and the destruction do finally end. my guest is ami ayalon, former chief of israel's shin bet security agency, now a fierce critic of the netanyahu government. is israel fighting an unwinnable war? ami ayalon, in northern israel, welcome to hardtalk. thank you for inviting me. it's great to have you on the show, mr ayalon. you have a long, distinguished career at the top of the israeli security forces. obviously that ended some time ago.

you have been watching israel's military assault in gaza from afar. has it unfolded in the way you expected? yes, it has unfolded in the way i expected but not in the way that i thought it should be. there is a huge tension between the way that i see this war and the way that the government define it, and the problem is, and i have said it from the very beginning, that this war is a war without any political goal. and what happens to this type of war, that the war becomes the end and not the means in order to achieve a better political goal. so the answer is yes and no.

isn't the strategic sort of aim to destroy hamas as a fighting force and to completely eliminate it as a governing force in gaza, isn't that a clear political strategic ambition? no, absolutely not. it is a military goal, it is not a political goal. we have to understand that when we discuss the whole concept of war, the idea is to create a better political reality. the battlefield or the military forces are just the means in order to achieve it, but what you mentioned, to dismantle hamas and its military capabilities and its leadership is an achievable military capability and achievable military goal, but it is just a military goal, it is not a political goal.

do you think that today's generation of military commanders from the very top down, those in uniform, have their own doubts about the strategic goals they been set by the political leadership, of course led by prime minister netanyahu? first of all, i have to remind to you and the people who listen that i do not represent the state of israel and probably not the people of israel, but if you ask me, yes, i believe that all the generals, by the way, not only in israel, i think that almost worldwide, i know that in america and in britain, we know that in this type of war, which is a war between a state and an organisation, we call it, you know, low intensity or asymmetry or whatever we call it, hybrid war, we have to change

the definition of victory. we are fighting two types of wars in two dimensions. one is a military war, is a battlefield, and this war should have a military means. if i may, let me come in and ask you a simple question. this war cannot, will not go on forever. wars do end. when it ends, do you believe... not this war. this will not end. this is not exactly a war, it is something between, when we say hybrid, the real meaning is it is between crime and what we used to see as war. let me finish my thoughts. you are saying it is not a war as we think of them in the traditional sense, but if i accept your premise

that it isn't necessarily going to end, is it, day by day, week by week, as we see the civilian death toll rise, as we see talk of famine in gaza, is it strengthening or weakening hamas? it is strengthening hamas because we do not understand that there is a huge gap between our major achievement on the battlefield and in the battlefield we are winning every day. if we measure military winning by the number of military infrastructure and command centres, and how many warriors or hamas terrorists are we killing, we are winning the war. but the real victory will not be achieved in the military battle in the military battle.

it is on the other dimension because the war against terror is a war against an idea and there is no way to destroy or to defeat an idea by the use of military power. so... most times it is totally different. it is the opposite. the more power you use, the deeper the roots of this ideology within society. so today hamas is increasing his popularity and his influence within the palestinian society, within the arab society, and within the muslim society. you know and i know that the international court ofjustice is already hearing a case brought by south africa under the genocide convention. israel rejects any talk of genocide but nonetheless that court is now considering that case.

we also in recent days have heard reports that the international criminal court may be about to indict some seniorfigures in israel on the basis of alleged war crimes. it is indeed possible benjamin netanyahu himself might be named in an icc indictment. how much do these legal manoeuvrings and machinations matter right now, do you believe? it does matter. you can see it in israeli newspapers during the last two or three days, it is a major issue. but i'm not sure that it will change the policy of our government. you have to understand that it is a trap. on one hand, we are, after 7 october, the horror, the violence, the way that hamas terrorists celebrated,

