11) The Media Coverage  

A) Internationally:

International news agencies covered the house demolition operations that took place in Rafah, and that coverage damaged the image of the Israeli government in the world.  Everyone realized that what the Israeli government has done was a collective punishment against civilian Palestinians, and by doing so Israel has once more violated basic international human rights norms.  The European Union directed very strong criticism to the Israeli army for carrying out such “unacceptable” operation against civilian population.  They said “such practices don’t help the chances for peace in the region”.  While Amnesty International protested against “this collective punishment”.  See al-Ayyam Newspaper on 15/1/2002.

Christina Galash, spokesperson of Ghavier Solana, the Coordinator of the European Foreign policy, said: “The European Union which includes 15 states, condemns the actions taken by the Israeli army in revenge for the attack carried out by two Hamas activists across the border with Israel.  Those actions won’t help stability in the region.”

Amr Mousa, the Secretary-General of the Arab League, criticized the absence of an international reaction on the crime of destroying Palestinian homes by the Israeli army.  He said: “This is a very serious action, and it doesn’t help the peace process at all.”

B) Locally:

The coverage of the house demolition operations in Rafah varied considerably in the Palestinian and Israeli media.  The Palestinian media did not cover the incident of the demolition of more than 70 houses on 10/1/2002 fully and strongly enough.  This fact left the International community to hear and take in the Israeli version of the event.

Talal Okal, is a Palestinian journalist who said on this matter: “The demolishing of such a huge number of houses should have received a very wide media campaign by the Palestinian media agencies, and by Palestinian politicians.  It was an excellent chance for the Palestinians to expose the ugly face of the Israeli occupation.  That savage operation was a human disaster that should have been uncovered to the whole world.”  Okal explained this failure on the part of the Palestinian media on the basis of the lack of professionalism in forming such suitable coverage of the event.  Okal added that the Palestinians dealt with those actions from the political side, but neglected the human side.  He said: “There is no clear Palestinian media policy.”  Mr. Ashraf al-‘Ajramy, from the Palestinian Ministry of Information, said: “The Palestinian media does not have outreach programs, we hardly have contacts abroad.  So our media is limited to the local boundaries.”  Therefore, we can simply say that the event itself was big enough to beat the Israeli media.

The Israeli media covered the events of the al-Aqsa Intifada from the Israeli point of view.  It was biased.  Israeli sources gave wrong figures of the victims and casualties.  Since the start of the Intifada, the Israeli authorities prevented Palestinian personalities from appearing on the Israeli radio and television.  The Israeli coverage gave the impression that the popular uprising is a military confrontation between two armies, but in fact it is not.  That implication provided a scapegoat to the heavy bombardment by the Israeli army of civilian communities in the Palestinian Territories.  The Israeli media didn’t reflect an objective analysis of the events, except Ha’aretz newspaper.  Many of the crimes that the Israeli soldiers committed in the Territories were simply overlooked by the Israeli media.

While the Israeli aggression against the Palestinian people continues, the Israeli media makes great efforts trying to find justifications for the actions that take place.  Until now, the Israeli media finds all kinds of explanations for the crimes that the Israeli army carries out, saying mainly that those actions are legitimate “to bring back calm and stability, and put an end to the Palestinian violence.”