"Why Israel Feels Threatened"
By Benny Morris
A25
Benny Morris is in full repentance mode. In his editorial, he makes a very important general point about the Arab-Israeli conflict. "The Arab and wider Islamic worlds...have never truly accepted the legitimacy of Israel's creation and continue to oppose its existence," he writes. In fact, the editorial was so good that I began to wonder how it got into NYT. Then, I read Morris' skepticism about a ground invasion, and it occurred to me - based also on the editorial on A24 - that here is where NYT will hold the line. If Israel invades Gaza, NYT promises to provide highly critical, and even negative, coverage.
In raising his skepticism about a ground incursion, Morris exaggerates the potential scenario to underscore its small likelihood of success. "Even if these goals were somehow achieved, renewed and indefinite Israeli rule over Gaza would prove unpalatable to all concerned," he writes. Yet, Israel has said repeatedly that it does not intend to re-administer (re-occupy) Gaza.
The final flaw in an otherwise good editorial is in the final paragraph wherein Morris desribes the IAF attack as a "violent reaction." Since describing a military strike as violent is rather obvious, the use of the word "violent" serves to subtly delegitimize the action. Calling the strike a "reaction" further undermines its legitimacy and contributes to the cliched cycle of violence theorem.
If Morris wanted to repent fully, he would have described the strike as preventative and defensive, not a "violent reaction."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Good post.
ReplyDelete* The definition of an editorial (Webster's) is: a newspaper or magazine article that gives the opinions of the editors or publishers.
Morris' is an "opinion piece".
* Good point about "repentance" by Morris, but you don't explain what that means to those unfamiliar with Morris' work. You should maybe provide a link.
* You correctly note it's a good piece, but I think it deserves more credit -- notwithstanding the good points you make about. It really conveys the profoundly difficult position in which Israel finds itself, and that is so rarely found in the NYT.