One Week Reading the Mouthpieces of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

8/14/2019 One Week Reading the Mouthpieces of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

1/23

One week reading the mouthpieces of Israel and Palestine

By Christopher Haynes

Written for menso.wordpress.com, the Menso Guide to War, from 09/6/09 to 16/6/09

Since the media play such a large role in our perceptions of the world, and our

perceptions influence our opinions, and our opinions feed conflict, I have decided to readleading Israeli and Palestinian newspapers to try to make sense of the perspectives of the

protagonists of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I have decided to read several newspapers

every day for one week to get a decent balance of opinions and baises. I am mostlyinterested in news related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and learning local

perspectives on it, although any more about the newspapers that could be relevant I will

try to take note of.

I realise that there is more to the conflict than newspapers report, and that there are (or at

least, should be) more opinions than there are writers, but newspaper readers do not

always bear this in mind. I also realise that seven days is not long enough to get more

than a superficial understanding of the way people think. Nonetheless, it may be enoughtime to understand how a newspaperthinks. I doubt I will learn any true history, but I

do expect to understand the purported grievances of the two sides of this endlessconfrontation. Over this week, I expect to become frustrated and tired, but that is the

nature of resolving conflicts.

Day 1The Palestine Chronicle

The leader is called How much really separates Obama and Netanyahu? Jennifer

Loewenstein from the University of Wisconsin-Madison writes that the term Israeli-Palestinian conflict implies that both sides have equally reasonable grievances, and that

this is why finding a fair resolution is so difficult. People who believe this have been, shesays, deeply indoctrinated.

Loewenstein uses more charged language throughout her story. She calls the US and

Israels approaches to Palestinian statehood, with reference to a 1976 UN SecurityCouncil resolution recognising national rights for Palestine (which, incidentally, I could

not find on this page), rejectionist. She calls Baracks speech in Cairo patronising

and obsequious. She says he supports a depraved Holocaust industry. And she all but

accuses him of a cynical approach to the two-state solution because he knows Bibi willreject it.

The writer reminds us of the grievances of the Palestinians. She writes of the hypocrisy ofcondemning violence by Hamas when war in Gaza earlier this year was far deadlier. And

she uses pathos to great effect, filling the readers head with images of children in Gaza,

[t]he rocketing, fire-bombing and bulldozing of entire neighbourhoods, and asking whyObama failed to chastise Israel for attacking hospitals, schools, ambulances, UN

buildings and shelters, food warehouses, businesses, factories and family homes. In the

end, she says, Barack has told Bibi exactly what he wanted to hear.
http://www.un.org/documents/sc/res/1976/scres76.htmhttp://www.un.org/documents/sc/res/1976/scres76.htm


2/23

Other articles are lighter on Barack. Several articles that claimed to be about Baracks

speech were really just historical analyses of the inherently hawkish Israeli state and its

actions against Palestine. One said that the speech was encouraging, but it showed thepresident was not willing to go far enough. It was, he wrote, more of the same. Another

article even praised him for bringing his country into the 21st century and well away from

the policies of the Bush administration.

The Chronicle website even had a picture of Ehud Olmert with the words most corrupt

above it. The link took you to a story on Transparency International and corruption in theIsraeli state. However, the article did seem to twist the facts to make them sound as if the

Israeli government was hopelessly riddled with corruption, when what it really said was

that 86% of Israelis said that the governments fight against corruption was ineffective.

That is not a sign of corruption, but of public perception. I wonder how many newspapersknow the difference between fact and opinion.

The Jerusalem Post

The main editorial in todays Post is called Why Obama is wrong about Israel and theShoah. It comments on Baracks trip to the Buchenwald concentration camp, and his

statement [t]he nation of Israel [arose] out of the destruction of the Holocaust, and hisnext, that it is also undeniable that the Palestinians have suffered in pursuit of a

homeland.

The editorial corrects Baracks mistake immediately. Barack Obama has been terriblymisinformed if he thinks Israel's legitimacy hinges on the Shoah. (The Shoah is the

Hebrew word favourable to some people to Holocaust.) What the Holocaust provedis

that the world is too dangerous a place for Jews to be stateless and defenseless.

The writer continues by citing the historical precedents for a Jewish state in Israel, since

long before Christianity and Islam appeared. And yet, he says, if the US presidentcontinues to call Israel the state created to atone for Nazi genocide, Arabs will never

accept the Jews three thousand year old claim to the soil, and peace will never come.

While the Palestine Chronicle only had stories on Israel, Palestine, the US and the

Lebanese elections, the Jerusalem Post writes on business, politics, science, health and

sports. That said, it is clear that the focus of the paper is on the same issues as the

Chronicle. It is clear that everyone considers the Israel-Palestine questions central to thenews of the region; it is equally apparent, however, that few are willing to admit their

side has done anything wrong.

An article on NGO fact-finding missions in Gaza dismisses the NGOs reports out of

hand. One might be tempted to dismiss the article in the same way, though it proceeds to

make a good point about bias. According to the article, 500 NGO statements werereleased condemning the three-week war in Gaza in January 2009. During the same

period, less than six (so five?) NGO statements condemned the violence raging

simultaneously in the Congo. That said, this article sets the tone for any number of


3/23

similar articles in the future, articles that reject all organisations investigating the war in

Gaza that find facts Israelis do not like.

A lot was also in todays Post about the defeat of Hezbollah in the Lebanese elections,

mentioning its violent past and sidestepping the fact that these elections were peaceful.

Israel cautiously hopeful on Lebanon, said one headline, while another quotedHizbullah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah as saying Hizbullah will fight Israel. It

seems to have no desire to conceal its confrontational ideology, with one article on the

Barack administrations loyalty to Israel titled Which side are they on?, one headlineasking Are Jews ready for Obama? and a third, related article, Whats best for the

Jews.

The Palestine TimesThe Palestine Times is based in London. The first headline reads Last-ditch effort to end

rift between Hamas and Fatah at the talks in Cairo aimed at ending the violent rivalry

between the two political factions representing the Palestinian people. It quickly blames

the US for backing Fatah security lords trying to overthrow Hamas in Gaza andsurrender to Israel.

The article quotes various Palestinian leaders as desiring a national unity government to

confront Israel. Highly contentious, however, is the matter of recognising Israel, which

could lead the talks into deadlock. Curiously, at the end of the article, there is a seemingly

perfunctory note that the Israeli occupation army arrested hundreds of suspectedpolitical activists in the West Bank in recent weeks. While I was scratching my head

wondering what that had to do with Fatah-Hamas reconciliation, the next paragraph made

it slightly clearer. Israel is holding thousands of Palestinian activists and political leadershostage in concentration camps all over occupied Palestine, mainly as a pressure tactic to

force Hamas to capitulate to the Zionist regime.

Some of the other leading articles are regarding Mahmoud Abbas and Fatah. In a tone of

slight accusation, Fatah is implied to be pro-Western, corrupt and less representative of

the Palestinian people than Hamas. Abbas is shown as a divisive figure, even within hisparty. This may, of course, be common knowledge in Palestine.

