Return to Transcripts main page
WORLD RIGHT NOW WITH HALA GORANI
U.N. Resolution Condemning Israeli Settlements Passes; Milan Shootout Ends Manhunt for Anis Amri; U.S. Abstains In Vote Condemning Israeli Settlements; Europe's Most Wanted Man Is Dead; Security Challenges Facing Germany After Attack; Hijacking Of Libyan Plane Ends Without Casualties; Putin: Trump's Nuclear Comments "Nothing New". Aired 3-4p ET
Aired December 23, 2016 - 15:00:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[15:00:00] HANNAH VAUGHAN JONES, CNN ANCHOR: Hello. Welcome back to this special extended edition of THE WORLD RIGHT NOW. I'm Hannah Vaughan Jones
sitting in for Hala Gorani. We are live from CNN London.
An update now on our breaking news from the United Nations in New York. The Security Council there have just approved a resolution criticizing
Israel's settlement policy. The United States did not block it with its veto power.
That despite heavy lobbying from both Israel and the U.S. president-elect, Donald Trump. Instead, the U.S. ambassador abstained, a dramatic shift
from years of the United States shielding Israel from any such (inaudible) at the U.N.
The resolution itself calls for a halt to all Israeli settlement building in Palestinian territory calling it a flagrant violation of international
law. U.S. Ambassador Samantha Power spoke shortly after that vote.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SAMANTHA POWER, U.S. AMBASSADOR TO UNITED NATIONS: Israeli settlement activity in territories occupied in 1967 undermines Israel's security,
harms the viability of a negotiated two-state outcome and erodes prospects for peace and stability in the region.
Today the Security Council reaffirmed its established consensus that settlements have no legal validity. The United States has been sending the
message that the settlements must stop privately and publicly for nearly five decades.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JONES: Israel's U.N. ambassador reacted furiously to the vote and said he has no doubt that the incoming Trump administration in The U.S. will usher
in a new era in U.S.-Israeli relations.
Let's get more now from Oren Liebermann who is live for us in Jerusalem. Oren, Samantha Power, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N. trying to explain
America's position saying that the U.N. has always treated Israel differently and that is why they had to abstain on this particular point.
Has it gone any way in alleviating Israeli concerns?
OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Not at all, that statement won't be seen in a friendly fashion here at all. Israel was furious when it became
apparent yesterday that the U.S. might not veto this one. It might abstain or even vote in favor of this resolution and certainly her abstention even
with that lengthy explanation won't do anything to alleviate the anger of the Israeli government and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
And as we just saw of the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon. Let me read you his statement in full. It came out just moments
after this vote, 14 voting in favor, none against, and again the U.S. abstaining.
Here is what Danon had to say. He said, "Neither the Security Council nor UNESCO can sever the tie between the people of Israel and the land of
Israel. It was to be expected that Israel's greatest ally would act in accordance with the values that we share. That they would have vetoed this
I have no doubt that the new U.S. administration and the incoming U.N. secretary general will usher in a new era in terms of the U.N.'s
relationship with Israel." In the end of the statement makes it obvious which way the Netanyahu government is looking now.
It's looking to the future. Four weeks into the future, when President- elect Trump takes office. He had released a statement intervening in this affair between Israel -- between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and
President Barack Obama.
He had released a statement saying this should be vetoed, even hopping on the phone with Egyptian President el-Sisi, who had introduced this
resolution at first and convincing him to pull it. So that was an intervention by the president-elect that was called for by the Israelis,
who spoke with him on the phone.
But as we now know it made no difference. It was Samantha Power's decision to abstain. Israel now looking to President-elect Trump to see where this
goes and he could very well stop this and the United Nations from having any serious effect on the ground.
We'll see as for what practical effect this will have that remains the biggest question and the most difficult to answer right now -- Hannah.
JONES: Oren, he is not -- the U.S. not just being criticized from Israel, but also some senior Republicans also coming out calling this shameful.
John McCain, the House speaker as well, Paul Ryan among those criticizing this decision by the U.S., had this potentially backfired by Barack Obama
or will it have the desired effect whatever that may be?
LIEBERMANN: That is one of the biggest criticisms that we're hearing from the Israelis. They say this resolution that criticizes settlements and was
intended to advance the peace process towards a two-state solution in Israeli state and Palestinian state.
Israelis saying this will only backfire, distancing the Palestinians from the need to hold direct negotiations. What will happen, again, that's the
question of what effect will this practically have.
And the most difficult question at this point to answer, but that has been the Israeli criticism for a long time of any U.N. Security Council
resolution as well as the criticism from a number of others.
As you point out, Republicans and even Democrats saying that the U.N. resolution will not advance piece. It will only come through direct
negotiations. We heard that criticism again over the last 24 hours as the Israelis try to heed this off.
