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.
The Brits hate Israel for the same reason as everybody else does. Because it’s full of Jews.
The only thing we can do to stop people loathing us is to die.
The cause/effect inversions you mention are just some of the many erasures of Israeli history that plague any discussion of the Middle East. You don’t hear much about Jews ethnically cleansed from Hebron in 1929, 750,000 Jewish refugees from Arab countries after Israeli independence, the many pre-1948 Jewish settlements in what is now the West Bank which the Jews were prepared to give up for the sake of having a state, the fact that West Bank settlers are exercising the right of return Palestinians claim for themselves in Israel – but that it’s more legit because the West Bank has never been sovereign Palestinian territory, etc.
I’m an FT subscriber, and when I read something like this I wonder if their *business* stories are written with a similar level of research and attention to objectivity.
Anti-semitism is the opiate of the (european) masses.
The Euros hate Israel. It seems to me its a different level of hatred to the Muslim countries. The European hatred is like a phsychotic disorder type thing (something they need to work out in theraphy) while the Islamic hatred is like a war time enemy type thing (something that can be overcome by dialogue and education).
just came across this – interesting article. says in the bible that jerusalem will be ‘a stumbling block’ to all nations – or something like that – and so it is. Its pretty amazing how much grief the jews have suffered (individually and as a collective) over the years – and yet they still remain a seperate nation, where so many other ancient civilisations have distintegrated into nothing.
The Muslim reaction to Jews is equally psychotic as the Eruo reaction. For example, Iran aspires to destroy Israel and exterminate its Jewish population (just like the Arabs do). What did Israel and the Jews do to the Persians? Nothing. Israel exists and that offends the monstrously inflated vanity of Iranian Muslims, that is all Israel’s done to Iran. Israel has done nothing to Malasian and Pakistani Muslims, yet they too want to annihilate the Jews. This is psychotic.
And remember, today anti-Americanism is the other side of the coin of antisemitism. The Jews and the Americans are in the same boat, we shall sink or swim together. Non-Jewish Americans shold get used to being targeted for existing, not for anything America does.
Indeed we already are. The jihadis hate us for preventing Serbian massacres of Kosovars, for rescuing the Bosnian Muslims, for preventing the conquest of the Gulf by the bloody-handed tyrant Saddam, for supporting the Afghans against the Soviets, for supporting Pakistan, for protecting Turkey and Iran from Soviet imperialism, for standing up to the Soviet Union and preventing it from conquering the Middle East, which it would have done if not prevented. Oh yes, instead of taking the Arabs’ oil by force and profiting from it ourselves, in the Arab fashion, we paid them world market prices for their only export, not to mention the Arabs cannot find, extract, refine, and market the stuff without Westerners doing the job for them, thus making the Arabs filthy rich. You can see why they hate us.
Interestingly enough, the second intifada is ascribed to “frustration” without a mention that it happened shortly after Barak offered them ninety-five percent of what they could reasonably have hoped for, leaving negotiations still open. You also get the impression it was a spontaneous uprising and not obviously planned. For that matter, there’s no indication that Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount was disrespectful; apparently the fact that a Jew set foot on it was enough.
The fact that the separation fence (it’s mostly a fence, not a wall) was not only built to cut down terrorism but in fact did so is also not mentioned. That’s not in inadvertent omission.
The sad thing is that the FT article is probably as favorable to Israel as you’re likely to get from a major European publication.
Once again, thank you Morris Meyers, my grandfather, for not stopping in Europe and coming to the US.
Maybe this will provide some answers to the question posed in the post and comments.
How Britain outsourced anti-Semitism.
The link to Robert Wistrich is especially illuminating.
There is another glaring ommision. It says the PLO was founded in 1964. True. But the Plo and the PA keep claiming they want to regain the land they lost in the Six-Day War. But that war was in 1967! So obviously the PLO was founded to destroy _all_ of Israel. But don’t expect anyone to point that out. AAMOF, I saw an entry in an encyclopedia that says the PLO was created in 1964 to regain land lost in the Six-Day War. They aren’t embarrassed by the obvious contradiction.