The first article in the articles section is about a massacre in 1948 by the Hagana

attacked the village of a man who is still alive to talk about it. It cites the first Israeliminister of agriculture, Aharon Zisling, as having said of its brutality that Jews, too,

have committed Nazi acts. The man who witnessed it all recalls all the brutal details,

none of which are spared the reader. The whole article was written from an interviewwith one man, aged nearly 100.

The second headline reads Freed Palestinian woman speaks of horrific mistreatment inIsraeli jails. The third spits bitter poison as it outlines UN Security Council resolutions

(one from 60 years ago) regarding Israeli occupation and continually addresses the

Quartet (the US, the EU, Russia and the UN) as one might rap anothers head to wake

him up. And as with the Palestinian Chronicle, the Times details the brutal existence of


4/23

Palestinians under Israeli occupation, and as many details of the January 2009 war in

Gaza as can fit in a well-written news article.

Haaretz

Binyamin Netanyahu is convinced President Barack wants a confrontation with Israel in

order to bolster his image among Arabs. Washington and Jerusalem are rowing overJewish West Bank settlements. More on Netanyahu. More on Barack. The headlines are

in-depth stories on personalities and policies.

But there are fewer bitterly political stories than the other papers. Haaretz also features a

count of how many days (and seconds) since Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit was kidnapped

by Palestinian militants from the Gaza Strip. After the first five headlines is an article on

joining the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). It follows a new recruit, proud and psyched tobe there, and tells the reader how great it is to be in the Golani Brigade. I am not the most

perceptive person, but I think even I can recognise propaganda. The article really does

feel like another support our boys piece. My suspicion rises a bit more when I read

related articles Were IDF close-range killings in Gazan justified? (the conclusionturning out to be who says we did?) and Iraqi general tells of Arab armies' admiration

for IDF.

In fact, the former article on close-range killings writes, during the siege of Gaza in

January of this year, of Israeli soldiers ordering the Abu Hajaj family out of their home. A

shell burst through the wall of their home and a young girl suffered from a shrapnelwound in her hand. They went out with white flags, saw Israeli tanks in front of them,

tried to run, but the mother and sister were shot.

Could it be that the IDF admits it killed two innocents at close range during the war in

Gaza? Well, said a spokesperson, the army denies knowledge of such an incident; and by

the way, Hamas cynically exploited the civilian population and used it as a 'humanshield. So maybe it was Hamas.

Haaretz has all kinds of other articles: like the Jerusalem Post, it is not dedicated solely toanti-Palestinianism but also business, sports, travel and the arts. For some reason, the

news on Lebanons election is way down the page, under the Jewish World section where

Will anti-semitism take over Hungary? is the top story. It is interesting, too, that unlike

the other papers, there are sections called Diplomacy and Defense. I will look moreclosely at them tomorrow.

Day 2The Jerusalem Post

Todays headline reads Security cabinet directs IDF [Israeli Defence Forces] to respond

to any Gaza aggression. That doesnt sound good. Next to it is a photo of guys in aquarry wearing ski masks jumping through a hoop of fire with the caption PRC [dont

know] terrorists train in the central Gaza Strip. The US wants Israel to ease the blockade

of Gaza and the Israeli security cabinet is trying to figure out how to allow more goods to

be traded without endangering Israelis.


5/23

The Gaza Strip is treated like a kind of rats nest: dont let any of them out or they could

bite you. Keep them stuffed in there and if any tries to bite you from inside, throw the

poison down. According to the Post, a terrorist attack near the Karni crossing was foiledearlier this week. And the matter of the kidnapping of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit could

lead to a prisoner swap. Interesting that they refer to an Israeli prisoner by name but do

not hint at the name of any Palestinians. Perhaps the Palestinians do not have names.

[D]efense officials continue opposing bringing concrete and steel into the Gaza Strip,

arguing that it would be used not only to reconstruct buildings, but also to construct armssmuggling tunnels and rebuild Hamas' rocket building capacity. So do not expect a lot of

reconstruction in the material sense. Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak maintains there

is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza. We cannot know from this article if he is right because

it does not mention food. But the security cabinet, Ehud Barak and Binyamin Netanyahuall reaffirmed their commitment to the security of both the Israelis and the Palestinians.

A video of Arafats ex-manager reads Israel and America killed Yasser Arafat.

Another video shows US Mideast envoy George Mitchell shaking hands with MahmoudAbbas in Ramallah. Related articles are titled Some Islamic extremists respond

positively to Obamas speech, Hillary Clintons troubling transformation on Israel andthe one I read yesterday, Why Obama is wrong on Israel and the Shoah. It is possible

that the Jerusalem Post is trying to systematically take apart the Barack administrations

stance on Israel and Palestine in order to legitimise Netanyahus governments dissent

from it.

One article quotes Ehud Barak at length on Arab-Israeli matters such as Baracks speech

in Cairo, the two-state solution and Irans nuclear development. It is rare that one sees aCanadian or American newspaper with such full quotes of their leaders. It is perhaps an

effort not to take Mr Barak out of context. The same article shows a photo of him shakinghands playfully with a group of smiling seventh graders.

Todays Must-Reads includes Taking a stand on Iran, about Canadian legislation called

the Iran Accountability Act, holding Iran and apparently everywhere else accountable forgenocide. The article says that, while all signatories to the 1948 Convention of the

Prevention of Genocide have a responsibility to stop genocide when it happens, they


6/23

have largely ignoredthe worlds greatest threat [Iran]. Apparently, Iran is the most

likely country in the world to commit genocide.

One Op Ed piece recognises, for the first time as I have read this week, the ideological

divisions within Israeli discourse regarding human rights and security concerns. The rest

of the articles tend to leave the impression of consensus, and the consensus is of taking ahard line on the enemy. This one, by senior fellows at the Israel Democracy Institute, a

think tank, says that the US could learn something about counterterrorism from Israel,

and that the ideological differences between Dick Cheneys no middle ground on terrorattitude and President Baracks constitutional approach parallels the debate in Israel

today. Thank you, gentlemen, for showing there are both soft and hard views in Israel on

security and not simply varying degrees of hawk.

The Palestine Chronicle

Lebanon's Election Results and the Age of Resistance: An election observer named

Franklin Lamb, who saw it all, describes at length first the peaceful prayer that took place

after the election in Lebanon on Monday, and then the peaceful elections. From hisdescription, they sound very much like elections I have worked for in Canada, except

with soldiers. The losing coalition is described as disappointed but civil. Mr Lambquotes a member of Michel Aoun (leader of the losing coalition)s senior political bureau,

two members of Hezbollah and no one from the winning group.

On an angrier note, Mr Lamb proceeds to say that the Barack administration isdisappointed their side did not perform better in the election, that they violated Lebanese

voting laws by campaigning for their favourites and felt contempt for Lebanons voters.

With regard to the weapons of the resistance (Hezbollah), which was such a big issue inthis election, Israel insists on decommissioning them, but political will in Lebanon to do

anything about it is weak. In other words, dont expect Hezbollah to give up its arms.

At the end of the article, Mr Lamb puts somewhat confusing rallying calls for the

National Lebanese Resistance to defend a Zionist-terrorised Lebanon, staking their lives

on their basic belief in God and the independence and sovereignty for their country andthe Liberation of Palestine. As this era of Resistance to Zionism spreads around the

World and intensifies here and abroad, every hour that Lebanon resists brings the region

closer to justice and real peace.