And Samantha Power, she spoke, the American ambassador to the U.N., also noted this was not the best way to do it, but she says the facts on the
ground, the expansion of settlements, that is what convinced the U.S. to abstain on this one.
[15:05:12]JONES: Oren Liebermann live for us in Jerusalem, thanks very much indeed.
Now we turn to some other news, the most wanted man in Europe is dead, killed by Italian police in a shootout just outside of the city of Milan.
Anis Amri, a Tunisian national, was the chief suspect in that deadly attack on a Christmas market in Berlin this week.
Quite remarkably, the police officers who killed Anis Amri haven't actually been searching for him. In fact, Amri was stopped as part of a normal,
routine patrol operation. CNN's Erin McLaughlin traces Amri's last movements in this report now from Berlin.
ERIN MCLAUGHLIN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Tonight new video released by ISIS shows Anis Amri, the man police believed attacked the
Berlin Christmas market pledging his allegiance to the terror group's leader, Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi -- and threatening the west.
ANIS AMRI (through translator): By God's will we will slaughter you pigs. I swear, we will slaughter you.
MCLAUGHLIN: It is unclear when the tape was made or where it was recorded. The 24-year-old Tunisian man was killed overnight in a shoot-out with
police outside of a small train station near Milan.
The Italian government said it was not tracking Amri and didn't even know he was in the country. Officers on regular patrol approached him around
3:00 in the morning because he was acting suspiciously.
MARCO MINNITI, ITALIAN INTERIOR MINISTER (through translator): The suspect immediately drew out a gun and shot at the police officers, who asked him
to show identification documents.
MCLAUGHLIN: With Amri dead, police across Europe are now frantically trying to find any accomplices who may have helped him. The fact ISIS had
the tape of the alleged terrorist ready to release, combined with Amri's train route from Germany to France and on to Italy suggest he may not have
BILL BRANIFF, NATIONAL CONSORTIUM FOR THE STUDY OF TERRORISM: The death of the attacker from Berlin certainly doesn't mean the end of the
investigation or the end of the threat. He was unfortunately embedded in a much larger network.
MCLAUGHLIN: CNN has learned authorities were not just aware of Amri. It appears they were concerned he might turn to terror. Two German
intelligence officials tell CNN this spring Amri was put on a list of what they called dangerous Islamists, one of about 550 people considered to be
on a, quote, "terror spectrum."
Sources tell CNN say Amri was on the list because of his connections to a known ISIS recruitment network in Germany. Raising fears, his death could
accelerate plans for other attacks by those with whom he was in contact.
BRANIFF: Clearly, whatever reticence the German authorities to disrupting this network prior to now, that is gone. So these individuals know they're
operating on finite thought.
JONES: Erin reporting there and Erin McLaughlin joins me now live from Berlin. Erin, I'm wondering what the mood is like there in the German
capital now. Is it a sense of relief or perhaps fear that this could so easily happen again?
MCLAUGHLIN: I think it is a combination of both, Hannah. You do get a sense of the people you talk to here that they are relieved, but
authorities are clearly concerned that there are more accomplices out there. They are preparing more attacks.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel also saying that officials will be analyzing each and every aspect of this case on several fronts. They will
be looking at this country's surveillance practices.
Figure out why they were not following Amri closer given that he was on a terror watch list, given his affiliations to an ISIS recruitment network.
They're also looking at this country's asylum and deportation practices.
After all authorities tried to deport Amri back in June, tried and failed. We understand that Angela Merkel had a phone call with the Tunisian
president today about that, talking to him about speeding up some of the remaining deportations.
We also expect authorities to look at the ways in which they're sharing information here in Germany. How to improve that and how to improve
information sharing with other European countries as well.
JONES: Erin, presumably a sense of justice, perhaps, for the families of the 12 victims that were mowed down in that marketplace just behind you?
MCLAUGHLIN: That's right. Although many people here that I have been speaking to as I walking through the Christmas market, the scene of the
attack, there was a sense they wanted him to be captured, brought back to Germany to face trial and justice that way.
[15:10:06]That sentiment echoed in a small gathering that happened across from the Christmas market. Hundreds of members of the Muslim community
came out with candles for a show of solidarity with the victims. They too said they wanted to see him tried in a court of law. Those members of that
community also expressing concern about the ramifications for this, what the reaction will from the far right in this country.
JONES: Erin McLaughlin live for us in Berlin, thank you very much.
We know that a deportation order has been issued for the 24-year-old Anis Amri. So how did Germany fail to stop this attack? And of course, how can
it confront terrorism now going forward?
Well, Afzal Ashraf is a consultant fellow at the Royal United Services Institute and he joins me now live from New York. Thank you for being on
the program with us.
How concerned should we all be not just in Europe, but in the wider world, that this particular manhunt lasted as long as it did, and was ended really
only by chance.
