Israel doesn’t accept criticism. In fact, whether from friend or foe, even mild criticism is viewed as an existential threat, prompting Israeli officials to unleash a torrent of abuse in an effort to silence and/or punish critics. And given new initiatives being rolled out in Israel and here is the US by Congress and some state legislatures, this effort to silence critics is endangering free speech and the search for peace.
This worrisome tendency was on display in recent weeks, as Israelis reacted with striking vehemence to remarks by United Nations Secretary General, Ban Ki Moon, and US Ambassador Daniel Shapiro.
In a speech to the Security Council, the secretary general decried the “unacceptable levels of violence and polarized public discourse” that has taken hold in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories. He condemned the Palestinian attacks on Israeli civilians and insisted that “the full force of law must be brought to bear on all of those committing crimes – with a system of justice applied equally for Israelis and Palestinians alike.”
But Ban went further, observing that,
Security measures alone will not stop the violence. They cannot address the profound sense of alienation and despair driving some Palestinians … Palestinian frustration is growing under the weight of a half century of occupation … [and] as oppressed peoples have demonstrated throughout the ages, it is human nature to react to occupation, which often serves as a potent incubator of hate and extremism.
The secretary general went on to express his concern with recent Israeli announcements to expand settlements in the occupied lands, urging them to stop the demolitions of Palestinian homes and confiscation of Palestinian lands; address the humanitarian situation in Gaza; and to take concrete steps to improve the daily lives of the Palestinian people – noting that all of these behaviors made more difficult the achievement of an Israeli-Palestinian peace.
Ban offered, as well, a series of steps the Palestinians needed to take to end their internal divisions, put their house in order and end incitement against Israel.
In an address to an Israeli think tank, Ambassador Shapiro echoed some of Ban’s concerns, noting,
We are concerned and perplexed by Israel’s strategy on settlements. This government and previous Israeli governments have repeatedly expressed their support for a negotiated two-state solution – a solution that would involve both mutual recognition and separation … Yet separation will become more and more difficult if Israel plans to continue to expand the footprint of settlements.
Shapiro also criticized the way Israel governs in the occupied lands. “Too much Israeli vigilantism in the West Bank goes on unchecked,” he said. “There is a lack of thorough investigations … at times it seems Israel has two standards of adherence to rule of law in the West Bank – one for Israelis and one for Palestinians.”
The Israeli reactions to both Ban and Shapiro were predictably harsh. Ban was accused of demonstrating a “double standard,” with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu saying that the United Nations had “lost its neutrality and moral force” and charging that Ban had given “tail wind to terror.” Netanyahu also called Shapiro’s observations “unacceptable.” The ambassador was accused of demonstrating a “double standard” and was crudely dismissed by a former Netanyahu aide as a “little Jew boy” courting favor.
All of this heightened hyper-reaction to criticism plays out against a backdrop of dangerous moves by Israel and its supporters in the US to not only defame and politically punish critics, but in some instances, to go further by making criticism illegal. In Israel, steps have been taken to punish teachers and artists, and the Knesset is considering a series of measures and the passage of a new law that target domestic critics in an effort to blacklist them as “traitors.”
Meanwhile, here in the US, the Department of State has issued guidelines on anti-Semitism which, in addition to including examples of displays of “hatred toward Jews … Jewish institutions and religious facilities” also goes down a dangerous path terming as anti-Semitic “applying double standards by requiring of [Israel] behavior not expected of any other democratic nation.” And several state governments have passed laws prohibiting efforts that call for boycotting, sanctioning and divesting from Israel because of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians.
The net effect of all these measures will be to silence critics and to deny them not only their right to speak out, but to peacefully organize and act to affect change in Israel’s policies in the occupied Palestinian lands.
There is a certain irony in all of this, because in their hysterical charge of a “double standard” – i.e. that Israel is being “singled out for criticism” – it is Israel’s supporters who are themselves guilty of a “double standard,” since, if they were to have their way, it is Israel which would be singled out as the only country that cannot be criticized.
In the end, Ban and Shapiro are right: Israel’s behavior is doing grave damage to the Palestinian people and to any hope for peace. And their critics are wrong. It is not a double standard to criticize Israel, and it is most certainly not anti-Semitic. In fact, the overreaction to criticism harms our political discourse, damages the effort to combat real anti-Semitism, and because it serves to enable destructive Israeli policies, it makes a just peace a near unattainable goal.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.