 we can start. So, hello to everyone. I can't say good evening, good morning, good afternoon. Nowadays, with such devices that we're using, we have people from across the globe and that's in itself exciting, although it would be very nice to have received our two guests for this session here in London. Actually, we have three participants and two of them are in Israel, if I'm not wrong. Bashir, you're there now. Yeah, you are there and Leila is in the United States and in Boston, correct? Okay, so that's in itself already an international panel and that fits, I mean fits the book quite well, but first of that, let me remind you that this is an event organized by the SOS Middle East Institute and the Center for Palestine Studies, whose chairperson is Dina Matar. She's here with us on the panel, but not showing for the moment at least. So, a very, very great and warm welcome to our participants and for this presentation and discussion of a very important book and even more important in the light of all the tensions that we have seen here in the UK in particular and in many countries over the recent months and years on everything related to the Arab and the Jewish questions, as the title of the book says, the geographies of engagement in Palestine and beyond and indeed this engagement is very much has been very much a topic of discussion recently again. Let me just introduce our speakers of the way I presume that the people attending this session have read about it about the event, but this will be online as a video and therefore it is useful to introduce the speakers. So we have the two editors of the book, published by Columbia University Press, the Arab and Jewish questions geographies of engagement. As we said in Palestine and beyond the two editors are Bashir Bashir and Leila Farsach, who are both of us with us here. Leila is an associate professor in the Department of Sociology, Political Science and Communication at the Open University of Israel and a senior research fellow at the Van Lair Jerusalem Institute is the co editor of the Holocaust and the NACBA, a new grammar of trauma and history also Columbia University Press two years I mean it's a book that came out two years ago. Leila is an associate professor of political science at the University of Massachusetts Boston. She's the author of several publications among which Palestinian labor migration to Israel. She's a labor land and occupation, a book that came out in a second edition in 2012, and also commemorating the NACBA, evoking the NACBA subtitle book of 2008. Her forthcoming book is entitled rethinking statehood in Palestine, and this should be coming out this year. Bashir and Leila will talk for close to 10 minutes each. That's shorter than what we have been used to in the series but that's because we have a discussant with my colleague Yair Walaq from from so as with heads also did the center used to head center for Jewish studies at at so as, and he is presently on sabbatical that's why he is so I mean, intervening from from Israel where where he went for his sabbatical. So you will be acting as discussant he will speak for something like 15 minutes or so expressing his comments on the book, which is a collective book we were speaking with the editors but we have a very fine list of there is a very fine list of contributors to the book. Maybe when presenting it Bashir or Leila will will maybe mention mentioned then. And after that, both our the both both editors may get get back to to the discussing the years comment after which we will be taking the your questions which I mean for the audience should be posted on the Q&A device here on zoom for those who are on zoom. We can't use the chat. For this we just can use the Q&A to write your questions comments or whatever you want our panelists to to to discuss. Okay, then so without any further delay, let us move to the event itself and who wants to start Bashir said you want to you will be starting. Please put your mic on. Leila. Okay, so. Well, thank you very much. And thank you for the Center for Palestine studies at so as for inviting us these studies inviting us to speak about our book we're very delighted it's a great pleasure and a great honor. What I will be speaking about is really the genesis of this book, what this book so to do. Why did we come up with this idea. And basically the aim of this book is to put the Arab and Jewish questions together questions that often people thought about a lot, but thought up as two separate issues rather interrelated. I know that these were actually intimately related questions. And this idea of the intimacy and how they're connectedness comes from the fact that emerged from a series of workshop organized by the Kraski forum in Vienna. As part of a larger project on alternative to partition and Israel Palestine. The aim of this workshop where we invited the range of scholars international scholars various fields. And it was to bring together and revisit contemporary Arab engagement with the Jewish question, namely how Arab dealt with the question of Jewish political rights under the light of European anti-Semitism and Zionism, as well as explore Jewish engagement with the Arab question, which in itself is about how Zionism and that non Zionist voices Jewish voices that with Palestinian presence in Palestine with the arrival of science. And what was to put the two is to question the Arab and Jewish question together because they are intrinsically intertwined and are concerned fundamentally with the issue of citizen rights, the problem of nationalism, and how can we achieve political equality today. So, what this book tried to do, thanks to these workshop and then that evolve into papers that we've compiled a total of 11 papers which we compiled in this book. What we tried to show is how to show how the Arab and Jewish question are connected in three important ways. Firstly, they're connected historically. The Arab and Jewish question are connected historically. So far as we try to show, particularly in the first part of the book, how these two questions are tied to Europe are tied to the history of anti-Semitism, and specifically to Europe's relationship with the non-Christian other. And its reliance on colonialism to transport this problem elsewhere, thereby aggravating them. And the first part of the book discusses three different articles that show how Europe, the Arab Jewish question is fundamentally the European question, and how this European question of how to deal with the other still continues with us today, the other who in the 19th century was the Jew today becomes the Muslim and in both case that excluded from an inclusive citizenship. Secondly, the book tries to explore the connection between the Arab and Jewish question politically. In other words, how these two questions are tied with the problem of nationalism, and are at the heart concerned with the issue of citizenship and equality and how citizenship and equality can be protected in under what political shape. The reason here, and this is what the second part of the book tries to do, is to highlight the problem of nationalism in aggravating the Arab and Jewish question, rather than solving them. Since it's tied to an exclusion in nationalism that always creates an other which is to the ostracize and left out, and which ends up limiting one's identity in very segmented ways that deny the diversity of one's identity. We take the figure of the Arab Jew as an example of how binary divisions are central to nationalism and thereby destroy the complexity of identity in the Middle East and elsewhere, and fostered a hegemonic understanding of political identity that often leads to certain political structures that oppress and negate rather than protect citizens rights. And thirdly, and this is where the third part of the book focuses on the Arab and Jewish questions are connected in so far as they allow us to, and they force us we need to put them together because they allow us to think about an alternative to the present stubborn realities on the ground. The reality of continuing network, the dispossession and try to think to go beyond partition as a political paradigm to solve the present political impulse. In other words, by putting the Arab and Jewish question together and seeing how they connected historically and politically, and our concern with issues of rights, and who is including the other, it allows us to think rethink nationalism in more inclusive and which allows us also thereby to talk about different identities in the Middle East, with the Kurdish, the Yazidis, whoever who are part of the Middle East, and need to be included as equals not as minority in any particular configuration. I'll stop at this point and I'll let Bashir take it from there just wanted to give you an overview of what the Genesis and what the productive conversation allowed us to produce this book. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Bashir, your turn. Thank you, Gilbert, and Yair as well as Dina and thank you, Layla, and it's a great honor to be here at Salah Smidili Center. So my, my contribution is going to be really about trying to put a larger frame to this project the way I understand it at least and I want to make really some few few comments that really make make a perspective on this. First, I want, I want to say that this project is one of three pillars that come together from our perspective that make a whole and this whole put together and make sense. And therefore, this book that the Arab and the Jewish question is part of the following other two pillars. The first is alternatives to partition. The second is the Holocaust and Iraq and the third is obviously this book that we are discussing here which is the Arab and the Jewish question. The claim is that these put together, these three things put together actually are informed by two very fundamental observations and assumptions. The first is interrogating modernity. That is not to suggest that interrogating modernity is exhausted by only focusing on three on these three pillars, but actually to suggest that actually interrogating modernity through these three interesting pillars is giving the way for something that I think would be the way for some new form of thinking and what I call new moral and political grammar and let me do a little bit elaborate on this. Interrogating modernity here has two dimensions that I think these three pillars put together lead to. One is basically nation state and the national order or basically nationalism and more specifically nationalism as the emerging cement and a grammar of the global politics after the first world war. And more specifically nationalism desire for homogeneity purity and sameness, which by result actually creates a great deal of, you know, if you wish, colonial violence internally and externally. And it's actually in this perspective that we understand the Holocaust and the network by the way, which, you know, by the way, Gilbert has inspired us in this project and actually in the Holocaust and the network project that I speak about there So understanding this emerging global national order post the imperial or after the disintegration of the imperial order and specifically its desire for homogeneity is the context within which you understand and interrogate nationalism in a very explicit way and definitely understand some very important events, which is basically the events of other rising the events of the Holocaust and the network in that specific thing. And, and clearly, it is the context within which we understand, obviously colonial violence and specifically and particularly recital colonialism, which is extremely fundamental issue when it comes to understanding zionism in the context of Israel Palestine and so this is an extremely important one, you know, one trajectory of understanding these three pillars coming together. The second point that I think is extremely important for understanding these three dimensional project, which this book is one dimension of these three dimensions is basically that these kind of understood together in the very specific context of Israel Palestine, leading to by national ethics and by national interventions of some sort. And that is basically that once these understood mostly through the terrain of alternatives to partition and alternatives to partition is to be understood and contextualize in the larger history of interrogating nationalism and settler colonialism and bringing Europe to the republic crux and the center of its imperialist and orientalist kind of enterprise the way it projected itself in the balfour declaration and many other kinds of consequences in Palestine. This leads us to suggest how we can engage in a way that we can transcend the existing realities so we can conceptualize a different alternative future for Israel Palestine and this is where by nationalism comes. And this is why actually in the third part of the book, a huge chunk of the articles there really elude to these types of potential futures, but I for one and I think later as well, you know, you know, kind of more favor this kind of by national track of interrogation that lead to these types of things so this is really the major perspective that we can understand this kind of project. The second point that I want to say that I think is extremely important for understanding the larger context. So, if the pillar of alternatives to partition is about thinking about things that go beyond the two state solution and think that account for the inseparability of the Arabian Jews. And then the Holocaust and Anakba are being really inseparable, not in the sense that not in the sense that they are equal or similar but in the sense that they need to be understood in the same context of history and conceptual development of nationalism. And the way the Holocaust, the way the Anakba has become inseparable part of the modern history of Jews and the way the Anakba, sorry the Holocaust has become inseparable part of Palestinian history and present and voluntarily. And the third one is this Arab and Jewish question book the way Leila alluded, I think they put together also indicate to a second point that I want to include too, which is basically, which is basically the claim that this whole enterprise is actually an intervention to rethink the question of Palestine differently. And under no circumstances, I am suggesting that what we are doing here in this enterprise, which was sponsored, thankfully by the Bruno Kreiske Forum for International Development in Vienna is not the only way of rethinking Palestine and it's not the only way and the only methodology of rethinking The starting point of our analysis is that Palestinian nationalism is undergoing a very serious rethinking process. And the question of Palestine is going through serious process of rethinking. Definitely this is influenced also by a very serious transformation and rethinking is the answer. And in that way, if I were to summit up in the second point of macro perspective, this is an attempt to rethink Palestine through a very modest specific contribution of certain methodologies. And under again, and I repeat this and there are no circumstances we are suggesting here that this is the only way or the most exhausted way of rethinking person. There are some contributions that can be doing micro history cultural history. They can be other ways of political economy to integrate these types of things and think differently. But I think even these things the way we look at them they remain to be very focused on these kind of micro perspective. We are trying here to bring the major perspective of thinking about these questions in a very specific larger And the last point that I want to say here before I conclude is that actually if I were to send this book specific book which is the Arab and the Jewish question differently, I would identify simply three different registers. The first register. This is a book that seeks to interrogate Europe. This is one. The second thing this is a book that seeks to interrogate Zionism. Okay. And the last one this is a book that seeks to interrogate Arab nationalism and particularly a very particular grab variant of Arab nationalism which is assimilationist form of Arab nationalism. Now again, and by this I conclude and finish. I am not suggesting that this book is doing these three things exhaustively and I'm not suggesting that this book is doing this, unlike any other things but it is definitely a pioneering book and project that is trying to do this through a very specific and very unique perspective, where it brings actually otherwise, what has been accustomed to be disconnected, separated questions, and actually ties and draws links between otherwise segregated struggles histories and conceptual and conceptually frames and therefore the modest aim of this project is really to bring these questions together to see the intersections to see the differences, but also to see the productive, instructive way of putting these questions together and to see why Europe is in the Middle East and why the Middle East in zero is in Europe, and going beyond these. This is the way of particularly a decent contribution to how to understand Palestine Israel differently. You are a mute. Many thanks to both of you. Would you like just to describe the book, the number of contributors how they were selected, you know, and a few words on that or. Yeah, one of you. Okay, the contributors were a diverse group of people who attended these workshops and we're willing to submit chapters of what they discussed so we have people. We have some interesting, isn't a discussion on the Arab Jewish question on Arab, Arab Jews, we have article by Brian cloak and Jill and he jar on the European question we have article by Massar way and he jar on alternative to partition. So we try to include the diversity of Jewish and Palestinian and European voices that deal with the, it's a total of 11 chapters, plus an introduction. I'm happy to if you want I can put the content of the book table of content. Thank you very much. Thank you. So your turn now please. Okay. I want to start by thanking Jill bear and Dina for inviting me to give these comments I want to also thank Leila and Bashir for their comments and for editing this remarkable book. This is a conversation, as we've heard on Israel Palestine on the Jewish history and antisemitism on the question of the rights of Palestinians in Palestine but also on