Text of NGO Monitor - New Statesman Q & A on B’tselem
In its 10 November 2008 edition, the New Statesman (UK) published an article by Samira Shackle on B’tselem “Filming Israel’s trouble spots” which included quotes from Gerald Steinberg of NGO Monitor. As these quotes were garbled and rewritten (particularly the final sentence), leading to some distortion and confusion, we are posting the texts of the email Q and A exchange. For more information on B’tselem, see http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article/b_tselem
Samira Shackle - New Statesman: Q- Why do you think the image of the West Bank given by the video campaign is inaccurate?
Gerald Steinberg - NGO Monitor: A- The public relations and media battle is one of the central arenas in the Arab-Israeli conflict, and the image of victimization is a core part of the Palestinian strategy. B’tselem’s video campaign has become an integral part of this battle, and there is no parallel to the video campaign which highlights Palestinian violence or provocations that lead to Israeli responses. If such videos existed, this would reduce the strength of the victimization myth. In the past month, for example, there were incidents in which a Palestinian threw acid in the eyes of an Israeli, who lost sight in at least one eye. No one filmed this, and most journalists and diplomats are entirely unaware of this even though the injury to the Israeli was far greater than to Palestinians in the confrontations shown in Btselem’s videos.
And in this same brief period, the record shows there have been many incidents in which Palestinians were caught attempting to smuggle explosives to be used in terror attacks. None of these were shown in any videos. Two wrongs do not make a right, but one wrong in isolation totally distorts the political and moral situation.
Btselem is primarily a political organization funded by Europeans, including governments and churches, and that seeks to force Israel to return to the 1949 armistice lines, this video campaign is another example in which human rights claims are exploited in a one-sided and distorted manner, thereby undermining these universal values.
Q - The Israeli authorities have brought charges in some cases due to video evidence. Would you view these incidents as isolated events, or as part of a more endemic problem of settler violence against Palestinians?
A- The decades-long Arab-Israeli conflict, and the accompanying incitement, terrorism and warfare, are far too complicated to be reduced to “settler violence”, and other such one-dimensional slogans. Since 1947, over 22,000 Israelis have been killed as a result of the refusal to accept the legitimacy of Jewish sovereignty — most before the third Arab-Israeli war in 1967 and the “occupation”. In the past decade, more than 1200 Israelis were killed in mass terror attacks, and thousands more were severely injured. Almost no Israeli family has not been scarred by this terror — yet your question erases this context, and the dominant dimension of ongoing Palestinian violence, which increased during the Oslo peace process.
In this context, and despite the Palestinian violence, most Israelis are embarrassed and are strongly opposed to illegal and immoral actions of individuals — even if these are deliberately provoked. The Israeli media and Knesset discussions feature many criticisms of the government and the army for failing to act more strongly against those who violate the law. This trend will continue to grow as the fringe ideologues and messianists on both the Right and the Left of the spectrum are increasingly isolated, and the Israeli political system coalesces around pragmatic centrist positions, including on issues of territorial compromise and withdrawal.
Q- Some people have argued that action taken after these charges was inadequate.
Do you think the authorities have acted fairly?
A - Although the provocation and Palestinian violence that led to this incident were not shown on the video, the IDF and the government moved too slowly in terms of addressing this and insuring that the other soldiers in similar situations do not allow themselves to be provoked into such unacceptable responses. Here again, it is morally important to prevent Palestinian violence from undermining Israel’s moral standards.
Q - Do you accept that settler and army victimisation of Palestinians in the West Bank occurs?
A - The myth of Palestinian victimization was a deliberate and successful strategy pursued by Arafat for decades — the combination of victimization and terror succeeded in putting the Palestinians on the international map. Indeed, the main problems in the West Bank, in Israel and in Gaza have always and continue to be Palestinian, Arab, and Islamic rejectionism — the unwillingness to accept the legitimacy of Jewish sovereign equality and territorial compromise in this land. This rejectionism is often encouraged and supported by theological and other forms of Christian antisemitism (often thinly disguised) as “antizionism” in Europe and expressed through the rhetoric of demonization (”apartheid”, “racism”, etc.) and in boycotts, sanctions, and similar campaigns (particularly in the UK) directly at Israel.
