I thought the Financial Times was one of the more respectiable British publications. At the very least, it doesn’t usually carry the screaming anti-Israel screeds that rags like the Guardian carry. I’ve quoted it approvingly from time to time.
I’m thinking not anymore.
Read the FT’s version of the history of Israel in the Middle East, and you’ll see a glaring lack of context for most of Israel’s aggressive reactions to the aggressive actions of her neighbors, and in particular, an utter lack of context for the re-investing of the West Bank and Gaza. In fact, there is absolutely no mention of the withdrawal of all Israeli forces and citizens from the Gaza Strip last year. It is mentioned only as a “planned withdrawal,” and the actual withdrawal of troops is never mentioned. Let’s look at a few entries, shall we?
1964 The Palestine Liberation Organisation formed. The PLO claims to be the sole representative of the Palestinian people and vows to reclaim their land and destroy the state of Israel. Yassir Arafat took over the chairmanship of the PLO in 1969.
No mention whatsoever of the terrorist attacks that the PLO launched or took part in. Not one mention that it was a terrorist organization, actually. And not a single mention of the Munich Olympics and Black September.
October 6 1973 On Yom Kippur, the holiest day in the Jewish calendar, Syria and Egypt begin an offensive against Israeli held territory. After initial losses Israel regains almost all the land taken during the six day war.
It was a surprise attack, not just “an offensive war.” Kuwait, Iraq, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Jordan, and Yasser Arafat and his terrorists all took part in the war.
1982 Israel invades Lebanon. After the PLO launches terrorist attacks on towns in northern Israel from bases in Lebanon Israeli troops enter Lebanon and surround Muslim West Beirut forcing PLO fighters to leave after a siege.
Not the order of the sentences in this paragraph. “Israel invades Lebanon” comes before the explanation as to why she did—to stop the constant terror attacks by the PLO’s presence in Lebanon. It’s effect and then cause, I suppose. Some newfangled journalistic notion? No, just the way the mainstream media describe all things Israel.
September 28 2000 Palestinian frustrations over continued Israeli settlement building, which accelerated after the Oslo accords and the slow pace of negotiations erupt into a second uprising, or intifada, which is to prove much bloodier than the first.
The violence follows a visit by Ariel Sharon, the Likud leader (later to become Israel’s prime minister), to the sacred site in Jersualem known as Temple Mount to Jews and Haram al Sharif to Muslims. Several Palestinians are shot and killed in the ensuing protests, which then escalate throughout the West Bank and Gaza Strip, sparking the second Palestinian intifada.
Standard boilerplate reasons for second “intifada.” Interesting how the FT then goes on to describe the dozens of suicide bombings that murderered and wounded thousands of Israelis on buses, in markets, in malls, at weddings, dance clubs, and Bar Mitzvah celebrations. Oh, wait. They don’t, really. Except they do go into that effect and cause thing again:
2000-2004
Many of the areas granted autonomy under the Oslo accords are re-invaded and there is a dramatic deterioration in the living conditions of the 3.5m Palestinians who live in the West Bank and Gaza Strip as Israel seals off the Palestinian territories. The second intifada is marked by a series of suicide bombings against Israeli civilians carried out by militant Palestinian groups - hardening the attitude of the Israeli public towards the possibility of peaceful coexistence with their Arab neighbours.
Notice how the effect comes far before the cause. The cause was the “intifada.” The cause was the almost-daily, and sometimes more-than-daily suicide bombings and terror attacks. The Netanya Massacre—at which 29 civilians sitting down to a Passover dinner were murdered by a suicide bomber and hundreds were wounded—was Yasser Arafat’s crowning achievement of the “intifada.” This is what the FT describes above. But note also the effect—the suicide bombings hardened Israeli attitudes “towards peace with their Arab neighbours.” The suicide bombings are not mentioned as a horrific tactic of Arafat and his fellow terrorists. They are mentioned as the reason that Israelis hardened their attitude towards the palestinians. As if that’s not a normal thing, after the palestinians blow up their children, their brothers and sisters and parents and grandparents. As if Israel should simply suck it up and allow terrorism as a legitimate reaction to “occupation.”
But wait, there’s more.
Relations between the two sides are further soured by Israel’s targetted killings of Palestinian militant leaders and by tank and helicopter raids into Palestinian towns and refugee camps, in which houses are bulldozed and civilians killed.
Again, no context. The targeted killings were all done in response to the terror attacks, and also to decapitate the leadership of Hamas and other terrorist groups. They worked, too.
But the FT isn’t done yet.
Despite international protests, Israel begins the construction of a wall to seal off the West Bank from Israel. It is proposed that large swathes of Palestinian land be confiscated so that the wall can be routed around Israeli settlements.
Again, no context. Israel just built the wall to steal land, you see. It has nothing to do with preventing terror attacks, or the fact that terror attacks have actually, well, gone down since the wall was built. But Israel, in spite of international protests, up and built the wall anyway, damn them!
The rest of the history covers 2004-2006 but again, does not state specifically that Israel withdrew from every inch of Gaza, including the Philadelphi corridor. If you were reading only this history, you’d think that Gaza is still occupied.
No wonder the Brits hate Israel so much. They can’t find an honest representation of Israeli history anywhere.
