Israel’s Public Relations Problem

What we have here is a failure to communicate.

March 31, 2011 - by Joseph Puder

This September 2011, when the United Nations General Assembly meetings open in New York, the Palestinians, led by Mahmoud Abbas, will receive overwhelming international support for recognition of a Palestinian state. The Palestinians have galvanized worldwide support by strategically organizing a targeted public relations campaign.

Recognition of a 23^rd Arab state will mark the greatest public relations failure the Israeli government has ever experienced. Israel has categorically failed to convey a simple message: a contiguous Palestinian state will, in no uncertain terms, become a terrorist state, destabilizing both Israel (with over 1 million Israeli Arabs) and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, where approximately 70% of its people are easily radicalized Palestinians.

Citizens of a separate Palestinian state, without any semblance of an economic infrastructure, any sea access (unless Gaza is incorporated), or any natural resources, would become like the Bedouin, whose livelihood has traditionally come from raiding neighboring tribes. Only, instead of tribes, “independent” Palestine would attack the neighboring states of Israel and Jordan.

The state of Israel has failed miserably in winning over the English-speaking world, as well as the French, German, Spanish, Portuguese, and Russians, by ignoring the need for an essential media tool — a satellite television channel with an ability to broadcast worldwide news reports and interviews, similar to Al-Jazeera, Al-Arabiya, or the BBC. Even Hezbollah had the foresight to set up a satellite operation, Al-Manar, influencing viewers across Europe and the Middle East. Since Israel is not on the world communications map, it is neither on the geographic map. Israel has foolishly depended on outlets such as CNN and the BBC to bring its side of the story to English speaking households. Its image has been severely damaged as a result, leading to a worldwide willingness to participate in a concerted effort to delegitimize the state through a so-called “BDS” campaign of boycotts, divestment, and sanctions.

Israel controls much of the ground the Palestinians hope to have for their state, and while the IDF is more than capable of circumventing the operations of a Palestinian state, the international community would not permit that to happen. Unless Israel is prepared to be isolated politically and perhaps economically as well, a Palestinian state would possess full sovereign rights. That would mean that the two principal conditions Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu set in his Bar Ilan address in 2009 for supporting the establishment of a Palestinian state next to Israel — recognition of the latter as a Jewish state and demilitarization of the former — would amount to a pipe dream.

All Palestinian leaders, including the current chairman of the Palestinian Liberation Organization and (disputed) president of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, have refused to state their recognition of Israel as the Jewish state. They have argued that doing so would undermine the lives of their Arab-Muslim brethren who reside in Israel, and that recognition would also prevent the “right of return” of Palestinian-Arabs to Israel — a sure way to undermine the Jewish nature of Israel. Not publicly mentioned is the fact that deals made with the “Zionist entity” could be the last deals Arab Muslims make. And, of course, statehood for the Palestinians, if recognized at the UN and sanctioned worldwide, would put the lives of more than 300,000 Israelis at great risk.

Palestinian leaders have been silent on the issue of demilitarization of the Palestinian state. Obviously, there are no demilitarized states, especially in the Middle East. (Netanyahu is fully aware of this, as is the Obama administration.)
Last week’s Israeli naval action served as a reminder of the fallacy of demilitarization. An Iranian civilian vessel laden with advanced weaponry was intercepted as it made its way from Iran through Syria and Turkey to Egypt. Its ultimate aim: Hamas-led Gaza. For each ship intercepted by Israel (and Egypt, which has aided in interception but may, in the future, become a supplier of weapons to Gaza and the Palestinian Authority), there is an Iranian shipment that gets through. And, should a Palestinian state become a reality, there would be no way for Israel to legally intercept shipments of weapons from neighboring states and beyond, arriving either by sea or by air.

An armed Palestinian state would be an unequivocal strategic threat to the state of Israel. It would threaten major Israeli population centers, its international airport (Ben Gurion), and its power stations — all of which are within range of artillery fire, not to mention the sophisticated missiles the new state would rush to acquire.

And so, it is tragically uncanny that a technologically sophisticated Israel has neglected to mount a robust public relations campaign through a worldwide satellite TV channel station. Such neglect represents gross negligence on the part of the successive Israeli governments. Israel has the facilities: TV studios, qualified broadcasters, and technical personnel who know how to create and operate a satellite TV. And Israel enjoys the money to bankroll such an operation. What it lacks is the will to take action. Israel’s well-being depends on arming itself with a global communications weapon like Al-Jazeera.

An Israeli, pro-Zionist, Al-Jazeera-like channel would help Israel overcome the biased reporting of European and most American channels, and would reach households in Europe as well as the U.S. with a clear and undiluted message as to the dangers a Palestinian state would pose to Israel, Jordan, and the region.

Utilizing satellite technology would allow Israel’s 7 million people to match the Arab/Muslim world propaganda, even with its vast resources and 350 million people. As Israel is being savaged and delegitimized in the media, on campus, and in international institutions, Israel must fight back — not with government press releases, speeches, conferences, or meetings with world leaders, but by bringing its message to ordinary citizens worldwide.