i don't know, i'm not sure that i have the english vocabulary to describe what we saw, and it will take us years to understand what happened to us on 7 october, so we had to respond because the reality on which — in which hamas are living more than 2 million palestinians on one side of the fence and we are living on the other side is not acceptable, not acceptable any more. as i understand it, you just said something important, you've tried to capture the horror of what happened to israel on 7 october, and there is no doubt that israelis were obviously traumatised by that and remain so, but you also right now are saying it would be entirely wrong for israeli forces to go into rafah where it is believed that senior hamas commanders, and quite possibly yayha sinwar himself, who appears to have been the mastermind of 7

october, are hiding in the tunnels. you say, no, we shouldn't push with full force into rafah and you also say that there should be a prolonged ceasefire, that prisoner releases should be organised to get the hostages out of gaza, the israeli hostages, of whom we believe there are still more than a hundred, and you say that as part of a deal marwan barghouti, who has been in prison for so many years now, should be released back into the west bank. wouldn't your approach be handing a clear victory to hamas? no. totally not. we have to understand that the only way to defeat hamas — hamas is an ideology with organisation. the military wing of hamas,

izz ad—din al-qassam, is only the military wing of this ideology. in order to defeat the ideology, we have to present a better ideology. we are fighting in a war of ideas, and the only way to defeat the horror, the violence, and the concept, the ideology of hamas, which is to create a muslim state, that sharia is the constitution, which is not acceptable by the majority of palestinians, is to present a better political horizon for us and for the palestinians. which is the future of two states living side—by—side. so unless we shall do it, it is not, you know, it will not help us. if we shall kill all the hamas leaders, if we shall kill all hamas activists,

on the day after, two palestinian children will take knives and will do everything to kill an israeli or ajew. but if i may say so, mr ayalon, your idea of the only way out of this, which is the two—state solution, it is the idea that drove peres and rabin and arafat to the oslo accords in the early 1990s. it was the dream to live side—by—side in coexistence, and that dream conclusively died. you are trying to resuscitate something which is dead. no, it is not. it is not. you just have to listen to the american president. you have to listen to all the european leaders. you have to listen to all the arab leaders. you have to read the arab peace initiative. so it is a dead only among us in israel.

it is the only living concept of the world — it is acceptable by china, by russia, by all the political, you know, community, worldwide. so we did not give ourselves the answer, why it did not work. yes, it didn't work. but it is because we did many mistakes, and the palestinians did many mistakes, and we do not analyse, we do not try to understand what were the mistakes. the last prime minister who really tried to achieve a viable solution was ehud olmert, and he was sent to jailfor corruption. the thing is, you speak with the authority of a very senior member of the security elite, but you don't speak as a guy who appears

to have the israeli public on his side. if you look at all the polling of israelis since 7 october, overwhelmingly majority... no, no. ..show opposition to any notion of an independent palestinian state. mr netanyahu is clearly opposed to it, his entire cabinet is opposed to it. no. you are totally wrong. since 7 october, in all our polls, and i am mentioning not all of them, we have a poll of about two months ago that says that 83% of the israelis want to see or even demand to see a border between us and the palestinians. so if it will come, it is not because theyjoined the zionist movement or because we love palestinians or we believe that they deserve something,

it is because we decided that the option of one state, because we hate so much one another, so this... crosstalk yes, but mr ayalon... another poll... nearly three quarters of a millionjewish israelis live beyond this wall that you are imagining as the border between israel and a palestinian state. and there is no israeli government on earth which appears to have the intent or the will or the capacity to remove those jewish settlers. just a moment. first of all, if you read the last agreement that that were not signed between ehud olmert, as the prime minister, and mahmoud abbas as the palestinian president, the idea is that the border

will be based on the lines, the lines of 1967, and with exchange of territories. so more than 80% of the israeli jews who are living in settlements not far from the borders will be living in the state of israel as a result of this exchange of territories. in addition... crosstalk i know, mr ayalon, this is the plan you've worked on with palestinians like sari nusseibeh many years ago... i'm not working on anything. this is a plan was accepted by all the arab league states in the arab peace initiative. it was agreed between ehud olmert, as the prime minister, and mahmoud abbas, as the president of the palestinian authority, and in addition they were ready to discuss even the statutes and the number of settlers

