- "Israel: Netanyahu Demands Recognition of Israel First"; World Briefing; A12; Friday, April 17
- "Palestinians Urge Envoy To Press Israel On Statehood"; By Isabel Kershner; A12
A rather hilarious formulation, worthy of The Onion, begins Isabel Kershner's article, "Palestinians Urge Envoy...":
"Palestinian leaders asked the American envoy to the Middle East on Friday to press Israel's new government to accept the notion of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict."
The statement is a recitation of clever Palestinian propaganda, as it adheres only slightly to actuality. PM Benjamin Netanyahu has expressed his support for the Road Map of 2003, which calls for a Palestinian state after the Palestinian Authority dismantles the terrorist infrastructure in areas under its administration. What Netanyahu is doing, in contrast, to his predecessor, Olmert, is insisting on fulfillment of this condition before calling for a Palestinian state.
To suggest, however, that Israel does not "accept the notion of a two-state solution" is a purposeful mischaracterization.
Contradictions between Palestinian propaganda and reality mar the article throughout. Netanyahu calls upon Palestinians to "recognize Israel as a Jewish state, a condition Palestinian negotiators have long refused to meet," writes Isabel Kershner.
Two paragraphs later, however, Saab Erekat, a senior Abbas aide, refers to Netanyahu's demand as "a stalling tactic." Here is the propaganda. The reader, at this point, is not certain what the actuality is. Has the Palestinian leadership accepted Israel as a Jewish state or not? Instead of a paragraph clarifying the matter, Kershner delves into Palestinians' rationalization for not recognizing Israel as a Jewish state, showing, in a backhanded way, that they have not.
"Palestinians contend that recognition of Israel's Jewish character would negate Palestinian refugees' demand for the right of return," she writes. Here, she could have also stated that this demand - "the right of return" - is the primary obstacle to an Israeli-Palestinian agreement.
Finally, IK repeats a charge of "activists" who battle with the IDF near the security barrier on a weekly basis. Tear gas canisters, they complain, are shot "directly into the crowd" in order to harm people. The ability of pro-Palestinian advocates to contort every action of Israel into a vicious attack is remarkable.
Posts
Strong analysis which demonstrates the Orwellian nature of NYT coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Israel is intransigent while the Palestinian Authority arms are wide open.
ReplyDeleteInteresting that IK provides an opportunity for the PA to explain its opposition to Israel as a Jewish state, but does have any comments from Israeli officials on the matter.
And as you note, the Times refuses to connect the dots, failing to explain the danger of the PA's refusal to negate the right of return. This refusal is emblematic of the PA's lack of desire to have its own state and instead focus on dismantling its neighbor.
Of the narrative falsehoods of the Times, this article touches on
ReplyDelete- Fatah's immoderacy
- The ONUS on Israel
It may even touch on lack of accountability for Palestinian extremism, as IK does not share with the readers that the PA's refusal to drop the right of return completely negates any sort of peace agreement.