The Chronicle featured two interesting commentaries on the US government: Obama

Spoke to Muslims for Oil, not Humanity and Obamas Outreach to Muslims: Same Old

Policies. They might as well have been the same article. One writer suggests Barackscampaign slogan should have been Continuity We Can Believe In. Without a lot of

analysis, he says Barack was using soft power (influence through carrots rather than

sticks) and peripherally examines his choice of Egypt to give his speech as likely to bepopular with Americans. He also disagrees with Baracks statement that the image of the

US as a self-interested empire is a stereotype. The writer finds it difficult for those with

knowledge of American foreign policy history to believe.


7/23

As with yesterdays Palestine Times (and all newspapers, really), there are some

perfunctories attacks on the papers enemies. One is about a town of 170 Jewish families

in Israel. The town has begun requiring its citizens to take an oath of loyalty to Zionism,Jewish heritage and settlement of the land. The article called this a thinly veiled attempt

to block Arab applicants from gaining admission. Really? It is veiled? I would call it an

unveiled attempt to keep Arabs out. It was a move by the town council to put Zionistvalues and Jewish heritageat the heart of [the towns] way of life. We dont see this as

racism in any way. While I believe towns should have this right, it is clearly racist and

highly reminiscent of the town of Herouxville, Quebec, that did something similar a fewyears ago. Nonetheless, does blasting a small towns prejudiced choices really advance

the Palestinian peoples cause?

I just realised that the Palestinian Chronicle is written largely by non-Muslims. Thenames of the contributors are most Anglo-Saxon or German (Jewish?)-sounding. Makes

sense: get non-Muslims on your side to show that others agree with you, and even that

the world is on your side. Its tagline reads global voices for a better world. Considering

the nature of the articles, on the sinister US, terrorist Israel, and the plight of thePalestinians, it seems ironic to use a better world tagline and the photo below to present

your cause. The paper is more about how they are making the world worse than how wecan make the world better.

Haaretz

Being a newspaper more for English-speaking Jews around the world than Israelis alone,the leader of todays Haaretz was that an 88-year-old (88!) white supremacist opened fireat a Holocaust museum in the United States. (When I return to the Jerusalem Post, its first

article has been updated to the same news.) The second article was the same as the first of

the Jerusalem Post, Cabinet to IDF: Repond to any attack from Gaza. This is clearly abig issue in Israel and it scares me to think of that any aggression from Palestinians in

Gaza could mean a repeat of the war at the beginning of this year.

US envoy: Obama wont yield on settlement freeze. This article says that Netanyahu

has rejected the US demand, though it is an obligation under the Road Map to Peace. It

also makes the first mention I have seen so far that George Mitchell, Baracks Middle

East envoy, was a a senator and the broker of the Good Friday peace agreement inNorthern Ireland. This is the first article mentioning anyone from the US administration

that makes an American seem human.

This item references Prime Minister Netanyahu as saying Israel is acting to advance

peace and security with the Palestinians and the Arab world, and yet gave no details. Is

this short statement meant to appease Israelis? To me at least, the lack of any details onthis seemingly noteworthy act is suspicious. But perhaps I am in the minority, and Israelis


8/23

reading it will nod their heads in understanding. The article gives more voice to Mr

Mitchell and has him state clearly, Let me be clear. These are not disagreements among

adversaries. The United States and Israel are and will remain close allies and friends.Thats pretty clear.

Writing on Ehud Baraks speech to the Council for Peace and Security, comprising IDF,Shin Bet and Mossad veterans, one journalist says it was filled with the staples: a little

peace, an open hand extended to our neighbors, an existential threat or two. He got a

short interview with Mr Barak and protrays him as somewhat pessimistic. On one hand,his government is committed to the Road Map and the two-state solution; on the other,

says Barak, [t]he Road Map should be changed now that Hamas is in power.

The Defense section had more words from Defense Minister Baraks speech, tainted withthe fear that American weapons to Lebanons army would end up in Hezbollahs hands;

and yet another on Barak and his comments foreshadowing more wars like Operation

Cast Lead in Gaza in January. I dont like labeling people I do not know personally, but it

could be fair to call Barak a hawk.

A lot more of the headlines are related to Jewish West Bank settlements, though some areabout Jewish comedy, a Tel Aviv gay pride parade and Liberian warlord Charles Taylors

conversion to Judaism. And most interesting to me, both Haaretz and the Jerusalem Post

have side bars about Jews marrying non-Jews. Scandalous!

Day 3

Palestine Media Center

The official mouthpiece of the general secretariat of the Palestinian LiberationOrganisation (PLO). The two-state solution is a big thing here. Three headlines have the

words two-state in them. Another headline uses the word Apartheid, and there is an

apparently separate link saying Israeli Apartheid next to it. I would not deny that theplight of the Palestinians is apartheid, only that it is a very strong word. If life is as bad

for the Palestinians as it was for non whites under apartheid, they are in trouble.

The most interesting thing is to hear Ehud Barak himself using the word. He says that, if

there is only one state, and if the Palestinians cannot vote, it will be an apartheid

regime. Fancy the defense minister of a right wing Israeli cabinet admitting something

like that. Are we actually making progress?

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak says, according to the leader, that a two-state solution

is coming sooner or later. (Yet another article on foreign pressure for a two-state peacesays is about Javier Solana, Foreign Minister of the European Union.) Egypt and Israel

are on reasonably good termsEgypt is one of the only two majority Muslim countries,

with Jordan, that recognises Israelso pressure for Palestinian independence is likely tocome from them. The US is pushing for the two-state thing, and Egypt and Jordan are its

allies, so they may feel emboldened to push too. President Mubarak also said the

Palestinians must work hard to achieve unity. That might be the biggest obstacle to peace.


9/23

For the past two days, I have seen talk about Prime Minister Netanyahus speech on

Sunday. The Palestine Media Center (PMC) says Netanyahu will adopt two-state

language on Sunday speech. Seems a little vague. They might as well have saidNetanyahu will give all the Palestinians a job and a pension. Any politician can speak

in terms that sound good. Only action can make peace.

According to the PMC, Netanyahu will be asking for a lot in return for Palestinian

independence. The Palestinians must recongise Israel and [h]e will ask [not demand?]

Arab states to normalize relations with Israel during negotiations, rather than after Israelwithdraws from occupied Arab land. I do not feel the bitterness from the PMC that one

feels in other media from Palestine. Of course, they are just as prone to bias as any other

medium; but you let your guard down when you hear relatively conciliatory tones like

these.

As the PMC points out, Palestinian independence is only one condition of peace

negotiations. It is unclear, it says, whether Netanyahu will accept the other condition,

which is US President Barack Obamas demand for a total halt to all construction inillegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Jerusalem. In fact, the PMC has a set of

links entitled Permanent Status Issues, and they are Jerusalem, Settlements, Refugees,Water, Borders, Summary of Palestinian Positions. Each is like an encyclopedia entry on

Palestinian grievances for each issue, along with a long list of links regarding the issue

you are reading about.

