BEING IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM DISTRACTED FROM THE IMMEDIATE NEED FOR A CESSATION OF VIOLENCE IN THE MIDDLE EAST, THE NEED FOR THE RELEASE OF THE HOSTAGES FOR HUMANITARIAN AID TO FLOW UNIMPEDED AND UNHINDERED.

AND I CAN SAY THIS TO THE PEOPLE OF ISRAEL.

WE RECOGNIZE THE STATE OF ISRAEL.

WE RECOGNIZE THE STATE OF ISRAEL'S RIGHT TO LIVE IN PEACE AND SECURITY.

THAT IS THEIR RIGHT.

THE PEOPLE OF PALESTINE MUST ALSO HAVE AN EQUIVALENT RIGHT TO PEACE AND SECURITY.

AND LET ME ALSO SAY THIS TO THE PEOPLE OF ISRAEL.

THE IRISH PEOPLE KNOW WHAT IT'S LIKE TO HAVE THEIR NATIONAL IDENTITY HIJACKED BY A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION.

THE IRA WAS NEVER THE PEOPLE OF IRELAND.

AND HAMAS IS NOT THE PEOPLE OF PALESTINE.

>> AS YOU SAY, YOU DO HAVE EXPERIENCE, AND MANY SAY THAT YOUR ACTUAL EXPERIENCE, CERTAINLY THE NORTHERN IRELAND EXPERIENCE OF ACTUALLY BRINGING PEACE WITH THE REPUBLIC'S HELP IS A ROAD MAP FOR THESE KINDS OF TERRIBLE CONFLICTS.

BUT SO THEY OBVIOUSLY, THE GOVERNMENT IN ISRAEL SAYING THIS IS JUST A REWARD FOR TERROR.

BUT I JUST WANT TO ASK YOU, BECAUSE EVEN FRANCE, YOU KNOW, A BIG EUROPEAN COUNTRY HAS SAID THE CONDITIONS ARE NOT RIGHT YET.

HAPPEN ACTUAL EFFECT DO YOU THINK THE EU COUNTRIES -- AND YOU SAY YOU WANT MORE AND YOU EXPECT MORE TO RECOGNIZE -- WHAT EFFECT DO YOU THINK YOU CAN ACTUALLY PRACTICALLY HAVE?

>> SO I DO EXPECT MORE TO RECOGNIZE.

AND IT DOES OBVIOUSLY HAVE AN IMMEDIATE EFFECT IN TERMS OF THE ABILITY OF PALESTINE TO SEEK TO HAVE AN EMBASSY HERE IN DUBLIN, AND INDEED OF OUR REPRESENTATION IN RAMALLAH 20 BE UPGRADED.

BUT IT HAS MORE THAN THAT.

I HOPE BY TAKING WHAT I HOPE TO BE A PRINCIPLED LEADERSHIP STANCE THAT IT ENCOURAGES OTHER COUNTRIES TO COME FORWARD AS WELL.

BECAUSE I KNOW THERE ARE MANY COUNTRIES THAT ARE GIVING CONSIDERATION TO THIS.

AND OF COURSE EVERY COUNTRY MUST MAKE A JUDGMENT AS TO WHEN IS THE RIGHT MOMENT.

BUT IT IS THE CONSIDERED VIEW OF IRELAND AND INDEED OF SPAIN AND INDEED OF NORWAY, THREE COUNTRIES WHICH I THINK ANY FAIR ANALYSIS HAVE A LONG AND PRIDED HISTORY IN PEACE AND PEACEMAKING AND IN WORKING TOWARDS THE TWO-STATE SOLUTION IN THE MIDDLE EAST.

I HOPE THAT OUR RECOGNITION GIVES THAT SENSE OF POSITIVE MOMENTUM.

THE STATE OF ISRAEL LOSES NOTHING BY US RECOGNIZING THE STATE OF PALESTINE.

WE SET IT AS A POSITIVE STEP FOR PEACE, BECAUSE WHAT IS HAPPENING NOW CANNOT CONTINUE.

AND IT IS TIME FOR THE WORLD TO FIND COURAGE OF THEIR CONVICTIONS.

WE NEED TO STAND BY INTERNATIONAL LAW.

WE NEED TO STAND BY HUMAN RIGHTS.

AND THAT MEANS CHILDREN IN ISRAEL, CHILDREN IN PALESTINE HAVING A RIGHT TO LIVE SAFELY SIDE BY SIDE IN PEACE AND SECURITY.

ANYTHING ELSE IN TERMS OF VIDEOS, VIDEOS FROM FOREIGN MINISTRIES AND THE LIKES IS DISTRACTING FROM THE VERY, VERY SERIOUS ISSUE THAT THE SERIOUS ISSUE OF THE HUMANITARIAN CATASTROPHE UNFOLDING.

AND LET ME BE ABSOLUTELY CLEAR AGAIN.

WHAT HAPPENED IN ISRAEL ON THE 7th OF OCTOBER WAS A DESPICABLE, DISGUSTING TERRORIST ATTACK ON THE PEOPLE OF ISRAEL.

WE STAND IN SOLIDARITY AND WE'VE BEEN CLEAR IN OUR CONDEMNATION OF HAMAS.

BUT WE ALSO KNOW THE WAY TO BRING PEACE AND SECURITY AND STABILITY TO THE MIDDLE EAST IS A TWO-STATE SOLUTION.

AND TO BRING THAT ABOUT, YOU NEED TO RECOGNIZE THE EXISTENCE OF TWO STATES.

>> AND TAOISEACH, AS YOU SAY, THAT VIDEO, WHICH IS JUST HEARTRENDING FOR THE FAMILIES OF THE WOMEN.

IN THIS CASE, THEY WERE WOMEN SOLDIERS, THEY RELEASED IT YESTERDAY TO THE PUBLIC BECAUSE THEY WERE TRYING TO PRESSURE THEIR OWN GOVERNMENT TO BRING BACK THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS WHO ARE STILL BEING HELD IN THESE APPALLING CONDITIONS INSIDE GAZA.

I ALSO WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT THE FOLLOWING.

THERE ARE NOW, YOU KNOW, MORE AND MORE ANALYSTS SAYING THAT THE CENTER OF GRAVITY, PARTICULARLY IN THE EUROPEAN CENTER MAY BE MOVING AWAY FROM THE HISTORIC PRO-ISRAEL POLITICS.

AND EVEN THE U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY OFFICIAL JAKE SULLIVAN EXPRESSED CONCERN YESTERDAY ABOUT THE INCREASING ISOLATION OF ISRAEL.

I JUST WANT TO PLAY THIS.

>> WE CERTAINLY HAVE SEEN A GROWING CHORUS OF VOICES, INCLUDING VOICES THAT HAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN IN SUPPORT OF ISRAEL DRIFT IN ANOTHER DIRECTION.

THAT IS OF CONCERN TO US, BECAUSE WE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THAT CONTRIBUTES TO ISRAEL'S LONG-TERM SECURITY OR VITALITY.

>> SO, I MEAN, THEY'RE ANGRY ABOUT THE RECOGNITION, BUT THEY'RE NONETHELESS ALSO SEE THIS ISOLATION, INDEED SENATOR CHUCK SCHUMER MADE AN IMPASSIONED SPEECH IN CONGRESS IN MARCH ABOUT THE SAME THING, THE DANGER OF ISRAEL BEING ISOLATED.

WOULD YOU SAY THAT EUROPE IS RECALIBRATING ITS POSITION, ITS RELATIONS?

>> CAN I FIRSTLY JUST BE VERY CLEAR.

MY COMMENTS IN RELATION TO VIDEOS VERY MUCH RELATE TO VIDEOS ISSUED BY THE ISRAELI, NOT RELEASED BY FAMILIES DESPERATE TO GET THEIR LOVED ONES BACK INTO THEIR ARMS.

AND MY HEART GOES OUT TO THE FAMILIES OF HOSTAGES, AND I WANT TO SEE THOSE HOSTAGES RELEASED.

IN RELATION TO REGARDING ISRAEL, I DON'T WISH TO SEE A SCENARIO WHERE THE STATE OF ISRAEL FINDS ITSELF ISOLATED IN THE WORLD.

BUT ISRAEL NEEDS TO -- ISRAEL NEEDS TO RECOGNIZE INTERNATIONAL LAW.

IT NEEDS TO RECOGNIZE HUMAN RIGHTS.

AND INDEED, IT NEEDS TO LISTEN TO OTHER COUNTRIES AROUND THE WORLD IN RELATION THE ABSOLUTE NEED FOR A CESSATION OF VIOLATION TO TAKE PLACE.

I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE DIVIDING COUNTRIES INTO CAMPS OF PRO-ISRAELI OR PRO-PALESTINIAN.

