From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be Free | Explained

Summary

The video script explores the contentious slogan 'From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,' examining its implications for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It delves into the slogan's origins, the varying interpretations that range from a call for coexistence to a demand for Israel's destruction, and the historical context of the conflict. The script also discusses the complexities of the two-state solution, the impact of extremist groups on peace efforts, and the current challenges in achieving a peaceful resolution, emphasizing the intertwined destinies of Israelis and Palestinians.

Takeaways

• 📢 The slogan 'From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free' has sparked controversy and confusion, with different interpretations leading to polarized views.
• 🗣️ Some view the slogan as a call for peaceful coexistence and harmony, while others see it as a demand for the elimination of Israel.
• 😕 Many people, including some who chant the slogan, are unaware of the geographical specifics it refers to, indicating a lack of understanding of what they are advocating for.
• 🌍 Geographically, 'from the river to the sea' refers to the area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, which currently includes the state of Israel.
• 🏛️ Historically, the United Nations had proposed a two-state solution for the region, which was not fully realized and has led to ongoing conflict.
• 🏗️ The call for a single democratic state in the region faces significant challenges due to deep-rooted identities and historical tensions between Israelis and Palestinians.
• 🔄 The script highlights the complexity of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, showing that it's not just about modern nation-states but also about ancient identities and aspirations.
• 🗣️ The script points out that the original Arabic slogan has different versions, some of which explicitly call for an Arab or Muslim Palestine, contradicting the idea of a democratic state for all.
• 📜 Historical documents, such as the PLO's 1968 charter, reveal that the initial goal of some Palestinian factions was the destruction of Israel, not coexistence.
• 🕊️ The 1990s brought a brief period of hope with peace talks and mutual recognition between Israel and the PLO, but these efforts ultimately failed due to extremist opposition and internal conflicts.
• 🚨 Recent events, such as the 2023 Hamas attack on Israel, have led to a resurgence of violence and a return to the zero-sum mentality of 'either a free Palestine or Israel'.

Q & A

What slogan has caused controversy and is associated with the Palestinian cause?

The slogan 'From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free' has caused controversy and is associated with the Palestinian cause.

What does the phrase 'From the river to the sea' imply according to some interpretations?

Some interpretations suggest that the phrase implies the establishment of a Palestinian state in the entirety of the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, which would mean the elimination of Israel.

What does the phrase 'From the river to the sea' imply according to other interpretations?

Other interpretations suggest that the phrase calls for a single, democratic state where Jews and Palestinians would live together with equal rights.

What historical proposal is mentioned in the script that aimed to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

The script mentions the United Nations' proposal for separate Jewish and Arab states, which included Jerusalem under United Nations trusteeship.

What does the acronym 'PLO' stand for, as mentioned in the script?

PLO stands for Palestine Liberation Organization, which is a group active in the Palestinian cause.

What does the script suggest about the understanding of the slogan 'From the river to the sea' among the general public?

The script suggests that many people chanting the slogan 'From the river to the sea' do not fully understand its implications or even which river and sea are being referred to.

How did the script describe the historical conflict between Israelis and Palestinians?

The script describes the historical conflict as a zero-sum game where the existence of one state meant the destruction of the other, with deep-seated identities and aspirations on both sides.

What significant event is mentioned in the script that took place on October 7th, 2023?

On October 7th, 2023, Hamas invaded southern Israel, leading to a significant escalation in the conflict and a harsh response from Israel.

What does the script suggest about the feasibility of a one-state solution for Israelis and Palestinians?

The script suggests that a one-state solution is not feasible because both Israelis and Palestinians have deeply rooted identities and are not interested in sharing a single state.

What does the script imply about the current state of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process?

The script implies that the peace process is in a state of disarray, with both sides becoming more entrenched in their positions and the situation deteriorating.

What is the script's stance on the use of the slogan 'From the river to the sea' on college campuses?

The script suggests that the use of the slogan on college campuses has led to chaos and controversy, with some interpreting it as a call for the destruction of Israel.

Outlines

00:00

🌐 Conflict Over 'From the River to the Sea'

This paragraph discusses the controversial slogan 'From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,' which has caused chaos on college campuses and ignited congressional hearings. It explores the slogan's ambiguity, with some interpreting it as a call for harmony and others as a call for the destruction of Israel. The paragraph highlights the slogan's impact on public opinion and the confusion about its geographical reference points. It also touches on the historical context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the United Nations' original vision for separate Jewish and Arab states.