For instance, on the subject of Jerusalem, while the Israeli papers talk of the long history

the city has had as capital of a (future) state of Israel, this section says the opposite. For

centuries, Jerusalem has been the geographical, political, administrative and spiritualcenter of Palestine. It begins the Israeli story at the 1967 war, several thousand years

after the Jews do, and says that since then, the Israeli state has taken over and expanded

East Jerusalem in a classic example of ethnic gerrymandering. The PMC continues,talking about the illegality of Israels occupation of Jerusalem according to a long line

of UN Security Council resolutions; discrimination against Arabs; Jewish settlement; and

forced evictions and demolitions. The Palestinian Position (or that of the PLO,anyway), is, basically, follow Resolution 242 (here and hereapparently the PLO did not

initially accept 242), and make Jerusalem a free city. They make some good points.

HaaretzLike yesterday, the Holocaust museum gunman tops the list. I am interested that some

senile American racist shooting up the Holocaust museum is so important to Jews (or the

ones writing this newspaper, anyway) that they put it right at the top. The article was verylong (more than 1100 words) and read as a mixture of a report of the shooting and the

biography of a white supremacist.

Rightists to Peres: Not your place to call for Palestinian state. A picture of Israeli

President Shimon Peres shows him looking deeply pensive in his chair. The president is

largely a figurehead, so he does not have much power. For this reason, two right wing

Israeli parties, one of which is in the governing coalition, spoke out against Peres
http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/240/94/IMG/NR024094.pdf?OpenElementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_242http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/240/94/IMG/NR024094.pdf?OpenElementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_242


10/23

discussing the two-state matter with Javier Solana. One of the parties, the National

Union, said the president should cancel such meetings in future. Though the prime

minister is likely to give some form of endorsement to the Road Map to Peace and thetwo-state solution in his speech on Sunday, it is likely that the parties that objected to

Peres meeting with Solana feel it puts undue pressure on him. A link to this article from a

couple of weeks ago says that President Peres criticised a right wing politicianssuggestion that Jordan should be the base of the Palestinian state. It was a fatuous

suggestion, but was Mr Peres within his bounds to say so? And why is there so much

stress on the right and left? The ideological divisions in Israeli society may beparticularly wide, or perhaps Haaretz is keen to exploit them.

Another major story in todays paper is that the International Atomic Energy Agency

(IAEA) released documents saying that Iran began its plan to enrich uranium in 1987under the moderate Mir Hossein Mousavi. If a moderate could start a nuclear weapons

programme, this implies, the Iranian state must be evil through and through. That said,

buying centrifuges does not mean you are trying to make a bomb. The article does not

mention that. And it repeats the fact that the centrifuges were bought on the black market.

The IAEA reported that the nuclear facility in Natanz was spinning 5000 centrifuges, upby 1000 from February, and has 2000 more ready to start enriching. I do not know how

many that is. It is just a number. Do Israelis know how many bombs could be made with

7000 centrifuges? (According to the New York Times, it is enough to make one or two

nuclear weapons a year.) I have noticed that numbers are a good way to win an argument.Since they can be manipulated, like all facts, numbers of bad things are always bigger on

their side than ours, even if we do not know what the numbers denote. The article ended

on the subject of the upcoming Iranian election in which Ahmadinejad and his opponent,Mousavi (the one who started enriching uranium) will be competing and left few

wondering whom the newspaper was supporting. The public were reflecting on whether

they want to keep hard-line President Ahmadinejad in power or replace him with areformist more open to closer ties with the West.

Finally, Palestinian police found a 15-year-old boy hanged for allegedly collaboratingwith Israelis. His father, uncle and cousin confessed. Tragic and senseless, of course; but

like the story about the little Zionist town in yesterdays Palestinian Chronicle, we seem

to be picking at small things about our enemies to exploit for propagandas sake. See how

messed up they are? the journalist is saying.

The Alternative Information Center

To mix things up today, we are going to look at the Alternative Information Center, a jointeffort between Israeli and Palestinian activists. The AIC calls itself internationally

oriented, progressive (I like those words, even if I dont know what they mean)

organisation engaged in dissemination of information, political advocacy, grassrootsactivism and critical analysis of the Palestinian and Israeli societies as well as the

Palestinian-Israeli conflict. It strives for equality, freedom and rejection of separationist

ideology. Perhaps not all news from the Middle East is anti- or pro- something. Or

perhaps it is. Let us see what we can learn from this website.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/06/world/middleeast/06nuke.htmlhttp://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/06/world/middleeast/06nuke.htmlhttp://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/06/world/middleeast/06nuke.html


11/23

The first thing that catches my eye is a video about a weekly protest of the separation

barrier in a Palestinian village near Bethlehem. The speaker, a Palestinian, makes it clearhe considers it apartheid, and says this wall is pushing the suffering of his people. Not all

the protestors were Palestinians, however. An Israeli citizen had joined the demonstration,

expressing his support for the tearing down of the wall. They are brave people, face toface with a dozen or more soldiers.

The podcast of a press conference by the parents of an American activist who was injuredby the Israeli military. Jail time for those who deny the existence of Israel as a Jewish and

democratic state, or who commemorate the Naqba (the 1948 Palestinian exodus).

Criticism of Netanyahu for his inaction on Jewish settlements in the West Bank. Photos

of the Israeli attack on the UN mission in Gaza in January. A UN report on an Israeliorder for more Palestinian housing demolitions. Another on checkpoints. A new wave of

unopposed attacks by Jewish settlers on Arabs. If this truly is unbiased or evenhanded

news, the Israelis have a huge amount to answer for.

But it is not. There are Israeli Jews on the editing team but that does not make it

balanced. A neutral, equal parts Israeli and Palestinian perspective of reporting would notuse words like occupation, because it is one-sided word. It would also show the

perspectives of moderate Israelis, Jewish settlers and perhaps someone who had been

injured by a Palestinian rocket attack. The AIC had none of those. While its points may

be valid, even a cursory glance at the website evinces that its claims to critical analysisare unconvincing.

Tomorrow we will examine different newspapers, including the news from Hamass pointof view.

Day 4It has become clear to me that it is too difficult to report every day on the same four

newspapers I set out to on day 1, simply because not all of them change every day. My

two choices for Palestinian papers, especially, are slower to change and not really writtenby Palestinians in Palestine. I am also having trouble keeping up with the workload of

reading and analysing several newspapers a day. I will take from a wider selection of

newspapers while keeping my main objective in mind: aiding our critical thinking by

comparing reporting bias in Israeli and Palestinian news media.

Palestinian Information Center

The Voice of Palestine (or the Voice of Hamas), the PIC aims to promote awarenessabout Palestine, the Palestinians and the Palestinian issue and to balance the often

distorted picture presented in the mainstream media. It is available in eight languages.

The leader reads Palestine resistance fighters clash with an IOF [Israeli Occupation

Force] patrol. It is an interesting change of words. If this headline had been written for

Israelis, it would have read Palestinian militants clash with an IDF [Israeli Defence

Force] patrol. They even had a name for the organisation that released the information


12/23

and conducted the attack: the Palestine Eagles Brigades. Newspapers give names to

people they want to make seem more human, and ignore the names of those who are less

than human. (One might read, for instance, 10 foreign terrorists were killed fighting withlocal citizen Menso El Rey.) The Eagles added that its fighters managed to withdraw

safety and that the attack was within the framework of retaliating to occupation crimes

against the Palestinian people in the West bank and the Gaza Strip, especially theaggression on farmers. The article is only 107 words long.