Islamophobia and all of these put together. But it's also conversation about about what about that conversation about what conditions are necessary to make that conversation possible and what directions could this conversation. Take, take. And it stands out. And not only because it has many excellent contributions from many colleagues are holding high esteem and, and it's quite interdisciplinary so people will find what the kind of directions that interest them more. But it also stands out for me as a kind of proposition a kind of project that points or suggest the kind of conversations that we can have maybe should have and enabling hopefully a new kinds of engagements, including disagreement, I think that's that and that is significant. So I will say something about what makes this book special. In terms of contributors. In terms of the topics, and in terms of the framework and the kind of question that all these pose. So first, I think it should be. It's not worthy that this book is edited by two Palestinian scholars, I think this is very significant. The book that poses the questions, among other things of Jewish history and Jewish political rights, and it is an unusual development now it rests to be sure on a revived engagement with the quote unquote Jewish question with Jewish history. In the Arab world, including, for example, she bears book, the Arabs and the Holocaust but a lot of literary and film expression which I mentioned in the introduction. And, but I think it's one thing to talk about Jewish history in Iraq in Lebanon and it's definitely to talk about it from Palestine. And I think that is an interesting contribution that I'd like to hear, and I'm sure maybe say a bit more about how is what it means to do this from a Palestinian perspective. I think you're not the only ones in the sense that there are growing numbers I think of Palestinians are interested in posing this kind of question. And we have, we hosted a few years ago, the colleague in Egypt, Abdelhaq, who talked about the revived interest in Jews in the Arab world and it's on YouTube. Yeah, so people can find it. And she's Palestinian, of course. And I think when I look I mean clearly you alluded to this but clearly that interest from a Palestinian perspective seems to. And I think of Leila's work on on frameworks beyond partition that that kind of kind of lead if you think seriously beyond partition you need to think about this question. Or Bashir's work on the Holocaust in Mecca, but it would be good to hear more from them, the kind of the different perspectives from, you know, different our perspectives and Palestinians perspective. The second thing I want to say is the wide spectrum of contributors in. So we have Palestinian editors as I said, we have our scholars from various backgrounds here. We have Jewish Israeli scholars, and some of them would call themselves are as well. And we have diaspora Jewish scholars. And so that's quite a mixed group. And in political terms, I think when you look at the various positions of scholars, the book spans quite a considerable spectrum. I think that that is unusual. I think we usually get more safer choices in the sense that people are more on this, you know, the room, the spectrum is, is more limited. And there's a question of how people, you know, when it comes to the Jewish Israeli scholars, how to identify themselves and design is some kind of science and so forth. But there are also real differences beyond the question of mere identification. And, and that kind of poses kind of interesting questions and the choice of bringing such a varied group. The third thing I would say is the emphasis of our Jews. And I think we should. You say how unusual it is, when we have a volume dedicated to Israel past and the Jewish question the question and half. I think about half of the contributions either engage seriously or center entirely on the question of our Jews. And this is really unusual. And again, I think this is unusual and it's a welcome development, I think, when you a lot of times when we tell the story of Israel Palestine, it's about European Jews coming to Palestine establishing as well. While in fact, you know, something like 50% of Jewish Israeli population has roots in the Middle East and North Africa. And so that, you know, however you what you take on it, this is a significant factor. I think this volume takes this on board seriously. We also have five Mizrahi contributors. And again, this is unusual. When you have Jewish Israeli Jews continue contributing. This is really unusual. And again, this is a very welcome corrective I think, to the kind of usual and story, but and it's not necessarily so we have Gilani jar, not writing necessarily about Arab Jews. It doesn't work on the basis of identity politics. It works on basis of, of a real argument that we see here. And finally, I think there's the framework that, again, as I said brings together the issue of Israel Palestine anti semitism if you want the kind of the question of Jewish history and predicament and questions of Islam, of homophobic or intimate and, and this is that kind of brings in bringing all these things together open certain questions. But let me ask you this question differently, why, why do we have, why don't we have more volumes like this and why this is so unusual. And I have so there's various responses to this and the first obvious thing is the political difficulties in assembling this kind of volume. So on the one hand, if I talk of the Israeli studies or Jewish studies, there are structures of exclusions, which exclude Arab and Palestinian scholars to be sure. And, but also the other side of the coin is the difficulty and reluctance on opposition of Arab scholars or scholars in solidarity with Palestine to engage with this kind of projects and the questions of boycotts and anti normalizations which are interpreted in different ways but I do are a real impediments to this kind of work. But, okay, these are the more familiar impediments I would say but there is another impediment I think that when we talk about Jewish Arab Israeli Palestine conversation. Let's just clear what the limits of this conversation. What are we talking actually about I think this is a really difficult one. And when we think of Israel. So there's this kind of two parallel conversations if you wish. One is to think about Israel vis a vis the Jewish world. Yes, so there is a real dialectics between Zionism and true diaspora Jews, a real dialectic between Israel and Jewish diaspora. And in that story, Palestinians are outsiders, you know, important outsiders maybe but they're outsiders. Okay. And there is a real conversation about place of Palestine in the Arab world. You know the question of Palestinians in historic Palestine vis a vis the refugees outside the question of Palestinians vis a vis the Arab world. And in this conversations Israelis are outsiders, important outsiders, but nonetheless. So we have a slightly ironic situation where we have a dialectic of domination Israel Palestine. These two conversations these two conversations push us outside against, you know, we don't not to discuss the dialectics but to discuss it kind of as an external factor and that is, that is a difficulty. Given example, if we talked about to race in the US. We would be in much clearer terms of course there are transnational ramifications of this conversation but the limits of geographic and the social limits are much clearer when we talk about questions like racing the US in terms of who do we talk about. You know what is the population and what is the geography. While Israel Palestine is sprawls over to all directions in the sense where you can talk about problems in Kishinev as part of the Israel Palestine discussion you can talk about the Jewish diaspora in the US as part of the Israel Palestine discussion you can talk about pan Arabism as part of the Palestinian discussion of course on refugees in Lebanon and so forth as part of the Palestinian discussion. So it's kind of sprawls over, you know, to to so many directions that make this conversation difficult. And I think what I see in the book are two directions to deal with this two approaches. And one is by nationalism which we heard of already. There are some really interesting challenging contributions here on by nationalism, whether it's by my mother, my son, my son, and you've got every and he left coin and their pencil and, and, and most of her, and all of these. So we examine by nationalism, either as a political fact and political possibility, or as a methodological so as a methodology of how we approach this topic and we approach it through the premise of by nationalism to say to focus on these kind of connections between Israelis and Palestinian. But the other direction I see here is not to focus in was but to put this within bigger conversations so put this in the conversation on on the Arab Spring on Islamophobia on antisemitism. Okay, not, you know, to accept the fact that we cannot delimit neatly Israel Palestine from these other conversations and we have to take them on board and this is the conversation. And I think there are some contributions, for example by a lot of hot by a Rustam by Brian Krug, and by Guilinija to