Tel-Aviv University

International Program in Conflict Resolution and

Mediation

Final assignment

Israel Palestinian conflict

How was the Ethos of conflict framed in Israeli

Newspapers during the Kerry Negotiations?

Tel Aviv University, Fall 2014

By: Trude Rebecha Levare

Student number: 998367718

From the Ministry of Strategic Affairs “Incitement and

Culture of Peace Index” 2014

1

Abstract

In this article I argue that the Ethos of conflict most

probably should be present in the medias during the Kerry

Negotiations. In looking at the two biggest newspapers in

Israel in the period from 20. December 2013 to 15.

January 2014 I find that that Parts of the Ethos:

Justness of own goals, beliefs about peace, beliefs about

security and victimization was expressed and most

probably had an effect on the Israeli opinions beliefs

about the peace deal.

The functioning of the Ethos of conflict

As a result of the start of the Israeli-Arab conflict in

1948 the Israeli society developed a new set of societal

beliefs about one self and the adversary and assimilated

it with beliefs form their tradition and history. This

enabled them to cope with the long lasting conflictual

situation. For instance self-victimization and positive

in-group image where part of a long Jewish tradition,

while other beliefs were forged in the course of the

conflict and adapted to the emerging reality in Israel

(Bar-Tal and Teichman 2005: 116).

According to Bar-Tal (1998: 41) intractable conflicts

like the Israeli Palestinian conflict are central,

2

protracted, violent, total, irreconcilable, zero-sum in

nature and the parties develop an interest in the

conflicts continuation. In this situation the conflict

has become a central unifying factor of the society in

with “frozen” beliefs regarding; the justice of ones

goals (the right of the Land of Israel), security

concerns (treats and dangers), delegitimization (and

dehumanization of the adversary), positive collective

self image, sense of victimization (from history and the

conflict), perceived need for unity, patriotism, and pace

as a goal (believe that oneself wants peace and the

adversary not). These beliefs are so central to the

society that they affect all members and therefore can be

applied to the general public as well as the leadership

and even the press. A circular process is at work, in

which the media both are influenced by the societal

process and, in turn, influence and help it (Sharvit and

Bar-Tal (n.d): 34).

Daniel-Bar Tal shows how these societal beliefs; also

called “the ethos of conflict” constitutes a conflicting

ideology. In a process model Bar-Tal & Halperin (2011:

3

217-240) integrates and elaborate the proses and how it

works (figure below).

The model explains how socio-psychological barriers;

fuel, maintain and self-reinforce a conflict and hinder

its resolution. According to the model the two content

related clusters of beliefs (general world-views and

ideological societal beliefs), together with the freezing

factors provide a prism through witch individuals

perceive and interpret the reality of the conflict (Bar-

Tal & Halperin 2011: 223).

The content of these conflict supporting beliefs could

easily be changed, it if was not for the essence of their

functioning as barriers is in their freezing, by

structural, motivational and emotional factors. The

freezing effects lies in that the societal beliefs

creates a emotional glue for the society and fulfill

basic human needs for identity, security, recognition and

self-esteem. The society is further motivated to keep

them because it help them coping with the stress of the

conflict and justifying their acts, like retaliation or

revenge, towards the enemy. But the emotions of distrust,

hate and fear that the societal beliefs creates also

directly affect the information processing, and create a

selective, biased and distorted information processing,

that strengthens the existing beliefs and hinders new

information. This prevents the entertaining of ideas that

suggest compromises, which are necessary for the peaceful

resolution of the conflict. Peaceful gestures initiated

4

by the adversary, new information about the humanness of

the rival, his suffering or one’s own wrongdoing and

fault, may not receive proper attention and

consideration. As a result, basic disagreements are

preserved and reinforced and the societies are not

psychologically ready for peace and reconciliation.

All together the ethos of conflict creates and ideology

that insist on the conflicts continuation, its

development and new violent outbreaks, and mobilize

society members to actively participate in this. Further

all the blame for the outbreak and its continuation is

put on the rival and delegitimize him, while the self-

image is glorified as it present the in-group as being

the sole victim of the conflict (Bar-Tal & Halperin 2011:

220). The ethos of conflict may play an important role in

coping with the situation, but it also constitute and

obstacle to peace when the societies involve decide to

open a new chapter in their relations (Sharvit and Bar-

Tal (n.d):1).

Background: The content of eighth themes of the ethos and

its presence in Israeli media.