Down the right side of the website, which always attracts my attention before the leftside, are the following links (with pictures): Palestine: What its all about; T-shirts mock

Gaza killings; Farming under fire and F16s in Gaza; Attacks on medics during Gaza war;

Use of phosphorus bombs in Gaza; Al Nakba: The catastrophe of Palestine, 1948. I do

not contain my curiosity and go straight to the link about the t-shirts. It led to an AlJazeera video on Youtube you may want to watch. (You can find lots of other Al Jazeera

videos on how evil Israel is from here.)

Other PIC articles are also short. There is less attempt at providing an analyticaljustification for why the Israeli state must be destroyed; they just get to the point. One

talks of a meeting between Hamas and the Egyptian government and combines this newswith a Hamas statement that the PA [Palestinian Authority] security apparatuses

practices against Hamas and the resistance in the West Bank must end. It is not clear

how these two issues are related.

I find three links to an item titled Barak calls on IOF to prepare for fresh war on Gaza

all visible at the same time. One was Most Read, one Most Printed and the other was

running across the top banner. Clearly, this was an article I am supposed to read. Apicture of an unsmiling Ehud Barak greets us. The article does not say much beyond the

headline, except that it uses words like deeper and larger than in January to describe

the threatened offensive in Gaza. Remember what I said yesterday about numbers beingused to evoke sympathy, anger and evidence? This article ends with the following: The

latest Israeli war on Gaza that started late December 2008 and ended in late January 2009

claimed the lives of almost 1,500 Palestinians and wounded almost 6,000 others. This isa quarter of the words in the article.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mJp5d3ffP8http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mJp5d3ffP8http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mJp5d3ffP8http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mJp5d3ffP8


13/23

Another feature of note on this website is the left-hand banner, part of which readsPalestinian Memory Bank. Apparently, every day the site reports something that

happened to the Palestinians in history on that day. There are two dates, 1996 and 1974,

and neither is particularly damning or interesting. But since they presumably havesomething to put there every day, what this section is saying is that on every day of the

year, the Israelis have been assholes.

The Jerusalem Post

Apparently, the number that turned out to vote for the next president of Iran was

massive. As I clicked on this leader, the first thing I noticed was not the body of thearticle but a banner: The Iranian Threat, a small picture of Iran and an apelikeMahmoud Ahmadinejad. I wonder, if Ahmadinejad is defeated at the polls, will they

replace his picture with one of Ayatollah Khamenei. In wording almost identical to

something I read yesterday, the article asks if Iran will keep hard-line PresidentMahmoud Ahmadinejad in power or [elect] a reformist who favors greater freedoms and

improved ties with the United States. Whom would you rather elect, a hardliner or a

reformist? The Post conceals its bias against Ahmadinejad like a burka made of air. Iwonder if it would not be more effective to be more subtle. Anyway, says the article, it

does not really matter who wins because crucial policies are all directly controlled by

the ruling clerics headed by the unelected Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

And if the Ayatollah were not enough reason to give up hope, the next article says

Mousavi [thats the other guy running for president of Iran] win would not stop nuke

drive. Oh dear. Then whats the big deal? Do Israelis really care if the Iraniangovernment stops cracking down on bloggers?

More headlines about Netanyahus speech on Sunday. Noam Shalit gives Carter a letterfor son is probably just a way of reminding everyone that Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit was


14/23

kidnapped in Gaza. Israel better at security issues than US is a funny headline about a

funny subject: comparing the numbers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan to those killed in

Israel and Palestine, the numbers of minorities incarcerated in the US to thoseincarcerated in Israel, and the better life expectancies in Israel to those in the US, Egypt

and Syria. If one is digging for the point of this article, it is probably to say to the US,

you have no business telling us how to treat people, because our record is superior toyours. In other words, we will keep building settlements in the West Bank whether you

like it or not.

And then we come to a thoughtful, relatively balanced article: the op-ed. I am used to

Canadian and American newspapers, where the bias is most visible in the op-eds and

editorials because they come right out and state their affiliations and beliefs. The articles

feel more balanced. However, this feeling may come from my having been socialised byNorth American news media and not Israeli or Arab. It is possible that those socialised by

the kind of reading I am doing this week find the language normal and balanced; and it is

the differences that enable me to see bias more clearly.

Todays op-ed is called Peace vs. Reality. Allow me to represent the opening passage.

Palestinian and Israeli youth gather on a soccer field for a friendly match as part of asports peace program. Two steps forward. IDF soldiers kill Palestinian civilians in the

war in Gaza. Two steps back. Bereaved Israeli and Palestinian parents meet each other to

share their pain and promote peace and reconciliation. Two steps forward. Hamas

launches dozens of rockets daily on the South, killing and terrorizing civilians. Two stepsback.

However many steps forward the grassroots peace process takes, the harsh winds ofreality, fanned by the political leadership on both sides, send peace spiraling backward.

At multiple levels, attempts at peace are being made. It is not just the governments thatare talking. This piece discusses an argument that broke out among Israeli and Palestinian

teenagers at a meeting arranged by the Peres Center for Peace. It then describes a

documentary of the uphill battle Palestinian and Israeli peace activists face. The articlemakes little use of numbers and instead shows the humanity, the legitimate grievances,

the bad choices, and the killing on both sides of the conflict. This editorial is my favourite

of anything I have read so far this week. I will stop for today in order to preserve the hope

with which it was written.

Day 5

I get the newspapers I am reading from two lists, found here and here. I am hobbledsomewhat by not knowing Arabic or Hebrew, but there seem to be a variety of news

sources in English. Some of them are niche media, or ones with wide appeal, and are

important because of the people they represent and influence. Unfortunately, as we shallsee, they are not equally worthy of our time.

The Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy

I like global dialogue and democracy. Lets take a look.
http://www.world-newspapers.com/palestine.htmlhttp://www.onlinenewspapers.com/israel.htmhttp://www.onlinenewspapers.com/israel.htmhttp://www.world-newspapers.com/palestine.htmlhttp://www.onlinenewspapers.com/israel.htm


15/23

This organisations vision is an independent, democratic Palestinian state. The leader has

a picture and headline about George Mitchell shaking hands with Mahmoud Abbas. Thisis Week in Review. For some reason this paper is also called Miftah (and is at

miftah.org), which is shorter than the Palestinian Initiative so I will call it Miftah.

According to Miftah, [t]his week was all about diplomacy. US envoy to the MiddleEast, George Mitchell, met with Israeli and Palestinian leaders. Miftah says Mitchell

basically carried the message of his big boss, US President Barack Obama, urging the

Israeli government to freeze settlement activity while pushing for its acceptance of thetwo-state solution. Notice the words used. Basically sounds to me like only,

implying that the big boss is calling the shots and the Israeli government has heard it

before.

This article talks about potentially reassuring moves from the United States, and after

each point begins a paragraph with Still to say why things might not be wonderful

yet. And for a recap, this article has some small stories. Occupation authorities (thats

the Israeli government) forced a man named Mohammed Gosheh to demolish his ownhome. More homes might be demolished. When newspapers want to bring out your

emotions, they take things personal, giving you a victim, a specific person you can feelsorry for.