AFZAL ASHRAF, CONSULTANT FELLOW, ROYAL UNITED SERVICES INSTITUTE: I think there is certain a lot of lessons to be learned here. The point is that
this is a man who was obviously known to the intelligence services, and was able to be at large for a long time, and was able to cross borders, and was
only captured because of an accidental search and intervention by the Italian police.
It could have ended really horribly had he been able to kill the policemen that were trying to investigate him and went on another rampage killing
other innocent people, possibly in Italy. There are very important lessons so be learned and there are certain measures to be put into place to reduce
the likelihood of this sort of thing happening again.
JONES: What can we learn from this very chilling videotape as well, pledging allegiance to ISIS. Why would an ISIS fighter, a terrorist like
Anis Amri, want to record on tape this kind of allegiance?
ASHRAF: Well, it's so that they can give credit for their horrible attacks to this organization. I think there is a lesson here for the governments
in Europe and elsewhere. That as long as this organization, is, exists, then people like Amri, who are criminals, who are emotionally susceptible,
psychologically susceptible by these hate preachers such as (inaudible), who are indoctrinated by, then these people will come out of the wood work.
And really the surest security that we can achieve is to destroy the myth of success that Daesh or ISIS have created. And for all of this time, the
last two or three years, the international communities focus, in most cases, has been in destroying Assad, the regime, rather than the extremist
organization and their affiliates who are fighting him.
So there may be an opportunity now to prioritize the threat, and the threat to the Europeans and to the U.S. and to the wider world, is from these
extremists. They should be dealt with, first, before other issues, such as regime change and countries such as Syria.
JONES: What we don't know at the moment is whether he was working as part of a terror cell, but do we know that there are these terror networks
across Europe and he was perhaps linked to one of these networks, but do we know -- does the intelligence community know exactly where these terror
cells are? Where they are operating from and therefore, how we can start trying to dismantle them?
ASHRAF: Well, clearly they know some of them, but not all of them, and they make a decision about when they start to dismantle. But if you
dismantle, if you -- normally they get to know about one person that might belong to a cell, if you arrest him then you make it harder to find the
others who may be part of that cell, who may actually be plotting.
You don't know what they are plotting, when they are plotting it so there is a very difficult decision to be made by the intelligence services and
indeed by the police, when to intervene and dismantle a cell, but they don't know all of these cells, of course, and they don't know all of the
individuals in the cells, and they don't know the individuals that may not be part of any cell at all.
It's a very complicated issue and I think the intelligence services are learning all of the time. But particularly I think in the case of Germany
there are lessons to be learned. The bottom line, of course, is as long as this organization is there to inspire these people, to do something their
warped ideology, in their sense and belief that they are going to succeed and achieve something.
[15:15:07]Then I'm afraid you will continue to get others that will join them downstream even if you dismantle the known cells. So it comes back to
eliminating this aura of success and belief these organizations have created.
JONES: It's a terrifying prospect really isn't it? Afzal Ashraf, we appreciate your analysis of the situation. Thanks very much indeed.
ASHRAF: A pleasure. Thank you.
JONES: Another hijacking of a Libyan plane that was forced to land in Malta has ended with no casualties fortunately. The hijackers themselves
have threatened to blow the plane up, but they then released all 111 passengers and turned themselves to police. Our Ian Lee has this report on
IAN LEE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Tense hours on the tarmac in Malta. Two hijackers threatened to blow up an Afriqiyah Airways plane.
Over 110 passengers and crew on board. The Libyan plane took off from Sabha going to the capital Tripoli when hijackers forced the pilots to land
The Maltese prime minister, Joseph Muscat breaking the news on Twitter. Malta's armed forces quickly surrounded the plane and led the negotiations.
The movement at the door as women and children began to leave.
Soon after more passengers followed. Eventually all of the passengers were freed and whisked to safety on buses. At one point, a hijacker leaves the
plane waving the green flag of former Libyan leader, Moammar Ghadafi. The hostage situation ended when the hijackers surrendered to police and were
JOSEPH MUSCAT, MALTESE PRIME MINISTER: Two hijackers have been detained in custody and interrogations are ongoing. The rest of the crew and
passengers are also being questioned to a certain events.
LEE: Now questions not only about airport security in Libya, but the safety of Europe's air space. One senior Libyan lawmaker called for an
emergency meeting to demand stricter security measures at airports. A serious concern with ISIS actively operating in Libya. Ian Lee, CNN,
JONES: Let's get more on this now. Ian Lee joins me in London, and our aviation correspondent and host, "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS," Richard Quest is
in CNN Center.
Ian, I want to start with you if I can. Fortunately, all 118 people on board, all 111 passengers all safely off of that plane now. But have we
heard any more from them about what they experienced during this hijack?
LEE: We have not heard from the passengers on the plane. We know that they are going to be questioned by the Maltese government, and then early
tomorrow they will be sent back to Libya on an Afriqiyah airplane again.
