Greetings friends, my name is Jessamah Clayne and this is Blueprints of Disruption, a podcast

dedicated to those going up against systems of oppression in a variety of ways. This week's

episode is no exception. We've got three incredible guests from United Against Genocide here to

talk about their push to get the Canadian government to name it, stop it, and sanction it. The IT

is genocide. No other word will do in this moment, and our guests will explain why. You'll hear

what it's been like meeting with our previous Prime Minister's office, and what their expectations

were of Carney, particularly at the G7. What are the excuses the powerful are giving out

behind closed doors? Why such hesitation to call it like it is? Even with all the testimony

and information in front of them, Those are not open-ended questions. They'll be answered

throughout the episode. But in large part, the Palestinian exception explains it all. Before

we get into all of that, let's have the guests introduce themselves. And remember, you can

find out more about them and their work in the show notes. Here is United Against Genocide.

I'm Dorothea Gucciardo, and I'm the Director of Development for GLIA, which is a Canadian

medical solidarity organization that has been operating out of Gaza. since 2012. I'm also

the co-founder of Eyewitness Gaza. Hi, I'm Ben Thompson. I'm a healthcare provider in

the Toronto area. I've been doing humanitarian work in a variety of conflict regions since

about 2012. That has brought me to Gaza probably every year a couple times since about that

time. I'm also the co-founder of Eyewitness Gaza. and I run an international medical education

charity that includes training people from the occupied territories of Palestine. Hi there,

I'm Alex Neve. I'm an international human rights lawyer. I am a senior fellow at the Graduate

School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Ottawa and also a professor

of international human rights law at both the University of Ottawa and Dalhousie University.

Previously, I was the Secretary General of Amnesty International Canada for 21 years.

And safe to say over the entirety of those 21 years, there of course were many, many chapters

of campaigning and advocacy regarding grave human rights concerns in Gaza, in the West

Bank, in Lebanon, in Israel itself. And obviously the current chapter is by far the worst of

anything we've seen, but certainly in many respects, a lot of what we're dealing with is not new.

I was looking at the guest list, you know, typing it out and looking at your backgrounds, and

I'll admit I felt a little overwhelmed. think each of you I could have talked to you for

hours about your experience and what you're currently doing to put pressures on the Canadian

government. to take a stand on Israel. We'll talk about your three demands specifically,

but is there one of you that wants to speak to the coalition that formed that brought you

here and has brought you to pressers and other events united against genocide and how that

formed? I'm recalling many of us, and many of us who are in fact listening to this podcast,

will of course have been to a protest. And what I've remarked over the last almost now 24 months

is that when we've been to a protest, it's such a remarkably diverse group of people, whether

it's independent Jewish voices, Orthodox Jews, Black Canadians, Albanians, Indigenous Canadians,

Palestinians, and of course, many people who look like me, know, Canadian settlers. So the

diversity of that group is unified. in many things. We're unified basically in that we

want Palestine to have a state, but that we want this genocide to end. And what I've noticed,

like many different types of advocacy movements, there are intermittent actions with small

groups of people, but to get a sense of how integrated it is and how diverse and broad

the coalition is that we are opposed to what our Canadian government is doing. We are absolutely

disgusted that this genocide has been allowed to continue now for almost two years. And

so really we brought together some of the most powerful voices to tell the Canadian government,

this is not acceptable and it needs to stop. And so thinking about who those organizations

are, I I think it's pretty clear that there are a broad support for our Palestinian state

and a broad support against genocide amongst Jewish community groups, Muslim community groups,

broad groups of healthcare professionals, broad groups of lawyers who support human rights

and international humanitarian law. And bringing those groups together for the purposes of saying,

this needs to stop and the Canadian government needs to do more and here's some things that

you can be doing. We thought that would be a very powerful message, one that we could build

on moving forward. And if I may just add an extra piece to that, it's, I think, behind

my involvement in the coalition, in the press conference, and even today, behind me is

an open letter initiative that brought together over 500 leading Canadian law professors,

academics, former ambassadors, including three former Canadian ambassadors to the United Nations.

the heads of three of Canada's major trade unions, all sorts of faith groups, human rights

groups, humanitarian organizations, and similar to what Ben is describing, the catalyst for

that was recognizing that there was a lot of disparate action happening in all of those

various corners, but it was time for people to come together and adjoined up. statement

to the Canadian government, to the federal government saying we are unified against genocide. And

for some of those individuals, this was actually the first time, some of the prominent voices,

it was the first time they had publicly stated that they were of the view that what was happening

in Gaza was genocide. So I think there's a lot of coming together behind this. And that's

a really good point, Alex, because You know, in November of 2023, and then again in December