give some examples here. And yes, and I think that's, that's the two directions and maybe you can, but there is a tension I think between these two directions and maybe you could speak a bit about this. I think the most. I mean one of the most interesting they're all very, very interesting chapters. I think Guilinija chapter is most challenging I think philosophically, but I think also what I liked about this that rather to lament, you know how we got here. In the north of the place of Arab Jews and so forth. He actually opens it as a possibility kind of says that there is a kind of fluidity about his identities the history of identities opens up conversation possibilities of transformation and undetermined nature of these things which means that there is space for change and I think in the current a dire situation that we find ourselves that's that's a kind of that's a kind of optimistic way to look at things. So I'll stop here and I'll let Laila and Bashir respond. Thank you very much. Thank you very much for this beautiful and generous decision of the book and what we're trying to do and of our ambition. That's definitely you got you definitely needed what we're trying to do. And I will repeat a little bit what Bashir said the aim of this book, we were fully aware that it is a difficult compensation but we wanted to start this conversation. It was a way to start the conversation as as you rightly pointed out, it's a difficult conversation to have, because of the reason that you mentioned whether it is people risk off in such of inclusion, or that it is because of BDS or, but both Bashir and I, and those who were participating at the Kraski forum meeting, it was very evident to us that this is a composition that needs to happen, and needs to happen in an informed way. At the very beginning, we were very well aware that there are these, as you said, conversations, one about Palestinians place in the world and the other one the relationship between Israel and the diaspora and the dialectic as you explained of Zionism and Jewish diaspora. What I just want to address is what we wanted to do is say, in the present political impasse, which we see today Israel Palestine, and in the present political impasse that the Middle East is and which the Arab uprising revealed very clearly. We see that there is an undisputable need to re-question nationalism. So that was one of the starting point if you want. Okay, like if we are now in a 21st century in need of a new political configuration, and this new political configuration in questions nationalism deeply, whether it is Arab nationalism, whether it is Zionism, whether it is European nationalism. Okay, so how putting these questions together will allow us to in question the problem of nationalism and more fundamentally the question of political rights. So what unites Europe, what makes it as you said Palestine such a wide spectrum is that we fundamentally talking about what is the meaning of political rights and democracy in the 21st century. This is the framework of hegemonic limited authoritarian nationalism. This is rejected that a spring was precisely about that about rejecting a hegemonic understanding of nationalism is about calling on the state to protect its citizen. It's not it's not about capturing the state is about holding the state accountable. So that's one dimension the other dimension was precisely the reality on the ground in Israel Palestine and we all know we are beyond partition Israel Palestine we have an apartheid reality. I am a political economist. You know it's my work out if you would have asked me 30 years ago would I have worked on these issues. No but what a lot made me work on these issues precisely when I was doing my field work on Palestinian workers working in Israeli settlements. And I'm discussing with the Israeli settler who tells me, I will never give up my Palestinian worker and never replace him with a foreign worker, and I ask him why. Because we're destined to live together in this land, which reminded me of what Ben Ben Asti wrote in 1984. We are in a rider host writer reality we basically said in 1984 we are in apartheid reality. So the trajectory has been the economic and factual facts on the ground, realize that we are in apartheid reality, however way you want to call it unequal reality definitely. How do you transcend it. You transcend it by saying I don't engage or you transcend by engage on ethical principles as she talked about and as we're all engaged. So what are the ethical principles and the ethical principles that we are all equal. That's the fundamental question. That's the question that Europe did not solve still today with the problem of anti-Semitism with the problem of an Islamophobia. Europe is still struggling with the issue of nationalism in way that the United States is not, you know, because we're not addressing the issue of phrase we're not addressing the issue of colonialism we're not addressing that legacy of colonialism. So, we see again as she said that it's a problem of modernity that needs to be decomposed in new language. So what this book allowed us to do what we try to do is say, where did we start. When Europe because Europe, both with the problem of nationalism and the problem of colonialism. Where are we today, and what is the cost of that, not dealing with this issue of the, of the right of others. We are in reality that continues to exclude. How can we overcome that exclusion. Well, we need to be engaging the conversation based on recognizing the injustice and the inequality and the structure of exclusion, in order to start proposing an inclusive political structure. So that's, that's the way we try to know, as we said we, this is just the beginning of a conversation is not a conclusive conversation. Why it is difficult for Palestinians to engage with is because Palestinians are being, you know, Israeli settler colonialism has deepened over the past in the 21st century did not gain, you know, and many from many Palestinians I don't want to even be engaged in this discussion in other forum which we have some people I told them why do you even engage in this conversation we have much more than things to do than engage with the Jewish question. But those who live on the ground realize that they cannot but engage with this question. The question is how do we engage with this question. And that's what this book tried to show that engaging with the other. And by recognizing the history and working that the regional context, as well as international content allows us to come to a new reality to start constructing a new political language. And that was I think what we tried to do, but I'll stop at this point and let Bashir continue. Thank you very much, Layla Bashir. We want to also do a few words. Yes, please. I can do that briefly. Thank you. This was very generous and very comprehensive and you indeed raise several interesting and challenging points. Let me relate to your first and maybe another another extra point later on in my intervention now. Your first point was about why would Palestinian scholars bother with Jewish rights and Jewish modern history and all of that. I mean, there are, I mean, there are many different ways how I can address this and you mentioned our earlier work that I did with Amos Goldberg with the Holocaust and Anakba someone with other also why we do course that deep into these kinds of sensitive explosive materials. But here is very briefly I'm very happy to elaborate later on but here is here is my take on this the way I understand it and this is also something that informs this projectively. Arabs and Jews in Palestine with all the implications that entails with their transnational kind of connections have become insuperable. Okay, this is not only a descriptive account by the way this is not a geographical, you know, descriptive account of realities only, but this has very serious implications of how we understand the history of Palestine, which is an important relational history that needs to be understood in a context in relation to Europe and in relation to the empires etc etc. And it is precisely in this context that today I believe that there is no moral consistent defensible Jewish point of view if there is anything that is qualified as Jewish point of view that can be defensible morally without engaging with the Anakba and the ongoing consequences of the Anakba. So this is one direction of thinking about that you might come and say okay fine so why the Palestinians would bother with the Jewish kind of question, and this is precisely something that I mean Leila and I and many of those who participated in this long project with all the, you know, with obviously existing diversities in the views are not here representing everyone you know this is not how much in years ago, also informed by a very continuous legacy in the Arab and definitely Palestinian intellectual, mostly literature as you mentioned, where there is a very clear evidence and not only clear evidence in the terms of, you know, in terms of like empirics, but in terms of why Palestinians owed a need to engage with Jewish history, definitely the way they pay the price as the victims of Zionism and the victims of Europe's anti-Semitism in