I haven't had the time to report much on the local media over the past two weeks, but here's the media review for the week ending 31/03/06. Click Continue Reading to read it all.
Linda Grant’s Guardian piece in the Mail & Guardian, “We are tired of blood”, analysed the pre-election fervour – or lack of it – currently hitting the Israeli streets. The political landscape, she wrote, (is) “almost unrecognizable from last August, when the last Israeli settler was forcibly removed from Gaza”, and Amir Peretz, the Moroccan born head of Histadruth, was elected leader of the centre-left Labour party. Sharon’s formation of the centre-left Kadima party, Sharon’s massive stroke, the Hamas win and the reduction of the “once-mighty Likud … to a right-wing rump” were all indicative of the changes happening. The piece focused on Sderot, the nearest town in Israel to the Gaza Strip, “development town”, a depressing run–down place of high unemployment. But the sentiment in the town is not pro-Peretz, although his platform is to “eradicate child poverty in Israel”. Rather, the feeling was that Likud is the party of choice “to start a war to put an end to the Palestinian’s violence.” Israelis from Arab countries, she said, ‘have not historically shown a greater affinity with the Palestinians; and the million-strong Jewish immigrants from the FSU in the early 1990s are not swayed by Peretz’s economic policies – having lived 70 years under Soviet communism, a socialist as PM is not an attractive proposition.” The real story of this election, wrote Grant, is that “in the most contested vote, in the most controversial, most closely scrutinized and most argued-about country in the world, in the place that declares itself “the only democracy in the Middle East”, many have given up altogether on democracy.” The election, she concluded, should be about a question – why a society that enshrined Jewish values in its declaration of independence should have abandoned its poor, old and sick and leaving its Arab citizens bereft of any hope for the future.
Business Day’s Weekender had a comprehensive biographical piece on Ehud Olmert by Dan Williams – “The politician with no past” –a well-balanced and well-researched article which analysed the man, his rise to power and his policies and opinions. In the words of Gerald Steinberg of Bar Ilan University, “He (Olmert) comes in without any negatives, nor with any positives. There is a tendency to give him room for action. This is important.” With no military pedigree, Olmert seems so far to have been blessed with luck and good fortune in his political career.
In the Sunday Independent, the piece “Israelis, defeated by peace, gun for a high wall” by Don McIntyre adeptly analysed the forthcoming Israeli elections and the chances of a Kadima win. Kadima had lost ground but still commanded a majority and barring any crisis before the election, like a suicide bombing, would get in. The surprise newcomer, slated to win 9 sets, was the Yisrael Beitenu party of Russian party leader Avigdor Lieberman, appealing to the Russian Jewish electorate who account for more than 20 % of the general Israeli electorate. Netanyahu and his supporters were way short of the 61 majority he would need to form a government – but the “election is not over yet” and anything could happen. There was, he wrote, a ‘weariness with both continued conflict and the peace process, and a recognition of the demographic argument that a jewish state is incompatible with the occupation of Palestinian territory.”
The Sunday Times piece, “Ideology takes a back seat in Israeli poll”, from NYT News service, analysed the very unusual elections in Israel, detailing the crises including PM Sharon’s stroke and the concomitant uncertainty surrounding the parties and their policies. Olmert, at the age of 28, was the youngest Israeli ever to be elected to Parliament – this was in 1973. The piece stated that “what appears to be drawing Israelis to Kadima is its policy of unilateralism, the belief that Israel should decide its future borders and relations with the Palestinians on its own terms.”
Milton Shain in “Condemned by Hamas’ new covenant” in Business Day challenged any possible comparison between the actions of the ANC and Hamas, stating that “Hamas bears as little resemblance to the ANC as George Bush does to Mother Theresa.” Hamas, he said, “sees itself in a cosmological conflict with Israel and Jews worldwide, rooted within theological frames and informed by fantasy.” In its covenant, the “worst of classical anti-semitism is on display, imported from Europe and firmly in line with many of the conspiratorial ideas operating in the Arab world today.”
Business Day’s editorial after the elections, “The pull of peace”, regretted the fact that Kadima had not won an outright majority, saying that “Olmert will now have to rely on some of the small right-wing parties (to form a coalition) that could easily withdraw their support … That could lay the groundwork for a repeat of the tragedy that is Israeli politics – the ability of fringe, rightwing parties to call the shots in forming governments and blocking movements towards peace.” The editorial paid homage to Prime Minister Sharon, lauding his contribution to Israel which was his “ability to begin the process of gradual … withdrawal from occupied territories.” Kadima’s plan for a unilateral disengagement from the West Bank, it continued, “is the second best path, but the only practical one currently available.” The writer confirmed that negotiations could not take place because of Hamas’s refusal to recognize the state of Israel, saying that “it is not clear what Israel must give to Hamas to restart talks if it refuses to accept the existence of Israel.”
Brandon’s cartoon accompanying the editorial was a cynical take on the possibility of Israel’s having to move unilaterally – Hamas is not likely to budge an inch, but Brandon, like Zapiro, sees this conflict as one-sided and partial.
Zapiro’s pointed cartoon in the Star, “…But will it make a scrap of difference”, once again highlighted the cartoonist’s disdain of any moves towards peace by the Israelis. Funny, but there was no similar cartoon about Hamas when it won the elections – no satire around suicide bombers or Israelis murdered in cold blood. Or did I miss something? Somehow I don’t think so…
“Abbas is on his way” in the Citizen discussed the SA position on the Middle East – that our government sees the elections in the Palestinian areas and in Israel “offering a new opportunity for the leadership of both sides to take forward the Middle East peace process.” The paper also reported comprehensively on the election results in a piece entitled “Likud election disaster”.
“The distortions behind Hamas’s policy on Israel”, also by Professor Shain, appeared in the Cape Times 2 weeks ago, and included a criticism of Allister Sparks “who viewed all political conflicts through the prism of our own iniquitous past.” Hamas, he said, “has no desire for serious negotiation … Its spokesmen will present themselves as reasonable and observers like Sparks will delude themselves that Israel can do business with them, just as Chamberlain believed he could do something with Hitler.”
Harvey Morris, writing in the Financial Times in “Hamas set for clash with Abbas over $1,4 billion investment fund”, discussed the main crisis looming between the two over this 4-year investment in the Palestine Investment Fund, critical now because foreign donors were threatening to cut funds to the terrorist body. The fund was established under pressure from foreign donors to move money made during Arafat’s rule to the financial head of the PA; now that Hamas has won, it appears that Abbas wants to control the fund. The new government is not happy with that, and the US sees the fund as a source of financing the PA for 4-5 months while they ponder how to avoid an economic collapse in the PA.
Virginia Tilley was interviewed more than once on SABC 3 for her “expert opinion” on the Middle East. She reiterated her usual stance - that the poor Palestinians had suffered greatly against the plundering Israelis and there were no negotiations taking place because the Israelis could never find a partner for peace. Her assessment that Olmert’s decision to declare unilateral borders failed to include the fact that Hamas refused to recognize Israel or disarm its terrorist wing. Tilley is definitely the darling of the media when it comes to the Middle East. Obviously her political stance (one state solution) is the one that appeals to them the most.
/there is no worse zionist than the zionist that pretends to care about others. obviously u never actually went to a check point yourself and witnessed first hand the gross barabarism of your people.
Posted by: just a caring individual | April 06, 2006 at 15:21