2023, and then early in 2024, a group of healthcare providers in Canada met with the prime minister's

office. And we said, even at that time, this is genocide. Here's some things that you need

to do immediately to end this. And each and every time we were ignored, each and every

time it was healthcare providers who came, sometimes we went with... We actually went with the head

of MSF Canada at one of those particular meetings. And despite those meetings, it was basically

healthcare providers. So it was very clear that healthcare providers alone were not going to

be pushing enough. This is despite the fact that Eyewitness Gaza represents every single

healthcare provider who's been to Gaza during the genocide. All of us agree that this is

genocide. And despite what should be considered a pretty powerful message for that. that has

not been enough despite multiple meetings with the prime minister's office. And so something

more needed to be done. And I think bringing together multiple groups was what was inevitably

going to be the next step. You talk about bearing witness and healthcare workers, I think, and

correct me if I'm wrong, it's important to note that they're one of the only professions that

can move in and out of Gaza. We normally depend on journalism. We have very few Palestinian

journalists left. but we are still getting images there. But obviously everything is done to

discredit the words of Palestinians over and over again, right? That the Palestinian exception

exists on absolutely every level. So one would think, you know, based on the criteria that

most settlers have that settler Canadian healthcare workers traveled into the region witnessed

this. spoke with international lawyers, you know, are versed in what the criteria for genocide

are, come back and still our government and many, many, others that could make a difference

are hesitant to call it a genocide. And that is one of the main demands of United Against

Genocide, right? The slogan there I saw was, name it, stop it, sanction it. And let's just

dig into why naming it a genocide is such a crux for you. You know, like we can't just

be like, fine, call it whatever it is. It's horrible. We have to stop it. Why is it important

it be labeled a genocide? It's important to label what's happening in Gaza a genocide because

language matters, right? Language is what shapes law. It's what shapes history. It's what shapes

morality. And it also what shapes and will inform action. So by labeling what's happening

inside Gaza genocide, and not just Gaza, mind you, all of occupied Palestine, is important

because it provides the blueprint for what the Canadian government must do in response. And

the Canadian government has a legal obligation to act. And I'm going to let Alex speak to

that. But just before that, there's a couple of important things to consider because what

we're seeing as you've noted, is systemic denial that this is what's happening, right? That

there's not a genocide in Gaza. When in fact, have every eyewitness who has come and gone

noted that yes, there are patterns of genocide. And so naming it genocide confronts the core

of the crime, that it isn't just the killing that's happening, but it's the intent to destroy

a people. And that's what we're all seeing is a systemic destruction of life inside Gaza.

And the other reason why it's really important to name it a genocide is because it then centers

the victims' experiences. Yes, we have these international healthcare workers going in and

providing their witness to what they're seeing. And we're fighting against our government

and pushing them to acknowledge this. Because once they do, calling it a genocide honors

the reality of the lived experience of Palestinians. in the occupied Palestinian territories. When

we consider that one of the goals of genocide is to destroy a culture, it's to eliminate

that culture, it's to eliminate identity, to eliminate its history, but also its future.

And so calling it a genocide validates those experiences and it brings that identity back

to the surface. So we can talk about what it means to be. Palestinian and the Palestinians

themselves can tell us what that means and where the future should go for them. And for us,

as part of this coalition that is unified against genocide, we want to mobilize political pressure

within Canada, but we also want to join that global movement because it isn't just Canadians.

There is a global movement that is building to tell the international governments to tell

the international community that what is happening is intolerable and it must stop. So for all

of these reasons, it's really important that that is named accurately, that it is named

genocide. And if you don't mind, I'm going to pass it over to Alex to talk a little bit about

the legal obligations that the Canadian government has once it calls it a genocide. Thanks,

Taye. And I think you've you've stated powerfully and beautifully why this matters so much. And

I guess to build on it, you began by saying this matters because language matters. And

I guess I would build on that by saying, and law matters. you know, take us, you know, just

to go back to a moment, for a moment to 1948, which is, of course, when the United Nations

came together, drafted and adopted the Genocide Convention. one of the very first pieces of

international lawmaking that the world undertook following World War II. It was an incredible

moment and the world came together in this powerful promise to humanity, which was captured in

two words, which I think carry both an evocative kind of moral sense, but a very clear legal

sense as well. And it was never again. And that was because we had finally admitted that

what genocide entails is at a level of evil and terror and beyond imagination such that

we simply have to have the tools to banish it. And here we are, almost 80 years later,

we cannot live up to that. that moral promise and that legal obligation to stop genocide

if we won't acknowledge it when it's happening. It is the first step to ensuring that all

that is supposed to flow legally to and let's not forget that the Genocide Convention, I

think very, very notably carries a very powerful name. It is the Convention on the Prevention

and punishment of the crime of genocide. Prevention comes first. And that's a bit unusual in terms

of international human rights treaties. You don't see that real focus on prevention right

there in the title. But we are not going to get down that road at all if we have our own

government and other governments around the world playing games, trying to, you know,

whether it's just complete denial or legal semantics. and refusing to name it what it

is. And that's why it's so important, I think, for such an incredible coalition of groups,

healthcare workers who are there on the ground seeing it happen in real time, legal experts

who have spent their entire professional lives, know, engaging in international court cases

in the Hague, et cetera, dealing with issues around genocide, and all have come together.

