Israel as cruel and evil … According to the Oxford English Dictionary, to “demonise” is to depict someone as being “persistently cruel or evil”. This is how Israel has been depicted for its policies following the outbreak of Palestinian violence in September 2000. The demonic image of Israel has been promoted by Western reporters and critics who routinely attribute cruel and inhumane motives to Israel. This depiction is reinforced by selective and often outright misleading reporting of events on the ground. The method of those who demonise Israel has various components:-
In this Briefing we highlight several of the most commonly mentioned “demonic” accusations against Israel. Underlying each accusation is a common theme – that Israel is cruel, evil and inhumane. Each accusation is sustained by incomplete facts, a disregard for the context in which these events occurred, and a refusal to acknowledge Israel’s point of view. In this Briefing we present concise facts to dispel the demonic accusations, and conclude with suggestions as to why these demonic accusations are so dangerous.
Fact Israel has repeatedly emphasised that its conflict is only with the violent, rejectionist groups who are organised and seek shelter in the midst of Palestinian villages and towns, and not with the Palestinian population as a whole. Where Israeli forces act with needless indifference to human life, this warrants investigation and prosecution by the Israeli authorities (and indeed such investigations have taken place). But there is a difference between Israeli actions which cause unintended loss of life, and the deliberate and intentional killing of innocent people. Israel has been responsible for causing the first, but it is not guilty of the second. For more detail see:- Briefing 7: Israel Deliberately Targets Palestinian Civilians; Briefing 11: Why Are There More Palestinian Than Israeli Victims?
Accusation Fact Israel’s checkpoints are part of the response of Israeli governments to this onslaught against its citizens. Many terrorist operations have been foiled by these checkpoints and closures, which also give Israeli citizens at least some hope that they can live relatively “normal” lives free of constant fear. Israel has a long-term interest in a stable and self-sufficient Palestinian society. If the violence would end there would be no possible justification for the checkpoints and closures. Seen in this light, the checkpoints are not Israeli “collective punishment”, but Palestinian collective self-punishment. For more see - Briefing 5: Roadblocks, Checkpoints and The Security Fence
Accusation: Fact: It is hardly surprising that young, frequently inexperienced Israeli soldiers and border police treat Palestinians warily and sometimes roughly or even violently. It is the Palestinian threat to Israel which causes Israel to act in this way – Israel’s policy needs to be seen in context, not in a vacuum.
Accusation
For 18 months from September 2000 Israel called upon the Palestinian Authority to curb the terrorism originating from the territories, and it was only their continued failure to do so which prompted Israel’s operations (See Briefing 14: The Palestinians’ Failure to Curb Terror: Three Examples). March 2002 was the worst month of terrorism in Israel’s 54 year history, with 130 civilian fatalities, culminating in the bombing of the Passover celebration at Netanya’s Park Hotel. These events were the trigger for Operation Defensive Shield. June 2002 witnessed particularly gruesome suicide attacks in various parts of Israel, resulting in the death of over 60 students, schoolchildren and others. It was this further sequence of attacks which prompted Israel’s Operation Determined Path. Israel is not an eager occupier of Palestinian cities, but a reluctant re-occupier. (see Briefing 15: Israel’s Reluctant Reoccupation of Palestinian towns).
Accusation Fact The terrorists’ centre of operations was located in a heavily fortified area of a Palestinian refugee camp on the outskirts of Jenin, and Israeli confined its military operation to that area. The terrorists were given the opportunity to surrender, but they chose to fight, booby-trapping civilian homes and (according to subsequent reports appearing in Egyptian newspaper Al Ahram, among other places) deliberately involved civilians in the clash with Israeli forces. Israel required its soldiers to enter homes from door to door, and through walls, rather than bombard the centre from the air, in an effort to minimise innocent civilian casualties. 23 Israeli soldiers died as a result of this tactic. A UN report in August 2002 found no evidence to support Palestinian and some western claims of an Israeli “massacre” of Palestinians. Most of the 52 Palestinians who died were armed fighters.
