The Disastrous Relationship Between Israel, Palestinians and the U.N.

Episode Summary

Executive Summary: Ezra Klein and Yale law professor Azar Balis discuss what international law is for, arguing that it often constrains power imperfectly but still matters. They trace Israel-Palestine through decolonization, UN structure, and war law, concluding that the current Gaza war exposes the limits—and continued relevance—of international norms, institutions, and enforcement.

Main Topics: What international law is for (Priority: 5/5): Balis argues international law can function like domestic law for many states, but its enforcement depends heavily on power, patrons, and political will. For weaker states, the rules can still deter or structure behavior; for great powers, they are more easily bent. Power, vetoes, and enforcement (Priority: 5/5): The conversation explains why UN mechanisms often fail: Security Council vetoes by powerful states, patronage by great powers, and lack of domestic pressure allow atrocities to continue even when the legal rules are clear. Israel, Palestine, and decolonization (Priority: 5/5): Balis frames Palestine as the last major unresolved decolonization case from the UN era, linking Israel’s creation to League of Nations mandates, partition, war, and the continuing denial of Palestinian self-determination. Gaza war and the laws of war (Priority: 5/5): They discuss October 7th, Hamas war crimes, Israel’s response, proportionality, distinction, starvation, civilian infrastructure, and the legal limits on destroying an adversary or governing authority. Russia-Ukraine as a comparison case (Priority: 3/5): The episode uses Russia’s invasion and continued Security Council status to illustrate how international law can condemn aggression without effectively constraining a major power. UN resolutions and political meaning (Priority: 4/5): The discussion addresses why General Assembly and Security Council resolutions matter even when nonbinding: they shape global legitimacy, historical memory, and future legal/political pressure, as seen in South Africa and potentially Gaza. Books and intellectual framing (Priority: 2/5): Balis recommends works by Anghie, Erakat, G. Adom Getachew, and Aziz Rana to contextualize imperialism, self-determination, Palestine, and American constitutional constraints.

Key Arguments: International law is real law, but its effect depends on the relative power of states and whether enforcement mechanisms are activated. Great powers can shield allies or themselves from accountability through Security Council vetoes, diplomacy, and geopolitical leverage. The UN was designed after World War II to prioritize peace among great powers over perfect justice, especially to prevent another world war. Israel-Palestine cannot be understood only as a war; it is also the unfinished business of decolonization and self-determination. Israel’s existence is tied to international law and the mandate/partition system, not simply to war outcomes; legal structures shaped the conflict before and after 1948. Hamas committed clear war crimes on October 7 by targeting civilians, taking hostages, and using indiscriminate rocket fire. Israel’s stated objective of destroying Hamas raises serious proportionality and total-war concerns under international humanitarian law. Blocking humanitarian aid and enabling starvation are among the clearest alleged war crimes discussed in Gaza. Claims that Hamas uses human shields do not nullify Israel’s obligations; civilian presence in dense areas is not itself human shielding. UN resolutions may be nonbinding, but repeated votes can shift legitimacy, isolate states, and help build future legal and political pressure, as with apartheid South Africa.

Data Points: UN General Assembly vote on Palestinian full member status: 143 in favor, 9 against, 25 abstentions - Described as an overwhelming and historically new vote for Palestinian member status UN General Assembly resolutions on Israel (2015-2022): 140 resolutions - Compared with UN attention to other countries UN General Assembly resolutions on all other countries combined (2015-2022): 68 resolutions - Used to illustrate Israeli claims of disproportionate scrutiny Percentage of historic Palestine allocated in 1947 partition plan to Jewish community: roughly 55% - Balis describes UN partition of the mandate territory Percentage allocated to Arab community in 1947 partition plan: roughly 45% - Part of the same UN partition proposal Territory under Arab control after the 1948 war: 22% - After war, Jewish forces controlled more territory than the partition plan assigned Number of states not recognizing Palestinian statehood: 50 countries - Balis notes overlap with former colonial powers Population on the territory discussed: 14 million total; 7 million Jewish citizens; 7 million Palestinians - Used to argue both communities are of equal size on the land Estimated civilian deaths in the Second World War: at least 30 million civilians - Referenced when explaining post-WWII UN design priorities Gazan deaths mentioned during the war: 34,000 plus - Used to describe the scale of destruction and civilian harm October 7 deaths in Israel: around 1,200 people - Most were civilians, according to the transcript Hostages taken on October 7: hundreds - Many were civilians

Pivotal Quotes: "The architecture of the United Nations security order gives asymmetric power to the victors of the Second World War..." — Azar Balis: Explaining why the UN Security Council was built to privilege the postwar great powers and prevent another catastrophic war "Blocking humanitarian assistance... I think is the clearest and most easily established war crime." — Azar Balis: On Israel’s restrictions on aid, food, water, fuel, medicine, and other necessities in Gaza "What the hell is the point of the UN or the UN Security Council" — Ezra Klein: Reaction to the U.S. treating a Security Council ceasefire resolution as non-binding

Implications: The episode suggests international law still matters, but only if states and publics demand enforcement. Without that, powerful actors can hollow it out—yet repeated resolutions, legal arguments, and legitimacy battles still shape future outcomes.