A special report on the Myth of Incitement in Palestinian Textbooks is a prominent

link. The Center for Monitoring the Impact of Peace, an organisation not described in thisarticle, only named, persisently publishes articles on how textbooks produced and read

by Palestinians incite hatred against Jews. As I said, this piece does not describe the

Center, except to say that the Centers first director, Itamar Marcus, is a right wingIsraeli supporter and resident of the West Bank settlement of Efrat.

The Centers work reveals a deeply flawed methodology aimed at misleading thereader. Unfortunately, we do not know anything about that methodology because, again,

this paper does not describe it. I personally have trouble believing that the textbooks do

not make people angry, as I find history books to be a hugely powerful propaganda tool.(Read this postfor related discussion.) However, if I were a Palestinian, I would probably

be pretty angry at the Israelis for everything. History books, newspapers, word of mouth:

all carry stories about very bad things the Israelis have done to the Palestinians. And

when an identity such as Israeli or Palestinian is thrust upon us, we usually want todefend its collective manifestation to the death.

This article was not particularly well written, as you only need to see what it leaves out tofind its bias. More useful, therefore, are the 23 links it provides to back up its premise.

Many of them are to Miftah and even Geocities, but some are to the European Union.

One final note on this long list of links that supposedly proves this journalists point: thelinks to Haaretz and the Jerusalem Post are dead. Did the newspapers themselves take the

stories out? Or are there not really any stories in those papers about the myth of

incitement in Palestinian textbooks? Or am I reading something into nothing?
http://menso.wordpress.com/2009/02/25/individualism-the-reappearing-ideal-the-amazing-power-of-the-history-book/http://menso.wordpress.com/2009/02/25/individualism-the-reappearing-ideal-the-amazing-power-of-the-history-book/http://menso.wordpress.com/2009/02/25/individualism-the-reappearing-ideal-the-amazing-power-of-the-history-book/


16/23

The heading that caught my eye fastest was actually the second from the top, but I

resisted reading it until the apparently more important meetings of George Mitchell and

the bulldozing of Mohammed Goshehs house. The heading reads Doughnuts forResidency. Anyone who knows Arab culture, the item reads, will know that a sweet

treat is usually offered by the bearer of good news. (That could be useful to know.) The

writer just bought doughnuts because she finally got her residency permit, which makeher a legal resident of Jerusalem. She has lived there for 11 years already. The reason she

and her husband have had to wait so long for a permit to live together, she writes, as if I

could not guess, are the complicated and extremely discriminatory laws designed toscrew with Arabs. The writer of this article has some very angry things to say about

Israeli law, though she hides her anger under smooth-flowing, personal-feeling prose.

Miftah is not only news. As far as I can tell, it is more of a think tank, with leadership andpolicy programmes, and links to other organisations, such as Al-Quds 2009, where I

found these evocative paintings by a Palestinian artist.

Jerusalem NewswireI get an idea of this papers orientation from its main headline: Israelis tell Bibi: Reject

Obamas demands. Right underneath this was a link for donations reading Help keepJNW on the front lines of the media war. I did not know the media were at war as well.

The main article says that a strong majority (clarified later in the article as nearly six

out of ten) of Israelis told Binyamin Netanyahu that they do not want anyone building aPalestinian state in Israel on land that, really, is just for Jews. The journalist discusses

Netanyahus speech this coming Sunday, where he is expected to address President

Barack Obama's belligerent foray into Middle East politics, the Israeli-'Palestinian'conflict and the Iranian nuclear threat to Israel - an issue Washington has relegated to a

position of secondary importance. SoBaracks reaching out to Muslims is belligerence,

the Palestinians have no legitimate argument and Irans nukes are no longer interestingto the US. The final paragraph is on the two-state solution [which] calls for the peace-

loving Israelis to give their land to the Jew-hating Palestinian Arabs who remain

committed to destroying what would be left of Israel. This writers bias is palpable andhis inability to see clearly on this issue makes this whole article a joke. And when I

realise that this whole website is written by the same author, I find it is he who is the

joke. Let us try again.

Arutz Sheva (Channel Seven)

At IsraelNationalNews.com, Arutz Sheva is Israels #1 news site, eh? Does that mean #1

for feelings of superiority and hatred too? There is only one way to find out.

The leader is about Jimmy Carter. Because three days ago Jimmy Carter declared

Mideast peace is impossible without Hamas, and yesterday won an award from thePalestinian Authority, residents of a Jewish town he is planning to visit called Gush

Etzion express their disapproval of the meeting. The article quotes a grassroots

committee who issued a statement reading Carter has always, and will always, speak up

and defend those who wish to destroy the State of Israel. He pushes an anti-Israel agenda,
http://www.alquds2009.org/pdfs/paintings.passia.pdfhttp://menso.wordpress.com/2009/06/06/barack-and-islam-the-to-do-list/http://menso.wordpress.com/2009/06/06/barack-and-islam-the-to-do-list/http://www.alquds2009.org/pdfs/paintings.passia.pdfhttp://menso.wordpress.com/2009/06/06/barack-and-islam-the-to-do-list/


17/23

while presenting himself as a good-willed broker who seeks peace and is ready to listen

to 'both sides.' This makes him all the more dangerous. This article is designed to pick

Carter apart so thoroughly as to be able to counterpunch his every argument and deed.And it claims only to be quoting from a letter by an unofficial group in a Jewish town of

44,000. Perhaps this newspaper believes the group speaks for all Jews.

According tothis article in another newspaper, Arutz Sheva is a religious Zionist radio

station and is viewed as the voice of the Israeli settler movement. Also known as Arutz-7,

it has been shut down by the authorities for being pirate radio (transmitted from a boatand over the internet). Gush Etzion, as you may have guessed, is in the West Bank, not

far from Bethlehem. Along with the two-state solution, the question of Jewish settlers in

the West Bank seems the most controversial, and both are being pushed hard by the

Americans. Therefore, if we want to understand the issues, we should listen to thesettlers. Whether you agree with it or not, Arutz Sheva is an important read.

Israels foreign ministry says that Mahmoud Ahmadinejads electoral win in Iran means

the world must act now. Actually, it does not say what action we, the world, must take.All Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman is quoted as saying is that the

international community must continue to act in an uncompromising manner to preventIran from obtaining nuclear [weapons] and to cease its support for terror organizations

and destabilization of the Middle East. No specifics on what we should do or what Iran

does.

An article near the top is about a rocket fired by Gaza Arab terrorists that did not hit

anyone or do any damage. The Palestinian Authority blames Israel (though I do not know

how you could blame a country for something) for wild boars in Samaria that aredestroying Palestinians crops. Israel (again I wonder who) is apparently doing its best to

cull the hungry swine. And while I was thinking the Jerusalem Newswire was just a

radical rag, I found an article just like the one I turned my nose up at earlier. 56% of 503survey respondents said that Netanyahu does not need to agree to freeze construction of

settlements in the West Bank. The good thing about this article is that it can teach you

about each major Israeli political party, because the writer breaks down how thesupporters of each answered the survey. 81% of those who vote Likud said Israel can

continue building settlements, whereas 68% of those who vote Kadima believe Israel has

no choice but to give in to American demands to halt construction. It is clear that Likud

voters (and the party that answers to them) are tough and steadfast, and Kadima votersare a bunch of pussies.