INSTEAD, WE SHOULD BE TALKING ABOUT PRO INTERNATIONAL LAW, PRO-HUMAN MAN RIGHTS, PRO-PEACE, PRO POLITICAL SETTLEMENTS TO CONFLICT.

THAT IS THE SPACE WE NEED TO BE IN.

WHAT I'M VERY CERTAIN OF AT A EUROPEAN LEVEL AND INDEED SAW THIS AT THE MEETING OF EUROPEAN LEAD WHICH I ATTENDED IS THERE IS NOW A UNANIMITY OF VIEWS AMONGST THE EUROPEAN COUNTRIES OF THE IMMEDIATE FOR IMMEDIATE CESSATION OF VIOLENCE.

IT'S BEEN A LONG-STANDING POSITION OF IRELAND, BUT IT IS ALSO NOW THE UNANIMOUS POSITION OF THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL.

THE VIOLENCE NEEDS TO END.

WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO HAVE GOOD DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS WITH ISRAEL.

I HAD A VERY CALL I VALUED WITH THE PRESIDENT OF ISRAEL ON FRIDAY WHERE WE WERE ABLE TO EXCHANGE VIEWS, AND I PUT FORWARD THE VIEWS OF MY COUNTRY FORCEFULLY AND FIRMLY.

BUT I VALUE THE RELATIONSHIP WITH ISRAEL.

I DON'T WANT TO SEE A SCENARIO WHERE ISRAEL FINDS ITSELF ISOLATED IN THE WORLD.

BUT WE DO NEED TO SEE THE CESSATION OF VIOLENCE.

THAT'S WHAT BRINGS ABOUT THE CONDITIONS TO CREATE PEACE AND STABILITY IN THE MIDDLE EAST.

AND WE HAVE TO BE SO CLEAR.

WE HAVE TO BE ABSOLUTELY SO CLEAR.

WHAT IS HAPPENING AT THE MOMENT IN PALESTINE IS UNCONSCIONABLE AND ALMOST UNIMAGINABLE.

I DON'T THINK YET THE WORLD COMPREHENDS THE SCALE OF DEVASTATION FACING PALESTINIAN CIVILIANS.

AND WE CANNOT TURN A BLIND EYE.

I WILL NOT ALLOW WHERE IN YEARS TO COME PEOPLE ASK ME WHAT DID YOU DO AT THAT MOMENT?

AND PEOPLE ASK IRELAND WHAT DID YOU DO AT THAT MOMENT?

THE ANSWER CANNOT BE THAT WE STAYED SILENT.

WE MUST STAND UP FOR HUMAN RIGHTS, STAND UP AGAINST BREACHES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, AND CALL OUT THIS HUMANITARIAN CATASTROPHE.

I'M REALLY THE ONLY WAY YOU RESOLVE THIS CONFLICT IS THROUGH PEACEFUL POLITICAL DIALOGUE.

>> AS YOU KNOW, PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU HAS OUTRIGHT REJECTED A PALESTINIAN STATE.

BUT AS YOU SAY, YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T WANT FUTURE GENERATIONS TO ASK WHAT YOU DID OR DIDN'T DO.

THE PROSECUTOR OF THE ICC, KARIM KHAN SAID THAT TO ME IN EFFECT, THAT HE FELT THE BRINGING THE DEMAND, THE REQUEST FOR ARREST WARRANTS ON BOTH HAMAS LEADERS AND ISRAELI LEADERS WAS -- WAS DONE AT THIS TIME IN ORDER TO TRY TO CHANGE THE BALANCE OF POWER THAT'S HAPPENING ON THE GROUND, THE TERRIBLE CONTINUED CAPTURE OF THE HOSTAGES, THE TERRIBLE CIVILIAN CASUALTIES IN GAZA.

BUT OF COURSE, THIS HAD A FURIOUS REACTION.

NOW I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR YOUR REACTION TO THE ICC ACTION, BUT ALSO TO THE FACT THAT NOT JUST REPUBLICANS IN THE U.S. CONGRESS, BUT ALSO THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION IS CONSIDERING SANCTIONING THE ICC AND PERHAPS EVEN KARIM KHAN FOR THIS ACTION, FOR THIS MOVE.

>> WELL, I HAVE GREAT RESPECT FOR THE WORK OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT, AND INDEED FOR THE WORK OF THE INTERNATIONAL COURT STRUCTURES THAT ARE IN PLACE.

I THINK THEY SERVE A VERY IMPORTANT PURPOSE, AND I AS A POLITICIAN, AS A TAOISEACH, AS A PRIME MINISTER DON'T WISH TO CROSS THE INDEPENDENCE OF THAT WORK.

I AM CONSCIOUS THAT THE PROSECUTOR HAS MADE A REQUEST OF THE ICC, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT WILL BE CONSIDERED OVER SEVERAL WEEKS.

LET'S SEE WHERE THAT PROCESS BRINGS US TO.

BUT I DON'T INTEND TO ADD A RUNNING POLITICAL COMMENTARY TO THE WORK OF THE ICC.

>> SIMON HARRIS, IRISH TAOISEACH, THANK YOU SO MUCH INDEED FOR JOINING ME.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> LET'S NOW BRING IN MUSTAFA BARGHOUTI.

HE IS A MERE OF THE PALESTINIAN LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL, AND HE IS GENERAL SECRETARY OF THE PALESTINIAN NATIONAL INITIATIVE PARTY, WHICH IS BASED IN THE WEST BANK, AND HE IS JOINING ME FROM RAMALLAH.

MUSTAFA BARGHOUTI, WELCOME BACK TO OUR PROGRAM.

LET ME START BY ASKING YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>> YOUR REACTION, WHICH I KNOW THAT YOU'VE CONGRATULATED AND WELCOMED THE DECLARATION OF RECOGNIZING PALESTINE AS A STATE.

BUT DO YOU THINK IT WILL ACTUALLY CHANGE THINGS, OR DO YOU THINK THAT IT'S WELCOME WORDS FOR YOU?

>> NO.

ACTUALLY, IT WILL CHANGE THINGS, AND IF IT WASN'T CHANGING THINGS, YOU WOULD NOT SEE THIS HYSTERICAL REACTION FROM THE SIDE OF THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT.

IT IS IMPORTANT.

A BIT LATE, BUT IMPORTANT, BECAUSE FIRST OF ALL, IT DENIES THE DE FACTO ISRAELI ANNEXATION OF THE WEST BANK, WHERE ISRAEL THROUGH ITS SETTLEMENT ACTIVITIES IS CHANGING FACTS ON THE GROUND.

THIS RECOGNITION, AS WELL AS THE VOTE IN THE UNITED NATIONS IS SAYING THAT ALL ISRAELI CHANGES IN FACT ON THE GROUND WILL NOT CHANGE THE FACT THAT THIS IS A PALESTINIAN STATE UNDER OCCUPATION.

AND THAT ALL ISRAELI MEASURES ARE A VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND WILL NOT HAVE A LONG-TERM EFFECT.

SECOND, IT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT IS AFFECTING OTHER COUNTRIES.

TO ALSO JOIN IN AND RECOGNIZE PALESTINE, AND IN MY OPINION, IT'S A VERY IMPORTANT IN PUSHING TOWARDS A COMPLETE CEASEFIRE IN GAZA.

IT ATTRACTS THE ATTENTION OF THE WORLD TO THE REALITY OF OCCUPATION THAT HAS BECOME THE LONGEST OCCUPATION IN MODERN HISTORY, AND THE SYSTEM OF APARTHEID THAT PALESTINIANS HAVE BEEN SUBJECTED TO.

IT ALSO DRAWS A VERY IMPORTANT LINE BETWEEN TALKING ABOUT TWO-STATE SOLUTION AS A REAL GOAL OR JUST USING IT AS AN ACT OF HYPOCRISY.

BECAUSE IN MY OPINION, ANY COUNTRY IN THE WORLD, INCLUDING THE UNITED STATES THAT SPEAKS ABOUT TWO-STATE SOLUTION WITHOUT DEMANDING THE IMMEDIATE END OF ISRAELI OCCUPATION AND THE REMOVAL OF ISRAELI ILLEGAL SETTLEMENTS IN THE OCCUPIED TERRITORIES, AND THAT WOULD NOT RECOGNIZE PALESTINE IS SIMPLY PRACTICING HYPOCRISY.

>> MUSTAFA, LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION.

YOU TALKED ABOUT THE ISRAELI REACTION.

WELL, FIRST, LET ME ASK YOU THIS.

HAMAS WELCOMED THE DECLARATION OF RECOGNITION.

