Depiction of Hebron Settlers' Goals Lacks Nuance

"Israeli Troops Evict Settlers in the West Bank"
A6, Tuesday 12/05/08
By Ethan Bronner

Reporting on the eviction of 200 Jewish settlers from a contested Hebron building, Ethan Bronner appropriately states that "much is at stake for both sides". He rightly points to the Israeli government wanting to "ease the construction of a Palestinian state in most of the West Bank". He then reports that "the settlers and their backers say they will do all in their power to prevent such a state."

Yes, but this is an incomplete point. Do these settlers wish for Israeli sovereignty over Hebron and the entire land? Hardly. Some of these settlers – which the Times neglects to mention, oppose the Jewish state and its authority. Their bottom line is to maintain, and grow, their presence in Hebron and throughout the land. Yet this goal is impossible even for the Jewish settlers who'd accept citizenship and live peacefully in the new Palestinian state, since this state is to be without Jews.

That a future Palestinians state needs to be cleansed of Jews is an unpleasant reality only implicit in Times reporting. Perhaps it would be too powerful a blemish on the opportunity for co-existence the paper projects onto the Palestinian Authority. Nevertheless, it would help explain the rationale of some settlers who look to "prevent" a Palestinian state.

Bronner notes Hebron is "second only to Jerusalem in its historic and religious significance to them." Yes, "to them," (the settlers) but also in Jewish history. There are non-settler, even secular, Israelis who see the importance of both Palestinians ruling themselves in a state of their own, and a Jewish presence in Hebron. To many, Hebron is not some random hilltop. To keep ignoring this important nuance is unbecoming a paper like the Times.

Bronner states that recently, "settlers had grown more rebellious." This is vague. To which of the nearly 300,000 West Bank settlers does Bronner refer? Would the Times state so generally that "Palestinians had grown more rebellious," without being more specific?

An editorial in Thursday's Jerusalem Post points out two "fundamental" issues lost amidst the news of this eviction. "First, the vast majority of Israelis living in Judea and Samaria are law-abiding patriots. Secondly, in any and all circumstances, Jews must be guaranteed access to the Cave of the Patriarchs."

It would be instructive for the Times, which has lauded the self-critical nature of the Israeli press, to turn to the Israeli press for these sorts of informed points it often overlooks.