Right now, though, the Maltese government interrogating those two hijackers trying to figure out exactly what happened. When he heard from the Maltese
prime minister, he said that they weren't going to negotiate with the two hijackers until they surrendered all the passengers, turned them over
safely, the crew members and surrendered themselves.
And that's exactly what happened. So now they are trying to figure out exactly why these two men hijacked this plane.
JONES: Ian, we do know that the weapons that they claimed to have, these hand grenades. They were indeed replicas, but huge questions how they even
managed to get replicas on to this plane.
LEE: That's right. One Libyan lawmaker has cast a lot of doubt about the security in Libya's airports. At times, these security checkpoints are run
by tribal members. It is not a formal process and so that's what they're calling for right now, is a meeting so they can go over security in the
country and make sure that their airports are secure so you don't have something like this happen.
But again it raises questions of security for Europe, too, if these two men can sneak on a plane with what they described as replica weapons. What
stopping someone else with real weapons.
JONES: OK, Ian, thanks very much indeed. Let's bring in Richard Quest live for us in CNN Center in Atlanta. Richard, unfortunately the hijacking
of commercial airliners is relatively rare, but what do the aviation authorities do? What are the procedures they follow when this sort of
thing does happen?
RICHARD QUEST, CNN AVIATION CORRESPONDENT: It is a very well-travelled, pardon the pun, procedure that is being honed over many years of
experience. The first thing is to get the plane on the ground and usually at an isolated part of the airfield. So every major airport has a part of
the airfield reserved or restricted away from the terminals or away from anyone elsewhere they can isolate the aircraft and the security forces can
then handle the emergency.
[15:20:11]In this case, interestingly enough, the Egyptian authorities refused permission to allow the plane to land in Alexandria, where it was
originally the hijackers have wanted to land and instead of course the plane continues on to Malta.
And probably for the best in many ways because there was probably a better and more honed response from the Maltese authorities in that regard. Once
you have the plane on the ground, this is the second part of that equation. Get the plane on the ground and then make sure it does not take off again.
This is a cardinal principal of hijacking situations. So the Maltese would never allow this plane to take off again. End of subject. This was going
to could end good or bad, and it ended well, thank God.
But the plane was never going to be allowed back in the air. Then you bring in hostage negotiators, and then at that point it is really no
different to any other hostage situation, be it a building or an aircraft.
JONES: Yes, Richard, I was going to ask you about the negotiations themselves. Are all airline crew, airline staff, ground controllers as
well in Malta, would they all have been trained, to some extent, at least, in this hostage negotiation training?
QUEST: Not so much in the training, but in handling the situation. So the air traffic controller, soon as the pilot sent out an emergency that they
are being hijacked, as soon as they would have seen that or as soon as it was clear that a hijacking was under way, the plane could have just
deviated from the flight path, then yes, air traffic control, airports, and airlines have a very well-honed plan.
Everybody knows what they are supposed to do and once it's on the ground, then the real professionals in negotiations, the security forces, Special
Forces, any of those parts that might have to storm the plane in an emergency.
What is interesting here, the airport where it left, and where it was heading. Clearly the question of security, not so much that they could not
get a real device on board the plane, but that they were even able to get a dummy device. It should have been telegraphed before it even got to
JONES: OK, well, my thanks to both of you, Ian Lee in London and Richard Quest in Atlanta, thank very much indeed.
Still to come on THE WORLD RIGHT NOW, Vladimir Putin mentioned Donald Trump quite a bit during his year-end press conference and we're learning details
now of how their relationship is shaping up even before Trump takes office. Stay with us for more.
JONES: Welcome back. Let's get back to our stop story and the U.N. Security Council has just approved a resolution criticizing Israel's
settlement policy in Palestinian territories. The U.S. crucially abstained from that vote.
And now President-elect Donald Trump who has been very involved in this whole discussion about whether this resolution would actually go to a vote
or not, he commented on that vote on Twitter.
Donald Trump writing just in the last few minutes, "As to the U.N., things will be different after January 20th." Of course, that reference January
20th will be his inauguration when he takes office and President Obama is no longer president.
Nikki Haley will be the next U.S. ambassador to the U.N. She takes over for Samantha Power, who we heard in the last hour addressing her colleagues
in the Security Council, trying to explain why the Unite States did abstain from that vote saying that while the United Nations she thought had always
biased against Israel.
The U.S. had a very long history and long standing position against settlement buildings. She actually went on to lift -- presidents for years
past, both Republican and Democrats, who have supported a two-state solutions. It looks like that is all set to change as Donald Trump just
said in his own words, things will be different after January 20th.
Now if you thought U.S.-Russia relations could not get any worse, then you're in agreement with Vladimir Putin. But the Russian president did try
to down play the stress of a Soviet era arms race. Concerns fled after Trump tweeted again about boosting America's nuclear capability. Our
Matthew Chance is in Moscow.
MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: In his annual epic news conference that lasted nearly four-hours this year, Vladimir Putin
addressed a range of issues including the comments by President-elect Trump about the United States renewing its nuclear arsenal. Putin moved to
downplay the risk of a new nuclear arms race with the U.S. saying there was nothing new in President-elect Trump's controversial remarks on the
subject. Take a listen to what Vladimir Putin had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PRESIDENT VLADIMIR PUTIN, RUSSIA: So if someone accelerates and speeds up the arms race, it's not us. But I would like to underline, which is
important for our domestic situation and domestic public, I would like to say that we will never, once we're in an arm's race, we will never spend
too much -- more than we can afford.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CHANCE: The kremlin also confirmed they sent that letter offering President-elect Trump seasonal greetings and expressing hope for an
improvement in their relationship between Moscow and Washington. The whole tone of the letter, which was only made public a week after it was sent,
appears very conciliatory and positive.
Certainly in stark contrast to the scathing tone that we've seen the kremlin adopt when speaking about the current U.S. administration. During
his news conference, Putin again launched into an attack on the White House.
So while answering questions about the alleged hacking of the U.S. presidential election, the current U.S. administration, Putin said, always
tries to find a scapegoat for its failings. The Democrats lost the presidency and the Congress, he said, am I responsible for that?
If you lose, Putin added, you should lose with dignity. Again a dig at the outgoing Obama administration while extending a hand of friendship to the
incoming Trump one. Matthew Chance, CNN, Moscow.
JONES: Coming up on THE WORLD RIGHT NOW, after the killing of the chief suspect in the Berlin attack, should Europeans breathe a sigh of relief or
brace themselves for what might be ahead.
But before we go to that break, we're going take you back to the United Nations because that we are going to be listening in to the Israeli
ambassador, Danny Danon, who is responding after Samantha Power, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., made this comment explaining the American position.
DANNY DANON, ISRAELI AMBASSADOR TO UNITED NATIONS: You voted no to progress in a chance for better lives for Israelis and Palestinians and you
voted no to the possibility of peace. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon addressing this very council one week ago said that the U.N. has, quote, "a
disproportionate volume of resolutions, reports, and conferences criticizing Israel."
This resolution today will be added to the long and shameful list of anti- Israel U.N. resolutions. Instead of supporting a cause forward, you're sending a message to the Palestinians that they should continue on the path
of terrorism and incitement, that they should continue to hold their own people hostage, that they should continue to seek meaningless statements
from the international community.
[15:30:15] The sad truth is that, today, vote will be a victory for terror. It would be a victory for hatred and violence.
By continuing to provide excuses for the Palestinians to avoid recognizing our right to exist, you are only maintaining the status quo. The world is
undergoing great change and the new Secretary General will soon assume office. I call on this council to take this opportunity to turn on a new
page, put an end to the bias and obsession with Israel. Stop these endless attempt to blame all the problems of the Middle East on their one true
democracy in the region, and make clear with the Palestinians that the only way forward is to end incitement and terror and to enter into direct and
meaningful negotiations with Israel.
Just two months ago approved an absurd resolution, denying the connection between the Jewish people and Jerusalem. Today, this council, including
many of the world's leading democracies, the beacons of liberty, voted to condemn the state of Israel. You voted to condemn the Jewish people for
building homes in the land of Israel. You voted to ban us from building in our historical capital of Jerusalem, the heart and soul of the Jewish
people, with the resolution.
Tomorrow night, Israel and the entire Jewish community around the world will celebrate the holiday of Hanukkah. Over 2,000 years ago, King
Antiochus banished the Jewish people from our temple in Jerusalem and issued decrees trying to sever us from religion and our heritage, but we
prevailed. The Jewish people fought back. We gained our independence and relight the menorah candle in the temples.
I ask each and every member of this council who voted for this resolution, who gave you right to issue such a decree, denying our eternal rights in
Jerusalem? Would this council have had the nerve to condemn your country for building homes in your capital?
Would you ban the French from building in Paris? Would you ban the Russians from building in Moscow? Would you ban the Chinese from building
in Beijing? Would you ban the British from building in London? Would you ban the Americans from building in Washington?
We overcame those decrees during the time of the Maccabees and we will overcome this evil decree today. We have full confidence in the justice of
our cause and in the righteousness of our path. We will continue to be a democratic state based on the rule of law and full civil and human rights
for all our citizens, and we will continue to be a Jewish state, proudly reclaiming the land of our forefathers where the Maccabees fought the
oppressors and King David ruled from Jerusalem.
This Holy Book, the Bible, contains 3,000 years of history of the Jewish people in the land of Israel. No one, no one, can change this history.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): I thank the representative of Israel for his statement, and I now give the floor to the Permanent
Observer of the observer state of Palestine.