who would decide, who would prefer to stay in palestine once palestine will be created. see, mr netanyahu doesn't frame the current security challenge facing israel as a challenge about the palestinians. he does say that if a palestinian state would be a fundamental threat to israeli security, but what he frames it as is part of a much bigger picture, an existential struggle with iran. i would put it to you that, as we just saw days and weeks ago, direct hostilities between israel and iran, right now the netanyahu narrative that we can only understand hamas as part of an axis based in tehran, that is something which is working for him politically inside your country, even if you don't like it. first of all, i don't like it, but this is, the way i see it, this is not important. neta nyahu is over. 75% of israelis believe that he should retire, he should leave his position, but yes, among them,

several believe he should do it only after the war. and this is why this war will not end because this is the only way for mr netanyahu to stay in power. but let me say something about iran. we have to understand that the israeli—palestinian conflict is not a conflict between israelis and palestinians anymore. i've said it before. it is a regional conflict with a global impact. so we have to understand that iran is taking advantage of our conflict with hamas. so what i suppose and what i suggest is exactly to accept the vision of america, the american president, a greater middle east, and to create an axis that will enable us to confront iran and all its proxies — houthis in the south,

hezbollah in the north, and hamas wherever it is. this is the only way for israel to maintain our security and identity as ajewish democracy. isn't there another... to do it, we have to be a majority in our state, so we have to divide this piece of land and we have to accept the proposition that was proposed to us by the american president. isn't there another problem that you face? we've talked about whether your ideas are attractive to the israeli general public, but we also need to talk about whether your idea of a two—state solution is any longer credible or attractive to the palestinian people. and it is interesting to me that again, polls taken since 7 october across the west bank and gaza suggest the rise in support for hamas but a complete loss of confidence in the viability of a two—state solution and there are many palestinians

who would point to people like you and say, "it's all very well, mr ayalon, "saying we have to return to the two—state solution, it's the only option we have." they would say, "no, fundamentaljustice, if we're really talking "aboutjustice, requires us to go the heart of whether zionism "is viable in the future, whether we actually "to have a full accounting for what happened in 1948 and, "in fact, we have to have a one—state future "wherejews and arabs live side—by—side "in the land from the sea to thejordan river "in a secular democracy." why are you laughing? this is a british kind of thought or at least western. you have to understand that judaism and islam never were able to separate religion from statehood. from nationalism. this is part of our identity.

we are not like the christians who fought for, i don't know how many hundreds of years killing i don't know how many millions in the wars between the church and the kings or whatever. judaism and islam... even if you think it's impossible to imagine a unitary state where jews and arabs live... no, because i see... hang on... when huntington during the �*90s came with the idea of war or clashes between civilisations, it was very simplistic. too simplistic. what we see today is clashes within civilisations. in the middle east, in order to understand the middle east, you have to understand that the major, major conflict in the middle east is not the israeli—palestinian conflict. it a conflict between the shia and the sunni. we saw what happened

in afghanistan, in iraq, we saw what happened in lebanon, they are killing each other in syria. the israeli and palestinian conflict has nothing to do with it. people here in the middle east are killing each other. foi’ so many reasons. for identities. so we have to understand that the only way we are not losing, the only way for all of us, for all palestinians — palestinians want to have a palestinian state and their identity, yes, most of them, 75%, 80% of them, they want to see it as a democratic state. but they do not want to lose their identity, their symbols, their language. we are almost out of time, mr ayalon. i need to ask you one more basic question. you are three years older than the state of israel. right now the state of israel is not listening to voices like yours.

do you believe that your own country right now is on a pathway to potential self—destruction if it continues on the path it's on right now? if it continues on the path, yes. this will be the end of the zionist dream. i am saying it, i am writing about it. the zionist dream is the creation of the state of israel as a jewish democracy. and if we shall lose our identity and we shall lose our security, this is the end of the zionist dream. so, for me, this is what i am trying, look, israel was created by dreamers who were very, very pragmatic. it was an unusual combination with people who knew how to dream but they knew how to deal with the reality.