DOESN'T THAT HURT YOUR CAUSE WHEN HAMAS CHIMES IN, GIVEN THAT THE ISRAELIS AND THE AMERICANS AND EVERYBODY, YOU KNOW, SAYS THAT IT'S A VICTORY, IT'S A GOLD MEDAL FOR TERRORISM?

>> OF COURSE IT HELPS, BECAUSE IT SHOWS THAT HAMAS ALSO IS READY TO ACCEPT A PALESTINIAN STATE HOOD.

SOMETHING THAT THE ISRAELIS CLAIM IS NOT THE CASE.

IT SHOWS THAT ALL PALESTINIANS CAN BE UNIFIED IN DEMANDING TO HAVE A STATE OF THEIR OWN THAT IS SOVEREIGN AND THAT ALL PALESTINIANS, INCLUDING HAMAS, COULD BE UNITED IN ACCEPTING A REGULATION OR AN AGREEMENT THAT WOULD LEAD TO REAL PEACE.

BUT WITH ALLOWING PALESTINIANS TO HAVE THEIR RIGHTS OF FREEDOM, SELF-DETERMINATION AND PRACTICE THEIR RIGHTS TO BE FREE FROM OCCUPATION, FREE FROM APARTHEID, FREE FROM ALL THE CAUSES THAT LED TO THE CONTINUATION OF THIS SITUATION FOR SO MANY YEARS.

>> MUSTAFA BARGHOUTI -- >> I THINK IT'S A POSITIVE THING THAT THEY ACCEPTED.

>> WHEN YOU SAY THEY ACCEPTED AND THEY ACCEPT A STATE, DO YOU MEAN A STATE ALONGSIDE A SAFE AND SECURE ISRAELI STATE?

>> WELL, I THINK THAT'S WHAT TWO-STATE SOLUTION MEANS.

BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, I THINK THE ISRAELI -- THE QUESTION HERE IS IF ISRAEL IS REALLY ACCEPTING THE RIGHT OF THE PALESTINIANS TO BE HAVING THAT STATE.

SO FAR PALESTINIANS HAVE ACCEPTED THAT LONG TIME AGO.

MORE THAN THAT, OFFICIAL LEADERSHIP OF THE PLO HAVE ACTUALLY RECOGNIZED THE STATE OF ISRAEL.

ISRAEL NEVER ACCEPTED OR RECOGNIZED THE PALESTINIAN STATE.

MORE THAN THAT, YOU SEE MR. NETANYAHU, THE PRIME MINISTER OF ISRAEL, AND MOSTLY OF THE ISRAELI ESTABLISHMENT, INCLUDING THE OPPOSITION REFUSING EVEN THE IDEA OF PALESTINIAN STATEHOOD.

WE HAVE NOW ABOUT 7.3 MILLION PEOPLE PALESTINIANS LIVING ON THE LAND OF HISTORIC PALESTINE.

THAT'S ABOUT 7.1 JEWISH ISRAELS.

WE'RE EQUAL, IF NOT A LITTLE MORE THAN THE JEWISH ISRAELS.

WHAT'S THE SOLUTION?

IT'S EITHER TWO STATES WHERE PALESTINIANS WILL HAVE A STATE OF THEIR OWN THAT IS SOVEREIGN AND THAT IS FREE, OR ONE DEMOCRATIC STATE WITH EQUAL RIGHTS, WHICH I REALLY PREFER, IF ISRAEL IS READY TO ACCEPT IT.

BUT IF THEY DON'T WANT ONE STATE, THEY DON'T WANT TWO STATES, WHAT'S THEIR SOLUTION?

EXACTLY THEY ARE TRYING TO DO NOW IN GAZA THROUGH ETHNIC CLEANSING, AND WHAT THEY ARE TRYING TO DO IN THE WEST BANK BY SETTLERS' COLONIAL ATTACKS ON PALESTINIAN COMMUNITIES WHICH HAVE ALREADY EVICTED MORE THAN 31 COMMUNITIES FROM THEIR LAND.

>> MUSTAFA BARGHOUTI, CAN I ASK YOU THE RECENT ACTIONS.

AS PART OF THIS REJECTION OF THE STATEHOOD DECLARATION, THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT, THE DEFENSE MINISTER HAS JUST ANNOUNCED THAT HE WILL ALLOW ISRAELIS INTO THE NORTHERN PART OF THE WEST BANK, WHICH COULD PAVE THE WAY FOR MORE SETTLEMENTS.

THE FINANCE MINISTER HAS SAID THAT HE WILL CUT OFF PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY TAX REVENUES, THAT MEANS FUNDING FOR RUNNING YOUR SECURITY FORCES AND CIVIL INSTITUTIONS.

DO YOU BELIEVE -- WELL, FIRST OF ALL, DO YOU THINK THAT'S GOING TO LAST?

AND DO YOU THINK ACTUALLY THIS DECLARATION HURTS YOU MORE THAN HELPS YOU?

>> WELL, I THINK WHAT -- NO, I THINK THE RECOGNITION HELPS US.

BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, I THINK WHAT THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT IS DOING IS PROVING OUR POINT.

THESE PEOPLE WANT TO TOTALLY ANNEX ALL OF THE OCCUPIED TERRITORIES AND PREVENT PALESTINIANS FROM THE RIGHT OF FREEDOM AND SELF-DETERMINATION.

NOT ONLY THEY ARE COMMITTING THREE TERRIBLE WAR CRIMES IN GAZA TODAY, INCLUDING GENOCIDE, ETHNIC CLEANSING AND COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT, NOT ONLY THEY ARE CAUSING STARVATION IN GAZA, THEY ARE ALREADY REOCCUPYING ALL OF THE WEST BANK.

THERE IS NO CITY OR VILLAGE NOW IN THE WEST BANK THAT HAS NOT BEEN INVADED SINCE THE 7th OF OCTOBER BY THE ISRAELI ARMY.

THEY HAVE ARRESTED MORE THAN 9,000 PALESTINIANS IN THE WEST BANK ALONE.

AND ADD TO THAT ABOUT 5,000 IN GAZA.

AND THEY ARE PRACTICING TERRIBLE TORTURE TO PRISONERS PALESTINIAN FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE WEST BANK OR GAZA.

WE'VE LOST ALREADY TENS OF PEOPLE BECAUSE OF THE TORTURE.

AND THAT GOES ON.

THEY INVADE JENIN CAMP, DURING THE LAST 24 HOURS, THEY'VE KILLED AROUND 12 PEOPLE IN JENIN CAMP.

BEFORE THAT, THEY ATTACKED ALSO THE CAMP AND KILLED SO MANY PEOPLE.

WHAT IS THE SOLUTION OF THIS BEHAVIOR OF A GOVERNMENT THAT HAS FASCISTS IN IT LIKE -- WHO DECLARE ALL THE TIME THAT THEY WILL FILL THE WEST BANK WITH SETTLEMENTS AND SETTLERS SO THAT PALESTINIANS WOULD LOSE ANY HOPE OF A STATE OF THEIR OWN AND WOULD HAVE TO CHOOSE BETWEEN LEAVING THE COUNTRY, WHICH IS ETHNIC CLEANSING, OR ACCEPTING A LIFE OF SUBJUGATION OR DIE, WHICH IS EXACTLY THE GENOCIDE THEY TRYING TO PRACTICE NOW IN GAZA.

THIS IS THE REALITY OF THE GOVERNMENT WE ARE FACING.

>> THE ICC THIS WEEK AS YOU KNOW PERFECTLY WELL ISSUED A REQUEST FOR -- THE CRIME OF GENOCIDE WAS NOT INCLUDED.

LET'S LEAVE THAT ASIDE.

BUT WAR CRIMES WERE.

I ASSUME YOU -- I DON'T KNOW.

TELL ME YOUR REACTION ABOUT THOSE THINGS.

BUT I ASSUME YOU ACCEPT THE WARRANTS OUT FOR THE HAMAS LEADERS AS WELL, GIVEN WHAT HAPPENED ON OCTOBER 7th.

>> WE RESPECT THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE ICC.

WE WANTED TO PROCEED WITH ITS INVESTIGATION.

THIS BOOK ABOUT GENOCIDE, BECAUSE ONE OF THE WAR CRIMES THIS BOOK WAS ABOUT WAS EXTERMINATION OF THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE.

WE TRUST THAT ANY INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION THAT IS FAIR WILL NOT, WILL NOT EQUATE BETWEEN THE OCCUPIER AND THE OCCUPIED.

WILL NOT EQUATE BETWEEN THE OPPRESSOR AND THE OPPRESSED.

>> BUT BOTH SIDES ARE SAYING THAT, MUSTAFA BARGHOUTI.

BOTH SIDES ARE SAYING THAT, NO EQUIVALENCE.

EXTERMINATION IN THIS CASE I ASK MEANS MASS KILLING.