Palestine. So in that sense this inseparability has this historical and also as I indicated the conceptual way of this kind of nationalism as opposed to imperial kind of order, but it but as manifests itself in the grounds today that today in the context of the failure of partition. These questions have become much more pressing. These questions have become much more prominent, as you indicated in your in your work here in the genealogy of partition. I mean, even partition back in the time in 37, 1937 and 1947 was very much of a colonial global intervention that actually interfered in the in the affair of Palestine in the colonial context of Zionism. And that is still need to be understood in a way where these actually interventions need to be seen in this relational entangled history, rather than in these kind of micro perspective and this is why for instance in the work of obviously Lias Khouri, who is very fundamental pillar in this project, he doesn't have a contribution, but you know, and obviously in the work of Gilbert who also is a fundamental figure that inspired also this project. I mean, this is type of engagement that existed there. Now, we try to take this engagement to a different level. We try to push the conversation to different level. This is where literally these things have become inseparable. And the last thing that I want to say in this specific context of partition, you know partition, you know, had the illusion that the Arabs and the Jews can divorce. That's it, like, you know, when you are divorced you externalize the other that once you externalize the other you engage with it differently. You know, the Israeli colonial settler colonial project from day one, but definitely in the past three decades have, have made the Arabs and the Jews insuperable. Their into a intertwining is not just a matter of realities on the ground. These are also reflected in a very deep understanding of very powerful forces of nationalism of very deep forces of colonialism and very deep forces of you know, European European politics and European imperialism so and this needs to be understand indeed in this sense of context. If I have time I can relate to a second question very briefly. And that is, you know, what is this whole conversation because this whole conversation indeed here has very serious troubles. I mean, Palestinians rightly so are sick and tired of dialogue, Palestinian don't want to die. Like why were the Palestinians as victims of this whole enterprise with the complicity of Europe into, you know, coming to these conversations of dialogue, as if they are equal, as you indicated yourself with the real commissions, you know, as if they are treated, the two parties, the victim and the victimizer the colonized and the colonizer, the oppressed and the oppressor as if they are equal and our own parity and we are inviting them to come and converse jointly under conditions of parity and equality. This is absolutely nonsensical. And it is precisely this, that when we envision this project, and we wrote the rationale of this project, we were not inviting people to come and deliberate and converse jointly on the basis of egalitarian politics, but we are clearly were indicating from the very beginning that we are talking about a colonial context, if through which we are clearly talking about asymmetry of colonial power that needs to be transcended needs to be dig and interrogated, and needs to be questions and investigated and therefore this is why this conversation and by the way, one of the fascinating things about this project and this is again, we are very grateful to the blue guys from and Gertrude who is who is actually the director of this, because when we engage with this project we didn't mean to come up with a product actually, and very few institutions would be hosting you continuously, and they were not hosting you to have a product. This project was not aiming to produce a product this project was incremental transformative informative and exchange that was grimaced clearly on diagnosing the situation from the very beginning as a situation of asymmetry of power, where the need is to engage to transit and go beyond this and this takes me to the last point of by nationalism. And by nationalism is definitely the entry here and I think the only way forward, and for very specific and very work very specific reasons. I mean post nationalism civic expressions of the demands of the Jews and the Palestinians will not go for the Palestinians for a very long period of negation of their national identity by zionism by European politics and surely by some Arab regimes. Palestinian identity is an extremely important thing and probably the most important achievement of Palestinian nationalism post neck by time. If Palestinian nationalism achieved anything in a post back the time it achieved that Palestinians they are back and big in history as a national group and as a people. What is the Palestinian we that now is not contested any question, but what is contested any question is its leadership and the functional of its national institutions, not the very fact of existence of Palestinian nationalism, which until 3040 years ago, our fathers and our fathers were contested questions and actually interrogated about their national identity for the Israeli Jewish prior side of the story. It's a very different history and I'm not equating that it's a different genealogy. It's a genealogy of settler colonialism that created a national group that is a fact of the ground of six millions more than six million Israeli Jews that have robust vivid developing kind of culture. Again, within the lab of a settler colonial roots and settle colonial, not only roots but existing things that is actually pushing very clearly to dominate eliminate the Palestinians, etc, etc. There is a very precise context that the egalitarian binationalism that Leila and I speak and some other contributors here is actually conditional on a very serious process of historical reconciliation and decolonization, under which there is no, there are no circumstances it will be accepted any form of Jewish exceptionalism Jewish privileges or Jewish particularism. And in that sense, it is this egalitarian binationalism that I think to be understood in the context of also looking today how the Palestinian advocacy for these types of rights is immediately translated and cashed out into antisemitism, and you know this better than I do in Britain and other places where the definition is being instrumentalized deployed and put forward to criminalize and struggle and what is the Palestinians guilty of the Palestinians are guilty of and those who are supporting the Palestinians in their advocacy and in solidarity with them, they are criminalized for advocating what the ultimate crime that is equality. And it is in this context why we think binationalism in its egalitarian version has a very powerful, you know, decolonizing power and decolonizing enterprise. Seeing these things all put together, obviously, you know, clarify, you know, again, the potentiality and the opportunity of this project, but also sees why at the end of the day, and this is not a romantic statement, this is a very bold I have no sense of apology about this, the only way forward for the future of Palestine is Arab Jewish partnership, our Jewish partnership that is bremist on variety equality mutual legitimacy, and the context of very clear decolonization under which there will be very fundamental dismantling of any Jewish colonial privileges of any sort where it is based on reparative historical justice that will bring the question of refugees into centrality and rethink Palestine not to be reduced only as to the borders of 1967, and reducing the question of Palestine to be about independence and a statehood that Palestinian is not about statehood that Palestinian questions about very fundamental basic rights, collectively and individually, the minute the frame and the solution addresses these questions, we can move forward. Layla and I in this decent project without now speaking on behalf of every contributor in this seek to pave the way for trying to address these questions modestly through baving the way to identify potential instructive and productive discussion on how we can move forward to that direction of decolonization and historical reconciliation. Thank you. Okay, thank you, thank you very much to all I mean I let you speak because the it seems that the audience is happy listening to you to discussing very. I've seen only, only one kind of question which is more a comment and a question but get back to that. I think the discussion showed how how much this this book is. I mean provides a food for thought, I mean, one can see all all this discussion and the year confirmed that there's a lot of food for thought in this book it's an extremely stimulating book. And, and I mean there are so many issues that are also tackled with in the book that it opens a lot of doors to to to really on on many, many discussions. And the, I mean, the, I would probably as long as we don't have any kind of list of questions yet and I would encourage people who have questions listening to us to use the Q&A device and type their question. But maybe we can