05:01

🗣️ The Evolving Meaning of the Slogan

Paragraph 2 delves into the complexities of the slogan 'From the river to the sea,' examining its different interpretations in Arabic and how it has evolved over time. It discusses the historical context of the Palestinian and Israeli conflict, including the PLO's charter and the Likud party's stance. The paragraph also covers the peace agreements of the 1990s and the rise of extremist groups like Hamas, which reject the two-state solution and advocate for a single state from the river to the sea, often with violent implications.

10:03

📉 The Erosion of the Two-State Solution

Paragraph 3 describes the current state of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, focusing on the deterioration of the situation and the resurgence of the zero-sum game mentality. It discusses the rise of Hamas, the corruption and incompetence of the Palestinian Authority, and Israeli settlement expansion. The paragraph also highlights the impact of violence and intimidation on campuses and the broader implications of the conflict for Jewish students. It concludes with a call for mutual recognition of self-determination and safety for both Israelis and Palestinians.

Keywords

💡Palestine

Palestine refers to a geographic region in the Eastern Mediterranean, between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River. In the context of the video, it represents the aspiration for a sovereign state for the Palestinian people. The script discusses the slogan 'From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,' which implies a vision of a Palestinian state encompassing the entire area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, raising questions about the future of Israel.

💡Israel

Israel is a country in the Middle East, established in 1948 as a Jewish state. The video script explores the complexities of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, particularly how the existence of Israel is perceived in relation to the slogan 'From the river to the sea.' It highlights concerns that some interpretations of this slogan could imply the elimination of Israel, which is a central point of tension.

💡Genocide

Genocide refers to the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group. In the video, the term is used to express concerns that some interpretations of 'From the river to the sea' could be seen as advocating for the destruction of the Jewish state, which some view as a form of genocide. This term is controversially applied in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

💡Slogan

A slogan is a memorable phrase used in politics and marketing to convey a concise message. In the video, the slogan 'From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free' is analyzed for its implications. The script suggests that the slogan is not universally understood and that its use can be polarizing, with different interpretations leading to different reactions.

💡Harmony

Harmony refers to a state of agreement and peace. The video mentions the idea that the main message of the slogan could be for everyone to live in harmony, regardless of religion or other differences. This concept is juxtaposed with the more contentious interpretations of the slogan, suggesting a desire for peaceful coexistence.

💡Identity

Identity refers to the characteristics determining who or what a person or thing is. The video discusses how deeply held identities, such as Jewish and Palestinian, are central to the conflict. It suggests that resolving the conflict is difficult because both identities are intertwined with the land and the aspirations for statehood.

💡Zero-sum game

A zero-sum game is a situation in which one party's gain is exactly balanced by the losses of the other party. The script uses this term to describe the historical dynamic between Israelis and Palestinians, where one side's gain was seen as the other's loss, particularly in terms of territorial claims.

💡Two-state solution

The two-state solution is a political concept that envisions two sovereign states, one Jewish (Israel) and one Palestinian, coexisting peacefully. The video discusses how this idea was a hopeful step towards resolving the conflict, but also how it has faced significant challenges and opposition from both sides.

💡Intifada

Intifada refers to Palestinian uprisings against Israeli occupation. The video mentions the Second Intifada, which was marked by violence and loss of life. It also references current calls to 'globalize the intifada,' which some interpret as an escalation of the conflict and a move away from peaceful solutions.

💡Self-determination

Self-determination is the right of people to determine their own political status and pursue their economic, social, and cultural development. The video emphasizes the desire for self-determination as a driving force behind both Israeli and Palestinian aspirations, and how this right is contested in the context of the conflict.

💡Peace process

The peace process refers to diplomatic efforts to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The script outlines the history of peace talks, agreements, and their failures, highlighting the ongoing challenges in achieving a lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians.

Highlights

The slogan 'From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free' has ignited chaos and ended careers.

The slogan is interpreted differently, either as a path to harmony or a call for genocide.

Many who chant the slogan are unaware of which river or sea is being referred to.

The slogan's meaning is clarified geographically on a map, highlighting the existing country of Israel.

A survey reveals that most American college students do not understand the slogan's implications.

The United Nations originally proposed separate Jewish and Arab states in the region.

The call for a Palestine from the river to the sea implies the destruction of Israel.

The concept of Eretz Yisrael has been integral to Jewish identity for thousands of years.

The slogan stirs strong emotions due to the deep identities involved on both sides.

Some envision a single democratic state where Jews and Palestinians can live freely.

Less than one-third of Palestinians and Israelis support a single democratic state.