to say this is that moment, there is no question. The evidence tells us, told us months and months

and months ago, almost in the very first days of October the 7th, that that is what is

happening. And now all of the obligations and especially around that word prevention, the

international legal framework isn't about, you know, once the final body has been thrown on

the heap. that then the world does something about acknowledging it was genocide and deals

with it after the fact, it is about preventing it. And that is why the first of our three

demands, or the second of our three demands, stop it, is also so crucial. And I think

there's an angle here as humanitarian workers, whether that's as physicians or nurses or

non-healthcare related humanitarian workers, all of us in the very beginning of our training

to do humanitarian work would have taken a course in which the humanitarian principles would

have been probably, if not the first, one of the first things that we learned. And what

that says is that our actions as humanitarians and actions of delivering humanitarian aid

needs to be done with humanity, independence, impartiality, and neutrality. And that's why

it's so critical that when healthcare workers do speak up. It is after massive consideration

and contemplation of the impact that it might have. And I think there's an excellent historical

example of this. During the Rwandan genocide, the head of Medecins Sans Frontières for France

had returned from some time in Rwanda, during which time he witnessed genocidal acts. and

what he described internally with MSF was described as genocide, but they really debated

internally quite heavily about whether they wanted to publicly use that word. And yet

when the interview took place in the French press with the head of Mid-Centenance Frontier

France, he used the word genocide, and it was the first time that it was actually used within

the public sphere. And within a week, the French government had met within parliament

to talk about withdrawing weapon sales to Rwandan parties that were committing genocide. And

public opinion in France shifted significantly, which made the political cost of supporting

genocide even heavier. I mean, it is important. It's very, very important. And as a healthcare

provider, you know, I don't use the word genocide without careful consideration of the fact that

it is something that has a very clear definition within international humanitarian law with

the 1948 Genocide Convention that Alex has discussed. don't take this willy-nilly. This is something

that's obviously very serious. And the other thing I think we need to consider is where

are we? We're in Canada, right? I was born in Canada. Canada is a settler colonial entity

whose creation is essentially established by committing a genocide against Indigenous people.

One that is ongoing and today manifested through the legal and prison system by inferior housing,

by perpetuating horrific conditions in Indigenous communities, many of which are still without

clean water, and by the government saying one thing and doing another. So when Prime Minister

Trudeau committed to reconciliation, then when we look at the Truth and Reconciliation Commission

of Canada, 94 recommendations and literally no progress on any of them in several years.

The majority are still unanswered. So Canada has had a shameful commitment to perpetuate

genocide, not just in Canada with Indigenous people, but now also abroad. in Gaza. And as

someone born in Canada, I'm ashamed of this. And I feel it is my responsibility to speak

out about this. You've given two very powerful reasons, like collectively, why the Canadian

government is so hesitant to use the language of genocide. You've talked about Trudeau. How

hopeful, especially with the most recent developments out of Carney's mouth. new prime minister here

in Canada and his belief that any new Palestinian state, which you folks mentioned was one of

the points of agreement that exists amongst most people, must be a Zionist one. Does anybody

have hope here that this liberal government or this form of the liberal government will

be more receptive to the pressures being applied and will finally declare it a genocide? I'll

start by saying in early days, I think we had a glimmer of hope for a moment. There was

quite a remarkable joint statement that Prime Minister Carney signed on to with President

Macron and France and Prime Minister Stammer of the United Kingdom. Now, obviously didn't

use the word genocide, but for the first time was seemingly starting to suggest that there

were some red lines. for Canada and France and the United Kingdom, obviously. And they

were expressing opposition to the renewed military offensive in Gaza, the ground offensive. They

were speaking out strongly about the denial of humanitarian aid. They were saying very

clearly it has to stop. And they were saying, we will not hesitate. There will be sanctions

if that doesn't happen. Now that's six weeks ago, and obviously every single minute of

every day since, the situation has only gotten worse. So I think we went from that moment

of, there a hopeful sign that we may see a slightly new direction here, to recognizing

that it's same old, same old, empty words that betray Palestinians, that they give some sort

of... empty nod to the role of international law without showing any willingness or indication

of an intent to stand up for international law and enforce international law because of course

international law is utterly meaningless if states will not stand behind it, will not

enforce it through a variety of different means. And then we've had this most recent bizarre

indication that for Prime Minister Carney, he's got this notion of a Zionist Palestine,

which I think has obviously caused incredible concern that whatever that initial glimmer

of hope was, we've completely lost ground. And then in the midst of that, and of course,

lot of the impetus for why we came together as a coalition was hope that we might see from

the Prime Minister some willingness to show some leadership. around Gaza at the time of

hosting the G7 summit. And it would be generous to say that hope was betrayed. We came out

of that incredibly important meeting without an utterance of what is happening on the

ground, an acknowledgement of what is happening on the ground, let alone some sort of weak

additional action to do something about it. If we're placing all of our hope... in current

political leadership to negotiate a Palestinian state, then I'm not entirely hopeful. However,

if we believe in the resilience and the resistance of the Palestinian people, then I think we

can be reasonably hopeful. Because what we have seen, especially over the last two years,

is their struggle has been met with courage, and it has been met with creativity, and it

has been met with determination. We have also seen, as mentioned earlier, a growing grassroots

movement. There is growing mass movement among the people to make this stop and to liberate

Palestine. And so if we do see, and I hope we do, the creation of a Palestinian state,