continue for a while, a little while at least the this dialogue and yeah, how would you react to Bashir's definition of the solution and binationalism and how he sees the the future. And of course, I want to emphasize what both Layla and Bashir said that this is not a kind of party line in the book. It's not a monolithic or homogeneous or whatever book. It's a book with multiple authors they have different views on many issues they are certainly not all on any kind of of single perspective, although I would say, in order to be able to do such books. You need people with at least the possibility of dialogue and possibility of thinking in common. And, and that that's why you can have this kind of thing which is, of course, not. And by taking people that random bit of among communities of the communities that are involved so that that that here requires some kind of possibility of dialogue and and that's also what the two editors share was was here. The possibility of discussing these these issues. And so yeah, you want to to react to that. The, the last bit of, of Bashir's intervention. Okay, so in terms of binationalism. First of all, it's, it's, it's, as you know, it's not an obvious choice. I mean, the very, and the very recognition of. I think the one question here is, I mean the recognition of Palestinian national rights, but which is, you know, it's a much more dire requirement and here you have a history of denied of these rights, which is a century old. It's a more pressing question in a way. But there is the question of Jewish or Israeli political rights, I think within within any future scenario which the book puts on the table I think which I think is not an obvious thing for for the many people who support us. I think the quick, you know it and Israel seems so strong so why do you need to, why do you need to care about this. But anyway, I mean you have to because if you don't, if you don't say what exactly is to happen with the Jewish Israelis. Then, hey, you're not going to bring them on board any time, not now but not also in 100 years you need to spell out what and and second you open yourself to various criticism that you know, you know, including that you want to push them into the framework. So that is, I think, I think this is crucial in terms of binationalism as a framework. First of all, it has to be part of the. So even if we were talking about to state solution and so forth and Israel in the 67 borders. There is a Palestinian minority of 20% you cannot think of a minority with 20% does not have national rights. It's not a democracy. As long as that's my, you know, and of course we are beyond that stage, I think, I mean, it's very unlikely that we'll see partition. And if that's not going to happen, then we are clearly in the territory. But it's not. It's not an obvious. It's not an easy path in any way. There are many, many reasons. But what is it I think for binationalism to work. It would require a meta identity that would somehow bind these groups together I don't think you can just have. That's that's one of the difficulties that I think. And also it opens a lot of questions that I think needs to be need to be discussed in a way that in a way that in many places where we have binationalism or multinationalism say the UK. We have a British identity which kind of overarching and and people can choose if they feel very English or very British. If you don't have that and you have only Jews versus Palestinians that creates a more antagonistic potentially situation. And the question is how does how does it relate to the Jewish diaspora I think is important. Yeah, your last question on how it relates to the Jewish diaspora this is a question that I am personally not interested in and I don't think it's our job. It's, it's, it's, it's a discomposition that has happened between Israelis and Jews. And, you know, diaspora Jews and I think has has continued ever since as well as creation you know very well this relation with the diaspora is complex is diverse. The aim was not to get engaged into that it's more to I want to focus on the issue of binationalism I think we can shoot ourselves in the foot if we get fixated on what is the format of the state. So this, what this project, what we try to do with this project, and what we're trying to show is that we need to rethink the state. You know, practically, if you if you talk a practically people tell you maybe we can have a confederation maybe it can be you know, another further, like we, you know, everybody is supportive of the two sets of which nothing can happen. So the two dimension that our book does not address the geopolitics, we did not address the geopolitics, and we did not address also the political economy. But if you look in the short term, yeah, nothing's gonna happen is very powerful nothing changing is there doesn't need to engage in this question and Palestinians don't need to engage in this question. But this is not our aims, our aim in a given now something finished, we tried to do this solution, and we know it did not work. And Israel realize, and as there have been already said it, this was the biggest success to have a solution and Zionism could not accept it as yes who do you want said, Zionist cannot even accept Palestinian defeat. And we see more crudely, it's colonial and identity, however much is also national identity. The question becomes very important for Israel is how do they deal with their colonial essence. This is a question Israel today doesn't need to address because very powerful but sooner or later it will catch up with it, just as South Africa was caught up with it just as the United States was caught up with. We are in a different historical drama sure we are at the 21st century and in this 21st century, the old answers of nationalism 20th century do not work. Okay, and we need to rethink the state and we don't know exactly how to do it. So I think if we start thinking like that if the starting point becomes how do we ensure in 21st century equality for all in a political configuration, where equality or rather that superiority of one national group of another, then we can open a conversation. This doesn't mean that we have a solution, but it does allow us to pose questions that the partition paradigm did not allow us because the partition paradigm said we don't need to do this. Okay fine they want they have, we are being so generous at Palestinian we give them 78 they have 78% of historic Palestine okay they live there will appear. That partition did not work, because Israel does not make it work because Israeli may prove that it cannot but be colonial. Then sooner or later you have to face this reality. How do we decolonize in the 21st century that was being posed. And this is an answer which I don't think can be answered without addressing what's happening in the Arab world, without seeing the connection between authoritarian regimes and cruel regime, without seeing that it's now we're going to talk much more about the Jewish question in the Arab world because Saudi Arabia because the Emirates and Israel signed a piece in a way to trivialize the question. Okay, so it is a question that is posing us to re examine power structures and how do you empower liberating politics in the 21st century. If we look at it this way, we can see some venues doesn't mean that we have a solution but we start walking in the right direction. That's what I think we're trying to do. Thank you, thank you. Can I relate to this. Yes, you can this year but just let me slip into that a question that is related to the issue there's someone. Yeah, I saw the question yes please go ahead. Yeah there is someone raising the issue of the refugees and their place the Palestinian refugees of course and their place in all that so if you could address this also please. And then I will have been asking a question and there is a question from the audience. So so very briefly in relation to two points before I address the question of the refugees and I will tie these two comments to the question of refugees. Yeah, he rightly so say, you know, Israel is powerful why Israel would bother, you know, with getting into this kind of enterprise of binationalism which gives Palestinians way much power than they can afford at the moment or they have anyway. And, and there is a very interesting question here and I briefly relate to this in the following way. I mean, despite the success, the success of the unism and this the way where the state of Israel exists today. You know, the state, as the says of the Israeli identity and Jewish nationalism the way Zionism has manifested itself with it continues until today to suffer from two serious problems. That problem in the eyes of Palestinians at least or in the eyes of victims. That is the issue of legitimacy and the issue of normalization. In any interaction between a Palestinian and Israeli Jew, and let alone a Jew in general sometimes, but with Palestinian and an Israeli Jew, there is this very disruptive affair, in which actually the Israeli Jew often put in a very state of discomfort, despite the mighty despite the success despite the powerful, and that discomfort the stems from the fact that in the eyes of the Palestinians, as far as the politics