RIYAD MANSOUR, PERMANENT OBSERVER OF PALESTINE TO THE UNITED NATIONS: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I thank you for --
JONES: OK. You're looking at live pictures from the U.N. Security Council. We're going to get more reaction to this historic move by members
of the Security Council against Israeli settlements in Palestinian territories. I want to now bring in Hanan Ashrawi who's a Palestinian
legislature and joins me now on the phone.
Thank you for speaking to us on the program. This has been described as a blow to Israeli policy. Are you pleased with the vote?
[15:35:11] HANAN ASHRAWI, PALESTINIAN LEGISLATOR: Well, before we talk about it as a blow to Israeli policy, I think we all should understand that
all the settlements are illegal by international law and in accordance with a wrong statute. It's a war crime for there's nothing accepted in our
mission (ph) than the body that's in charge of a global rule of law condemns settlements which are a violation of the rule of law.
And this has been a long-standing policy of the U.S. The only problem is that Israel has always coerced the U.S. to support Israeli impunity and
lawlessness. Israel is an occupying power that is in violation of the international law, that is in violation of Palestinian rights, and that is
constantly undermining and destroying the chances of peace by stealing Palestinian land and resources and culture and history, and therefore,
destroying the peace keeping solution.
Now, by abstaining --
JONES: Hanan, I'm sorry. I just want to jump in and interrupt you for a moment because the Palestinians are now speaking within the U.N. Security
Council as well, so I want to just take our viewers straight there so we can hear from him live now.
MANSOUR: -- on behalf of the international community reflecting the long- standing global consensus on the matter. Here, we must express our gratitude to the four core sponsors, Malaysia, New Zealand, Senegal, and
Venezuela. They have acted in line with their constant calls for action to redress this unjust situation, firm in their responsibilities as council
We also thank Angola among the noncaucus members for their abiding support. And, of course, we also thank our brothers in Egypt, the Arab
representative on the council for all efforts exerted throughout this process.
Let me also thank all those who have applauded the adoption of Resolution 2334 in this Chamber, and the millions who have applauded in all corners of
the globe, including, especially, in the state of Palestine.
Over the years, we have made countless appeals to the Council to uphold its chartered duties, convinced in its central role and the primacy of
international law, insisting on the need for concerted action to confront Israeli's oppression of the Palestinian people and relentless colonization
of our land under its half-century foreign occupation.
Our appeals have sought in the immediate, to alleviate the suffering of our people, a defenseless civilian population denied their rights, dignity, and
humanity. But our appeals have also been calls for the Council to contribute to the cause of peace for the long term. Peace for Palestine,
peace for Israel, peace for the Middle East region, and peace for our world.
We have not been alone in our appeals. They have been echoed by Security Council members themselves and by the states, organizations, international
civil servants, and civil society that have come before the Council, all imploring the council to act including, in specific, to address the
illegality of Israeli settlement activities in occupied Palestine, including east Jerusalem, and the erosion of the two-state solution based
on the 1967 borders and the prospects for a just, lasting, and comprehensive peace.
That the Council has finally chosen to act is significant. Let me repeat, that the Council has finally chosen to act is significant after years of
paralysis, as is the fact that this resolution has been adopted with majority support, overwhelming majority support. But this step requires
vigilant follow up, if it is to be meaningful, to stem further deterioration and salvage the two-state solution from the allegation to
Urgent efforts are needed to reverse the dangerous, negative trends on the ground and to advance our collective efforts to end the Israeli occupation
that began in 1967 and achieve freedom, rights, and justice for the Palestinian people including the Palestine refugees, leading to
Palestinian-Israeli peace and security as well as the goal of Arab-Israeli peace.
[15:40:22] Mr. President, there is no bashing as repeatedly claimed by the Israeli government, not by the Palestine, not by the Council, nor by any
who have, time and again, urged the Council to act in the interest of peace and security. Claims of bashing are beyond offensive because in reality,
today's action may be too little too late. After years of following the law to be trampled and the situation to spiral downward, today's resolution
may rightly be seen as a last attempt to preserve the two-state solution and revive the path for piece, to keep the hope alive.
For many, this seems virtually impossible at this point as Israel, the occupying power, has been permitted to entrench its occupation and a one-
state reality with absolute impunity, at times, even being rewarded for its violations and intransigence. Against this backdrop, one Council
resolution in nearly eight years is not disproportionate. It is shameful. But today's vote rectifies this record and set us on a new course.
The facts are that the only bashing being done is by Israel of this Council. You heard what he said. And entire U.N. system. You heard also
what he said of the charter and international law.
For five decades, despite Resolution 242 of 1967 calling for Israelis' withdrawal from the territories it occupied in 1967 and all the resolutions
thereafter, Israel has persisted, full force, with its occupation. Its illegal settlements and the war have severely fragmented our land,
undermined its contiguity and isolated east Jerusalem, the heart and capital of our state, a de factor Israeli annexation of which the
international community has never recognized and continues to reject.