I think it will come from grassroots political ruptures, from power at the top. This is going

to be a bottom up. movement, which makes this type of coalition all the more important, I

think. agree with you. It's kind of the basis of our show. So I always wonder when I see

people speaking to the prime minister or speaking to ministers and pleading with them. I often

wonder, you really, and sometimes I ask and maybe I'll ask you, are you really actually

speaking to them? Because some of them, I think I've shown their true colors. And if we believe

as as Taya said that it comes from below the power and the change that we need, then I try

to see these pleased to politicians as really a platform for a broader audience. That that

hoping for these politicians to move at this point is sometimes I worry that that's wasted

energy. Do you ever feel that way? Or do you again, like kind of Taya said, see it as a

broader message to the world, to Canadians as a whole, not just to the Liberal Party

itself? Yeah, that's a very good question. having been in some of those meetings, I definitely

have left some of those meetings feeling exactly what you just asked. Was that a complete waste

of time? And even in some of the meetings, hearing back the depths of the anti-Palestinian

racism and the Palestine exception, even within the meeting, can be demoralizing. But I am

remembering, well, one of the very first books that I think radicals or advocates are almost

required to read is Rules for Radicals, Saul Alinsky's book, which is probably the most

over-read book in our advocacy circles, but still very, very important book. And what

it says is there has to be a diversity of tactics. And there must be ways in which you can engage

people from all across the spectrum of the movement. And so, you know, we've seen letters, we've

seen meetings with MPs and politicians, we've seen protests, we've seen some more high risk

actions, whether like protesting at weapons manufacturing plant or, you know, spray painting

on Indico. there's... There are a whole variety of tactics and I don't think at the end of

the day it's going to be one tactic that you can say that was the tactic that worked most

and nothing else worked. I think it's just, you know, a combination or a snowball of multiple

tactics. At times meeting with politicians probably made sense so that we could learn

at least what they were thinking and what we were up against. Certainly my impetus to meet

with politicians like the Prime Minister's office dwindled significantly after the second time

we met, recognizing that he simply wasn't going to do anything without additional pressure

from the ground. It was very obvious. And like Teja said, this is a ground up movement. The

Prime Minister's office is not going to plead to sanity or shame or kindness. He's going

to plead because there's a groundswell of support for Palestinians that are banging on his door

over and over and over again and making it impossible not to listen and not to act. As frustrating

as it is to have these engagements at senior political levels and of course, know, counterparts

in other countries are having the same, it'd be generous to say disappointing outcome of

their efforts as well. But I don't see it as a waste of time. because as Ben was saying,

I think, especially when we're talking about something so enormously consequential as genocide,

we have to be active on every front we can possibly imagine. And that means at those

top senior levels, means from the bottom up grassroots levels, it means individual avenues

for advocacy, it means enormous opportunities for solidarity, it absolutely means engaging

with and supporting the community resilience that Taya is talking about. And of course,

we're going to be as strategic and deliberate as we can possibly be about how we choose those

moments, how we express ourselves publicly, who we find common cause with, et cetera.

But there's always that other aspect in this kind of advocacy and activism that you just

never know. what the tipping point is going to be, what the change moment is going to be,

when is going to be that notable meeting when someone unexpected is sitting in on the meeting

and they become the one who starts to change thinking at a senior political level, you just

never know. And as long as we just don't know, then we have to keep trying everything we possibly

can. I wonder if we can talk a little bit about the Palestinian exception. We've mentioned

it a little bit, but I was kind of surprised that it would be so bold-faced in those meetings.

Politicians are usually a little bit better with their appeasement tools, right? Like

they seem to know what to say to get you to nod and leave the room somewhat satisfied.

So to hear that you were faced with this and like comrades are being faced with this all

over. Can you tell us just how deep it runs? Like where they are at, at their viewpoint?

Because, you know, I imagine them struggling with it in the background, but that's not the

picture you're painting. You can name names or not, but just maybe the experience of what

politicians are saying to excuse their inaction behind closed doors. Well, it's everywhere.

It's absolutely everywhere. And of course, it isn't just political. It's, you know, we

saw it in how universities were reacting to the encampments last year and all of the amazing,

amazing student-led activism, which, you know, over the decades with respect to other political

causes and social issues and human rights concerns gets lifted up and celebrated as this is what,

you know, students are all about. We should be encouraging this. And it just gets vilified

and shut down and punished and sanctioned because it's Palestine. that we have freedom of expression

in this country, for protesters to be out on the streets and to be even doing more militant

direct action protests in certain circumstances. We cherish that. We recognize how crucial

it is to a functioning democracy, except when it's Palestine. We want to support vibrant

academic research across all sorts of social issues, know, exploring history, grappling

with political challenges, and we want that to happen on campuses in ways that are leading

edge and unorthodox, except when it is Palestine. And then to bring ourselves to the issue that

brings us together, we're unified as an international community in saying no to genocide, both in

the sense that it should be prevented from happening in the first place. It should certainly be

stopped while it's underway and that it should be sanctioned as it's occurring, except when

it's Palestinians. it's, unfortunately, given that wide, wide context, and I think we all

have a sense of the historical and racist and geopolitical reasons that lie behind all of

that, it's not surprising that Ben and colleagues go into a meeting in PMO and even there.

they encounter it because it is everywhere. I can give a little bit of a backdrop as well

in, Alex, you mentioned it's not just the political system, it's the healthcare system

as well. you know, you may know Jessa, but I was suspended from my job when I said,

this is a genocide. I basically tried to stand up for human rights as well as against dehumanizing

rhetoric of Palestinians. And I was suspended within like less than 48 hours of posting.