WHETHER IT'S IN GAZA, IT DOESN'T MEAN GENOCIDE UNDER THIS CURRENT ARREST WARRANT REQUEST.

AND THEY ACCUSED HAMAS OF EXTERMINATION OF THE ISRAELIS, THE CIVILIANS INSIDE ISRAEL ON OCTOBER 7th.

I WANT TO KNOW WHETHER YOU ACCEPT THAT AS WELL.

>> I ACCEPT THE RIGHT OF THE ICC TO DO THE FULL INVESTIGATION IN A FAIR MANNER, AND WE TRUST THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE COURT.

LET THEM DO THE INVESTIGATION.

LET ISRAELIS ALLOW THE INVESTIGATION OF WHAT HAPPENED ON THE 7th OF OCTOBER.

THERE WERE LOTS OF FALSE STORIES ABOUT BEHEADING OF CHILDREN WHICH TURNED OUT TO BE UNTRUE, ABOUT SEXUAL ABUSE WITH JUST ASSOCIATED PRESS HAS JUST PROVEN OR DECLARED THAT LOTS OF IT WAS FALSIFICATION AND FABRICATION BY THE ISRAELI SIDE.

LET THE INVESTIGATION TAKE PLACE.

WHO IS REFUSING AN INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION?

IT'S ISRAEL.

WE ACCEPTED IT.

LET THE INTERNATIONAL INDEPENDENT COMMISSION COME AND INVESTIGATE EVERYTHING.

THEY SPEAK ABOUT ONE DAY THE 7th OF OCTOBER.

ISRAEL HAS BEEN COMMITTING WAR CRIMES FOR 228 DAYS UP UNTIL NOW IN GAZA.

AS A MATTER OF FACT, THEY HAVE BEEN COMMITTING WAR CRIMES AGAINST US AS PEOPLE SINCE 76 YEARS, INCLUDING ETHNIC CLEANSING, INCLUDING APARTHEID, INCLUDING THE LONGEST OCCUPATION IN MODERN HISTORY, AND NOW INCLUDING ETHNIC CLEANSING.

THIS HAS TO STOP.

AND WE DO ACCEPT INTERNATIONAL LAW.

IT'S THE ISRAELI SIDE THAT SAYS -- THAT IT HAS THE RIGHT TO BE ABOVE THE NATIONAL LAW.

>> OKAY, MUSTAFA BARGHOUTI -- >> THE MOST IMPORTANT VALUE OF THE ICC DECISION IS THAT IT SAID THAT ISRAEL IS NO LONGER AS THE RIGHT TO HAVE IMPUNITY IN FRONT OF INTERNATIONAL LAW.

>> IT SAID ALL SIDES HAVE NO RIGHT.

IT EQUATED VICTIMS.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

>> IT EQUATED THE VICTIMS.

AND THIS WAS SOLELY FOCUSED ON VICTIMS.

AND MUSTAFA, THERE ARE ALL SORTS OF THINGS COMING OUT.

BUT SOME OF THE BODY CAM VIDEO THAT HAS BEEN RELEASED IS TRULY SHOCKING THAT WAS FOUND ON THE DEAD HAMAS FIGHTERS, TERRORISTS.

IT'S TRULY SHOCKING.

AND WE'RE GOING TO TALK MORE ABOUT THAT.

BUT FOR THE MOMENT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH INDEED FOR JOINING US.

SO WHILE NETANYAHU INSISTS THAT THE IDF IS, QUOTE, THE MOST MORAL ARMY IN THE WORLD, OUR NEXT GUEST SAYS THAT OCCUPATION HAS IN FACT CORRUPTED THE HUMANITY OF ISRAEL'S MILITARY.

HE'S AVNER GVARYAHU, AND HE IS A FORMER IDF SOLDIER.

HE IS ALSO THE DIRECTOR OF BREAKING THE SILENCE, AN ORGANIZATION OF ISRAELI VETERANS OPPOSED TO THE ONGOING OCCUPATION OF PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES.

AND HE'S JOINING ME NOW FROM TEL AVIV.

AVNER GVARYAHU, WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM.

>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

>> AT THIS INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT TIME INSIDE ISRAEL AND AROUND, YOU CHOSE TO PUBLICIZE AN OP-ED ESSENTIALLY TALKING ABOUT THE CORRUPTION OF THE HUMANITY OF YOUR OWN SOLDIERS, YOUR OWN MILITARY.

WHY DID YOU DECIDE TO DO THAT NOW, AND BASED ON WHAT EXPERIENCE?

>> YOU KNOW, WHERE I'M SITTING HERE IN TEL AVIV, AND WE'RE SPEAKING, I HAVE A 6-MONTH-OLD BABY THAT WAS BORN INTO WAR.

ROCKETS WERE THERE FROM THE MOMENT HE SAW THIS WORLD.

FRIENDS OF MINE WERE KILLED ON OCTOBER 7th.

I KNOW FAMILIES WHO ARE CRYING OVER THEIR LOVED ONES.

AND I UNDERSTAND IN THE DEEPEST WAY POSSIBLE THE FEAR AND EVEN WISH FOR REVENGE AFTER THE HORRIFIC ACTIONS ON THAT DAY.

BUT WE'VE BEEN AT THIS WAR FOR ALMOST EIGHT MONTHS.

AND THE DEATH TOLL AND THE BODIES AND THE DESTRUCTION IS JUST SOMETHING THAT I FEEL I CANNOT BE SILENT ABOUT ANYMORE.

I BELIEVE FULL-HEARTEDLY THAT WE ISRAELIS HAVE THE RIGHT FOR SECURITY.

I JUST DON'T BELIEVE THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING IN GAZA IS HELPING OUR SECURITY, AND I FEAR THAT THIS GOVERNMENT IS DRUNK ON REVENGE AND INABILITY TO BRING BACK OUR HOSTAGES.

AND IN THAT SENSE, THE CEASEFIRE CALL HAS TO GO HAND IN HAND WITH BRING THEM HOME.

THOSE THINGS DO NOT CONTRADICT.

I FEEL THAT MY GOVERNMENT SEES THEM AS A CONTRADICTION.

AND THAT'S WHY I FELT I NEED TO SAY MY PART.

>> YOUR OWN PERSONAL EXPERIENCES, AS YOU WERE, YOU KNOW, PATROLLING I GUESS THE WEST BANK.

>> WE'VE BEEN AROUND FOR 20 YEARS.

AND THOUSANDS OF SOLDIERS HAVE SPOKEN TO US.

MY TESTIMONY IS ONE OF THOSE STORIES.

I SERVED AS A PARATROOPER IN ONE OF THE SPECIAL OPS UNITS OF THE PARATROOPER BRIGADE.

TOWARDS THE END OF MY SERVICE, I WAS THE SERGEANT OF A SNIPERS TEAM.

AND PART OF WHAT I DID ALMOST EVERY NIGHT, BESIDES PATROLLING THE STREETS OR DRIVING AROUND OR STANDING IN CHECKPOINTS WAS HOME INVASIONS.

AND I PERSONALLY BARGED IN TO PEOPLE'S HOMES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT AND USED THEIR HOUSES AS OBSERVATION POINTS.

AND I THINK THAT FOR ME, MEETING PALESTINIANS WITH THIS UNBELIEVABLE POWER WAS REALLY ONE OF THE MOMENTS THAT LATER ON SHOOK ME.

BUT I THINK THE MORE IMPORTANT ELEMENT WAS THAT AS TIME PASSED, YOU SORT OF GET USED TO THIS REALITY.

AND I THINK IT REALLY TOOK ME A WHILE TOWARD THE END OF MY SERVICE TO UNDERSTAND THAT I DON'T REALLY SEE PALESTINIANS AS EQUAL TO ME.

AND I WROTE THIS IN MY PIECE, BUT I THINK THAT THE MILITARY ITSELF HAS BEEN CONTROLLING PALESTINIANS FOR SO MANY YEARS, AND WE'VE SEEN THIS DETERIORATION FROM THE TESTIMONIES, BUT ALSO FROM THE ACTIONS.

AND IF YOU COMPARE THE ACTIONS OF THE ISRAELI MILITARY, EVEN ONLY IN GAZA, YOU SEE THIS IMMENSE, IMMENSE DETERIORATION.

AND I THINK THAT I, I MYSELF FELT THIS IN MY SERVICE, AND MANY OF THE TESTIFIERS WE MET WITH EXPERIENCED THIS AS WELL.

>> AVNER, TELL ME ABOUT THE DETERIORATION OF BEHAVIOR IN GAZA.

BECAUSE WE'VE OBVIOUSLY SEEN ISRAELI IDF SOLDIERS POSTING ALL SORTS OF PRETTY UNSEEMLY VIDEOS OF THEM AT THE SITE OF JUST SORT OF ALMOST LIKE TROPHY, TROPHY DEPICTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

I THINK IN THE WAKE OF THE ICC ARREST WARRANT SEARCH, ONE OF YOUR OFFICIALS TOLD THEM TO STOP POSTING.

WHAT HAS SHOCKED YOU ABOUT BEHAVIOR BY IDF INSIDE GAZA NOW?

>> SO I MEAN, SOME OF THE IMAGES COMING OUT, SORT OF THE TIKTOK VIDEOS ARE SHOCKING.

AND I THINK HUMILIATING TO PALESTINIANS.

BUT I THINK ALSO HUMILIATING TO US AS ISRAELIS.

AND I THINK REALLY SHAMEFUL.

BUT I THINK THE VIDEOS ARE MORE OF A SYMPTOM THAN THE PROBLEM ITSELF.

I THINK THE LEVEL OF DESTRUCTION IS UNBELIEVABLE.

I THINK THE -- FROM WHAT WE HEAR AND SEE, TESTIMONIES THAT HAVE ALREADY SURFACED TALKING ABOUT ALMOST AN UNEXISTING REALITY OF ALMOST NO RULES OF ENGAGEMENT, PUBLICATIONS THAT HAVE COME OUT, 972 LOCAL CALL TALK ABOUT AN UNBELIEVABLE LEVEL OF COLLATERAL DAMAGE THAT WAS APPROVED.

NOW ALL OF THAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST.

BUT WHAT WE'VE SEEN IN GAZA STRIP FOR THE LAST EIGHT MONTHS IS EVERYTHING WE'VE SEEN IN THE PAST ON STEROIDS.

AND WE FEEL, OR I FEEL THAT WE BASICALLY CONTINUE THE NEXT WAR OPERATION WHERE WE FINISHED THE LAST ONE.

AND THE HORRORS, THE ATROCITIES OF OCTOBER 7th JUST GREEN LIGHTED ACTIONS THAT SURPRISED ME HEARING THEM FOR THE FIRST TIME.

>> LET ME JUST INTERJECT THERE, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY, AS YOU KNOW VERY WELL, YOUR NATION, YOUR PRIME MINISTER, OTHERS CALL THE IDF THE MOST MORAL ARMY IN THE WORLD.

AND EVEN NOW THEY KEEP SAYING THAT THEY HAVE SPARED CIVILIANS UNLIKE ANY OTHER MODERN FORCE.

FOR INSTANCE, THEY COMPARE WHAT'S HAPPENING IN GAZA WITH THE CIVILIAN CASUALTIES INFLICTED BY THE U.S.

IN IRAQ OR IN AFGHANISTAN.

WHAT CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT THE CLAIM OF YOUR POLITICIANS ABOUT THE MORALITY OF YOUR ARMY?

>> SO I DON'T KNOW WHERE TO BEGIN TO COMPARE TO.

EVEN THE ACTIONS OF THE EXACT SAME ARMY JUST A DECADE AGO IN 2014, ALSO A VERY VIOLENT ROUND WITH THOUSANDS OF CIVILIANS KILLED, THE AIR FORCE, FOR EXAMPLE, WOULD SHOOT WARNING STRIKES BEFORE TOPPLING DOWN BUILDINGS.

IN THE FIRST COUPLE OF MONTHS, AT LEAST IN THIS WAR, THE AIR FORCE SAID THEY STOPPED DOING THAT.

THAT'S JUST ONE EXAMPLE.

HOW MANY LIVES WERE LOST IN THAT WAY.

WE KNOW THAT IN THE PAST OPERATIONS, THE LEVEL OF COLLATERAL DAMAGE WAS SMALLER THAN WHAT WE SEE NOW.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IN SOME CASES DOZENS, IF NOT CLOSE TO 100 CIVILIANS KILLED FOR ONE TARGET.

AND I THINK THAT IF YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THE PRACTICES IN THE ARMY CLOSED NEIGHBORHOODS AND DECLARED THEM AS BASICALLY A FIGHTING ZONES, OR DE FACTO FREE SHOOTING ZONES.

AND ANY CIVILIAN THERE WAS SHOT.

AND WE HAVE MANY TESTIMONIES ABOUT THIS.

IN THIS WAR, HALF OF THE STRIP WAS ALMOST DESIGNATED AS A SHOOTING ZONE.

AND THOSE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT HAVE BROUGHT CASUALTIES IN NUMBERS THAT WE HAVEN'T SEEN BEFORE, AND THAT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO SPEAK OUT AGAINST AND NOT BE SILENT.

>> AVNER, WE'VE SEEN THE LATEST OF THESE HORRENDOUS VIDEOS, THE FAMILY OF HOSTAGES, PARTICULARLY IN THIS CASE THE FEMALE SOLDIERS.

AND THEY'RE JUST HORRENDOUS.

DO YOU THINK YOUR SOLDIERS WHO OBVIOUSLY HAVE ALL SEEN THIS AS WELL, THE BODY CAM VIDEO OF THE HAMAS TERRORIST, DO YOU THINK -- THEY'RE OBVIOUSLY -- THEY WANT TO PAY THESE PEOPLE BACK FOR WHAT THEY DID.

>> YEAH, YEAH.

AND, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE FEELING OF REVENGE IS A HUMAN FEELING.

I HAVE TO SAY THAT I FEEL IT MYSELF.

SOME OF OUR MEMBERS IN BREAKING THE SILENCE WERE KILLED ON THAT DAY.

SOME PEOPLE THAT WE KNOW CLOSELY ARE STILL IN THE TUNNELS OF GAZA.

BUT PART OF WHAT COUNTRIES HAVE TO DO IS REGULATE THIS GUT INSTINCT AND WORK ACCORDING TO THE LAW.

BUT I HAVE TO SAY SOMETHING ELSE.

IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT'S BEEN UNFOLDING IN THE LAST EIGHT MONTHS, WE ALL FOLLOWED THE CASE OF THE HOSTAGES BEING SHOT.

IF WE WOULD HAVE UPHELD OUR OWN RULES OF ENGAGEMENT, WE COULD HAVE MAYBE SAVED THE LIVES OF OUR HOSTAGES.

IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT'S BEEN HAPPENING WITH BOMBARDMENTS OF HOSTAGES, THOSE WHO CAME BACK TALKED ABOUT THIS, BUT WE ALSO KNOW THAT THERE WERE HOSTAGES THAT WERE KILLED, RIGHT.

IF WE'RE THINKING ABOUT THE HOSTAGES, WE OF COURSE NEED A CEASEFIRE.

BUT WE ALSO NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT SHOOTING INDISCRIMINATE WAY, THAT WE'RE USING OUR FORCE IN A SMART MANNER.

>> OKAY.

>> AND I FEAR THAT WE'RE IN A MOMENT WHERE THAT HAS SPIRALED OUT OF CONTROL.

AND I MEAN, I'M SO FRIGHTENED AND TRAGICALLY THINKING, YOU KNOW, IF THIS WILL CONTINUE, HOW MANY HOSTAGES WILL MANAGE TO SEE THEIR FAMILIES.

WE NEED A CEASEFIRE.

>> UNLIKE SO MANY ISRAELIS, YOU'RE WEARING THE YELLOW RIBBON FOR THE HOSTAGES.

AVNER GVARYAHU, THANK YOU OMUCH FOR BEING WITH US.

>>> NOW IN THE UNITED STATES, MORE CONTROVERSY AT THE SUPREME COURT.

ACCORDING TO "THE NEW YORK TIMES," A SECOND PROVOCATIVE FLAG WAS FLOWN AT A HOME BELONGING TO JUSTICE SAMUEL ALITO.

THIS AFTER AN UPSIDE DOWN AMERICAN FLAG, THE SYMBOL OF TRUMP'S ELECTION DENIERS WAS SEEN FLYING OUTSIDE ALITO'S HOUSE SHORTLY AFTER THE JANUARY 6th INSURRECTION.

SEVERAL JUSTICES HAVE NOW HAD THEIR IMPARTIALITY CALLED INTO QUESTION, WITH LITTLE CONSEQUENCES.

AND AUTHOR OF "SUPREME HUBRIS" AARON TANG BELIEVES THAT THEY'RE GETTING TOO CONFIDENT, OVERPLAYING THEIR HAND.

HE SPEAKS TO HARI SREENIVASAN NOW ABOUT HOW TO REGAIN PUBLIC TRUST IN THIS VITAL INSTITUTION.

>> CHRISTIANE, THANKS.

PROFESSOR AARON TANG, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

RECENTLY "THE NEW YORK TIMES" HAD REPORTED A STORY ABOUT A FLAG BEING FLOWN OUTSIDE JUSTICE ALITO'S HOUSE.