Joseph Puder, a freelance journalist, is the founder and executive director of the Interfaith Taskforce for America and Israel (ITAI).

- Pajamas Media - http://pajamasmedia.com

Settlement on the West Bank?

Question:

I have no wish to be controversial but the subject is very serious. It seems to a lot of people around the world, including loyal supporters of Israel, that Israeli settlement in the west bank is perhaps the greatest danger to Israel imaginable. Is there no feeling in Israel that this matter, in all its forms, legal and illegal, is and will be seen as beyond reason in this day and age?

It did seem to be strange that after the terrible murders of the family in Israel that Israel’s answer was to authorise more building in the West Bank. It also seemed strange to me that the settlement where these horrible murders took place was an isolated town in the heart of PA territory.

Why would anyone want a settlement there? Do not misunderstand me. I am just terribly curious as to why things are as they are.

Jack Cohen Answers:

In order to answer your question adequately I must provide some background. Unfortunately, delving into the past tends to put off those who think that all the settlers are Orthodox and base themselves on the Bible. I am not Orthodox, far from it, and I do not support the settler's position based on the Bible per se. But, let me say up front, that Israel has a perfectly legal claim on the territories called "The West Bank" and the legal situation is that until a negotiated agreement is reached between Israel and the Palestinians, Jews have a legal right to build and settle there. To believe otherwise is to accept Arab propaganda.

1. One should be aware that this area, what is now Israel (including the West Bank), was inhabited by Jews from the destruction of the Jewish State by Rome in 55 bc until the Muslim conquest of the 7th century ad. It is important to remember that there were no Arabs here until then, they came from Arabia and conquered the land and forced most of the inhabitants, Christians and Jews, to convert to Islam or be killed. From 1517-1917 it was part of the Turkish Empire.

2. In 1917, during WWI, the British Government issued the Balfour Declaration that stated that they would establish a "Jewish homeland" in "Palestine" as they called it (the term derives from the Philistines who no longer existed) if they conquered the land from the Turks.

3. The British conquered the Land and were given a Mandate to control it by the League of Nations, with the legal requirement to fulfil the Balfour Declaration. Nothing was mentioned about an Arab State in Palestine.

4. After WWI there were various treaties, such as the San Remo Treaty of 1922, that required the British to establish a Jewish homeland. But, not only did Britain unilaterally establish "Transjordan" from part of the Mandatory territory, in 1938 they also reneged on their commitment to establish a Jewish State.

5. After WWII, the Jewish forces (Haganah, etc.) fought the British and the Arabs and established the State of Israel in 1948, recognized by the UN. At no time did Israel give up its right of sovereignty over "the West Bank." Although Jordan occupied the West Bank from 1948-1967, this occupation was never recognized in international law. So the "West Bank" was never under Arab sovereignty, and certainly never under Palestinian sovereignty. This may come as a surprise to most people fed on the pro-Arab propaganda of the western media. But, let me repeat that, the West Bank is neither "Arab land" nor "Palestinian land", it has never been under the sovereignty of either. It is disputed land between Israel and some supposed Arab entity.

6. Therefore it is not surprising that Jews believe that they have the right to live on the West Bank, just as Arabs do. But, Israel Governments, while first not supporting such settlement (under Labor Governments) in the expectation of a peace agreement with the Palestinians after 1967 and then supporting settlement (under Likud) when there were murderous suicide bombings of the two intifadas (1980-2000s), now is freezing all new settlements and buildings in established settlements under pressure from the US. This is an artificial situation, when settlements are growing and there are major Jewish towns on the West Bank that all Israeli Governments intend to incorporate into Israel in any agreement with the Palestinians.

7. One of the few political moves an Israeli Government can now make is to continue building and expanding settlements as a pressure on the Palestinians to either stop terrorism or to make some move towards peace. This is what the Netanyahu Government did in the wake of the horrible murders of 5 in Itamar. You could call it state-controlled building. But, 500 building permits are on the face of it minimal. Incidentally Itamar is not in "PA-controlled territory," it is in an area that is under Israeli control according to the Oslo Accords interim agreements, which divided the WB into three categories (PA control, Israeli control, joint control). Only the seven Palestinian cities (Ramallah, Nablus, etc.) are in PA-controlled territory.

8. There is no doubt that Jewish/Israeli building on the West Bank will continue and will expand the longer the Palestinians refuse to compromise and engage in direct peace negotiations with Israel.

9. At present the Palestinians are apparently not prepared to deal with Israel, because they are divided between Hamas in Gaza and Fatah on the West Bank, and because the Pali-leaks exposure on al Jazeera showed that the Abbas regime lied to its own people.