And on the one hand, while that was a career altering suspension and my employability after

that has been dramatically hampered, it did give me the opportunity to meet literally

dozens of other healthcare providers across Canada. and across the United States who've

gone through very similar experiences with regards to being suspended. At one local Toronto hospital,

the Sick Kids Hospital, over 10 different people were suspended all for social media related

advocacy of Palestinians. And yet in the same hospital, physicians who posted the most grotesque,

obviously pro-genocidal racist material suffered no consequences whatsoever. You know, I've

also met with multiple provincial and the national Canadian Medical Association. Most recently,

when we met with the Ontario Medical Association, they had posted a racist tweet in support of

a study which was not scientific, claiming anti-Semitism when what they were really claiming

wasn't anti-Semitism at all. It was simply pro-Palestine advocacy. They agreed to apologize for the

miscommunication. They agreed that they would come out with a public statement, that they

would take the tweet down. We also pointed out some other cases of anti-Palestinian racism

within their organization. And even though we met with the president, the president-elect,

the heads, all the leadership of the OMA, the subsequent follow-up meeting They read a pre-prepared

statement in which they said they were no longer going to engage in geopolitical issues. And

thank you, but no thank you, we're done this conversation. And this is despite them quite

proudly speaking up about anti-black racism, anti-indigenous racism. They donated money

to Ukraine and called out Russian aggression. Like this is just pure racism on the Ontario

Medical Association. That's what it is. It has to be called out. It's anti-Palestinian racism.

It's not anything else. They have literally decided to change the rules to be completely

silent on Palestine, who's literally experiencing a genocide. they're somewhere where healthcare

facilities have been targeted and bombed, healthcare providers have been targeted and killed. And

the medical association that was quite proudly speaking up against Russia for Ukraine and

raising money for them can't even say, yeah, genocide is wrong. You know, it's horrific.

It's pathetic. And I'm, I'm, I'm ashamed that I actually give this organization money I'm

compelled to, to practice medicine in Ontario. And if I had a choice, I would withdraw that

money in an instant. It's just gross. It's gross. it's a theme that exists in, so many aspects.

I mean, Alex gave us the. university example. And we've covered those cases and we've talked

about those and we get digging and we find out that like the social media posts that Ben

was suspended for, it generates campaigns amongst the Israeli lobbyist group in Canada. And

these institutions end up being bombarded with all sorts of their own pressure points, like

we're creating our pressure points and the Israeli lobbyists spending considerable amount of money

putting pressure. They're the number one lobbyists right now for our politicians. So I guess

my original question to Ben was to try to get inside the minds of these politicians when

the doors are closed and what excuses they're using. Like, are they telling you they're feeling

these pressures from lobbyists or do they have genuine anti-Palestinian views that are why

they don't think Canada should help at all? Like whether they call it a genocide or not,

like they're seeing death, destruction. I mean, they don't call Ukraine a genocide, but they

help, right? Like they didn't need a label to trigger legal obligations. They still went

in and we've seen imperialist states do this many, many times. We'll come help you and

how it turns out. So it's not always great, but I really did want to know, you know, what

do they have? the guts to say to your face when you have experienced what's going on over there.

Like what are the lines that they're giving you even when the door is closed? I mean the

lines are the same lines we hear publicly. That's shameful. I've heard Israel has the right

to defend itself. I've heard that so many times. I've heard you know we believe in a two-state

solution but then when called out they say oh no we're not going to vote for a Palestinian

state. much of the time what I hear is, you know, oh, thank you so much. We'll have to

consider what you're saying and we'll get back to you. As opposed to saying, yeah, you know

what? Genocide actually is wrong. They can't even get to the point of saying that. Now,

I think we should mention there are some very brave politicians in Canada who have called

it a genocide and who have actually taken considerable risks to do so. you know, and that needs to

be commended, whether that's Heather McPherson, Nikki Ashton, Adam von Covertin. There's

some that are very, very clear that, and I'm sorry, that is by no means a complete list,

but there's many politicians who have come out and said it, and they should be supported and

commended for that. So it's not like Canadian politicians are denying, well, they are denying

the human experience because as Taya explained, acknowledging it as genocide is what really

encompasses that whole Palestinian experience at this point, but they are using the usual

tropes that we hear. And I don't know what's worse, to be honest. And I think what is,

to come at that from a legal perspective, what is galling and disgraceful is that here we

are 20 plus months into this and that line has not shifted. Right from day one, what we heard

was Israel has the right to defend itself. And always throwing into the mix this empty

exhortation calling on Israel to comply with international law. It is Canada's expectation

that Israel must comply with its international legal obligations. And then never, ever following

that up, whether it be in behind closed door meetings, to start to have the conversation

around what What does self-defense mean as an international legal concept? Does it apply

at all in this context? Or is there a certain dimension to it that perhaps does and other

aspects that do not? And recognition that at the end of the day, no matter what, nothing

ever, ever, ever justifies or excuses genocide. And then also this complete refusal to acknowledge

that ages ago, Israel long ago crossed that line of not complying with its international

legal obligations. And when do we ever name that? Whether it be the most obvious concern

that we have, genocide, but even the lesser concerns about crimes against humanity, war

crimes, other kinds of human rights violations. None of that ever, ever gets named, let alone

some sort of meaningful action announced to deal with Yeah. I mean, in 2019, I was in Gaza

during the March of Return protests. And there were many physicians who had a very similar

experience. I worked as a field medic. And during that time, I saw, I mean, you could literally

see the Israeli snipers from the protest area. And they were shooting children. healthcare

providers, reporters, people in wheelchairs, like anyone with live ammunition. saw it.