It has destroyed convictions in the rationality, feasibility, and fairness of the two-state solution as reflected in the growing negative sentiments
among Palestinians, what are those besieged and inhumanely blockaded for nearly a decade in the Gaza Strip or those enduring the colonization
onslaught and daily settler terror in the West Bank including East Jerusalem or those in the diaspora including in our refugee camps across
the region, whose patience in awaiting justice and a peaceful solution is legendary yet now so afraid.
The audacious claims of bias, we say that the only bias taking place is that against the law, against reason, and against the vision of two states
as the most viable solution to this prolonged illegal occupation and disastrous tragic conflict. We have heard it loud and clear in the gleeful
boasts by some Israeli officials that, and I quote, "The two-state solution is dead," end of quotation. And I quote, "There will be no Palestinian
state," end of quotation.
We witnessed it in the constant Israeli schemes including Knesset ploys attempting to prevent the law, to accommodate the unlawful, and the pretext
used to expropriate and colonize our land and deepen the occupation. We witnessed it in the Israelis blatant contempt of the global demands to
comply with obligations under the law, as is expected of every single other state in the international community, and to finally commit to the path of
But today, this Council has said enough, and we thank you for that. Mr. President, this resolution represents a necessary step for addressing one
of the most critical aspects of the longest issue on the U.N. agenda, a 70- year open wound precluding peace and stability in our region with far reaching sequences, not least of which is fueling the anger and despair
that injustice breeds, especially among youth who see no present or future and undeniably fueling much of the radicalism and extremism plaguing our
region and the world.
[15:45:34] The Security Council must stand firm by this decision. Stand by the law and stand the right side of history. Each should not be --
JONES: OK. If you are just joining us, you're looking at Riyad Mansour, the Palestinian authority representative addressing the U.N. Security
Council in New York following that vote in which the United States abstained from a vote against Israeli settlements in the occupied
Palestinian territories. Riyad Mansour there saying that this was welcomed, but it was perhaps too little, too late.
Let's get more from Oren Liebermann now who's live for us in Jerusalem monitoring all of the events at the United Nations for us.
And, Oren, he said it was too little, too late. And that does seem indeed to be true because we know that President-elect Donald Trump has already
tweeted since this vote to say, "Things will be different after January 20th." So this one's gone against Israel but perhaps not for long.
OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, there's very little it seems that President-elect Donald Trump can do to reverse or repeal this U.N.
Security Council resolution. It's because of the overwhelming support it got in what would almost certainly be a veto from the other permanent
members of the Security Council if he ever tried to repeal this.
So although this might not go any further for the next four years under President-elect Donald Trump, there's no changing or removing this
resolution. It may just be dormant for the next four years under Trump who promises to protect Israel at the U.N.
Now, we just got a response from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office. So let me read this. This says, "Israel rejects the shameful
anti-Israel resolution of the U.N. and will not abide by its terms. At a time when the Security Council does nothing to stop the slaughter of half a
million people in Syria, it disgracefully gangs up on the one true democracy in the Middle East, Israel, and calls the Western Wall, quote,
'occupied territory.' The Obama administration not only failed to protect Israel against this gang up at the U.N., it colluded with it behind the
scenes. Israel looks forward to working with President-elect Trump and with all of our friends in Congress, Republicans and Democrats alike, to
negate the harmful effects of this absurd resolution."
And incredibly strongly worded statement that's both very critical of Obama and very complimentary of incoming President Trump. Something else worth
pointing out is what he's says right at the beginning there, that "Israel will not abide by its terms," perhaps referencing what Benjamin Netanyahu
plans to do right after Trump takes office in terms of building in the settlements.
Certainly, it's something his government partners want, a right-wing government that is very much pro-building in the settlements and in East
Jerusalem as well as, for some members, annexing parts or all of the West Bank. So Netanyahu clearly showing where his allegiances lie. He is
waiting for Trump to come in and waiting for a different relationship between the Prime Minister of Israel and the President of the U.S.
JONES: Oren Liebermann live for us in Jerusalem. Thanks very much indeed, Oren.
Well, do stay with us here on THE WORLD RIGHT NOW. Plenty more on this and other stories, of course, coming up after this break.
[15:50:42] JONES: Hello and welcome back. More now on one of our top stories. This week began with a terror attack on a Christmas market in
Berlin that left 12 people dead, and it ended today with the shooting death of the suspect, Anis Amri. But the implications of this attack will extend
far into the New Year.
Earlier on, I spoke to "The Financial Times" commentator, Quentin Peel. He's also an associate fellow for the Europe Programme of the U.K.-based
think tank, Chatham House. And I began by asking him if Europeans should feel safer or more worried after this week's events.