Israel's wars with Arab nations have led to low trust and a reluctance to share a state.

The original Arabic slogan has different versions, some of which call for an Arab or Muslim Palestine.

The PLO's 1968 charter called for the elimination of Zionism in Palestine.

The Likud party's platform asserted eternal and indisputable Jewish rights to the land.

In the 1990s, Palestinian representatives recognized Israel's existence for the first time.

Peace agreements in the '90s aimed to create a Palestinian state alongside Israel.

Islamist groups like Hamas opposed the peace agreements and claimed the land as sacred Muslim territory.

Some Israeli Jews also opposed a Palestinian state, fearing it would make Israel less safe.

The peace process deteriorated, with Hamas taking over Gaza and continued Israeli settlement building.

A surprise Hamas attack in 2023 led to a harsh Israeli response and global protests.

The slogan is now accompanied by calls for intifada and revolution, increasing the stakes.

The situation has returned to a zero-sum game, with high stakes and no easy solutions.

Israelis and Palestinians are intertwined, and neither can achieve true freedom without mutual recognition.

Transcripts

- It's plunged college campuses into chaos,

ignited congressional hearings, even ended careers.

- He was fired for using the following six words.

- From the river to the sea,

Palestine will be free.

- This slogan is anything but simple

because depending on who you ask,

it's either a path to a brighter future.

- The main message is for everyone to live in harmony

regardless of your religion or whatever it is.

- Or a direct call for genocide.

- Those who chant "From the river to the sea"

are either useful idiots who do not understand

what they are saying, or worse, people who wish

to wipe the Jewish state from the map.

- So who's right?

What does "From the river to the sea" really mean?

(text whooshing)

For all their passion,

many of the people chanting the slogan have no idea

which river or sea they're talking about.

- What's the river?

- Um.

I forgot the river's name.

- What's the sea?

- But the sea is the Red Sea.

- I think it's the Black Sea

and the river on the other side of Gaza.

- From the mountains to the sea.

- From the mountains to the sea?

Which mountains?

- What? You gotta be kidding me!

- I'm not trying to make fun of anyone,

but we do have to set the record straight

because if most of these people understood exactly

what they were calling for,

they might not be so enthusiastic.

- From the river to the sea,

Palestine will be free.

- What happens to Israel?

- In fact, a small survey of American college students

around the country revealed

that most had no idea what they were saying.

Nearly 70% walked back their use

of the slogan when they learned what it really meant.

- I think I've made a terrible mistake.

- So what does it really mean?

The answer is right here on the map.

This is the river.

This is the sea.

This is what's in between.

You see the problem?

There's already a country there.

Now, it's entirely possible that one day

there will be another country called Palestine there,

flourishing right next door to Israel.

That was the original vision proposed by the United Nations.

- The United Nations Special Committee

had advocated separate Jewish and Arab states

as the uneasy compromise.

The Jewish state will include the ports of Haifa

and Tel Aviv and the whole of the Negev valley.

The Arab will occupy the fertile eastern part.

Jerusalem will come under United Nations trusteeship.

- But calling for a Palestine that stretches from the river

to the sea means destroying the sovereign country

that is already there,

and that leaves nine million Israelis

in quite a predicament.

"Not so fast," you might be thinking.

Freeing Palestine doesn't have to mean killing

or expelling all Israelis.

Okay, maybe that's true.

You have to remember, Israel as a modern nation state

was founded in 1948, but Eretz Yisrael, the concept

of a Jewish homeland in this region has been inextricable

from Jewish identity and Jewish practice

for thousands of years.

- That's a long time.

- Similarly, Palestine, as a region,

as an identity, as an aspiration unites Palestinian people

all over the world.

So when we talk about Israel and Palestine,

we're not just talking about modern nation states

or aspirational nation states,

we're talking about the deeply held identities

that define both sides.

That's why "From the river to the sea" calls up

so many emotions, no matter what it means

to the people saying or hearing it.

For some, it means the creation of a single democratic state

where anyone can live freely.

Jews will still be safe in their ancestral homeland,

even if their state ceases to be Jewish.

Palestinians will finally get a state, albeit not one

that's exclusively Arab.

- And everyone gets to live happily ever after?

- Wait, did we all just solve the conflict?

Why has no one ever tried

to implement this one-state solution before?

Well, 'cause it's a fantasy.

(slapping sound)

- Snap out of it.

- Most people who live there just aren't interested.

Less than 1/3 of Palestinians

and Israelis would be okay with a single Democratic state

that is neither explicitly Jewish,

nor explicitly Palestinian.