in this land is orchestrated against along the lines of Jewish supremacy, Jewish, I mean Jewish Israeli Jewish Israeli privileges, and Jewish Israeli supremacy of some sort, and oppression of the Palestinians. There is no legitimacy that is granted to this enterprise and to this existence and surely the right in the eyes of the Palestinians. And this is precisely the issue of normalization as well and I'm not talking about normalization the way Israel is normalization normalizing with the Emirates, or with Sudan. I'm talking about normalization in the very profound sense of the word of how we can turn a colonial sit by colonial state into one in which actually the victim or the native can accept the sit by under certain circumstances of decolonization and dismantling the privileges of different sort and and colonial power. So this is an extremely important and powerful thing, you know, and I to demonstrate this point, you know, Israel, after so many years of negotiating with the Palestinians and more than 70 years of existence goes back to ask the Palestinian to recognize Israel as a Jewish state. This means that the Palestinians still hold so much power and more than anyone can imagine. This power is not cashed out and translated into serious power simply because of dysfunctional corrupt and and you know Palestinian political system of some sort that has its own problems. I agree with you. I agree with you that the Palestinian has here very powerful, you know, cost to pay, and why the Palestinians go and recognize some form of Jewish Israeli nationalism of some sort, even if it is decolonized. There's no been question and I think, you know, I have my own particular view on this and I have this in my writings and others have contributed to this as well. And this is exactly the debate, shall we go to individual or collective rights, what is much more relevant in this context, and you are right. You know, your questions about this overarching we or other overarching identity that needs to be, this is not a prerequisite. This is a prerequisite if we were to conceptualize politics as to be an institutionally as one homogeneous state or one, even by national the way one can imagine by national enterprise can be institutionally and constitutionally cashed out in multiple forms and modalities. What we are talking about my nationalism here is as an ethical principle, which actually give rise to multiple forms of solutions, that is, if the entry is by national ethics and if the entry is by nationalism that is bremist on parity and Jewish Arab partnership, etc, etc, etc. Palestinians for that matter can live with multiple solutions, Palestinians can live with confederation with federation, and that is an invitations for Israeli Jews to live with these types of things, without compromising their right to nationalist determination under these conditions. So this is why by nationalism from my point of view, might appeal to Israeli Jews way much more than the liberal discourse of rights of individuals, and what might bind us together is a historical process that might be capitalizing on Mizrahi, capitalizing on constitutional commitment to certain patriotic rights of commitment to rights, etc, etc. So you are right, there is a very serious challenge whether this identity exists, whether this, but what is existing there, what is existing there, the overarching frame that brings us and the land and the history and this intertwining that are in the making as we speak, that actually lent some serious support to law along the line of nationalism without binationalism meaning that you will have to create a hybrid Jewish Israeli identity through intermarriages or something, it might be the case in the future, but this does not really reduce what it needs. As for refugees in this political frame, it's clearly the Palestinian right of return is at the core of what Palestinian identity is. This is why we are insisting Leila and I, and many others obviously that the Palestinian struggle is about tribes one of the most fundamental rights of what defines the modern experience of Palestinian nationalism post-maqpat time is the right of return is the right of return in the very profound, since you know in the very profound understanding of it, how to realize that the right in practicality is a different question than the principle, engagement of the ethical foundations of the right of return as a very serious ethical intervention to interrogate the racism and the simple colonial enterprise of the state of Israel, and how it pays the way for restorative historical reconciliation through which you achieve this kind of joint living of some sort in different institutional modalities that we can cash out whether that federation confederation or even two state solutions by the way, but not the two state solution that Israeli speaks, and not the two state solution that Leila is right, not the two state solution that represents this with fairly and robust understanding of sovereignty to be Jewish exclusive sovereignty there is no Jewish exclusive sovereignty under the rubric and the ethics of binationalism the way we speak about it. There is no vulgar if no nationalism in the form of a status Jewish state under the rubric of binationalism that we speak of it, and this has direct implications on how Palestinian identity manifested itself and how Palestinian rights are realized that they don't actually lead to any form of vulgar if no nationalism that is Palestinian as well. I mean that danger is less of a concern for me because of my understanding of Palestinian nationalism but it is definitely a very some concern in the case of Zenism having to understand that Zenism is largely by mainstream of its stand vulgar if no national form of enterprise that inform most of these strands of Zenism. Okay, thank you very much now we now we have a number of questions and little remaining time so we need we need to address them. I was asked for the floor first so Dina can you formulate your your question please or your intervention your comment. And maybe then I will also read the what we have and then give the floor back to to our speakers so so that they address the different questions that we have for now. Very much it's a quick question about why nationalism it glosses over a lot of other issues, including religion and including ethnicity so how do you deal with that. So, I think you know sort of, we need to understand how it glosses you know, and particularly in relation to the idea of religion being a significant kind of characteristic or component of how Israel sees itself. So, so that needs that needs to be, you know, I just would like an answer to that. Thank you, thank you Dina and let me just check the question we have a question about the is Jewish Arab partnership that doesn't reproduce the two distinctive categories of Arab and Jew. It's possible. I mean our participants can can read the question I'm not going to read the whole question. There is one about demographics with regard to everything we were discussing of course. I have a question about the ongoing influence and intervention of the United States and Europe in the occupation, and how to propose accountability to the states. A question about the concept of settler colonialism. At what point do settler colonialists cease to be settler colonialist probably at what point they cease to be colonialist because otherwise if they cease to be settlers that would change the problem. How do you distinguish by nationalism from the, what is now today calls consociationalism or whatever that is a sectarian political system Lebanese style. And, and yes, and that's, these are the questions that we have for now please, who wants to speak first later please. I'll go first I'll try to be brief because I realized we only have 10 minutes so I will, I will address maybe the easiest question and the more hard when would the settler colonists stop being cloning is when they are stripped of their power. That's as simple as that is, you know, I don't know it's not a simple answer but I think fundamentally the issue is, it's not expelling the people is is expelling or ending any privileges to one group on the expense of other and this can happen only through power. Now what power do the Palestinians have the Palestinians have the power the only power their presence on the land and they are part of a larger Arab world, which is today in questioning itself and once a new political configuration again. I cannot help bring it back to the Arab uprising because the Arab uprising, which we now celebrate is commemorate his 10th anniversary. Although it failed, it did pause that a clear message to everybody that the Arab world has changed and is changing and it's not sustainable and the fundamental question is how do we are we going to re establish a political order in the Middle East that guarantees equality and development. And right now we don't have any answer, but the answer is being posed in very serious matters. And I think these are interconnected as to the issue that trace by by about the Jewishness of the state. The Jewishness of the state of the point of Dina. This is part of Zionism definition of its nationality. Okay, I don't think the problem is