NPR‘s Morning Edition (10/8/14) decided to examine the terminology used to describe Israel’s illegal building projects in the West Bank, which could have been a useful exercise. Unfortunately, its sole source for the discussion was an Israeli newspaper columnist who essentially endorsed the Israeli government’s misleading rhetoric.
NPR aired excerpts from a recent interview with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (Morning Edition, 10/2/14), in which he said of a planned expansion: “These are not settlements. These are neighborhoods in Jerusalem.”
As host Steve Inskeep explained: “It matters a lot to Israelis and Palestinians alike just what things are called. The differences in language suggest differences in ways of seeing the issue on the ground.”
This is certainly true. But what to call something depends on what that thing “on the ground” really is. Under international law, it’s illegal to colonize territories captured in war, which is what Israel is doing by constructing housing for Israelis in the Occupied Territories of the West Bank. This is true whether or not Israel claims sovereignty over the land, as it does in the part of the West Bank known as East Jerusalem, as it’s also illegal to annex territory captured in war.
But that was not the kind of perspective NPR was looking to share with listeners. Instead, Morning Edition turned to historian Ari Shavit, a columnist for the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz.
The Gilo “neighborhood” on the occupied West Bank (cc photo: Justin McIntosh/Wikimedia)
The NPR host started off by asking, “Why would someone call them neighborhoods instead of settlements?” Shavit’s response was that Israelis mostly agree with Netanyahu:
You have to understand that for most Israelis–in this sense Netanyahu’s not alone. The neighborhoods built in Jerusalem, although in the parts of Jerusalem that were occupied after ’67, are part of Jerusalem. And therefore, probably 90 percent of Israelis see them as having a different status than the settlements in the deep West Bank, so to speak.
Inskeep followed up by noting that “just as a matter of language, settlements sounds like aggressively reaching out and settling on new territory. Neighborhood just sounds like a neighborhood. It’s a friendly-sounding thing.”
But in reality, “settlements” is a euphemism for illegal colonies (Extra!, 10/09), so the discussion is really about swapping out one euphemism for another.
And Shavit’s point is that both sides use troubling language:
The verbal war is an integral part of the political warfare. And therefore, the terms they use are part of a political battle. The Palestinians use terms that actually describe all of this holy land as theirs. Some Israelis on the right use terms that describe the entire land as theirs.
Inskeep picks up on this point:
You said the Palestinians use terms that describe the entire region as theirs. Do you mean to say that they don’t refer to Israel? They might refer to Palestine and occupied Palestine.
So somehow a discussion about how Israel has recast its illegal occupation as the building of neighborhoods turns into a lament about how both sides are being misleading.
They close with a discussion of Netanyahu’s other claim, that the settlement expansion in question is in “south Jerusalem.” Shavit’s verdict? “In a technical way, Mr. Netanyahu’s right,” he explains, before admitting that it is also true that “this is in the parts of Jerusalem that were conquered by Israel during the ’67 war.”
He finishes with a call for both sides to reject the “petty debate over terms and terminology” and “look for a fair, realistic way of dividing the land in a way that will not risk Israel’s security and future.”
It’s perhaps not surprising that an Israeli columnist’s chief concern is for “Israel’s security and future”; a Palestinian journalist would likely have different priorities. Inskeep mentioned near the top of the segment that this was just “one perspective on the political wording in the Mideast.”
When will Morning Edition devote space to another perspective, one that actually challenges Netanyahu’s misleading spin about illegal West Bank settlements?
ACTION:
Tell Morning Edition that its October 8 segment on Israeli rhetoric about construction in the Occupied Territories should be balanced with a critic of Israel’s colonization.
CONTACT:
NPR Morning Edition
Contact Form: http://help.npr.org/npr/includes/customer/npr/custforms/contactus.aspx?sid=1
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/nprmorningedition
Twitter: https://twitter.com/MorningEdition
What exactly is the problem? Both sides are at war because of the decisions of the Palestinians to NOT allow Israel to have its land and live in peace.
