We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
UNRWA funding cuts threaten Lebanon's Palestinian refugees
GZERO went inside the Shatila Camp in Beirut, one of Lebanon’s largest Palestinian refugee camps, to better understand what the loss of UNRWA funding would mean for the people who call it home—the teachers, doctors, and local government workers who rely on UNRWA to provide basic services, like education, healthcare, and clean water to residents. The agency says it has enough funds to last through June, but it will need to make some tough choices after that.
“The reason UNRWA still exists after 75 years is because there is no political solution,” says Dorothee Klaus, URWA’s Lebanon director, “It is time to find a solution for Palestinian refugees to live in dignity like everybody else.
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week on US public television (check local listings) and online.
Does Palestine pass the state test?
Did Hamas score a big win at the United Nations, or was it actually a win for the much-maligned idea of the two-state solution?
Forgive yourself if you ignored the critical UN vote last week. Like the blaring horns on the streets of New York, many folks tune out the UN as meaningless background noise to the real action in global politics: sound and fury signifying bias. That is a mistake. The controversial May 9 vote on granting Palestine full membership to the UN bears real scrutiny. After all, in plain terms, the vote effectively means recognizing a Palestinian state.
The vote was supported by 143 of the 193 countries that make up the General Assembly – that’s more countries supporting this idea in 2024 than the last time something like this was voted on, back in 2012. Just seven months after the Oct. 7 Hamas terror attack on Israel, Palestine has won more support, not less. And Israel is more isolated, not less. Nine countries, including the US and Israel, voted no, but this next bit is telling: 25 countries, including Canada, abstained. This signals a major shift in Canadian policy, as it has historically voted “no” alongside the US.
What changed, and what exactly was the vote saying about who would represent the Palestine state if it was granted full status– the Palestinian Authority or Hamas? Can there be a Palestinian state with Hamas playing a role? Is the current Israeli government trying to kill the idea of a viable two-state solution?
To find out, I spoke with Canada’s Ambassador to the United Nations Bob Rae.
Evan Solomon: Ambassador, 143 countries at the UN General Assembly just voted to grant Palestine full member status — essentially recognizing a Palestinian state. Canada was among the 25 countries that abstained, which is a change in policy from a hard “no.” Why the shift in policy?
Ambassador Bob Rae: Largely because we think the situation on the ground is changing so fast. We wanted to make it clear that we still favor a two-state solution, but that we also recognize that it’s going to take a lot of work for that to happen. There’s going to have to be significant changes, frankly, on both sides to get there. Most dramatically on the side of Hamas, which continues to wage war after its Oct. 7 attack on Israel, and is not, by any means, defeated. We have to be clear that there can’t be a terrorist group in charge of a state. Israel will never accept the notion of a terrorist state being granted a status in international law, and we would never do it. The only way we can proceed is if that changes.
The other thing that needs to change is the policies that are currently being pursued by the Israelis in political terms, which is refusing to countenance the idea of two states coexisting.
The argument that we’ve always made in the past with this kind of resolution is to say, “No, we can’t support that, but we want to ensure that the parties will get back to the table, and that’s where things will get resolved.” But it's clear that at the moment, the current Israeli government has no intention of negotiating anything approaching sovereignty for Palestinians. So we don’t see how we can simply vote “no” anymore. We also don’t see how we can simply say “yes” either. We don’t think we can responsibly do that either. So that’s why we’ve taken the position we’ve taken.
Solomon: Was this a position that was true before Oct. 7, or has it changed because of the attack and the aftermath?
Rae: The feeling was that you had more of a discussion going on within Israel about the possibilities of two states. However, we know that Mr. Netanyahu has never been enthusiastic and never really admitted to the possibility of a Palestinian state, and now it’d become even clearer that’s not on the table.
On the other side, I do think that there has been, in the last 20 years, a strong endorsement of the two-state position by the Palestinian Authority leadership on the political side in the West Bank, but that has not been matched by Hamas. So that’s why we changed the position from 2012.