Like we said, these identities - Jewish, Palestinian -

are deeply rooted.

They've spent the past century fighting each other.

- Two states have been born.

For the Holy Land,

the immediate future would not bring peace.

(lively music)

- For the third time since its birth

as an independent state, Israel is embroiled in a war

with the Arab nations that surround it.

- It is an all-out war.

That's how Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Dayan

describes an invasion of the Golan Heights

and the East Bank of the Suez by Syria and Egypt.

- And after October 7th, trust is at an all-time low.

Most people don't really wanna share a state

with neighbors who wanna kill them.

History is very clear about what happens

when you smash together a bunch

of hostile populations into one country

and tell them to play nice.

Take a look at Israel's neighbor to the north.

Civil war tore Lebanon apart for 15 years,

and today their government is more or less controlled

by an internationally recognized terrorist group.

- A group of six Gulf Arab nations

has officially declared Hezbollah a terrorist organization.

- But this isn't just a Middle Eastern problem.

There's a reason the former Yugoslavia is well, former

and just ask the folks in Belfast whether they'd like

to unite with their neighbors to the south

for a one-state solution to work,

both sides have to actually want it.

- I tell you, I don't see it happening.

- And while some of the folks chanting

"From the river to the sea" think they're calling

for a binational utopia,

the original Arabic slogan tells a different story.

Well, three stories.

The first part is more or less the same.

(host speaking in Arabic)

"From the river to the sea.

In some versions, it's (host speaking in Arabic).

"From the water to the water."

But things get spicy in the latter half of the slogan

because while some call for Palestine to be free,

(host speaking in Arabic)

others call for (host speaking in Arabic),

(protestor shouting in Arabic)

which means Palestine will be Arab

or even (host speaking in Arabic),

Palestine will be Muslim.

What was that about a single Democratic state for everyone?

- I don't have any recollection of that at all.

- No one is quite sure

when "From the river to the sea"

gained traction among Palestinians.

Some claim it came into the Palestinian mainstream

in the 1960s with the formation

of the Palestine Liberation Organization.

Others say that it only became popular

in the mid to late 1980s,

but it doesn't matter when it came to be adopted

because until the 1990s,

every Palestinian faction shared the same goal:

the destruction of the Jewish state.

Don't take my word for it, just have a look

at the PLO's 1968 charter,

which calls for a "Holy war until complete

and final victory, the complete restoration

of our lost homeland."

That restored homeland had no room

for Jewish self-determination.

"The liberation of Palestine aims

at the elimination of Zionism in Palestine.

The demand for security

and peace require all states to consider Zionism

an illegitimate movement, to outlaw its existence

and to ban its operations."

In other words, the Palestinian position

was that Jews had no right

to self-determination in their ancestral homeland.

Parts of the Israeli right were just as adamant

that the territory had only one rightful owner.

In 1977, the Likud party ran on a platform

whose very first line read,

"The right of the Jewish people to the land

of Israel is eternal and indisputable.

Between the sea and the Jordan,

there will only be Israeli sovereignty."

Sound familiar?

Now, Likud was not the only voice in Israeli politics,

but it was and remains one of the loudest,

which meant that both Israelis and Palestinians

were playing a zero sum game.

Until the 1990s, "From the river to the sea"

was a pretty explicit call for either a Jewish state

or a Palestinian one in the entire territory.

A free Palestine meant no Israel

and Israel, "From the river to the sea," meant no Palestine.

It was a real winner-take-all situation,

but things got a little more complex in the '90s

and a little more hopeful.

For the first time,

Palestinian representatives actually

recognized Israel's existence.

- We want to live in peace with all our neighbors,

including the Israelis.

- And Israel recognized them right back.

- Let me say to you the Palestinians, we are destined

to live together on the same soil, in the same land.

- It took a long time and a lot of arguing,

but the two sides signed a couple of peace agreements

that were ideally meant

to usher in an eventual Palestinian state

that would exist next door to Israel.

For the first time ever,

the two sides stopped playing a zero sum game

in which the existence of one state

meant the destruction of the other.

Free Palestine no longer

had to mean no more Israel, or so it seemed.

- And I think we were making a lot of progress.

- The peace talks failed.

Islamist groups like Hamas

and Palestinian Islamic Jihad believed

that the territory from the river to the sea

was sacred Muslim land, which meant

that the Palestinian government had no right to give it up.

They were absolutists whose charters went something

like, "From the river to the sea, Palestine is ours.

Israel? No such thing."