I literally ran out to collect a healthcare provider because she was shot in the ankle

while she herself had been providing aid to someone else who'd been shot. I came back

to Canada after witnessing this. and contacted the International Criminal Court. It was Ms.

Fatou Bansouda who was the head of the court at the time. And I provided what I witnessed.

I provided my testimony and was given a letter of thanks for providing the testimony. And

then to no surprise, there was actually an independent commission by the United Nations investigators

that found that indeed Israel's snipers shot at handicapped people. reporters, children,

healthcare providers, knowing they were fully identifiable as such. You know, that report

didn't surprise me because I saw it with my own eyes. And yet we're sitting here wondering

if Israel is capable of behaving in a way compatible with international humanitarian law. Like we

already know they haven't. Like, and the Canadian government should know that because one of

our own healthcare providers who was a medic at that protest, Dr. Tarek Lubani, was shot

while providing care, fully uniformed, and he was shot. And the Canadian government, eh,

you know, they have an independent commission of inquiry on that that confirms what Israel

did and still nothing. Still nothing, right? So, I mean, there's a longstanding history

of this. Which makes, like, red lines hard to imagine. What would be a red line or what

information are the powerful lacking? None. Because they have sources well beyond even

what we have, right? For information from conflict zones or whatever we want to call it. Well,

this is the thing, right? Even just saying that Israel has the right to defend itself as providing

cover. Absolutely. Or our politicians to ignore what's happening on the ground and to not confront

what is happening to the Palestinians. For my part, I've met with quite a few politicians

as well. And the ones who perhaps are more pro-Israeli just aren't answering me. I don't

get meetings with them. And for those who are more sympathetic, I find those meetings

frustrating as well because firstly, the main thing they want to hear is what I've seen.

And at first, you know, we relay our eyewitness testimony, explain the things that we've seen,

explain some, you know, some of the trauma that we that we witnessed. But after a time, it

became very frustrating for me because I wondered, you know, are we all just interested in trauma

porn and we don't want to move beyond that? Like what you can see? Yes, I've seen it firsthand.

I've smelled it. I've heard it. You know, I was there, but. anybody can see what's happening,

right? As you said, Jessa, those in power have access to information, but even those

without power can just pick up their cell phone and see what's happening. And so then that's

followed by, well, what can we do? Tell us what we can Tell us what we can do. That's, I'm

like, you're the politician. Tell us. And, you know, and I'm not medical, but. But well,

when my colleague was like, well, I'm, I'm who's a surgeon. She's like, I don't invite you into

my operating room as a politician and ask you what I should do. I'm about to operate on a

patient. Like this is your space. We're here telling you what we've seen so that you can

do something, you know, um, worth, worth noting though, that, uh, you know, some info that

came from, especially the NDP caucus was really encouraging Canadians to contact their MPs.

And this ties into the idea of the grassroots movement, right? If there is no pressure, if

they're not receiving information from their constituents, they won't act. But if they are

flooded with concern by their constituents, then it forces them, even if they don't want

to, they have to. They have to respond to that at some point. And we have to... build that

more. think that is an area that I know that lots of people have signed petitions, but

it's important to keep doing it and to flood their inboxes. And we've seen this, as you've

already noted, Jessa, from the Israeli side, right? Like this is a tactic that they use

to do much success and it is a tactic that we need to build on as well. And also remember

that it isn't just about getting them to act now, but it's evidence of inaction down the

line. And there may be consequences for that. And those consequences cannot come to fruition

if there is no evidence of inaction. So I think it's really important. And so part of this

Unified Against Genocide Coalition campaign is to promote that action by Canadians. And

I'll just add, you know, I think it can be what we're experiencing, what we've been seeing

for the past two years, the overwhelming and hard to conceptualize and really hard to

or contextualize, I should say, to make sense of. And so it helps me to think of this resistance

movement as happening in three different areas, right? There's the militant physical resistance,

which we're not fighting, right? Like this is the Palestinians fight, physical fight

to liberate their lands. Then there are two other areas. One is political attrition, and

then the third is economic attrition. And so the Unified Against Genocide is really focusing

on that political attrition. And it really speaks to as well what Alex was saying about we never

know what the tipping point is going to be. We never know what meeting is going to be the

one that mattered, but we keep doing it and we keep pushing it. How people vote matters,

right? How they're engaging with their politicians matter. And that counts not just at the federal

level, but also the provincial level because we have, you know, illegal sales happening

in Ontario of stolen Palestinian land. And this is a provincial issue. But also your

city councillors, right? Bringing Palestine into all of these conversations matters because

it creates a shift, right, at the ground level that then can bubble its way up. And then

the third battle site, let's say, is economic. And that's where we have things like BDS,

where people can make a statement by how they spend or do not spend their money or where

they will spend their time or money and so forth. And those two areas, the political

attrition and the economic attrition, we have so much power. That is our power. Right. And

I think maximizing those two areas will help to push the needle in our favour. The notion

that we hear back from politicians, this sense of helpless, well, what should we do? Tell

me what I should do. I don't know what to do, is absolutely disingenuous garbage. And I

think one of the things that is somewhat different about the Gaza genocide crisis compared to

some other humanitarian situations around the world is there are so many leavers that Canada

has. We don't always have that in all contexts. We don't always have arms sales going through

to the country in question. We do here. We don't always have a thriving free trade agreement,

which could be suspended. We do here. We don't always have obvious opportunities to actually

be pursuing crimes against humanity and war crimes, investigations and charges against

Canadian citizens because what they've been doing on the ground in the country concerned.