Solomon: Back in 2012, only 138 countries voted for the resolution that upgraded the status of Palestine to a non-member observer state within the UN, but Canada voted against it. What does the increase of support tell you? Is this, essentially, a vote for the Hamas cause? Does this show that their horrifying terror attack was a strategic success?
Rae: I don’t think so. I think that this whole “reward theory” is wrongheaded. The support in the General Assembly for two states is overwhelming. If you actually read the speeches of the countries that voted no, and the countries that voted to abstain, and the countries that voted yes, the support for two states was unanimous going from the United States and Hungary and other countries that voted no to the countries that abstained like us.
Solomon: But you had countries voting yes, like Denmark, the Aussies, and New Zealanders. What does that say?
Rae: I think it is a question of asking if a Palestinian state is prepared for membership in the United Nations. Canada looked at that question and we decided it doesn’t meet the test of what it means to be a state. The state is a place that has control over a territory, and the Palestinian Authority doesn't. Now, the Palestinians say, “Yeah, we haven’t been able to exercise control over the territory because of Israel.” And that's partly true. But it's also true to say now that they don't have control over the territory because of Hamas terrorism, which they have not been able to deal with effectively or to the extent that you can say, “This is a state that's ready to go.” The point is that there's real work to be done in the creation of two states, and we've still got to get there.
Solomon: Did the vote at the UN signal that most countries are ready to recognize a Palestinian state, even if Hamas is part of the governing body?
Rae: No, I don’t think that’s the case. I really don’t. What has to be very clear is that there's no room for a Hamas state at the UN. That’s something where there’s a very strong consensus.
Solomon: But the vote doesn’t make that distinction.
Rae: That’s why I say the decision on who gets admitted to the UN is not based on high hopes. It is based on what are the realities on the ground. We have to get real about it. That's where I think Canada is not alone. Many other countries feel the same way. The real work starts now with saying: How do you get to a cease-fire? How do you get to where you want to go, which is a two-state solution?
Solomon: Is a two-state solution effectively dead?
Rae: The trouble with that argument, Evan, is that you’ve got to then say, ok, if the two-state solution is dead, then what? When you look at the other alternatives, they don’t work either. For example, if you take a “river to the sea” approach, whether it's from a terrorist position or an Israeli perspective, that doesn't work. So it's really important for people to come to grips with the fact that the most fact-based, realistic solution has got to be based on the notion of two sovereign states living side by side in security and in peace. And, one hopes, eventually in partnership. It takes a long time to get there. But if you drop the idea of any possibility of sovereignty to realize Palestinian aspirations, then you've really abandoned all hope.
Solomon: From the Netanyahu government point of view, the argument is that Hamas doesn’t even recognize Israel’s right to exist, and neither do many other countries in the region. So a two-state solution is, at best, a naive hope. At worst, a serious security risk.
Rae: All that is part of the solution. That’s all part of what needs to happen. These things can change. We've seen things can change. It's all about building the basis for change. To rule it out entirely is a mistake.
Solomon: Does Hamas, a listed terror group in Canada and the US, need to be destroyed, as Netanyahu argues, or can they evolve out of that status, and transition toward governance?
Rae: No terrorist entity can become part of a state. That’s not possible. Can terrorist groups change? History points to some examples of that. The IRA, the African National Union, which was listed in many countries as a terrorist organization. It transformed itself. It changed. But the problem with Hamas — and it is in their charter — is that it is based on the obliteration of the state of Israel. That's not something that anybody can accept. It isn't good enough to say if this and if that. We can't get into too many hypotheticals. Right now Hamas' official policy is to obliterate the state of Israel. Israel is a sovereign state and a member of the United Nations, so while Canada has strong disagreements with the current policies of the current government, that's very different from saying that we are going to pretend that Hamas is not Hamas. I mean, that would be wrong.
Solomon: Neither Joe Biden nor Justin Trudeau gets on well with Benjamin Netanyahu. How isolated is this Israeli government right now?