QUENTIN PEEL, EUROPE PROGRAMME ASSOCIATE FELLOW, CHATHAM HOUSE: I think a terrorist act like this is incredibly difficult to stop. Here is somebody
who didn't have a bomb, didn't actually use major weapons except for a truck. So just like the Nice event, it is extraordinarily difficult to
stop it. Of course, people should feel safer that the guy who did it has been caught and indeed killed. But at the same time, you can never stop it
and therefore, we're going to have to get used to the fact that we're going to see more things like this happening.
JONES: He did, of course, cross three borders, from Germany into France and then finally in Italy as well. Is this a failure of the intelligence
services and the agencies in terms of collaboration, or is it a success in the fact that he was eventually hunted down?
PEEL: Both, really. I mean the borders are open. It's the Schengen area, that you can cross without a passport or anything. So unless you really
pin down a specific border that you're watching, it's very difficult to stop anybody. They have caught him, and that was quite impressive because
clearly, there were roadblocks out with very well informed -- and they recognized him. So that, actually, I was quite surprised at. And I was
surprised at the confidence that Angela Merkel was speaking about, "We're going to catch this guy."
JONES: You say obviously that they caught him and that you're impressed by that, but it was also something of a fluke, you could say. It was a
routine check. Granted 3:00 in the morning local time in Italy but still a routine identification check, and he happened to pull a gun on the police
officers. He could have gone on to murder more people and cause more terror attacks throughout Italy and the wider continent as well.
PEEL: He could, and that's why I say we can never stop these things. This is people who are swimming in the sea of civilian life. They're not an
armed enemy with uniforms on. This is people like you and me.
JONES: And one of the ways of catching people who are swimming in the sea of civilian life is surveillance cameras, and Germany is not known for its
surveillance, its snooping laws. It has very strict privacy laws, which it's very proud of. But is that now outdated and unworkable in modern
terror threat that we now all face?
PEEL: I think it is going to have to change in Germany, and Germans will be very unhappy about that. But I think they'll recognize that they could
not go on indefinitely saying no CCTV cameras in public places and so on. This has been building up for a long time in Germany. As you say, Germans
really don't like it because of the historical memory they have. They don't like it because that was how the Gestapo behaved in the times of
Hitler and it was how the communist behaved in East Germany, but they're going to have to do it.
JONES: And you mentioned before, as well, about the Schengen area, the Schengen zone. Just explain for us, what exactly it means, the Schengen
zone, and why it's now potentially had a bitter blow given the fact that Anis Amri managed to exploit that.
PEEL: Well, it's had a bitter blow, if you like, from two directions. On the one hand, it's really complicated, the control of the flow of migrants
and refugees coming into Europe from the outside, and it's also much more difficult to police internal movements of terrorists, of criminals, and so
on. But there is much more exchange of information than there ever was before, and we're just having to control open borders in a different way,
if you like, back from the border and have much more surveillance.
[15:55:04] And even for a country like Great Britain, which is not a member of the Schengen area, we're having to do that as well. Borders alone are
not enough of a control system.
JONES: And let's look at the political situation in Germany as well. There are elections around the corner. Angela Merkel will be fighting
again for the Chancellorship. She has been accused by some in the country of having blood on her hands in the aftermath of this market attack.
President Obama has once said, at least, that history will judge her favorably for her refugee policy. But do you think, while she might be
able to take the moral high ground, that will potentially cost her her job?
PEEL: I don't think it will cost her her job. She is, by far, the most popular politician in Germany and she's a great reassurance to people at
times of uncertainty and anxiety. She's a very steady, reliable, and reassuring sort of person.
Having said that, she's already said before this happened it's going to be the most difficult election she's ever fought. There has been a drift of
people to the extremes of politics, particularly on the right, people who say she let in too many refugees, she should have stopped this from
I think, on the whole, well, I'm pretty confident she will still clearly come out top. But it's going to squeeze everybody in the center ground of
politics just as it has in virtually every other European country. In Britain, the center was squeezed, in France, in Germany. And that, I
think, is going to make it much more difficult to form a coalition at the end of the day with the numbers to get a majority in Parliament.
Angela Merkel may well have to fall back on having what they call a grand coalition with her biggest rivals, the Social Democrats, and neither of
them like that.
JONES: And just finally, we're often asked to be more vigilant in the face of terror attacks, but what does that mean when, effectively, by being
vigilant, we're having to curb, in the West, our way of life? What does it mean for all of us going forward?
PEEL: Well, I think we have to get used to the fact that our data is not totally private. That, actually, whatever we do on the internet, whatever
we do on the street, is going to be watched by somebody somewhere. We're sitting very close to Oxford Street where there's CCTV, all on the
Christmas triads, to stop robbery and that sort of thing. We've got to get used to it. That's the way of life we're going to face.
JONES: Quentin Peel, thank you very much for joining us on THE WORLD RIGHT NOW. Thank you.
JONES: And that is all we've got time for on THE WORLD RIGHT NOW. Thanks so much for watching. Happy holidays to you. "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS" is
coming up next.