The conflict in Israel, as explained by UP prof Herman Kraft

The Hamas attack on Israel was the latest and one of the bloodiest episodes in a long history of war between Arabs and the Jewish state.

UP political scientist Herman Kraft tells Howie Severino that the tensions began in 1948 when, backed by the United Nations but opposed by Arab states, Israel established itself as a state in what was then the territory of Palestine. As Israel, mostly a nation of European immigrants, won wars and became a military and economic power, Arab states sought peace, sidelining the nationalist interests of their Palestinian allies.

As Israel prepares for a bloody occupation of Gaza, Kraft advises Filipinos to postpone any travels to Israel, even pilgrimages to Jerusalem, as the war could widen and drag on.

HOWIE: Magandang araw podmates! Howie Severino muli na nagpapaalala na nakakatalino ang mahabang attention span. May giyera na naman sa Middle East kung saan may malaking populasyon ng mga Pilipino. Paano naiiba ang nagaganap ngayon sa Israel mula nu'ng lusubin ito ng Hamas, ang kalaban nila sa Gaza? Bakit hindi matapos-tapos ang karahasan? Anong ugat nito?

Para tulungan tayong maintindihan ang napaka-komplikadong sitwasyon doon, kasama natin ngayon ang isang propesor sa Unibersidad ng Pilipinas sa Diliman, ang political scientist na si Herman Kraft. Magandang araw sa inyo, Professor Kraft.

HERMAN: Magandang araw rin. At marami salamat sa inyong imbitasyon.

HOWIE: Thank you for joining us, Prof. Para sa maraming Pilipino, ang Israel ay isang lugar lamang na may mga trabaho para sa mga OFW na minsan naiipit sa giyera. So help us understand the roots of this conflict. Itong kasisimula lang na giyera ay huling episode lamang ng mahabang kasaysayan ng digmaan sa Israel. Anong pinakaugat nito?

HERMAN: Well, kung ang pinag-uusapan natin ay 'yung alitan tungkol sa mga Hudyo at saka sa mga Palestino, puwede natin itong balikan ng ilang milestones historically. Puwede nating balikan 'yung partition ng Palestine supposedly between a Jewish state at isang Palestinian state. 'Yun 'yung napag-usapan sa United Nations noong 1948. At ito talaga dapat 'yung pupuntahan o ito 'yung pinagmumulan noong ating mga pinag-uusapan ngayon.

HOWIE: 'Pag sinabi n'yong Palestine, hindi ito bansa? What do you mean by noong 1947-1948? There was a Palestine but it was not an independent country, it was not a state? What was it?

HERMAN: It was a mandate given to the British to administer a territory that was actually predominantly Arabic but mayroong mga communities ng Jews. And which became, parang naging parte siya ng usapan kasi rito tayo pupunta roon sa nangyari noong ikalawang digmaang pandaigdig, 'yung Holocaust.

Ang pinakamalaking populasyon ng mga Hudyo sa mundo actually ay nasa Europa noong panahon na 'yun. Siguro sumusunod na 'yung mga Jewish migrant na nasa US. Pero ito 'yung pinakamalaking enclaves natin ng Jewish population noong panahon na 'yun.

Dahil doon sa Holocaust, parang nagkaroon ngayon ng, sabihin na lang natin, paniwala roon sa mga komunidad ng mga Hudyo na parang kailangang gumawa na sila ng sariling estado at mayroong, sabihin natin, may utang ang mundo sa kanila dahil sa nangyari sa Holocaust.

Doon ngayon pumasok 'yung movement nila na magkaroon ng sariling estado roon sa kung anong pinag-uusapan natin ngayon na Palestine. Bakit sa Palestine? Kasi ito 'yung tradisyonal, historical or even biblical, ito 'yung lupa na pinangako sa kanila ng Diyos as the chosen people. So this goes back to very biblical times.

In fact, the very argument nila for an Israeli state, for a Jewish state, a large part of it was based on the Bible. Noong pinag-usapan nga ito sa United Nations and siguro nga dahil du'n sa simpatiya na nanggaling doon sa nangyari sa kanila roon sa Holocaust, parang nagkaroon ng paniniwala na dapat nga siguro magkaroon sila ng sarili nilang estado.

At ang napag-usapan na magiging lugar nito ay 'yung sinasabi nila na tradisyonal nila na puwesto. 'Pag ginawa mo 'yun, mayroon kang mga komunidad na mga Arabo, these are the Palestinians, that will have to accept that particular arrangement.

Papaano 'yun, papaano mo hahatiin ang isang lugar na kung saan mayroon kang isang grupo ng mga tao na pumapasok at may mga grupo ng tao na nandoon na? Hindi tinanggap ito ng mga Palestino, hindi sila sumang-ayon doon sa naging desisyon sa United Nations. 'Yung mga Arab state that emerged pagkatapos nu'ng second world war, 'yun ngayon 'yung kanilang sinasabi na parang dapat hindi mangyari ito, hindi makatarungan 'yung desisyon na 'yun ng UN.

Kaya parang ang nangyari nito ay ito 'yung tinatawag natin na 'yung partition ng Palestine that actually when the State of Israel was declared in 1948, nagkaroon ng giyera, which eventually the Israelis actually won. But in the course of winning that war, the Palestinians, a large number of them were actually displaced. Nawala sila sa lugar nila. Kasi kumbaga natalo 'yung mga puwersa ng mga Arabo, umalis sila roon sa mga lugar kung saan 'yung mga Israeli forces, 'yung mga Hudyo began to take over.

So if we fast forward now, kasi parang pagkatapos noon may series ka ng mga giyera between 'yung mga Arabo at saka 'yung Israel, which included things like for instance 'yung 1967 war, 1973 war, Yom Kippur war.

And then, eventually nga, you've come towards the end of the 1970s, nagkaroon ka na ngayon ng mga usapan and the Americans were actually responsible for 'yung trying to push the talks together. 'Yung Camp David Accords na kung saan unti-unti 'yung mga Arab state na kaaway ng Israel began to actually discuss peace terms with Israel. So Egypt 'yung unang-una rito sa mga ito. Jordan actually came next.

Now think about it, kung ikaw 'yung Palestinian people, ang iniisip mo na hindi tapos 'yung giyera, dapat makuha namin ulit 'yung lupa na sinakop ng mga Israeli. At ang inaasahan mo ay itong mga Arab state na ito, matutulungan ka na ma-recover 'yung mga territoryo na iyon.

And now all of a sudden ito 'yung mga Arab states na ito, nakikipag-usap na sila sa Israel, nakikipag-sign na sila ng peace accord. So kumbaga, parang nagkaroon sila ng problema as far as that arrangement was actually concerned. So tingin nila parang napapabayaan sila. Parang gano'n 'yung nangyari.

Ano ba 'yung teritoryo na pinag-uusapan natin? Well, of course, there are two significant pieces of territory. 'Yung una, 'yung tinatawag natin na West Bank. 'Yung West Bank kasi ito ay teritoryo na nasakop, parang ito 'yung parte ng partition dapat na ibibigay doon sa mga Palestinian. Pero noong 1948 war, sinakop ito ng Jordan.

So actually Jordan ang may hawak doon sa West Bank until 1967 war na kung saan na-recover, nakuha ng Israel 'yung West Bank.

Then the other piece of land na pinag-uusapan is 'yung Gaza Strip. Maliit lang ito na teritoryo na nandoon sa may Mediterranean, 'yung southern border niya is actually Egypt, Sinai Peninsula. Ang katabi niya is Israel.

It's a small piece of territory, a few hundred square miles na kung saan you have... I think ang bilang nila ngayon is around 2 to 2.2 million Palestinians actually live there. So ito 'yung dalawang enclaves ngayon ng mga Palestinian na pinag-uusapan natin.

Pero ayun nga, nagkaroon ngayon ng uprising, 'yung tinatawag nilang Intifada in the 1980s.

Ang ano uprising na 'yun is the Palestinians... Tingin ko dalawa 'yung rason niyan.  Una, 'yung frustration over 'yung issue na nakikita nila 'yung mga kakampi nilang mga Arab state are now settling with Israel.

The second thing was, because Israel was settling with the Arab states, the other thing that they were actually doing or what was actually happening, 'yung nangyayari dito, nagtatayo sila ng mga settlement doon sa teritoryo, in the West Bank in particular, doon sa mga teritoryo na ngayon na kung saan naglalagay sila ng mga Jewish settler, right?

Similarly, sa Gaza, mayroon ding mga ganu'n. So ang nangyari, in the 1980s, nagkaroon ka ngayon ng uprising ng mga Palestino against what they referred to as 'yung Israeli occupation of their territories of their land.

Dahil doon sa first and second Intifada, nagkaroon ng agreement between the Israelis and the Palestinians na number one, papayag 'yung mga Israeli na ire-recognize nila ang PLO, 'yung Palestine Liberation Organization as 'yung representative ng Palestinian people.

Tapos ang pupuntahan ngayon noon is that the PLO would now actually agree to three things. Number one, ire-recognize nila ang right ng Israel na mag-exist, 'yung state ng Israel to actually exist.

And everything else follows from that particular point. Magkakaroon ka ngayon ng Palestinian representation and then, eventually that transformed itself into 'yung Palestinian Authority, right, which became the, I guess sabihin na natin, 'yung government ng Palestine. They held elections. The Palestinians actually held elections.

HOWIE: But this is not a state yet?

HERMAN: No.

HOWIE: Kasi 'pag sinabi mong election and then, may Palestinian Authority, etcetera, parang it's almost ---

HERMAN: May bansa na sila.

HOWIE: Oo, parang may bansa na sila. And we know that they have their own flag and then, they have other hallmarks of being a country, 'di ba?

But I have some basic questions before you continue. 'Pag sinabi n'yong Palestinian, are they Arabs also? I mean it's a very basic question.

HERMAN: They're Arabs. And of course, the majority of them are actually Muslims. So they come from the same stock as the citizens and residents of the Arab states. So they're considered to be Arabs.

But when you talk about Palestine, tama ka, there is no such thing as a Palestinian state in the sense of it being recognized internationally. Pero mayroon silang representation sa United Nations as an observer. In fact, the irony of it is because Israel agreed to the PLO being the representatives of the Palestinian people. Ang observer actually is the PLO originally.

And then, eventually it became the Palestinian Authority. The PA actually had jurisdiction over both the West Bank and Gaza initially when things were actually set up. Pero ayun nga, all of this was premised on the idea that the Palestinian Authority recognized the right of Israel to actually exist.

And you're going to move towards a two-state arrangement. Parang ganu'n 'yung pupuntahan ng set of agreements na iyon.

Hamas emerged in the early 2000 because they opposed what was agreed upon in Camp David and 'yung discussions between the Palestinians and the Israelis in Norway. It's what became known as the Oslo Accords.

So ito 'yung sinasabi ko kanina na naging agreement as far as the establishment of the Palestinian Authority is concerned and then, the acceptance of a state of Israel's right to actually exist. So Hamas was a homegrown group. Homegrown as in it came out of the Palestinian enclaves.

HOWIE: And it was concentrated in Gaza? Gaza lang ba 'yung Hamas or nasa West Bank na rin?

HERMAN: Actually mayroon din sila sa West Bank na representation. Hamas actually emerged precisely because they opposed what was agreed upon in Oslo in Norway. And basically, they rejected the notion that Israel had the right to exist as a state.

HOWIE: So basically they want to destroy Israel. 'Yan ang goal nila.

HERMAN: And establish a Palestinian state where Israel is right now. I talked about elections being held. And in those elections, the dominant party, the Fatah, was the one that was actually responsible for creating the Palestinian Authority. Hamas emerged and created its bailiwick in Gaza.

So effectively, ang nangyari ngayon after the Palestinian Authority was actually established and all of these things were put into place, nagkaroon ka ngayon ng conflict between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority na kung saan, parang ang nangyari doon, the Palestinian Authority lost ground in Gaza.

Hamas became the dominant party, if you will, in Gaza. And Fatah was the one. And the Palestinian Authority only had its position of dominance in the West Bank. So effectively, may dalawa kang enclaves governed separately by different groups with different political objectives as far as 'yung relationship with Israel is actually concerned.

So here is the Palestinian Authority negotiating with Israel on how to move forward on this two-state solution to the establishment of a Palestinian state, which Hamas completely rejected. Kumbaga hindi 'yun 'yung objective nila. Ang para sa kanila, dapat ma-overthrow 'yung Israel and then, establish a Palestinian state over all of these territories.

In that context now, you had a situation where Israel had to negotiate with the Palestinian Authority and at the same time, deal with the threat that Hamas actually posed. But you also had within Israel a debate over the question of, well, basically, do we agree to a two-state solution?

So mayroon kang mga grupo sa Israel na ang sa tingin nila ay nararapat lamang na i-recognize natin 'yung karapatan ng mga Palestinian to have their own state. But there are, of course, other parties or at least from a political standpoint, sila 'yung naging dominante as far as Israel is concerned na kung saan sa tingin nila, Israel is going to be Israel. So, kumbaga the West Bank and Gaza will be part of Israel. They're going to have settlements there and so on. And the Palestinians will just have to accept that.

And this is the kind of coalition, I think, that many Palestinians believe Netanyahu has actually created in Israel.

HOWIE: Excuse me. Just to refresh, Netanyahu's Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel, who cobbled together this right-wing coalition government in Israel.

HERMAN: That's right. So you now have a situation where the Palestinians are becoming more and more frustrated. The situation in the West Bank is just as frustrating as the situation in Gaza. The difference, of course, is sino 'yung partido na namumuno? And in Gaza, you have a constant situation na kung saan Hamas was always threatening to do violence against Israel.

Small skirmishes, actions, rocket-firing events. And so, this did not contribute to the conversation about Israel actually pushing towards a two-state solution as far as the problem of Palestine is actually concerned. Parang 'yung idea na "How are we going to actually negotiate with them when they're actually attacking us?" 'Yung ngayon 'yung situation as far as Gaza is concerned.

HOWIE: So may dalawang competing vision dito sa Middle East: one is coexistence between Israel and a future Palestinian state.

HERMAN: Palestinian state, yes.

HOWIE: And then, the Jews and the Arabs, Israel and the Arab states will in the future live harmoniously side by side. And then, the other vision is Israel does not have a right to exist, must be destroyed, and the Middle East will be governed, ruled by Arabs, Arab leaders, Arab governments, etcetera.

But the reality now is Israel is there. It's a powerful country. Powerful militarily, economically, politically. Kasi sa kanila pumapanig ang America. And of course, the Jewish diaspora is very influential and powerful. So that being the case, we want to understand the motivations of Hamas here.

So Hamas wants to destroy Israel, but it knows that Israel is very powerful. So in a way, parang suicidal mission ito ng Hamas. I mean, they want to destroy Israel, but by doing this, didn't they create a situation where they themselves would be destroyed? Dahil like you said, Gaza is a very small place. They're surrounded by Israel. So naka-blockade sila ngayon. So even if Israel does not invade them and occupy them, they can be starved.

In fact, pinutol, pati internet pinutol, tubig. So why would Hamas do this now? Ano 'yung motivation nito? I mean, is there a rational reason behind all of this?

HERMAN: There must be a rational reason, at least rational as far as Hamas is actually concerned. And maybe the objectives are not strategic. Baka tactical lang talaga 'yung objectives nila.

Like for instance, kasi parang ang ano nila, one of the things that seems to be part of what they want to do was to get hostages that they can exchange for. They can exchange for Palestinians who are in jail right now in Israel, which apparently had happened before. But of course, the expectation there is that Israel will just take this, the way that the Palestinians seem to actually view it.

And I agree, it seems to be a suicide mission as far as what their objectives are actually concerned. If you look at this in the same context as political terrorism, right? Terrorist attacks. Ano bang objectives ng terrorism? Gusto mong i-project ngayon 'yung political agenda ninyo. Gusto ninyo ipakita sa buong mundo na ganito 'yung sitwasyon na, which apparently from their perspective, they were being ignored. Hindi napapansin 'yung kalagayan nila.

HOWIE: Nasa-sideline na 'yung Palestinian cause.

HERMAN: Oo.

HOWIE: Because even Saudi, parang nag-uusap na rin ang Israel at sa Saudi.

HERMAN: Yeah. Nag-uusap na rin with Israel. That's right. So parang kumbaga, 'yung window nila to be able to achieve whatever their objectives are, it's actually becoming smaller and smaller as the countries that are supposed to support them are talking to Israel and actually signing peace accords with Israel.

So there is that political objective of trying to get their cause again in the agenda of everyone, especially the countries that they want support from. And then the other thing would be the notion of unifying the Palestinians as far as this particular cause is actually concerned. Kasi nga baka mamaya ang tingin nila, wala na. Iisa na lang patutunguhan ng relasyon natin sa Israel and it has to do with the idea that we have to negotiate.

And that means recognizing Israel's existence as a state. So we do have those kinds of objectives. And maybe given the desperation that they're actually feeling, tingin nila kailangan gawin ito.

HOWIE: Could it also be trying to expose a weakness of Israel? Kasi nga this was a major military operation by Hamas that apparently surprised Israel, which has the reputation for a really strong military and with also a wide and strong intelligence network. Parang naisahan ang Israel so na-expose na mahina, at least in this particular instance na nagkaroon ng maraming patay na Israeli and then, ang daming na-hostage so there was a temporary, at least a temporary victory by Hamas.

And then Israel was exposed as weak in this particular episode because hindi nila na-defend 'yung border. And in a way, it undermines also I guess, Israel's standing in the Middle East. Kasi I guess the reason why the Arab states are accepting the reality of Israel is because ang lakas nila, e. Ang lakas ng Israel, e, 'di ba?

Ilang giyera na 'yung kung saan nanalo ang Israel. They won in 1948. They won in 1967. They won in 1973. Parang ina-accept na rin ng mga ibang Arab state ang Israel because ang perception nila is, well, there's nothing they can do about Israel. They cannot destroy Israel. It's too strong. It's backed by the United States. We might as well coexist with them.

And here is Hamas that doesn't believe, that doesn't accept Israel. So they're going to show that Israel is not as strong as the Arab states, the Arab world believes. And maybe in that sense, maybe in that sense, they did accomplish that goal. While maybe setting themselves up, I mean Hamas, for a huge retaliation that might actually widen the conflict.

HERMAN: Like I said, part of the purpose would have been to unify, right? To bring Palestinians in particular, but I think also Arabs in general, behind their cause again. And so to a large extent, because remember, the 1973 war, the Yom Kippur War, also showed the same kinds of weaknesses in Israel, right? They were surprised by the attacks of both Egypt and Syria during that war. So kumbaga, kaya nga, sinasabing naman 'yan, it's exactly the same, right?

The intelligence failure now is reflective of what happened then. Israel has its moments of weakness. And I agree with you that this is probably one of the things that the Palestinians were trying to actually show, right? That Israel is not the all-powerful and all-conquering military and intelligence state.

Pero if they think that Israel is actually going to take this lying down, then of course magkakaroon sila ng problema.

HOWIE: Well, oo, problema na ngayon. I mean, we're reading reports of ambulances being hit by missiles and hospitals running out of fuel. It's a horrible humanitarian situation now in Gaza. I mean, I think wala na natirang Hamas fighter sa Israel. I mean, puro bangkay na yata nahahanap doon.

But Israel, I think, intends to occupy Gaza and has already bombed key installation civilian targets. So it's an unfolding nightmare.

HERMAN: Disaster, yeah.

HOWIE: But Prof, can we just rewind a little bit to the 1940s, if you don't mind? I'm just curious. Kasi, okay, there was a great sympathy for the Jewish people because of what happened in World War II. You mentioned the Holocaust. About four million Jews were exterminated by the Nazis, led by Hitler during World War II. And so the Jewish people needed to survive, 'no?

And they felt that they needed a state. And then they got the support of the Western powers because they were victorious. So sabi niyo nga, nandu'n na 'yung British mandate sa Middle East. And then, the United Nations said, "Okay, you can have your own state, Jewish state." And they declared independence in 1948.

But it took some fighting by Jewish militias. So it wasn't like it was handed to the Jews on a silver platter. Parang pinaglaban din nila 'to. But there was also fighting on the Arab side. Kasi nga, the British were also occupiers of Palestinian territory. Nauna pa nga sila roon.

Now, ang tanong ko is if the United Nations was willing to give the Jews their own state in Palestine, bakit hindi nabigyan din ang sariling estado o state 'yung mga Palestino?

These Jews were mostly Europeans. Europeans, they migrated to the Middle East, which was occupied or inhabited mostly by Arabs. Of course, lupa na itong pinag-uusapan. So people are willing to die for their land. And then, you give them their own independent state. But these colonizing Western powers did not do the same for the Palestinians.

So parang it just seemed to have the seeds of this kind of endless war. People will not just give up their land, 'di ba? Ang daming kakampi 'yung mga Palestino. So bakit hindi nagkaroon ng two-state solution from the start?

HERMAN: Actually from the start, that was the solution. It was a two-state solution. Kaya nga parang 'yung pinag-uusapan nu'n, what the UN voted on was the partition of Palestine. Kaya ang tawag na ito...

In fact, if we believe the stories, the Philippines played an important role. Kasi it was our vote that turned things around as far as Israel was actually concerned.

HOWIE: So why was the Philippines so instrumental in the United Nations vote? So you're talking about 1947, 'di ba? Okay.

HERMAN: We're talking about 1947.

HOWIE: Yeah, katatapos lang ng war which was a huge, lot of destruction all over the world. So the UN was helping rebuild a new world order. And then, I guess part of this was how to solve this big problem in the Middle East. So anong naging papel ng Pilipinas? We, ourselves had just become independent in 1946. So I guess we were sympathetic to other people who wanted their own country, their own independence. Tama ba 'yun?

HERMAN: Medyo, kaya lang the United States during that time was actually not inclined to support the establishment of an Israeli state. So ang expectation was tayo, boboto tayo with the United States. Basically, we would vote against.

What happened was, apparently, our vote was the one that settled the question. Kasi parang majority ba ng, how many votes are we talking about that would vote in favor of partition? We voted in favor of partition.

HOWIE: Sa United Nations General Assembly ito?

HERMAN: Yeah. Ang ano roon is that our vote was at least one of, if not the one that turned the tide in terms of getting the majority that Israel needed in order for a vote for partition to actually happen. So kumbaga, ang pinag-uusapan doon, ipa-partition ba natin ang Palestine between a Jewish state and an Arab state? 

At that time, the UN was made up of a smaller number of countries. Most of it European in nature. So parang ang naging ano nila was to vote in favor of actually partitioning Palestine.

Okay. The question that you're asking is, so what happened to the idea of a Palestinian state? Why only a Jewish state? Why was it that only a Jewish state was actually established? Simply because the Palestinians, of course, refused to accept it, logically. But also the Arab states surrounding Palestine actually opposed the results of the vote in the UN.

So in rejecting it, they actually went to war against Israel. So ito 'yung giyera ng 1948, 'yung sinasabi mo na may militia. 1948. So Israel won that war. Actually, one of the funny things about the decision, about partition, is that if you take a look at the map, the proposed map of how the partition was going to happen, it was funny.

Kasi mayroon kang mga non-contiguous territories na ibibigay sa Israel, 'yun 'yung parte na magiging teritoryo nila. Non-contiguous, hindi dikit-dikit. So parang it was actually rather odd in that sense, kung bakit pumayag ang UN na ganu'n 'yung mangyayari.

Well, nagkagiyera. The Palestinians were forced out. The Israelis actually occupied most of the territories, except for the West Bank. This is in 1948. The West Bank was occupied by the Jordanians.

But the rest of the territory was actually occupied by Israel. So ang nangyayari ngayon, what was proposed to be 'yung magiging territory ng mga Arab were now actually being occupied by Israel. So ang nangyari, nawalan ngayon ang territory 'yung Palestinian Arabs.

HOWIE: Lumaki pa lalo 'yung territory ng Israel. Dahil nanalo siya ngang giyera.

HERMAN: Oo.

HOWIE: So in a way, nag-backfire?

HERMAN: Nag-backfire 'yung anong 'yun. Instead of destroying Israel, parang they facilitated the creation of a stronger Israel. And then, nawalan ngayon ng teritoryo 'yung Palestinians. And they were forced to stay in the West Bank under Jordanian authority. And in Gaza na kung saan it was the Egyptians that were actually in charge of that particular place.

So parang nawalan sila ng representation. And so from that point on, you had a Jewish state, you had an Israel and the Palestinians had to actually find a way to be able to establish their own state. And ang logical na ano roon, 'yung Palestinian state would be the West Bank. E, kaso hawak na siya ng Jordan.

HOWIE: Okay. So there was an opportunity for the Palestinians to have their own state but they would have to coexist and give up territory to a new Israeli or Jewish state.

HERMAN: Exactly.

HOWIE: Which they did not accept. Kasi gusto nila... Sa kanila, "Palestine is ours. All of Palestine is ours. Why should anyone carve this out for another people na mostly galing pang Europa, 'di ba? Sa amin ito." So in a way, we can understand that.

However, determined din 'yung Jewish people na magkaroon sila ng sariling estado. So nagkaroon ng giyera. And they happened to win. And so instead of a Palestinian state, now we have a Jewish state and no Palestinian state. So there was actually a window of opportunity for two states.

Pero that would have been considered a defeat by the Arabs and the Palestinians. So they thought they could just drive the Jews out of the Middle East. And they would just regain their own territory. But I guess they didn't foresee that Israel would get this strong. And now, here we are.

Ang lakas ng Israel in many ways. I mean their nuclear power, they're strong economically, scientifically. They're leaders in many fields. So they're not about to go away. Especially militarily. They just called up 300,000 reservists. I mean, this is going to be a major war.

So, Prof, where is this going? You know ang dami Pilipino riyan, tens of thousands of Filipinos in Israel alone. I know people in my community here in Batangas who are in Israel and they say, you know, it's a good place to work. Okay naman daw ang suweldo. Pero of course, may risk na ganito. So ngayon, naiipit sila. And then of course, there's a possibility that lumawak pa ito, madamay pa 'yung ibang bansa or 'yung ibang bansa gustong sumali rito.

And of course, America now, it's always been involved in helping arm Israel. It's a staunch supporter of Israel. So ano 'yung mga maaaring mangyari dito?

HERMAN: Kung tutuusin, ang naririnig na natin ngayon is that Israel already surrounds Gaza. Parang kumbaga, ang exit point na lang for the Palestinians in Gaza is their southern border with Egypt. So doon na lang, kung tatakbo ka, doon ka na lang puwedeng tumakbo.

In fact, that was the warning that Prime Minister Netanyahu actually gave. Parang "Tumakbo na kayo bago kami pumasok diyan." So they've already basically surrounded the Gaza Strip in one, two, three, including the sea, including Mediterranean Sea. Parang they've surrounded the Gaza Strip on three sides. So it's going to be very difficult.

The most dangerous parts of Israel that was vulnerable to the attacks were the areas around, immediately around Gaza. The other parts of Israel is subject to, of course, rocket attacks. So if we're talking about ano 'yung threat, ano 'yung danger sa mga Filipino who are in Israel, the immediate danger is not similar to what happened when the Palestinians actually attacked the settlements, the towns around Gaza.

But there are rocket attacks that are still going on. There might be the possibility that lumawak 'yung giyera, pero lalawak saan, 'di ba? Parang 'yun 'yung tanong. Sino ang mga puwede maging involved? In Lebanon, the Israelis are already in skirmishes with the Hezbollah, which is a militia that is aligned with Iran. And then, of course, the Golan Heights as well. The Syrians are also acting up there and there are fights that are actually going on there.

The danger, however, is whether the Palestinian Authority can actually maintain its control over the Palestinian population in the West Bank. We've seen videos of Palestinians in the West Bank rallying and demonstrating in support of Hamas and of course, Palestinians in Gaza.

So one of the dangers there is baka mamaya magkaroon ka na naman ng uprising in the West Bank. Basically, it creates a situation where Israel will have to fight on another front kung tutuusin. So it's not just a question of how much death and destruction is going to happen in Gaza. It's the danger that this might actually spread to other areas where there is strong support for the Palestinian cause.

HOWIE: In other words, this is far from over. And being very parochial now, so ang daming Pilipino na nagpi-pilgrimage diyan sa Israel, they go to the Holy Land. Would you recommend them cancelling or postponing now? Kasi halimbawa, 'yung mga pupuntang Jerusalem. Many Filipino tour groups there, many of these led by Catholic priests. Should they push through with this? Malayo ba 'yung Jerusalem halimbawa rito sa maaaring madamay na mga lugar dito sa giyera na ito kung lumawak pa?

HERMAN: I would recommend na 'wag. I-cancel muna, i-postpone muna nila 'yung mga trip nila. As you said, most of these trips actually go to Jerusalem. Jerusalem is actually in the West Bank, right? Kung magkakaroon ka ng spillover nu'ng conflict in areas outside of Gaza, and the West Bank is one of the likely places, you don't know what's going to happen in Jerusalem.

And it is a tinderbox. Ang Jerusalem, lagi na lang 'yan sensitive spot as far as Israel-Palestinian relations are actually concerned. So yes, I would actually recommend for those who have pilgrimages that are actually scheduled or are planning to actually go to the Holy Land right now, best to actually let things die down first.

And die down in the sense of not, it's not just about the fighting actually being over. Kailangan talaga mag-settle muna. Because we don't know kung ano 'yung mga ramification. Like I said, the spillover, spilling over of this conflict in other areas in Israel and Palestine.

HOWIE: Just to wrap this up, Prof, and just to bring this home a little bit. 'Pag sinabing Jewish people, may personal relationship 'yung Pilipinas sa Jews because in 1939, nu'ng sinisimulan nang i-persecute ng Nazis 'yung Jews, we actually sheltered over a thousand of them in the Philippines. Si then Commonwealth President Manuel Quezon.

HERMAN: President Quezon, oo.

HOWIE: You know, wanted them to come to the Philippines. So wanted to shelter them. So nabanggit mo nga na we supported... we were one of the early supporters of a Jewish state in the United Nations. But even before that, before we were even independent, we were hospitable, we were accommodating to the Jews. But what motivated Manuel Quezon to shelter Jews during their worst moment, maybe in their history? Kasi ito, nag-uumpisa pa lang 'yung Holocaust noon.

HERMAN: I wish I knew the answer to that. Pero parang ang pinaka-puwede natin i-assume talaga noon is that, well, kahit na anong sabihin mo about, we can be very cynical about our political leaders, there is a modicum of decency, especially with that generation of political leaders.

And I think there was an honest concern about the condition, the situation that the Jews were actually facing in Nazi Germany. So parang talaga is "Pumunta kayo rito. At least dito safe kayo. Not necessarily na dito kayo mag-settle.

HOWIE: "May sanctuary kayo."

HERMAN: Yeah, kasi this was a time when a lot of Jews in Europe, in Germany in particular, were trying to leave Germany. But there were no countries that were willing to actually accept them. Hirap silang makahanap ng puwesto kung saan sila puwedeng pumunta when they departed from Germany.

HOWIE: So, yeah, we want to thank you, Professor Kraft, for illuminating this complicated and worrisome part of world affairs. Salamat sa inyong pagtuturo. Mabuhay kayo, Professor Herman Kraft, professor of political science sa University of the Philippines, Diliman.

HERMAN: Maraming salamat din. Thank you for actually having me.