Rae: That’s a very important question. My own view is it’s not simply about Prime Minister Netanyahu or the state of Israel. Anybody with any degree of empathy would understand that the activities of Hamas – the sexual and gender atrocities, the atrocities on children and families, and the sheer brutality of the attacks on civilians – are unprecedented. It's been deeply traumatic for the Israeli people. So if you ask them, “How do you feel about two states?,” you can understand them saying, “For God's sake, don't talk to me about that until you've dealt with what we're dealing with.” You have to understand that the current disagreement that we have with Israel is not irreparable. It's not like we're stopping talking or engaging.
It’s important for everybody to be clearheaded about how we need to go forward and the work that’s involved. But any tactic or strategy that doesn't recognize the democratic rights of either the Israeli people or the Palestinian people is doomed to fail.
Smoke billows after an explosion in northern Gaza, amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinian Islamist group Hamas, as seen from Israel, May 12, 2024.
Israel increasingly isolated on world stage amid Gaza offensive
Israel marked a somber Memorial Day on Sunday, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declaring that the nation is prepared to "stand alone" if necessary. The Jewish state has become increasingly isolated as it faces pushback from adversaries and allies alike.
Meanwhile, 300,000 Gazans fled Rafah on Sunday in anticipation of ground operations. Battles resumed in the Gaza City neighborhood of Zeitoun and in nearby Jabaliya, Hamas said that its fighters were engaged in “fierce clashes” with Israeli soldiers in the area.
Last Friday, the UN General Assembly voted 143-9 in favor of recognizing Palestine's eligibility for full UN membership, with 25 abstentions. The US voted against the resolution.Palestine now gains additional rights, including the right to propose agenda items, reply in debates, and be elected as officers in UN committees. The resolution also recommends that the Security Council reconsider Palestine's full membership favorably, but the US will likely veto any attempt.
At the same time, Washington expressed serious concerns last week about Israel's use of US-supplied weapons in Gaza. US President Joe Bidenthreatened to withhold weapons sales. And on the legal front, Egypt joined South Africa’s lawsuit at the International Court of Justice, accusing Israel of genocide and human rights violations.
We’re now watching for how Biden handles growing bipartisan discontent in Congress over his threat to withhold weapons.A Russian Soyuz rocket is carried to the launching pad at Russia's Baikonur cosmodrome on the territory of the former Soviet Kazakhstan on December 18.
Hard Numbers: Russia shoots down space resolution, US economy sputters, Nigerian prisoners make slippery escape, Ecuador gets lifeline
13: A UN Security Council resolution reaffirming a long-standing prohibition on arms races in outer space got 13 votes in favor this week, but it was shot down by a single veto from UNSC permanent member Russia. Moscow says it wasn’t necessary to support a resolution that merely reaffirmed a 1967 treaty that Russia is already part of, but the US ambassador to the UN asked, “What could you possibly be hiding?” In recent months, the US has said it believes Russia is developing a new space-based, anti-satellite weapon.
1.6: The US economy expanded by just 1.6% in the first quarter of the year, lagging analyst forecasts by nearly a full percentage point, as consumer spending slowed. Normally that would create momentum for the Fed to cut interest rates to spur growth, but there’s no joy there either: Core inflation (which excludes food and energy) rose 3.7%, higher than economists expectations, limiting the scope for any near-term rate cuts.
118: Authorities in the Nigerian capital of Abuja are on high alert after a rainstorm destroyed a fence at a nearby penitentiary, allowing as many as 118 inmates to escape. A prison service spokesperson blamed “colonial era” facilities. Weak security and run-down buildings contribute to frequent prison-breaks in the West African nation.
4 billion: After months of talks, Ecuador and the IMF agreed to a $4 billion loan agreement meant to help stabilize the small Andean country’s finances as it grapples with a vicious cycle of economic hardship, rising poverty, and skyrocketing homicides. Just days earlier, Ecuadorians had voted yes in a referendum to boost the government’s ability to crack down on drug violence.