Okay, that's not a word-for-word translation, but this is:

"Israel will exist and will continue to exist

until Islam will obliterate it,

just as it obliterated others before it."

Hamas and PIJ weren't the only ones

who objected to the peace agreements.

- That as the Hamas and the Islamic Jihad

by way of terror try to kill the peace negotiations,

we have decided to take measures against these extremists

to try to find ways to put Kahane Chai

and Kach out of the law.

- Some Israeli Jews felt

that a Palestinian state would make Israel less safe.

They pointed to the near constant terrorist attacks

from the West Bank in Gaza,

which were explicitly endorsed by Arafat,

the guy signing the peace agreements.

Many Jews were outraged

that the Israeli prime minister was shaking the hand

of a man who called for peace out of one side of his mouth

and called for jihad from the other.

The divide in Israeli society became heartbreakingly clear

when a Jewish extremist assassinated

the Israeli prime minister who had spearheaded the talks.

And still, the peace process limped on.

But by 2001, the two-state solution

seemed further away than ever.

A handful of Israeli and Palestinian activists continued

to keep hope alive, calling

for a free Palestine alongside a safe Israel.

But the situation simply kept deteriorating.

Hamas took over Gaza.

The PA continued being corrupt and incompetent.

Israel continued building communities in the West Bank.

Both sides grew increasingly entrenched in their positions.

The status quo was, shall we say, not great.

And then it shattered.

- We have breaking news out of Israel this morning

where Hamas has launched a surprise attack

within Israel's borders overnight.

- On October 7th, 2023, Hamas invaded southern Israel,

butchering 1,200 Israelis, kidnapping another 240.

Israel responded harshly,

vowing to destroy the terrorist group once and for all.

And all around the world,

ordinary people took to the streets.

Protestors waving Israeli flags called for the return

of the hostages and the destruction of Hamas.

Meanwhile, protestors in keffiyehs shouted

for the elimination of Israel.

- We demand an end to the colonization of Palestine

in all Arab lands.

- We're back to the old zero sum game,

and this time the stakes are higher than ever.

Once free Palestine might have meant

build a Palestinian state alongside Israel.

It might even have meant

build one peaceful state for everyone.

But these days, "From the river to the sea"

is accompanied by other lovely slogans.

- Globalize the intifada.

- There is only one solution.

- There is only one solution.

- Intifada revolution.

- Intifada revolution.

- Allahu Akbar, Allahu Akbar.

- Ever lived through an intifada?

This is what it looks like.

- The Second Intifada caused the deaths

of over 300 Israelis from sniper attacks, ambushes

and suicide bombings.

- This is what protestors want to globalize

and bring to the rest of the world.

These are the means necessary

to free Palestine from the river to the sea.

This is the so-called only solution,

which, by the way,

carry some highly unpleasant associations for Jews.

And this is how Jewish students are treated on campus

by the same people calling to free Palestine.

- Take a look at this demonstration

near Tulane University

in New Orleans turning violent

after a masked pro-Palestinian protestor tries

to burn an Israeli flag.

- Shame, shame, shame, shame.

- At Cooper Union,

Jewish students were locked inside the library

after telling security staff

that nearly two dozen student demonstrators

made them feel unsafe,

that they were banging on the door in an attempt

to intimidate and cause fear according to those students.

- This is why the presidents of Penn

and Harvard have resigned.

- Last night, Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff

said the presidents of Harvard,

MIT and the University of Pennsylvania, quote,

"Lacked moral clarity," end quote,

in their responses.

During the hearing, they would not explicitly say

whether calling for the genocide of Jews

would necessarily violate their codes of conduct.

- It is a context-dependent decision, Congresswoman.

- It's a context-dependent decision.

That's your testimony today?

Calling for the genocide

of Jews is depending upon the context?

That is not bullying or harassment?

This is the easiest question to answer yes, Ms. McGill.

- And this is why so many Jews interpret

"From the river to the sea" as an explicit call

for our destruction.

Former Harvard President Claudine Gay

got one thing right when she said.

- It depends on the context.

- This is the context.

This is the cause that so many are rallying behind.

This is why Jews and Israelis, including Arab Israelis,

have zero interest in giving up their self-determination.

Like it or not, Israelis and Palestinians are intertwined.

Neither of us is going to magically disappear.

We can't suicide bomb

or airstrike one another out of existence.

We can kill one another,

but we can't kill each other's dreams of self-determination,

of safety, of liberation.

Until both sides realize that,

neither will be truly free no matter

what the maps end up looking like.