Islam has lands hundreds if not thousands of times larger than Judaism, or the Jews, looking at it in that way.
The population density, people per square mile is much higher in Israel than surrounds, yet neighboring hostile Islamic countries want to shrink that even further.
Palestinians live in Israel and vote, yet somehow Israelis are not supposed to live in Palestine, and if they do they risk danger and death.
Take off your anti-Semitic heat blinders FAIR and stop this nonsense framing of this issue, it doesn’t work except with those already of that mind, and nothing will ever reach them for an honest discussion anyway.
Mincing words about what either side says is not helpful as well, everyone in the world can see, and admit if they want to, the huge bias in the Muslim world for Palestinians and the NAZI-like cultural hate for Jews, that thanks for lots of oil money and cynical US PR firms is trying to associate itself with the political Left (ha,ha!) in order to take advantage of white/western/christian/authoritarian hatred of those non-thinking extremists on the Left that give the Left a bad name. That is all FAIR and other pseudo-Left leaning propaganda sites are doing, and in the end they will make the world miserable with their dishonesty and lack of transparency and real dialog with real facts and history.
Pooh!
My protestation sent to NPR’s Morning Edition Staff through the Contact Form link provided in this Action Alert:
Dear NPR’s Morning Edition Staff,
On the Wednesday, October 8th, 2014 airing of NPR’s Morning Edition, host Steve Inskeep failed to mention to guest Ari Shavit and the audience that the so-called “settlements” and so-called “neighborhoods” that were/are developed on land occupied by Israel after the Six-Day War of 1967 are illegal under international law. Therefore, a discussion of what euphemism to use for describing what are, by international law, Israeli colonies is propaganda in the service of Israeli state-power. A discussion of why the colonies are illegal and mentioning why what euphemisms one uses in place of the term colonies is moot, could of been accomplished by a responsible host and a guest critical of Israels illegal colonies and colonization policies.
-Sena
Israel is a settler-colonialist state that does “ethnic cleansing” (otherwise known as genocide) of Palestinians. The United States of America is a settler-colonialist state that did “ethnic cleansing” (genocide) to the indigenous peoples (a.k.a American Indians) and still discriminates against American natives and has not come to terms with sovereignty of native Americans and reparations. Let’s be clear and honest about this, OK?
For all the good it will do, I just informed NPR, in part:
“Most intelligent Americans have long since recognized that Zionist-controlled mainstream media corporations are little more than megaphones for Israeli propaganda. We had hoped that NPR was above such scurvy reporting, but it is increasingly apparent that NPR commentary on the Israeli-Palestinian question has become as suspect as that of CNN and its former AIPAC hireling, Wolf Blitzer.
“Not a comparison that the founders of NPR would have welcomed.”
Dear WBUR,
I was dismayed by your Morning Edition segment on the “controversy” over whether to call occupied territories in East Jerusalem as “neighborhoods” or “settlements” (10/2/14). The framing of the piece first came across as yet another example of the “Opinions differ on the shape of the earth” style of journalism. But it was actually worse than that, as you went on to only present the opinion of the flat-earther. This is not a matter for debate, international law is pretty clear on the subject, and it unambiguously states that it’s illegal to colonize or annex territories captured in war. Period. The fact that Israelis (whether they write for Haaretz or not) feel otherwise is as (ir)relevant as the opinion of a thief on whether he owns the car he just stole.
The facts are being distorted beyond belief. This latest complaint relates to homes that were taken by Jordan from Jewish residents in 1948 and recently purchased by Jews from Arab owners. Instead of posturing to prove a point, our decrepit press needs to check the facts on the ground before casting aspersions.
Many Israeli citizens are Arabs and send representation to the Knesset and have religious, security, economic and political rights and opportunities beyond any other country in the Middle East. In the mean time there are no Jews left in the countries surrounding Israel as they have all been killed or driven out.
Israel recognizes the religious rights of all of its citizens and provides both financial support and security for mosques, synagogues, cathedrals, churches etc.