Columbia & Yale protests: What campus protesters want
Ian Bremmer shares his insights on global politics this week on World In :60.
Why hasn't the United Nations insisted on military observers in Gaza?
Well, the United Nations doesn't really insist on things. And when they do, it's usually symbolic. Like they insist that humanitarian aid needs to get into Gaza and it doesn't happen. Or they insist that, there needs to be protections for the Palestinian civilians or that the Hamas needs to let go, release all of the illegally held hostages, and it doesn't go anywhere. So you can insist all you want. Also, keep in mind the Security Council would be vetoing that sort of thing because the US has a veto and they continue to use it on most Israel-Palestine related resolutions.
What specific demands are being voiced by campus protesters at institutions such as Columbia and Yale?
Well, I mean, the demands that got these protests started, are all about divestment of the endowments of these universities away from any corporations that do business in make money with Israel. Because of the view that the Israeli war in Gaza is wrong, the student protesters called it a genocide and that they want to end that. We've seen that kind of demand in Europe across the board. Not as much in the United States, at least not to this degree. Having said that, now that you also have students that have been suspended and arrested, surely the campus protesters are also saying those things need to be unwound. We're also increasingly seeing demands for university administrators, including presidents, to resign. So, I mean, the longer this goes, the harder it is to actually, accede to these student demands. And of course, the more polarized the environment on the ground in these universities become.
How will US aid package approval shake the dynamic of the Russia-Ukraine war?
Well, it makes it more likely that the Ukrainians can defend their front lines, at least for now. They had been losing some territory. Not a lot, but including one city. And the Russians are planning, with an additional mobilization, a new major offensive, probably end of spring, early summer. Ukrainians have a much better capability to hit back and stop the Russians from making gains there. They had been down to about 20% of the ammunition and artillery being fired against Russia, that the Russians were firing against Ukraine. This brings that back to parity through that offensive. What does this mean for 2025? Still, massive uncertainty and eventually a need to engage in negotiations with a much bigger Russia fighting an illegal war, an invasion with all these war crimes. Is that fair? No. But is that reality? Yes, absolutely. And any NATO leader you talk to privately recognizes that's where this is eventually going.
- Israel’s looming constitutional crisis: What’s the tech sector going to do about it? ›
- College campus watch: The chaos is spreading ›
- Campuses in crisis vs. Capitol Hill calm ›
- Crisis at Columbia: Protests and arrests bring chaos to campus ›
- How campus protests could influence the US presidential election - GZERO Media ›
- Why Israel's Netanyahu continues to antagonize Biden on Gaza - GZERO Media ›
- Why Israel's Netanyahu continues to antagonize Biden on Gaza - GZERO Media ›
World Health Organization (WHO) displayed on screen with pharmacy medical syringe and vaccine vial. Seen in this photo illustration, in Brussels, Belgium, on September 24, 2023.
WHO can succeed at AI?
The World Health Organization recently released Smart AI Resource Assistant for Health — or SARAH — an AI chatbot that’s able to answer basic health questions. SARAH is able to answer health questions in eight different languages, and the organization says she’s a tool to fight misinformation about mental health, cancer, and COVID, among other things.
The WHO bills SARAH, which appears as a female avatar with a voice and facial expressions, as a digital health “promoter” — not a provider — and, though SARAH hasn’t taken the Hippocratic Oath, it’s meant to fill in the gaps for people searching for health questions without access to proper health care providers. (They’ll still need a broadband connection.) You can speak through a microphone, and SARAH will respond, or you can type your answers to a similar effect.
But SARAH still struggles with plenty of basic queries, according to independent researchers who spoke to Bloomberg.
SARAH is trained on GPT-3.5, the model that OpenAI powers its free version of ChatGPT with, not the updated premium version (that’s GPT-4). Bloomberg found that SARAH repeatedly hallucinated — giving false and outdated medical information about drugs, medical advisories, or WHO’s own data. It incorrectly said that an Alzheimer’s drug was not approved, couldn’t provide details on where to get a mammogram, and couldn’t even recount the WHO’s finding about hepatitis cases worldwide.
When GZERO tested SARAH, it didn’t make any noticeable mistakes, but it basically refused to answer any questions, including a query about whether COVID is still dangerous. It responded, “I’m here to encourage you to live a healthy lifestyle, so I can't respond to that. Is there anything else health-related you'd like to discuss or any other questions I can help answer for you today?”
So maybe don’t cancel that appointment with your doctor just yet.
US-Israel rift over UN resolution: More drama than long-term impact
Ian Bremmer shares his insights on global politics this week on World In :60.
How will the US-Israel relationship be affected by the US backing a Gaza cease-fire resolution at the UN?
Well, it was high drama yesterday when Prime Minister Netanyahu said he was going to immediately suspend an Israeli delegation that was going to visit the United States on the back of that decision.Very unhappy that the Americans decided to allow it to go ahead and abstain as opposed to by themselves vetoing. And keep in mind that all every other permanent and nonpermanent member of the Security Council has voted in favor. A lot of US allies there. And you know, that would seem to be a big deal, except Yoav Gallant, Minister of Defense, still stayed in the United States and had a series of very productive and high level meetings with his counterparts in the US. And there are still negotiations proceeding that are constructive between the US and Israel and Qatar to engage with Hamas and try to get a temporary cease-fire done and a bunch of hostages released also called for immediate release by the UN Security Council resolution. So I think there's a lot more drama here than there is actual impact on the US-Israel relationship. And certainly a lot of pressure that continues to mount on a very unpopular Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu at home.
Will there be international consequences from the Francis Scott Key bridge collapse in Baltimore?
I mean, it wasn't terrorism. It was an accident, though. I mean, I guess if this was Russia, they'd say the Ukrainians were responsible for it. It is a major port on the Eastern seaboard that looks like it is going to be a real problem to get in and out of. And that means supply chain challenges, especially in terms of cars, millions of which go through Baltimore every year. But, you know, the United States has an economy that's doing quite well. A growth is significant, but not over whelming. And otherwise supply chain is working around the United States for imports. So I suspect that if there's an economic cost here, it's going to be relatively small and short lived.
What message is Russia sending by their public display of torture against accused terrorists?
Well, they're showing that they have a complete indifference to the well-being of any human being. They're also, of course, displaying that the Russian state will go after you with its full force if you are seen to be an enemy of theirs. That is true in terms of the way they treat opposition journalists and politicians. But it's also true in the way they treat suspected terrorists. And they, of course, have forced confessions. I suspect they do have strong evidence, given what we've seen of that over the last few days. But still, I mean, in a system of rule of law, you are innocent until proven guilty in Russia. Of course you are guilty when the government says you are guilty, in particular, when the absolute leader says you're guilty and then you no longer have rights and the state can do with you as they will. We saw that with Mr. Prigozhin, We saw that with Mr. Navalny. And now we're seeing that with four suspected and likely but not yet proven terrorists.
FILE PHOTO: Jack Clark, co-founder of Anthropic and an expert member of the Global Partnership on Artificial Intelligence addresses, via video link, the U.N. Security Council during a meeting on Artificial intelligence at U.N. headquarters in New York City, U.S., July 18, 2023.
The UN’s AI resolution
The United Nations General Assembly adopted its first-ever draft resolution on artificial intelligence on March 21, pledging to “to refrain from or cease the use of artificial intelligence systems that are impossible to operate in compliance with international human rights law or that pose undue risks to the enjoyment of human rights.”
The resolution was brought by the United States’ delegation with the support of 123 member nations—including China and Russia. Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the US ambassador to the UN, said it’s crucial “to govern this technology rather than let it govern us.”
The resolution comes one week after Europe became the first major government to pass comprehensive regulation to rein the most severe risks of AI. Read our interview with MEP Eva Maydell, one of the architects of the law, for more on the future of AI regulation.