we are losing, we are losing the idea of how to compete with the reality. and since, we do not know how to dream, we are losing our ability to dream, and we are losing our ability to compete with the reality. and this is a kind of messianic concept that will bring israel to its end. yes. ami ayalon, i thank you forjoining me on hardtalk. thanks. thank you. hello, there. it is turning warmer across

many parts of the country, but we have still got some rain in the forecast in the next few days. warmest weather was across eastern areas on tuesday. we've got low pressure still out to the west, but that weather front is weakening. this one across the east that's been bringing rain northwards through the night across eastern england, extending its way into eastern scotland. further west it is going to be drier and brighter but there will be more sunshine and just the odd shower. we'll get a few showers developing in the midlands ahead of this rain that's moving up into southern england during the afternoon. but for western areas, temperatures will be a bit higher, could make 18 degrees in western scotland and also the northwest of england. it will be cooler in eastern scotland and north—east england, especially if it stays grey and misty. further south with some warmth. we've got the risk for a short while on wednesday night of seeing some thunderstorms. that risk greatest across southern england and south wales. there could be some large hail and some gusty winds too. the wosrt of that tending to move away. and we're left with that weather front draped across england and wales. but to the north of it,

we're getting an easterly wind picking up. now that is actually bringing some warmer air from the continent. but that warmer wind is actually moving over a cold north sea and sea surface temperatures in the north sea eight or nine degrees. so at best it's going to feel cooler along north sea coast, but there still could be some mist and low cloud around it into thursday. but away from that, some sunshine across many parts of the country, the cloud breaking in the southwest and south wales eventually as that wet weather from overnight clears away, leaving a few sharp showers. but many places will be dry. and across the north midlands, north west england and northern ireland, it's going to be warm. and in western scotland, temperatures could reach 20 degrees. still on the cooler side for eastern scotland where we see a few showers on friday. and then we've got a bit more rain developing across england and wales, pushing northwards, bringing the risk of some storms in northern england. that will drop the temperatures here. we should get some sunshine in southern england. the highest temperatures will be in western scotland, 20 degreesjust for one more day because the weather is going to change here, because that weather front is going to work its way northwards and take some

outbreaks of rain, particularly into northern ireland but also parts of scotland on saturday. and to the south, the weekend is starting off on a more promising note with some sunshine in most places, dry, looks like the rain now steering into france on saturday rather than further north. so temperatures a pleasant 16 or 17 degrees. now, as we head further into the bank holiday weekend, it's going to be very difficult to get the details right. but we're looking to the southwest to bring more changeable weather our way. light winds, though, on sunday. so if you do get the sunshine, it'll feel quite warm. but there will be increasing cloud and we're likely to find some showers, particularly down towards southern areas of the uk. but those temperatures again reaching 17, maybe 18 degrees. we've got quite warm air in place over the bank holiday weekend. it's just typically difficult to get the details right. it looks like we're more likely to find unsettled weather continuing into the beginning of next week as low pressure moves up from the south—west. and that's going to bring with it more cloud and there'll

be more showers or some longer spells of rain, but still some sunshine in between those showers as well. now, are we going to see high pressure returning later on? well, perhaps not so much now because that low pressure is going to hang around for a bit longer, keeping us in a north—westerly breeze, higher pressure towards the southwest, but those showers could linger for longer.

live from london, this is bbc news. police raid a building at new york's columbia university that's been taken over by pro—palestinian

demonstrators. top us diplomat is in cairo where hamas is due to respond to terms of israel's revised ceasefire proposal as ceasefire negotiations get under way. water cannons and tear gas at a rally in georgia on people protesting a controversialforeign influence bill targetting civil liberties. hello. we start in the united states where hundreds of new york police officers have entered the campus of columbia university in new york to disperse pro—palestinian protesters who've taken over a building. a long line of officers have been seen climbing a ladder to enter hamilton hall. according to cbs news, 50 arrests have been made. the university had earlier told the students to leave or face being expelled.

columbia university said the students had escalated