In this week's UpFront, Mehdi Hasan speaks to French intellectual and author Bernard-Henri Levy, who defends Western military interventionism and calls for the US to intervene in Syria.
In the Reality Check, Hasan asks whether the Palestinian National Authority, created specifically to represent its people, is doing a poor job standing up for them.
And in the Arena, Professor Ather Zia and writer Sualeh Keen, both originally from Indian-administered Kashmir, debate the case for independence.
Headliner - Should the West intervene in Syria?
Since the turn of the century, the US has militarily intervened in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya.
Should they also intervene in Syria?
According to Bernard-Henri Levy, the answer is yes.
"This, for me, is the absolute embodiment of evil today," says Levy. "I will ask forgiveness the rest of my life to the coming generation to have been witness of what is happening in Aleppo and not having been able to prevent that."
When asked by UpFront host Mehdi Hasan about the post-intervention chaos in Libya, Levy rejected the comparison.
"It is still chaos, but nothing comparable with Syria," says Levy, who called for military intervention against then-Libyan President Muammar Gaddafi's brutal crackdown on protesters during the Arab Spring. "The colossal spread of blood today is in Syria. The absolute nightmare is in Syria.
In this week's Headliner, Levy defends his support for Western interventionism.
Reality Check - Is the PA helping or hurting the Palestinians?
It's coming up to 50 years of occupation for the West Bank and Gaza.
More than two decades ago, the Palestinian Authority, or PA, was established as part of the Oslo Accords to represent the Palestinian people.
Nowadays, the PA is finding its support dwindling. Six in ten don't approve of President Mahmoud Abbas, and eight in ten believe the PA is corrupt, according to a 2015 poll.
In this week's Reality Check, Mehdi Hasan looks at how the PA isn't representing Palestinians as well as they would hope.
Arena - Is self-determination in the cards for Kashmiris?
Indian-administered Kashmir is one of the most militarised places in the world.
Recent violence between demonstrators and Indian security forces in the disputed region left at least 80 civilians dead and about 12,000 wounded. One group even accused Indian forces of human rights abuse.
And, according to a 2010 poll of Kashmiris, a clear majority preferred independence or joining Pakistan.
Given the violence and allegations of human rights abuses, is it time for Indian-administered Kashmir to seek independence?
"Kashmir is an idea whose time has come," says University of Northern Colorado Professor Ather Zia, originally from Indian-administered Kashmir. "I think Kashmiri people have given a referendum in blood, and these past three months have proved that.
"When we address this dispute as a Kashmir issue, we are doing an injustice to the whole lot of people who are not Kashmiri," says writer and cultural critic Sualeh Keen, who supports joining India and is also originally from Indian-administered Kashmir. "The demand for cessation is only confined to a certain section of people within the [Kashmir] Valley."
In this week's Arena, Zia and writer Keen debate independence in Indian-administered Kashmir.
Follow UpFront on Twitter @AJUpFront and Facebook.
Source: Al Jazeera News