nationalism, even if it is posed as nationalism. The problem is the religious nationalist discourse. Okay, but we also are seeing the limit of a religious nationalist discourse, even the Islamist even the right wing. It is the fact that they can afford to have in a religious nationalist discourse is because they're powerful. But when we saw the nationalist Islamist scores, it did not succeed because it doesn't have any different solution to the issue of political participation and development happening in the Middle East. So I think the question will be how we can, we're going to find the means to decolonize Israel and democratize the Middle East both are interrelated. What is the role of Europe and the US a lot and nothing. I think one of the reason why we feel very much an impasse is because our situation on the ground as Arab and as Palestinian is pretty bad. The only thing going for us is our perseverance, but this in itself is not enough. I'm going to get out of the impasse is still to be seen but I think there are lots of initiative of various levels, both economically, socially, grassrootly and literally political happening they have not yet coalesced into a clear political message but I think it's clear as as you know, Gilbert's book, you know, morbid symptoms revealed, you know, the old is dead that the new is not yet born. And we are a little bit in that phase and, and in that phase we machine and I what we're trying to do with this book is raise the important questions to be addressed. Ethically, again, by nationalism, not as a political formula but as a way of rethinking rights and state within the 21st century. Thank you Leila Bashir. Yes. Yeah, very briefly about the, you know, with our binationalism really reduces, you know, the distinct categories of Arab and Jews. It definitely it has this risk. You know, but again, I mean, the way we are speaking about it definitely in my earlier work individually and my work with almost corporate in the Holocaust and the NACBA we address these questions precisely about the robustness of this identity and we say, the solution is not to ask the Jews to strip themselves of their national identity is definitely not to strip the Palestinians from the national identity under conditions of negation and denial over centuries, over the decades sorry, but it's actually to say that actually the mere fact of being able to do this by national ethics itself ethically not descriptively descriptively we are talking about a very serious complicated abrasive asymmetrical arrangement the minute we move into the egalitarian binationalism this is the this is this is the key word egalitarian binationalism, not actually colonial binationalism but egalitarian binationalism, we are suggesting here that there is an ought to be either an institutionally or socially some relaxation of this robust communitarian identifications of things, and this takes me to that to the question of Dina and I think the question of Dina conceals a very serious profound also questioning of Palestinian nationalism latest latest intervention was in relation to Zenith it's also in relation to Palestinian identity, one of the most alarming things about the Palestinian Islam Islamism like political Islam with Hamas and the jihad, also needs to be understood in the, you know, in the genealogy and the development of Palestinian nationalism which is part of the crisis of Palestinian nationalism, because one of the most interesting thing with partition is that Palestinian nationalism move to this kind of partition together with if no nationalism as well and that is that the Palestinian good to redefine in that way and that is actually moved from ban Arab business which was kind of to, you know, territorial, and sometimes even civic articulation of that into something that is much more ethnicized, it is precisely at this point of view, where the Jews have become internal more than external thanks to their colonial greed and their colonial expansionist that the Palestinians are at a point where they are asking themselves, who is the Palestinian, who is the Palestinian not politically, who is the Palestinian in terms of rights, and if the Palestinian is all the Palestinians, then what is there as a political, as a political values, political values that inform their national identification under conditions of intertwining with the Jews. And it is precisely at this point where Palestinian, I don't like this word but Palestinian political Islam, I mean, you know, the Palestinian Islamist kind of movement, run into a very serious challenge, but it's also, it's a way of looking at the diversity of Palestinian nationalism. And that is not only that you cannot reduce Palestinian nationalism to slap, and you cannot reduce Palestinian nationalism to Palestinian Islamist. And this is exactly where, you know, when you speak by nationalism, it is precisely the more successful entry, because Palestinians, Palestinians have a very robust Palestinian national movement. Now, the institutional dysfunctionality of Palestinian nationalism does not mean that Palestinian nationalism and identity is not robust the other way around. Palestinian national identity is much more stronger than any time before, if we take the link, the link history if negation and denial. This is the diversity within Palestinian nationalism, this is precisely the type of question that the Palestinian need to openly question and interrogate Hamas and the Jihad and Hizbik Tahrir and many others, and also revive their own internal ideological things about their left and about their right and about fatah and different things about what is today to be a Palestinian governed by which types of principles and values. I think it is also a point of view today that when I think about when I argue about not alone but when when we argue about this rethinking and redefining Palestinian nationalism. Part of what is required in this process of or what is happening, not only required, it's not like a wishful thinking. These types of conversations are taking place maybe in pockets in margins, but these are significant important pockets and margins where they are becoming louder about which type of Palestine they wish to think. Palestine again not institutional not only as a state, but also as a form of values, and I think there is a great deal. Now, in the Israeli side the story is even more complicated, but obviously, we cannot deny that despite all of these internal Jewish There is a very robust Jewish Israeli national movement that it has obviously colonially very bold colonial system or colonial dimensions to it. So again by nationalism here does not imply necessarily something that actually has this actually could manifest itself in an ethical principle of equality. Now what is exactly the identity that might develop this is not to be subjected to lab conditions of engineering that will be presupposing any you know factual things on the ground how things will develop in reality because otherwise we will engage in some very problematic engineering that I don't think is very constructive here. The last thing if I can say, which is, we will conclude with this is basically the question about sectarianism and binationalism and concessionism concessionism is not binationalism. Okay, concessionism as you very, you know very well, Gilbert and those who are in there, you know, it's about power sharing arrangements between enclaves and different sectarians binationalism is speaking about two national groups, okay, two national groups that are entitled to national determination. When we speak about concessionism, we are not talking about self determinations to group we are assuming a way, as you indicated earlier, we assuming that there is a national identity and there is self determination to every one that is called the group in binationalism concession. Now, binationalism might entail concession arrangement. Okay, but binationalism resupposes and assumes that we are talking about two national groups that are entitled to collective national rights cheaply among them is the right to national determination, how they cash out that either in federation or confederation. If you are closer to the federation business you are in concession arrangements. If you go to the confederation and business, you are in a much more complicated also concession but much more complicated one that is premised on national interests rather than assuming and presupposing a collective political community that is homogeneous or attached to a center that bring together to link cementing and gluing principles or an identity that might call a wheel of some sort. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Bashir. Thank you very, very much for our three panelists or to Leila, to Bashir and to Yeir for this very stimulating discussion, this very stimulating session about a very, very stimulating book which I encourage our audience to read, to borrow, to read, to acquire, but to read. That's the key point. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you for you. The Center for Palestine Studies, shared by Dina here. Thank you very much. Thank you who organized technically this event and well, all the best to all the participants. Thank you very much.