Accusation
In their effort to escape approaching Israeli forces, Palestinian gunmen broke into the Church of the Nativity in April 2002, in flagrant violation of the sanctity of the holy site. This act triggered the siege. The ringleaders of the besieged Palestinians were hardened terrorists with proven involvement in attacks on Israeli civilians. During the weeks of the siege, Israel sought to maintain the sanctity of the church, and seek a peaceful resolution, even when its soldiers were fired upon from within the Church precincts. Israeli offers to bring in food and drink were repeatedly refused by the Palestinians inside. The siege ended peacefully. But the fact that a gang of armed Palestinians could have holed themselves up there for over 6 weeks demonstrated Palestinian disregard for Christian rights, not Israeli disregard for such rights.
Accusation Fact There is no deliberate effort by Israel to harm expectant mothers. But in Israel’s view the checkpoints are necessary to protect its citizens from attack. Responsibility for the delays experienced by ambulance drivers and their patients lays on the shoulders of the Palestinian terrorist groups which force Israel to maintain the checkpoints in the first place. In any event, Israel has introduced humanitarian procedures at checkpoints to try to “fast-track” cases of genuine emergency. Incidentally, Palestinians have been caught smuggling suicide weaponry inside Red Crescent ambulances, to the horror of (amongst others) the International Red Cross. Such actions hardly smooth the passage for Palestinian ambulances. Accusation Fact Several of the US and UK activists who have been harmed in recent months have placed themselves in highly dangerous situations, ignoring the appeals of the Israeli authorities not to enter what is effectively a war zone. Each incident has been investigated, and the deaths found to have been accidental, except for the fatal shooting of Briton Tom Hurndall, where an Israeli soldier has been charged with criminal offence (which may be murder or manslaughter). Israel also considers that the key organisation sponsoring these projects – the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) – is not a neutral peace agency, but a highly partisan organisation which takes a one-sided view of the conflict and sympathises with the cause and the methods of operation of the terrorist groups.
Accusation Fact During the Oslo peace process years, Israel’s government and private sector companies invested large amounts in building up the Palestinian economy. Israel supported large financial assistance programmes from the European Union, the World Bank and other agencies. Israel’s security fence and its closures of the West Bank and Gaza now are entirely caused by the terrorist threat from those territories. In addition, in the previous Palestinian leadership, corruption and financial mismanagement were rampant. It is these factors which have brought about the collapse of the Palestinian economy, not Israel’s legitimate response to Palestinian violence. On many occasions, Israel has relaxed security restrictions within the territories in order to assist the local economy, even though this has resulted in a renewal of terrorist operations. If there were a sustained halt in the terrorism, there is no reason why the Palestinian economy could not begin to revive, with Israeli cooperation. Israel disrupts Palestinian Universities Accusation Fact This has all changed because of the Palestinian intifada. Several Palestinian universities such as An-Najah and Hebron have become conspicuous centres for terrorist activity and incitement, prompting Israel to close them temporarily. These closures are self-inflicted, and the inevitable reaction of Israel to what is perceived to be an intolerable anti-Israeli agitation. If there were a curbing of the incitement of terrorism, then Israel would have no reason to demand the temporary closure of any of these universities, and academic bridges could once again begin to be built.
Fact Most of this effort has frozen as a result of the violence of the last two years. But this is not because Israelis do not want to pursue such ties – only that the violence has broken the political rapport upon which such links were based, and because many Palestinians are intimidated by the terrorist groups and afraid of maintaining the links. Even in the midst of the violence, Israelis have continued to initiate many dialogue groups – low-profile, but continuing to operate.
Accusation: Fact: The effects of Israel’s demonisation The allegations against Israel listed above (and many others) have the cumulative impact of “demonising” Israel. This depiction of the country as persistently evil, cruel and inhumane has serious effects:-
Of course Israeli has its faults, and when it pursues wrong policies this warrants scrutiny and criticism. Israel does not ask to be whitewashed, but be subject to fair and informed criticism. But the demonisation of Israel goes far further than fair and informed “criticism”. It is an expression of hatred towards Israel. All the events on the ground are depicted through the distorted perspective of people who are simply unable to see any good, or potential for good, in what Israel does and is. Needless to say, to portray Israel as consistently evil and
demonic distorts the conflict and is an obstacle to future peace
and coexistence. |
||||||