We have that here. And all of that has been cataloged and put in front of politicians at

all levels, exhaustively in petitions and briefs. and media interviews incessantly. So no politician

gets to say, help me figure it out, I don't know what to do. It is clear what they have

to do. Why don't you think they do it? Especially the ones who acknowledge what's happening and

maybe will even publicly call it a genocide. Well, but I think, I think largely, not, not

absolutely, but largely the politicians who have had the courage to name it genocide. aren't

the ones who necessarily have access to the corridors of power. They tend more likely to

be opposition politicians and it still matters. It matters enormously because that's how a

chorus builds and they still have ways to exert pressure and you know maybe get an issue on

the agenda for a parliamentary committee etc. But we do not yet have enough courageous voices

who are close to the the centers of power where the decisions are being made. Can I, I just

I really struggle with something here because, we're talking about commending the post. No

offense to either of you. We're talking about commending the politicians who have spoken

out. We're talking about, you know, using words like courage for those who have advocated

on behalf of the Palestinians. Why? Like, this is basic humanity. This is basic fucking humanity.

They're racists. I mean, you want to talk about why? That's partly why, right? Like, this is

a systemic issue that has deep humanized Palestinians to the point that we have to give people who

actually speak out on behalf of them the label of being courageous. That's where we're at,

you know? And it's just, totally absurd and it's obscene. And we need to call them out

on this, frankly. And we're trying, right? Like, and as my esteemed colleagues have pointed

out, we're trying. We have to pull as many levers as we possibly can. And it isn't just us, you

know, who have been there or those of us who have the education that gives us a bird's-eye

view of how international law should function, it's anybody with a pulse who can see what's

happening as being wrong and understanding that they have a moral obligation to speak

out against the war crimes, against the apartheid, against the genocide, all of it. I think that's

a really important point, Teja, this notion of how pathetic it is that doing something

as basic to essential humanity as naming genocide genocide becomes labeled a courageous brave

thing to do, I think is in a weird kind of flip way, one more manifestation of the Palestine

exception, right? That that's how that gets portrayed and seen when it should be the most

natural and automatic thing that flows from the mouths of every politician, of every

political stripe. This should be something that doesn't at all have anything to do with political

ideology or anything. But here we are in this ridiculous space. I too hold so much anger

towards politicians that have acknowledged, that have done the bare minimum. Because I

see what comrades are doing getting arrested and people who have everything to risk and

are politicians. getting applauded for just opening their mouths and making statements

in the halls that they were elected to make differences in. Right? And it's like, you should

be, where are you on the front lines? There's no rule that says that they have to be confined

to those halls. If they feel totally ineffective there, they should be trying alternate tactics.

Right? If there's like, what do I do? Maybe it's like, well, I've tried all of those things

within my realm of possibilities of what I think I can accomplish as a backbencher, as

an opposition politician will then do something else. That's not because that's where my question

because they don't they so they've been presented with all of the trauma. They have gotten all

the brownie points for being on the right side and then they've really done nothing else with

it. It's only cowardice actually not courage that they haven't gone above and beyond. But

I bought my own personal gripes with politicians to the kind of bleeds out. So it's good that

there's people in balance. that are working these halls of power. I would not be able to

sit in those meetings that you do and try to gain ground there. I'm glad that other people

are willing to do it because I would be too upset and I think I expect too much of these

politicians at this point. But Tay, I wanted to go back to one of your points though, just

quickly. You mentioned the three kind of points of pressure, militant, political and economic,

and militant will set aside for now that That's another discussion. But political and economic,

I think at this point, we've been given so much evidence that politicians do feel pressure

and act on pressure, but economic pressure is the ultimate pushing point for them. And that's

what makes the grassroots so important. BDS is one example, but, you know, other disruptions

that can occur that affect the economics, the economy, right? We see a lot of activists

using other means to disrupt financially, right? And I think it's in hopes that that won't just

cut off the Zionist state from the funds and the weapons that they need, but it'll create

such a disruption and pressure point here that politicians will have to act, not in their

best conscious, but because capital's on the phone with them and they've got to do something

to stop it. So those two the political and the economic just can't be separated from one

another at all. That's frustrating. Yeah, no, I think that's really important too. And I

just want to quickly flag something that I did mention only in passing, but I think that

it is unbelievably unacceptable that here we are this far into genocide and we still have

a free trade agreement with the genocidal state in question, a free trade agreement that extends

to and benefits the illegal war crime settlements in occupied West Bank territory. mean, in

what other universe could that be at all imaginable? I'm not suggesting that by withdrawing from

that free trade agreement, that's suddenly going to bring the Israeli government to their knees.