Day 6Today we will start by looking at an Israeli paper, then a Palestinian one, then one that

claims neutrality.

Yedioth Ahronoth

Wikipedia calls Yedioth Ahronoth (latest news in Hebrew) the most widely circulated

paper in Israel since the 1970s. It gives right- and left-wing commentary, though it is seen

as more of a tabloid than a newspaper.
http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/2886.htmhttp://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/2886.htmhttp://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/2886.htm


18/23

The big news today is Netanyahus speech at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic

Studies. He will be laying his policies out plain, they say. They also say he will give hissupport to the idea of a Palestinian state, but that it must be a demilitarised state. How a

demilitarised state could keep its independence I do not know. The leader writes of this

and shows photographs of protestors. In one, some women are holding signs saying NOsettlements/apartheid wall/Gaza siege, and in another photo, counterpoint to the first,

people are waving Israeli flags and holding a banner in Hebrew that I cant read, but

which the article reliably informs me reads Barack Hussein Obama an anti-Semite andhater of Jews.

The next headline reads Iran reformists: annul vote. Ahmadinejad rivals Mousavi,

Karroubi say they will file an appeal to annul 'illegitimate' results of nationwideelection. Well, if you like. I doubt it would do anything. In the Israeli press, the

assumption is that the Iranian election was rigged and fraudulent. I wonder if it really

was. An op-ed embed in this story asks The beginning of the end? Young Iranians may

topple Ayatollah regime in wake of elections fiasco. It should have been titled Wishfulthinking? Israelis hope young Iranians will topple the Ayatollah.

You see, if all you read is Israeli newspapers, you will probably just presume the vote was

fraudulent, along with the fact that Iran is about to declare nuclear war on Israel. So you

could have trouble seeing that it is possible Ahmadinejad won the popular vote, or that

the ruling clerics might be popular. There is certainly some evidence of violence and voterigging. Do they mean the Iranian election should have gone to second-choice Mousavi?

Are enough Iranians going to be angry enough with the result that they will take down the

government?

The next headline down in Yedioth Ahronoth is about Jimmy Carter. Despite the protest

we read about yesterday, he met with the town council of Gush Etzion, a Jewishsettlement in the West Bank. The local council says it changed Mr Carters perceptions. A

seemingly carefully selected group was brought into council leader Shaul Goldsteins

house to meet with Carter. The group included two religious leaders, two women whohad lost family members to terrorists, and a pair of newlyweds who said that, if there

were limits to the natural growth of settlements, they could not raise a family in Gush

Etzion.

A link in this article leads to the report on Noam Shalit giving a letter to the former US

president for his son Gilad. Unlike Haaretz, the Yedioth Ahronoth website does not have

a timer counting the number of seconds Gilad Shalit has been kidnapped. It does,however, have the exact number of days, 1083, printed in the article.

Arab Media Internet NetworkAt first glance, AMIN is structured like the Palestine Chronicle: journalists write new

articles every day or so and submit them to the newspaper. As a result, the links to all the

old articles are down the sides of the page. There seem to be many more articles in Arabic

than in English. According to Google Translate, this site does not translate from English


19/23

to Arabic or vice versa. Here is a selection of the articles in Arabic. (Bear in mind that

Google Translate is imperfect and it is not always possible to capture the shades of

meaning of other languages.)

Is the establishment of a Palestinian state in the interest of Palestinians?

Palestinians pin their hopes on othersSuffering of prisoners and the suffering of 40 years of occupation

Exposing racism in the Israeli police and security forces

An Israeli ministerial committee ratifies a law against commemorating the Nakba

The Arabic headlines seem slightly more angry than the English ones. Here are some of

them.

Will the Netanyahu government make progress toward peace?

Obamas song and dance in Cairo

Oslo redux: Fools gold in Israel/Palestine

While I will not translate the full Arabic articles, the English articles are nonetheless pro-

Palestinian. But they are well-written and full of insightful analysis. The article on if theNetanyahu governments progress on peace, for instance, discusses why it may, though

gives six reasons why it probably will not. Popular, hawkish governments are sometimes

the ones who make real progress toward real solutions. This journalist, Elias Tuma, a

professor emeritus at the University of California, recalls how similar leaders such asMenachem Begin and Yitzhak Rabin have surprisd us by signing lasting peace treaties.

Being a strong leader, says Tuma categorically, Natanyahu is capable of reaching and

signing a peace agreement with Palestinians. Then he gives six reasons why he mightnot.

First, Avigdor Lieberman, Foreign Minister and Deputy PM, submitted a bill to theKnesset banning commemoration of the Nakba. Second, Liebermans party submitted a

bill demanding that Israeli Arabs recognise Israel as a Jewish, Zionist and democratic

state. Third, the same party demands that Israeli Arabs serve in the military or anothercivic institution. Failure to do either of the last two results in loss of citizenship. Fourth,

another party in the ruling coalition submitted a bill to declare that Jordan is Palestine. In

other words, the Palestinians can leave Israel and go there. (I read about this idea

elsewhere. It is really stupid. They might as well have declared that Russia is Israel.) It isnot just cracks that support this bill: its supporters include three cabinet ministers. Fifth,

Netanyahu has not accepted the two-state solution yet. Well, actually he has, but this

article came two days before his speech where he said he accepted it. Sixth, Netanyahuinsists on continuing construction of Jewish settlements in the West Bank. Well, actually

he said that new settlements would not be allowed, but natural growth of existing

settlements (which are numerous) would be allowed. History will bear out the accuracyof this analysis. I think Elias Tuma is right.

Many of the articles are out of date, speculating on what Netanyahu (or even Barack) will

say in his speech. This past weekend was something of a game changer because of Prime
http://mappery.com/maps/Jewish-Settlements-in-West-Bank-Map.jpghttp://mappery.com/maps/Jewish-Settlements-in-West-Bank-Map.jpg


20/23

Minister Netanyahus speech and the election in Iran, so they are not so relevant

anymore. One final note of interest on this site: there are a number of books in Arabic,

written by Palestinians about Israel. If I could read Arabic, I would love to delve thatmuch deeper into the experiences of Palestinians by reading them.

Bitter LemonsBitterlemons.org (subtitle: Palestinian-Israeli crossfire) is a project, financially supported

by the European Union, to present Israeli and Palestinian viewpoints on the Israeli-

Palestinian conflict and peace process. It maintains complete organizational andinstitutional symmetry between its Palestinian and Israeli components.

Bitter Lemons offers a long list of links to such pertinent documents as Security Council

resolutions; International Court of Justice decisions; the Athens Plan, a 2005 initiativecalling for Israel to disengage from Gaza and the Northern West Bank; statements by

political leaders; and other agreements and plans dating back to the founding of Israel.

I also appreciate that you can very easily access back editions all the way to 2001; andeach weekly edition addresses a different topic. Some of the most recent are Obamas

Cairo speech; In the aftermath of Pope Benedicts visit; and West Bank-Israel securityissues. Many of the same contributors write in each edition. This weeks is Netanyahus

speech on the peace process.