AND IT WAS AN UPSIDE DOWN FLAG, WHICH IS A SYMBOL FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO SUPPORT THE STOP THE STEAL MOVEMENT, PEOPLE WHO ARE SUPPORTERS OF PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP.

THE JUSTICE SAID YOU KNOW WHAT?

HE DIDN'T REALLY HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT, THAT HIS WIFE WAS THE ONE WHO FLEW THE FLAG, AND IT WAS PART OF KIND OF A NEIGHBORLY DISPUTE BECAUSE OF PEOPLE THAT WERE EXPRESSING POLITICAL VIEWPOINTS, ET CETERA.

WHEN YOU SAW THIS STORY, WERE YOU SURPRISED BY IT?

>> YES, I THINK SO.

AND THAT'S SAYING SOMETHING, BECAUSE YOU KNOW, THE RECENT CONSTANT FLOW OF STORIES ABOUT SUPREME COURT JUSTICES AND THOYG LAPSES, YOU MIGHT HAVE THOUGHT THIS WAS A POINT AT WHICH NOTHING COULD SURPRISE YOU ANYMORE.

BUT IT'S REALLY TRULY REMARKABLE THAT A JUSTICE, A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE WHO IS BEING ASKED TO MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT LIABILITY FOR CRIMES THAT WERE ALLEGED TO HAVE OCCURRED ARISING FROM DONALD TRUMP'S EFFORT TO SUBVERT THE LAWFUL RESULTS OF THE 2020 ELECTION, IT'S REMARKABLE THAT A JUSTICE IN THAT POSITION WOULD HAVE IN FRONT OF HIS HOME A VISIBLE SYMBOL INDICATING THAT HE BELIEVES IN FACT THAT THE ELECTION WAS STOLEN, THAT SOMEBODY IN THE HOUSE DOES, DESPITE ALL THE EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY.

>> JUST A COUPLE WEEKS AGO, THERE WAS THE AWARDING OF THE PULITZER PRIZES, AND PROPUBLICA, FANTASTIC INVESTIGATIVE NEWS ORGANIZATION IS REALLY SUPERCHARGED THE NATIONAL CONVERSATION ABOUT THE ROLE OF ETHICS AND MEMBERS OF THE SUPREME COURT.

THEY HAD DONE SO MANY REPORTS ON WHETHER OR NOT SUPREME COURT JUSTICES WERE REPORTING GIFTS AND TRAVEL THAT WERE GIVEN TO THEM BY IDEALOGICALLY ONE SIDE OR ANOTHER.

AND THEY WERE REALLY FOCUSING ON JUSTICE CLARENCE THOMAS AND JUSTICE ALITO.

AND, YOU KNOW, WHY HAS THAT REPORTING, AND THAT'S BEEN GOING ON FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS NOW, WHY ARE THOSE REPORTS TROUBLING?

>> SURE.

SO FEDERAL LAW, THERE IS A FEDERAL RECUSAL STATUTE THAT REQUIRE NICE FEDERAL JUDGE OR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE TO RECUSE THEMSELVES IN ANY CASE IN WHICH THEIR IMPARTIALITY MIGHT REASONABLY BE QUESTIONED.

SO WHAT YOU HAVE HAPPENING WHEN JUSTICE THOMAS RECEIVES MILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF GIFTS FROM REPUBLICAN MEGA DONORS LIKE CARLIN CROW, JUSTICE SAMUEL ALITO RECEIVING WEALTHY LAVISH PERSONAL JET FLIGHTS AND VACATIONS FROM REPUBLICAN DONOR SINGER, AND THEN TURNING AROUND AND VOTING IN CASES IN WHICH IN MR. SINGER'S CASE, HIS OWN HEDGE FUND WON A CASE WORTH HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS THAT JUSTICE ALITO VOTED IN.

JUSTICE THOMAS VOTING IN CONSISTENTLY CONSERVATIVE FASHION ON A HOST OF CASES, ONE STARTS TO WONDER WHETHER THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICES TRULY ARE IMPARTIAL WHEN THEY'RE ACCEPTING SUCH REMARKABLE PERSONAL GIFTS IN SEEMING EXCHANGE FOR VOTES ON KEY CASES.

>> LET'S TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT IMPARTIALITY.

I GREW UP, AND I'M OLD ENOUGH TO HAVE THE EQI LENS OF CIVICS CLASSES WHEN I WAS GROWING UP.

THERE WAS THIS NOTICE OF LADY JUSTICE BLINDFOLDED WITH THE SWORD AND THE SCALES AND BEING TRULY IMPARTIAL.

IS THERE SOMETHING DIFFERENT TODAY?

>> I THINK THAT'S EXACTLY THE RIGHT QUESTION TO BE ASKING.

AND THING IS A SITUATION WHERE TWO THINGS CAN BE TRUE.

THE FIRST IS THAT SUPREME COURT JUSTICES, EVER SINCE THE VERY FIRST ONE, THE FIRST, THE BEST CHIEF JUSTICE AND MOST FAMOUS CHIEF JUSTICE IN THE SUPREME COURT HISTORY, JOHN MARSHALL IN THE 18th CENTURY, THEY HAVE ALL BEEN HUMAN BEINGS, ALL SUSCEPTIBLE LIKE YOU AND I TO MOTIVATED REASONING, PARTNERSHIP BIAS, RIGHT.

SO IT'S TRUE.

WE'LL NEVER HAVE PERFECT ANGELS FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICES WHO CAN SET ASIDE ALL OF THEIR PERSONAL BELIEFS AND AFFILIATIONS.

THAT'S TRUE.

BUT IT CAN ALSO BE TRUE THAT SUPREME COURT JUSTICES WE HAVE CAN TRY, CAN BELIEVE THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO MAINTAIN AN APPEARANCE OF IMPARTIALITY AND NEUTRALITY, CAN DECIDE CASES TO THE BEST OF THEIR ABILITY BY SETTING ASIDE THEIR PARTISANSHIP AND MOTIVATION.

AND WHAT IS REALLY DIFFERENT ABOUT THE CURRENT SUPREME COURT IS AT LEAST SOME OF THOSE JUSTICES, THE JUSTICES WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT NO LONGER SEEM AS THOUGH THEY'RE TRYING.

NO LONGER FEEL AS THOUGH THEY HAVE TO EARN THE PUBLIC'S TRUST THROUGH THEIR EVEN-HANDED ACTIONS, BUT INSTEAD BELIEVE THAT IN VIRTUE OF BEING A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE, THEY ARE ENTITLED TO UNYIELDING DEFERENCE FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

AND THAT IS WHAT I THINK IS MOST TROUBLING ABOUT THIS RECENT SPATE OF NEWS.

>> WHAT CAN THE COURT DO ABOUT IT?

>> THIS IS THE REAL TROUBLE.

WHEN THE LOWER COURT JUDGE, THE FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT JUDGE OR COURT OF APPEALS JUDGE FAILS TO RECUSE THEMSELVES WHEN THEIR IMPARTIALITY MIGHT BE REASONABLY QUESTIONED OR FAILS TO REPORT A GIFT, THERE IS A MECHANISM IN PLACE FOR ENFORCEMENT.

THE JUDICIAL CONFERENCE, OTHER FEDERAL JUDGES CAN COME AND SIT IN JUDGMENT AND REQUIRE A JUDGE TO RECUSE.

THAT JUDGE CAN BE REPLACED BY ANOTHER DISTRICT COURT JUDGE OR COURT OF APPEALS JUDGE.

BUT WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU HAVE A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE ALLEGEDLY VIOLATING THESE SAME PROVISIONS IS THERE IS NO ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM, BECAUSE THE LOWER COURT JUDGES ARE NOT GOING TO SIT IN JUDGMENT OF THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICES.

THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICES ARE NOT GOING TO SIT IN JUDGMENT OF ONE ANOTHER.

MIGHT NOT WANT THEM TO GIVEN THE PARTISAN MAKEUP OF THAT COURT, THE CAN'T MIGHT SWING IN ONE DIRECTION ONLY YOU MIGHT WORRY.

>> SURE.

>> SO THE ONLY REAL ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM IN THE CONSTITUTION IS IMPEACHMENT.

SO A JUSTICE CAN BE IMPEACHED FOR REALLY PROBLEMATIC BEHAVIOR, HIGH CRIME OR MISDEMEANOR.

AND AS WE'VE SEEN WITH THE DONALD TRUMP IMPEACHMENTS, RIGHT, IN THIS POLITICAL MOMENT, IT IS VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO IMAGINE TWO-THIRDS OF SENATORS GETTING TOGETHER TO VOTE TO CONVICT A JUSTICE EVEN FOR SEEMINGLY OBVIOUSLY WRONGFUL BEHAVIOR.

>> DOES JUSTICE ROBERTS HAVE ANY EXTRA POWER BEING THE CHIEF JUSTICE?

>> I THINK THERE IS A BIT OF A PUBLIC MISPERCEPTION THAT IN VIRTUE OF JUSTICE ROBERTS BEING THE CHIEF JUSTICE, THAT HE MIGHT HAVE SOME OFFICIAL AUTHORITY TO REPRIMAND, PUNISH, EVEN REMOVE ONE OF HIS COLLEAGUES AND ASSOCIATE JUSTICE, BUT THAT IS NOT THE CASE.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE IN THE UNITED STATES IS TRULY FIRST AMONG EQUALS.

HE HAS INFORMAL SORT OF CULTURAL AUTHORITY.

AND I THINK THE CHIEF JUSTICE, TO HIS CREDIT, HAS REALLY DONE HIS BEST TO STAY OUT OF THE PUBLIC LIMELIGHT, TO LEAD BY EXAMPLE.

BUT THAT UNFORTUNATELY HAS NOT BEEN ENOUGH TO BRING BACK INTO THE FOLD SOME OF THE OUTLIER BEHAVIOR BY HIS COLLEAGUES.

>> WAS IT JUST LAST YEAR THAT THE SUPREME COURT FINALLY ADOPTED A CODE OF ETHICS?

ETHICS THAT TECHNICALLY APPLIED TO ALL SORTS OF OTHER JUDGES ACROSS THE LAND, BUT NOT TO THEM?

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

SO AFTER MUCH PUBLIC HULLABALOO, FRANKLY IN RESPONSE TO PROPUBLICA'S REMARKABLE REPORTING, IN NOVEMBER OF 2023, THE SUPREME COURT FORMALLY ANNOUNCED THAT THE JUDICIAL CODE OF CONDUCT THAT WAS BINDING ON ALL LOWER COURT OBJECTIVES WOULD WITH SOME TWEAKS BE ALSO BINDING ON IT.

BUT THE TWEAKS ARE THE KEY PART.

ONE BIG PROBLEM IS THERE IS NO ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM FOR IF A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE VIOLATES THE CODE OF CONDUCT.

AND THE OTHER IS THE SUPREME COURT CODE OF CONDUCT IDENTIFIED A COMPETING CONSIDERATION THAT MAKES IT EVEN LESS LIKELY THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICES WILL RECUSE, AS YOU MIGHT THINK OUGHT TO BE THE CASE WITH JUSTICE THOMAS OR ALITO GIVEN THEIR INVOLVEMENT WITH POTENTIAL JANUARY 6th CASES.

THE SUPREME COURT CODE OF CONDUCT RECOGNIZES THAT JUSTICES HAVE A DUTY TO SIT SINCE THEY CANNOT BE REPLACED BY OTHER JUDGES IN THE SAME WAY A LOWER COURT JUDGE, IT MAKES IT MORE LIKELY THAT JUSTICES WILL CONTINUE TO HEAR COURSES THAT WE MIGHT THINK THEIR IMPARTIALITY IS QUESTIONABLE.

>> HOW MUCH OF THAT IS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE OTHER BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT AND WHAT THEY'RE ABLE TO DO ABOUT THE SUPREME COURT?

I MEAN, TECHNICALLY, CONGRESS HAS A CHECK ON THE SUPREME COURT'S POWER, DOESN'T IT?

>> ABSOLUTELY.

CONGRESS CAN MAKE EXCEPTIONS FROM AND REGULATE THE COURT'S POWER TO HEAR CERTAIN KINDS OF CASES.

IT CAN OBVIOUSLY CONTROL THE PURSE STRINGS AND CHOOSE TO FUND OR NOT FUND THE SUPREME COURT.

IT COULD IMPOSE TERM LIMITS IF IT SO DESIRED.

THERE ARE WAYS TO CHANGE OBVIOUSLY THE SIZE OF THE SUPREME COURT, WHICH HAS HAPPENED ROUTINELY OVER TIME.

THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT THE CONSTITUTION AFFORDS CONGRESS A COEQUAL BRANCH AMPLE POWER TO CHECK WHAT THIS CURRENT SUPREME COURT IS DOING.

AND SO THE PROBLEM IS CONGRESS' LACK OF POLITICAL WILL.

IT'S INABILITY TO USE THAT POWER IN ANY MEANINGFUL WAY IN THE WAYS THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE MIGHT WISH.

>> SO IN THE CONTEXT OF THE ACTIONS BY JUSTICE ALITO OR HIS WIFE IN THIS CASE, OR CLARENCE THOMAS AND HIS WIFE, GINNI THOMAS, WHO HAS BEEN IMPLICATED IN SOME OF THE JANUARY 6th TEXTS BACK AND FORTH FROM HER PHONE THE MARK MEADOWS, TALKING ABOUT REALLY THE SIDING, AGREEING THAT JOE BIDEN PERHAPS DID NOT WIN THE PRESIDENCY LEGITIMATELY, AND THAT THIS IS ALL BEING HIJACKED.

WITH THAT IN THE BACKGROUND, WHAT'S IN FRONT OF THE SUPREME COURT TODAY ABOUT FORMER PRESIDENT TRUMP'S ROLE IN JANUARY 6th.

THOSE ARGUMENTS HAVE BEEN HEARD, RIGHT?

>> YES, IN A SORT OF INDIRECT KIND OF WAY, BUT YES.

THE SUPREME COURT IS CURRENTLY CONSIDERING AND WILL SOON ISSUE A DECISION IN THE NEXT MONTH ON THE QUESTION WHETHER PRESIDENT TRUMP ENJOYS IMMUNITY, WHICH IS TO SAY HE CANNOT BE PROSECUTED AT ALL FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY ARISING OUT OF HIS EFFORTS TO DEFRAUD THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND SUBVERT THE LAWFUL ELECTION RESULTS IN 2020.

HE HAS BEEN CHARGED WITH A FEDERAL INDICTMENT IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF COLUMBIA OF JACK SMITH BY SPECIAL PROSECUTOR.

THAT CASE WAS SUPPOSED TO PROCEED TO TRIAL IN MARCH.

BUT IT HAS BEEN DELAYED EVER SINCE THEN AS THE FORMER PRESIDENT HAS BEEN TAKING UP THIS QUESTION ABOUT IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION UP TO THE COURT.

NOW IT'S BEFORE THE JUSTICES.

TWO OF THEM WILL BE VOTING ON THIS CASE, DESPITE THEIR OWN EITHER PERSONAL INVOLVEMENT OR FAMILIAL INVOLVEMENT IN SOME OF THE CONDUCT THAT GAVE RISE TO THE CHARGES.

>> IS THIS A PROBLEM MORE WITH THE CONSERVATIVE SIDE OF THE COURT THAN THE LIBERAL SIDE?

>> SO I THINK WE CAN DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN TWO DIFFERENT KINDS OF PROBLEMS, RIGHT.

SOME PEOPLE MIGHT BE WORRIED ABOUT THE PROBLEM OF PARTISANSHIP IN GENERAL, THE IDEA THAT A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE MIGHT VOTE MORE RELIABLY AND PREDICTABLY IN SUPPORT OF CAUSES IN FAVOR OF THE POLITICAL PARTY OF THE PRESIDENT THAT APPOINTED THEM.

THAT TO THE EXTENT IT'S A PROBLEM IS A PROBLEM THAT HAS ALWAYS EXISTED AT THE SUPREME COURT AND IS EQUALLY APPLICABLE TO DEMOCRAT AND REPUBLICAN-APPOINTED JUSTICES.

DEMOCRAT-APPOINTED JUSTICES ARE PARTISAN TOO.

THE SECOND QUESTION, THOUGH, ABOUT ETHICS CONCERNS, THE EXTENT TO WHICH JUSTICES SEEM TO BE ABUSING THEIR POSITIONS OF AUTHORITY IN EXCHANGE FOR PERSONAL FAVORS, PERSONAL JET FLIGHTS, VACATIONS, OR SEEM TO BE EVINCING QUESTIONABLE DECISION MAKING WITH RESPECT TO PUBLIC STATEMENTS ABOUT THEIR VIEWS ON POTENTIAL CASES BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT, THAT DOES SEEM TO BE AN ISSUE ON WHICH CONSERVATIVE JUSTICES, IN PARTICULAR JUSTICES ALITO AND THOMAS HAVE CORNERED THE MARKET, SO TO SPEAK.

NOW AGAIN, THEY'RE NOT ALONE.

JUSTICE GINSBURG FAMOUSLY CRITICIZED CANDIDATE TRUMP BEFORE THE 2016 ELECTION WHICH WAS A BAD MISTAKE.

SHE DID APOLOGIZE AND OWNED THAT MISTAKE WHICH I THINK IS DIFFERENT THAN, FOR EXAMPLE, JUSTICE ALITO BLAMING HIS WIFE MARTHA ANNE RATHER THAN SAYING THIS IS A MISTAKE, WE SHOULDN'T HAVE DONE IT.

BUT THE PARTISANSHIP PROBLEM EQUALLY APPLICABLE TO BOTH SIDES.

>> WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS PARTISANSHIP PROBLEM -- WE SHOULD CLARIFY FOR OUR AUDIENCE WHO CLERKED FOR JUSTICE SONIA SOTOMAYOR, SHE IS FARTHER TO THE LEFT CONSERVATIVELY THAN SOME OF THE JUSTICES ARE TO THE RIGHT.

IS THAT STILL KIND OF TIP THE SCALES BECAUSE IT'S ONE JUSTICE, ONE VOTE WHEN IT COMES TO WHAT HAPPENS IN THAT DELIBERATION ROOM?

>> YEAH, I THINK, YOU KNOW, EFFORTS BY POLITICAL SCIENTISTS TO KWAUPTIFY HOW FAR TO THE RIGHT OR HOW FAR TO THE LEFT INDIVIDUAL JUSTICES ARE, THOSE ARE VERY DIFFICULT MEASURES TO MAKE.

IT IS CERTAINLY TRUE THAT ALL DEMOCRAT-POINTED JUSTICES INCLUDING JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, MY FORMER BOSS, JUSTICES KAGAN AND JACKSON ARE TO THE LEFT OF THE MEDIAN AND THE SIX CONSERVATIVES ARE TO THE RIGHT.

JUST HOW FAR IS A SUBJECT OF DEBATE.

BUT I THINK WE CAN ACCEPT THAT WE WILL HAVE JUSTICES WHO AS YOU MENTIONED EARLIER ARE HUMAN BEINGS AND WILL THEREFORE BE LIKELY TO VOTE IN ONE DIRECTION OR ANOTHER IN LINE OF THEIR PERSONAL VIEWS, THE PRESIDENTS WHO APPOINT THEM.

BUT ALSO BELIEVE THAT WE CAN HAVE A FUNCTIONING SUPREME COURT IN SPITE OF THAT IF THOSE JUSTICES HAVE A GOOD SENSE OF MORALITY ABOUT THEIR ROLE IN AMERICAN PUBLIC LIFE, RIGHT.

JUSTICES WHO ARE HUMBLE WHO VIEW THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AS THE DECIDERS, THE GREAT DECISION-MAKERS AND THE TOUGH POLITICAL QUESTIONS OF THE DAY, THOSE ARE JUSTICES.

LIKE FRANKLY CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS WHO CAN PROTECT LEGITIMACY OF THE SUPREME COURT AND SERVE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WELL.

IT'S ONLY WHEN YOU HAVE PARTISAN JUSTICES WHO ARE HYPER CONFIDENT OVERTURNING CHOICES BY THE DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED BRANCHES AND ASSERTING THEMSELVES IN PUBLIC LIFE WHERE IT'S NOT NECESSARY THAT WE START TO HAVE A PROBLEM.

>> ONE OF THE REASONS WE HAVE YOU ON FOR THIS CONVERSATION, JUSTICE TANG IS YOU WROTE A BOOK, "SUPREME HUBRIS."

LET'S TALK ABOUT THE HOW WE CAN FIX IT PART.

CONSIDERING THAT BY THE TIME A CASE GETS TO THE SUPREME COURT, IT IS A BIG DEAL, RIGHT?

BECAUSE OTHER COURTS HAVE STRUGGLED WITH IT.

THERE HAVE BEEN FLIP-FLOP DECISIONS IN LOWER COURTS.

BUT VERY NATURE OF WHAT DECISIONS A COURT DECIDES TO HEAR IS IN ITSELF KIND OF THAT FIRST POLITICAL ACT.

>> THAT'S RIGHT, YES.

AND THE SUPREME COURT, EVER SINCE 1925 AND ESPECIALLY SINCE 1988 IN A SERIES OF CONGRESSIONAL STATUTES HAS HAD REMARKABLE ABILITY TO SET ITS OWN AGENDA.

THE SUPREME COURT CAN REFUSE TO HEAR AND DOES REFUSE TO HEAR 99% OF THE CASES THAT GET APPEALED TO IT, AND CAN PICK AND CHOOSE WHAT IT WANTS TO HEAR.

AND UNSURPRISINGLY, IT'S MUCH MORE FUN IF YOU'RE A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE TO PICK AND CHOOSE THE CASES THAT CAN RESHAPE THE AMERICAN SOCIETY IN THE WAY THAT YOU WANT.

SO IN TERMS OF HOW WE CAN FIX IT, I THINK IT HAS TO START WITH THE IDEA THAT OUR BEST CHANCE TO SAVE THE SUPREME COURT AND RESTORE ITS PLACE IN AMERICAN SOCIETY AS A NEUTRAL AND TRUSTED ARBITER IS FOR THE JUSTICES TO MODERATE AND COME BACK TO THE MIDDLE THEMSELVES.

PACKING THE COURT WITH SIX MORE LIBERAL JUSTICES WILL LEAD TO A TIT FOR TAT ESCALATION THAT SOME DAY WE'LL HAVE 33 SUPREME COURT JUSTICES.

THAT'S NOT A SOLUTION.

THERE ARE OTHER WAYS, OTHER MEASURES CONGRESS CAN TAKE TO PUT PRESSURE SOME OF THE MORE INSTITUTIONALLY MINDED CONSERVATIVE JUSTICES TO BRING BACK THEIR VOTES, REIN IN, BECOME CENTRIST, MODERATE POWER BROKERS ON A TRUSTED SUPREME COURT.

THAT'S OUR BEST SHOT.

AND THE BOOK TALKS ABOUT SOME WAYS THAT WE MIGHT TRY TO BRING THAT ABOUT.

>> SO WHAT CAN CONGRESS DO?

>> SO THE NUMBER ONE THING CONGRESS CAN AND SHOULD DO IS TO PROPOSE NEW LAWS, THE DEMOCRATS FOR EXAMPLE EVER HAD ENOUGH VOTES TO OVERRIDE THE FILL BUST THEY'RE RESTRICT THE SUPREME COURT OF POWER OVER PARTICULAR ISSUES.

SO ONE IMPORTANT ISSUE, FOR EXAMPLE, IS VOTING RIGHTS.

IF DEMOCRATS WERE TO BE ABLE TO PASS A NEW VOTING RIGHTS BILL PROTECTING THE RIGHT OF PEOPLE OF COLOR TO VOTE, THEY COULD INCLUDE A PROVISION IN THAT LAW SAYING THE SUPREME COURT SHALL NOT HAVE POWER TO STRIKE DOWN THIS LAW AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

AND IN DOING SO, FIRST, IT WOULD PRESERVE THE SECURITY OF THIS VERY IMPORTANT KIND OF STATUTE VOTING RIGHTS, BUT SECONDLY, IT COULD SEND A MESSAGE TO THE CONSERVATIVE JUSTICES ON THE SUPREME COURT.

IF THEY KEEP MOVING ALONG TO THE RIGHT AGGRESSIVELY AS THEY HAVE DONE, CONGRESS IS GOING TO START PASSING LAWS TAKING THE COURT'S POWER AWAY TO DECIDE IMPORTANT CASES.

IT MIGHT BE VOTING RIGHTS FIRST.

IT MIGHT BE ABORTION SECOND.

IT MIGHT BE ENVIRONMENTAL LAW, IMMIGRATION LAW THIRD AND FOURTH.

AND THAT WILL FORCE THE CONSERVATIVE JUSTICES TO THINK WELL, MAYBE WE SHOULD REIN IN OUR VOTES AND BECOME MORE MODERATE IN EXCHANGE FOR THIS POWER SO CONGRESS WON'T FEEL THE NEED TO DO THIS.

AND IN DOING SO, WE COULD REPLICATE, FRANKLY, THE AMERICAN EXPERIENCE FROM 1936 AND 1937 WHEN CONGRESS DID THE SAME THING, THREATENED TO PUT PRESSURE ON A CONSERVATIVE SUPREME COURT THAT HAD GONE AWRY.

AND TWO OF THE CONSERVATIVE JUSTICES ACTUALLY SWITCHED THEIR VOTES, BECAME MUCH MORE HUMBLE AND MODERATE AND PRESERVED THE INTEGRITY OF THE SUPREME COURT AS WE KNEE IT.

>> PREFER AARON TANG OF UC DAVIS, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.

>> THANK YOU, HHARI.

>> AND THAT'S IT FOR NOW.

THANK YOU FOR WATCHING.

AND GOODBYE FROM LONDON.