But it's, it's unconscionable that we're continuing on on the economic front, as if it's business

as usual. That's, that's got to end. One would imagine that would occur before sanctions,

right? It would be kind of silly to have sanctions with the country you have a free trade agreement.

There's like steps to get to where we expect our politicians to be. That's yeah. And the

developments in the last few weeks, I know we didn't really talk about the situation on the

ground and Taya mentioned, you know, almost like trauma porn, but the stage that we're

at where Israeli soldiers are now admitting and almost complaining to Israeli media that

they are being asked to shoot at aid seekers, Palestinians seeking humanitarian aid. And

you folks did a great job in your press conference and in the letter that we'll link in the show

notes for folks to hear for themselves of going at that Canadian political narrative that goes

along with the promise of sanctions or not really, but know, tsk tsk Israel, do better

next time. It's a humanitarian crisis, right? That's the word that they love to use and they

frame it as though it's just occurring. There's no real culprit. People are just starving.

And I don't know if anybody wants to kind of hit on that point as well before we go because

that is the crux of Carney's position right now. And that if we could just figure out

how to deliver humanitarian aid a little bit better, things will be fine. I think it is

worthwhile to say that all of us here believe Palestinians, right? All of us have heard from

Palestinians who told us that their loved ones went to get food and were shot and killed by

Israeli soldiers. All of us heard that, all of us believed it, we reported it, and yet

the world, much of the world doesn't believe it until Israeli soldiers says it, which I

think is pretty... appalling reflection of anti-Palestinian racism. Your question, Jessa,

was, or not really your question, but your comment how the politicians will say, oh, we just have

to find a way to get aid in. Well, the thing is, we know how to get aid in. We had UNARWA,

we had, you know, UN partner groups, INGOs with an established history providing aid in Gaza

prior to October 7 and then stepping up when it would. all the efforts, we've seen so many

efforts to completely destroy, to dismantle, make aid provision completely impossible.

And then we see it being replaced by May of this year with this so-called Gaza Humanitarian

Foundation, which is a Israeli run, US backed mercenary organization that provides a militarized

aid model into Gaza. We used to have 400 UN sites that were located throughout the Gaza

Strip that community members could go and receive aid packages, but also very importantly, it

isn't just about receiving aid packages. They had access to other resources, educational

resources, medical resources, social resources, any, you know, things that families might

need given where they are at different life stages, whether with children, whether with

elderly, whether pregnant, nursing, what have you. The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, basically

eliminated all of that and provided three sites of a distribution, which has turned into,

you know, has been noted this, this hunger games situation where starving and I mean, starving

my, my staff on the ground are reporting that every single victim that they are treating

from these aid mass massacres are literally skin and bones. They are in a deep date of

starvation and they are explaining to my medical staff that the only reason they're even approaching

those aid sites is because of the sheer desperation that they are in to try to find food to feed

their families. And so they come to these aid sites, which mind you are in restricted areas

inside Gaza. They're located in red zones. They're located in areas where Palestinians

in Gaza have been told that if they enter those zones, they are at risk of death. that they

are at risk of attack. are not supposed to go into those zones and they are being told they

have to in order to access these aid packages. And so they show up and they are shot at.

They have been attacked with anti-personnel grenades from drones. They've been shot at

from drones. They've had tank fire on them. It is appalling. It is appalling. is, mean,

honestly, there's actually no words to describe the level of horror that is happening on the

ground at these sites. And so you have this system that was initially designed, as Ben

noted earlier, to meet the four principles of humanitarianism that has been replaced with

this militarized aid structure that is only providing cover for prolonging the genocide.

Just to clarify, you said there were 400 sites before? There were 400 UN sites providing

aid throughout the Gaza Strip. And they are now three. there are no red lines. Like, can

we all disagree? No, there are no red lines. This is dystopia. Like, this is dystopian.

That's psychological warfare above and beyond the actual massacres, right? Like, you're denying

them food and then you're killing them and yes, death, death. But then you're making them fearful

of aid sites, right? It's like creating this whole other horror in the middle of what

we thought was the ultimate horror. And it's no wonder that you folks are standing up and

kind of trying to build a coalition as big as possible. Can people still sign on to the

letter? Are you still accepting members? Like, is this something to grow? the letter that

was signed by legal professionals and academics and UN ambassadors, that one has closed because

it was very much focused on the G7 summit. But there continues to be an enormous interest

in the letter and every day people saying they want to sign on. So we're looking at what the

next phase will be around that, whether it's tying it to some other upcoming political

moment. But I guess all I could say is watch that space. I think that group of 500 plus

legal and diplomatic experts intends to continue to be very active and to broaden the platform

for others to join in. If ever there was a time when silence and inaction just is not an option

for anyone. And there's no matter who you are, where you're based, how much power you do or

do not think you have, no, you do have power. And this is a time like none other to use it.

is a wrap on another episode of Blueprints of Disruption. United Against Genocide is in the

midst of planning more actions and expanding their coalition. So... Again, find ways to

get in touch with them in the show notes as well as more information about the topics that

we talked about. Thanks for taking the time to listen. We are a small, cooperatively run

media team looking to amplify the many different ways people are challenging the status quo.

One way you can help expand this reach is to share our content online. We'll be back next

week with more stories of resistance. Until then, keep on disrupting.