10. That is why the PA is attempting to obtain a unilateral establishment of a Palestinian State through the UN. But, if they act unilaterally, so can Israel, and the future of the West Bank might then be determined by force rather than through negotiation.

Ha Navi Answers:

The hatred comes from the fact that Israelis tolerating two (2) so called "Palestinian" states. One is Jordan, which is their true home-land, while the other is Gaza, Judea & Samaria. There is NO Jewish occupation! There is only a Muslim occupation of Judea & Samaria, which the Muslims cleverly renamed 'The West Bank', in order to de-Judaize the area in the world's collective mind. The Muslims of Jordan (formerly Trans-Jordan, which England created), cleverly re-named themselves "palestinians" in the 1960's, and revised history in order to gain world sympathy for their cause, which is the annihilation of Israel, and to teach the great lie, which is, that the Jews stole their land from them! Before Jordan started its war against Israel, they told their Muslims brothers in Jerusalem & in Samaria & in Judea to sell the land to the Jews, because they were confident that they & their co-religionist Muslim nations (Syria, Egypt, etc.), would destroy Israel & so they could thereafter keep the land as well. So they sold & fled & waited for the results of the war. Israel won that war. They recaptured the Holy Jewish land; Jerusalem, Samaria & Judea. They rightfully settled it, even though Obama the Muslim, who constantly quotes the Koran, (NOT the Bible), demands Israel to stop settling Jewish, Israel, unlike the Jordanians, allowed Christians & Muslims to come & go freely in those areas. The deeds to the land were and are owned by Jews. They allowed the Muslims to continue living in Jewish apartments & homes as long as they continued paying rent to the Jews. Arafat came along & told the Muslims to be arrogant & not pay! They stopped paying and were consequently evicted. Of course Islam, the revisionist liars, tell the world that the Jews are pushing them out of their rightful land! It is NOT Muslim land, regardless of the fact that the Muslims continue to teach and even believe their own lies!

Israel files U.N. complaint over mortar barrag

March 20, 2011

JERUSALEM (JTA) -- Israel's foreign minister ordered the country's delegation to the United Nations to file a formal complaint after over 50 mortars struck southern Israel in one morning.

More than 50 mortars were fired from Gaza into Israel on Saturday morning. Two Israelis were injured by shrapnel and homes and buildings sustained damage, according to reports. Hamas' armed wing Izzadin Kassam Brigades claimed responsibility for 10 of the explosives.

Israel's military struck several Hamas targets with tanks and aerial fire in Gaza later Saturday in response to the barrage. The strike lasted some 45 minutes, Ynet reported, and at least two Hamas terrorists reportedly were hurt.

The previous day, 10 mortars were fired on Israel from Gaza.

In the complaint, Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman decried international support for the establishment of a Palestinian state, saying that it would be a "terrorist state whose primary goal is the destruction of Israel." He also noted that the attack on Israel came as Hamas and the Fatah Party of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas were talking about reconciliation.

Israel also filed a formal complaint with the U.N. Security Council on March 18 over its seizure of the cargo ship Victoria, which was transporting concealed arms from Iran via Syria to Gaza via Egypt.

Meanwhile, gunmen claiming to be from Hamas on Saturday raided the Gaza offices of the Reuters news agency, striking one employee with a metal bar, and smashing a television and other equipment. The gunmen also raided the offices of CNN and the Japanese station NHK.

The Death of an Illusion

Rich Lowry wrote an interesting analysis of the recent series of Middle Eastern revolutions for the March 18, 2011 the National Review Online.

In the great Middle East whodunit, the verdict is in: The Jews are innocent. They aren’t responsible for the violence, extremism, backwardness, discontent, or predatory government of their Arab neighbors. The past few months should have finally shattered the persistent illusion that the Israeli-Palestinian question determines all in the Middle East.

Read the rest of the essay here.

Why are there revolutions in the Middle East?

Thomas Friedman opines in the New York Times about several reasons for the recent revolutions in the Middle East.

He suggests that one reason is the media coverage of Israel by the Arab TV network. He writes:

"ISRAEL The Arab TV network Al Jazeera has a big team covering Israel today. Here are some of the stories they have been beaming into the Arab world: Israel’s previous prime minister, Ehud Olmert, had to resign because he was accused of illicitly taking envelopes stuffed with money from a Jewish-American backer. An Israeli court recently convicted Israel’s former president Moshe Katsav on two counts of rape, based on accusations by former employees. And just a few weeks ago, Israel, at the last second, rescinded the appointment of Maj. Gen. Yoav Galant as the army’s new chief of staff after Israeli environmentalists spurred a government investigation that concluded General Galant had seized public land near his home. (You can see his house on Google Maps!) This surely got a few laughs in Egypt where land sales to fat cats and cronies of the regime that have resulted in huge overnight profits have been the talk of Cairo this past year. When you live right next to a country that is bringing to justice its top leaders for corruption and you live in a country where many of the top leaders are corrupt, well, you notice."

Definitely an interesting analysis.