A Palestinian View: Ghassan Khatib calls Netanyahus speech a failed public relationsexercise that catered to the right-wing constituency that put him in the position he is

in. (An English transcript of his speech can be found here.) After taking apart

Netanyahus farcical concept of a Palestinian state, Khatib says that the entityNetanyahu describes is not a state at all. I agree wholeheartedly, and will explain why in

two days. Khatib continues by saying that the speech is a threat to peace, and that the

American administration must clean up the mess. He also acknowledges theradicalisation of Palestinian opinion, and that this speech will not help that either. Mr

Khatib is a former minister of the Palestinian Authority.

An Israeli View: Responding to pressure from Washington, the Israeli prime minister

and his advisors thought of the best way they could address US government demands and

throw them out at the same time: give everyone--the US administration, his coalition,

the Palestinians--a little of what they want. Confuse them, too. But also do somethingdramatic to satisfy the Americans. He avoided confronting the real issues, and is

steeped in Revisionist ideology. His coalition, meanwhile, will hold.

A Palestinian View (I do not really like the whole identity thing but I suppose it is

relevant): Mr Netanyahus speech was the death of hopes for peace and a Palestinian

state. Is that not a little premature and pessimistic? Anyway, the writer, a professor at Al-Quds University, goes on. He speaks of the PMs invocation of Abraham when he said

that the West Bank, like the rest of Israel, is Jewish and Israeli and whatever else makes it

ours because it is the land of Abraham. But, says the writer, Abraham is a prophet of the

Christians and the Muslims too. Are they not all his children? This article gets bitter.
http://www.bitterlemons.org/docs/athens.pdfhttp://jewishbreakingnews.wordpress.com/2009/06/14/full-english-text-of-the-netanyahu-speech/http://www.bitterlemons.org/docs/athens.pdfhttp://jewishbreakingnews.wordpress.com/2009/06/14/full-english-text-of-the-netanyahu-speech/


21/23

Though of course the Israelis, especially the government, should understand Palestinian

viewpoints, the ones this writer mentions are the kind that Netanyahus base would reject

out of hand. It therefore speaks less to Israelis in a position to do something and more tothe already bitter. This man should aim his lemons higher.

An Israeli View: This final article, also bitter, blames the Palestinians for repudiatingMr Netanyahus acceptance of a Palestinian state. Moreover, [h]ad they accepted

Netanyahu's offer, I have no doubt that there would have emerged in Israel an

unprecedented consensus favoring a Palestinian state. But that is like saying, if you offerme a bowl of rice off your banquet table, I should accept it graciously; and if not, I do not

deserve it. This writer, a columnist for Haaretz, said that they repeatedly reject Israel's

generous offers. So its all their fault.

I very much enjoyed reading Bitter Lemons, because even what I do not agree with, I

appreciate as a well-reasoned perspective. I can conclude that, as far as I have read, they

do indeed uphold their position in the centre of the road.

Day 7: Conclusions

I have spent the past week reading and analysing newspapers from Israel and Palestine totry to make sense of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. By balancing the biases from news

media, we can get a good picture of what is going on, what the people think and why

things are the way they are.

One unspoken job of the newspapers is to give its readers reasons why they are right. If

you believe Palestinians should not have their own state, you read the papers that not only

agree with you but give you well-reasoned arguments as to why yours is the only logicalposition to take on the issue. Thus, when you read other newspapers that say Palestinians

deserve sovereignty, you can denounce them dextrously. The newspapers I read,

particularly Haaretz, the Jerusalem Post, the Palestine Chronicle, the AlternativeInformation Centre and Arutz Sheva were very good at telling their readers how to think

and why.

All newspapers are biased, though some more obviously than others. It is hard to tell

which are the right-wing papers and which are left-wing, as the basic positions are the

same. The divisions would be more accurately described as into doves and hawks. I

didnt find as many doves as I expected. I know there are peace activists among Israelisand Palestinians but there is just so much anger that they are clearly fighting an uphill

battle. Others, meanwhile, claim to want peace, but since there could never be peace

while the other exists, they must be held down or eliminated.

My take on the two-state solution

The biggest issue at play in the Israeli-Palestinian dispute is, in my opinion,

independence for Palestinians. There are other issues too but they would all be solved if

this one was. For example, the right of return of Palestinian refugees. If there was a


22/23

Palestinian state, it would be able to accommodate them. So the two-state solution is the

solution. But it is still a long way off.

Netanyahus ideas on a Palestinian state are that, since it is a dangerous tiger, it should

have its teeth, claws and one eye removed. Having nominally endorsed the idea of a

Palestinian state, he can say he is on the side of the US. However, he has shown hishawkish side is the one he will follow. A Palestinian state must agree to recognise Israel

as a Jewish state; a demilitarisedPalestinian state; no control over Jerusalem; and Jewish

West Bank settlements will keep growing. He made this proposal because he knewPalestinians would reject and get angry at it, making his government look like the

peacemakers whose olive branch was rejected by the unreasonable Arabs. He started his

speech by saying Peace has always been our peoples most ardent desire. What he

meant was, Peace for Jews is our desire. If others need to be repressed or killed to secureit, fine.

That said, there is no reason to believe the two-state ideal is dead, as some Palestinian

journalists have claimed. Netanyahu will not be in power forever. The Barackadministration will keep up the pressure. Jimmy Carters point of view is valuable as

well. But a viable Palestinian state does, nonetheless, seem a distant prospect.

The Israeli press spends too much time writing about why everything Israel does is right,

and why everyone who disagrees with anything it does is wrong. If the newspapers

reflect and reinforce public opinion, Barack Obama and Jimmy Carter are hated in somecircles of Israeli society. These are the peacemakers. How can Israelis claim they want

peace if they shoot the peacemakers? And how can they find solutions if everything is the

fault of Arab terrorists?

Israelis in general also need to get over the idea that theirs is the only legitimate claim to

the land of Israel. Was there nobody there before the Aliyah? Why do Jews but not Arabsdeserve a nation state? There is no reason that Jews, Muslims and Christians, Jains,

Daoists, dogs and monkeys cannot all live in harmony in Israel. All it requires is

accepting that our group is no better than theirs.

How should Palestinian leaders proceed? Being far less powerful than the Israeli state,

Palestinian leaders might be better to commit to non-violent resistance and creative

solutions. I know, I know, in the face of aggression, one wants to be aggressive. I canunderstand the Intifada and the radical groups and the anger and bitterness of the

Palestinians. But violence by Palestinians has two major consequences. First, it means

retaliation, and if the blockade of and war in Gaza were any guide, violence is just notworth it. The Israeli Defence Forces should have made that clear. Second, it means less

international sympathy for the people committing violence. If the Palestinians can play

the peaceful yet oppressed minority, they could garner the support needed for recognitionof their plight, and the world would put enough pressure on Israel to give them their own

state. Or perhaps that is already the case and the result is not statehood but the status quo.

Perhaps everyone needs to work harder to achieve peace.


23/23

The media can play the role of the hawk, by presenting narrow views and arguments that

never compromise, or it can play the role of the dove, by presenting a variety of

viewpoints, each one reasonable, from people of all ideologies in the conflict. Too manyplay the hawk. More critical thinking, more balanced biases, and more recognition of the

legitimate claims of the other are the only way to achieve peace.

Documents

One Week Reading the Mouthpieces of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict