[Update, May 24: After I confronted Press TV about their gross distortion of my message, they removed the above video and published a new one of the full interview. Click here for the updated post.]
I gave an interview this week to Press TV about the US moving its Israel embassy to Jerusalem. Unfortunately, they not only cut my key points from the interview, but so badly distorted my message in this video that it comes across as the literal opposite of what I actually said.
Stop Conflating the “Peace Process” with “The Two-State Solution”!
First, they titled it “Killing the Two-State Solution”, which they conflate with the death of the so-called US-led “peace process”. They presented my interview on Twitter this way:
But has the U.S. ever been sincere about the peace process?
Many believe @realDonaldTrump has ruined any chance of a two-state solution in the #Israel–#Palestine conflict#OnTheNewsLine with @JeremyRHammond#PalestineMassacre #PalestineMarch #IsraeliCrimeshttps://t.co/ldHqslXbWT
— On The News Line (@OnTheNewsLine) May 17, 2018
That is the opposite of what I actually said in the interview, which was that the move in one way is really a good thing, because by destroying in the eyes of the world’s other governments the US’s last shred of credibility as a neutral mediator, it spells the death of the “peace process” — which, as I explained, has been the process by which Israel and the US have long blocked implementation of the two-state solution.
The logical corollary of what I said is that there is now an opportunity to actually pursue the two-state solution, which is essentially synonymous with ending the occupation, which I view in turn as a necessary step toward achieving a just solution for Palestinian refugees, i.e., a single democratic state solution.
I even elaborated on specifically how this could be pursued, namely, by pursuing legal remedy for Israel’s crimes against the Palestinians through the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and International Criminal Court (ICC). I further elaborated that for that to happen, there needs to be a unity of purpose among the Palestinian leadership, which Israel and the US have successfully prevented by employing a strategy of “divide and conquer”; specifically, by conspiring with the now-illegitimate Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, and his Fatah party to illegally overthrow the Hamas government that was legitimately elected into power in 2006. This resulted in the situation we see today with Abbas ruling in the West Bank and Hamas remaining as governing authority in Gaza.
I fully explain the critical distinction between the “peace process” and the two-state solution in my following article:
East Jerusalem Is Not “Disputed” Territory!
The second major point I emphasized in my interview that was not only cut, but completely twisted into just the opposite of what I said, was with respect to the status of East Jerusalem.
In the video they compiled from my interview, Press TV states that the UN views the status of Jerusalem as “controversial” and subject to “negotiations” between the oppressed and their occupier.
That is nonsense. As I observed in my interview, while the status of West Jerusalem may be open to legal debate, it is a completely uncontroversial point of fact under international law that East Jerusalem is “occupied Palestinian territory”.
I also explained in my interview how the US’s embassy move is actually illegal, a violation of UN Security Council Resolution 478 of 1980, which forbade member states from establishing embassies in Jerusalem since this would serve to legitimize Israel’s illegal annexation of East Jerusalem with great prejudice toward the right of the Palestinians to self-determination.
As I explained to Press TV, there are well over a dozen UN Security Council Resolutions condemning Israel for its measures to annex East Jerusalem, which the UN has observed are illegal, null and void. These Security Council resolutions also repeatedly re-emphasized that the status of East Jerusalem is not disputed or controversial, but that it remains under international law occupied Palestinian territory.
I explain all of that in more detail in my following article:
You might also find of interest:
Should I Give Any More Interviews to Press TV?
I agreed to this interview because I viewed it as an opportunity to get my message through to Press TV’s large audience. Yet, not only did my message not get through, but they so badly mangled it that it came across as the literal opposite of what I actually said.
So it seems to me like there’s no point in giving Press TV any more interviews; at least not for this kind of “sound bite” video format. What do you think? If they ask me again, should I do any more interviews with them?
Share your thoughts in the comments below!