Bar-Tal 1998: 22-50 identified eight themes of societal

beliefs comprising the Ethos of conflict: (1) societal

beliefs about the justness of one’s own goals, (2)

societal beliefs about security, (3) societal beliefs of

positive collective self image, (4) societal beliefs of

5

one’s own victimization, (5) societal beliefs of

delegitimizing the opponent, (6) societal beliefs of

patriotism, (7) societal beliefs of unity, and (8)

societal beliefs of peace. According to Sharvit and Bar-

Tal ((n.d): 3-5) and Bar-Tal and Teichman (2005: 113-122)

the content of the eight teems of ethos developed during

the conflict can be summed up as follows:

Societal beliefs about the justness of one’s own goals

deal with reasons, explanations, legitimization and

justifications of the Israeli societies own goals, which

are on the agenda in the conflict. Inspired by the

ideology of Zionism and history this is above all the

right of the Jewish people to settle in the Land of

Israel and establish a state therein, but also the

justness of the Jewish right to resettle in Judea and

Samaria.

Beliefs about peace also play a central role in the

Israeli society. The beliefs have been hat the Jews are a

peace loving people and in spite of the Jews whish for

peace, the Arabs have forced Israel to fight over and

over again. Peace has been conceived of as a dream, a

prayer, and believed to be utopian an idyllic images,

which probably could not be realized in the foreseeable

future. While the Jews where ready to negotiate an

achieve peace, the Arabs rejecting any peaceful

resolution of the conflict an even refusing to have

direct contact with Jews, were seen as the obstacle to

progress. Such beliefs inspire hope and optimism,

6

strengthen positive self-image, and contribute to an

emphatic self-presentation to the outside world.

Societal beliefs concerning security stemmed from the

feeling of most Israelis that the security of the state

of Israel and its Jewish citizens has been under constant

threat. A sense of security was he basic Zionist reason

to return to Israel and establish a Jewish state, and has

become the most central need and value of the society

(Bar-Tal and Teichman 2005: 118). It meant taking

significant military action, even if it means harming

innocents on the opposing side. Security considerations

became decisive in the formulation of Israeli policy and

major government decision. Great military strength, the

duty and right to defend it self, including preventing

possible Arab attacks and not to relay on foreign powers

is the most important assess in maintaining security

(Bar-Tal and Teichman 2005: 119)

The Israeli society’s sense of victimization is a

perception that is deeply rooted in Jewish history. The

Jews viewed themselves as a nation persecuted by a

hostile world, and in Israel this led to the development

of a “siege mentality”. Events connected with the Jewish-

Arab conflict, and acts of terrorism, contributed to the

further development of a victimized self-perception, and

were viewed as the direct continuation of the persecution

of the Jewish people. Accordingly, all of Israel’s

military activities were perceived as acts of self-

7

defense and Palestinian acts as unjust an unfair against

the Jews.

One of the bitterest expressions of the Jewish-Arab

conflict is the mutual delegitimization. On the Israeli

side extreme negative traits rooted in Arab mentality and

culture are attributed to Arabs. Arabs are further

portrayed as being bent on destroying and harm Israel,

the Jewish people and damage is as much as possible.

According to Bar-Tal and Teichman (2005: 121) the

negative attributes to Arabs have included the Arabs

being, primitive, uncivilized, savage, backwards murders,

bloodthirsty mob, treacherous, cowardly, cruel, wicked

and contributing through the conflicts continuation.

Finally the term Arabs is also used to negate the very

existence and legitimization of the term Palestinian.

Contrasting with the highly negative image of the Arabs

is beliefs of a positive self-image of the Jews. The

positive stereotypes of Jews included tenacious,

hardworking, courageous, modern and intelligent as well

as moral and humane. Jews where further industrious,

determined, smart, and intelligent, and were perceived in

their own eyes as a “light unto the nations” and as a

chosen people. Jewish culture and the Jewish religion

where viewed as the cradle of civilization and as

representing a supreme morality, providing the Jews with

a feeling of self-worth.

Over the years, the conflict demanded of the Israelis

great willingness for investment and self-sacrifice.

8

Therefore, beliefs emphasizing the importance of

patriotism and loyalty to the homeland developed in the

Israeli society. The beliefs relating to patriotism

called for commitment to the homeland and even

willingness to sacrifice one’s life in the violent

confrontation against the Arabs.

The beliefs relating to unity in the Israeli society

stems from the states early years where a sense of

partnership was necessary in the light of the different

origins of the new immigrants. Consequently an emphasis

was placed on heritage, religion, language, and a common

history. Against the background of the Jewish-Arab

conflict, national unity was perceived as a necessary

condition for victory. “Unity was also reinforced by

setting lines of agreement in form of a “consensus”, and

sanctions where applied to those who expressed opinions

or exhibited behavior that did not fit in with the

accepted consensus “Smooha, 1978)”(Sharvit and Bar-Tal

(n.d): 5 and Bar-Tal and Teichman 2005:119).

The Israeli media as an obstacle to peace, reinforcing a

conflicting ideology

The mass media is one of the major instruments of a

social system and reflects the society’s beliefs,

assumptions and values. Sharvit and Bar-Tal ((n.d): 6)

finds the Israeli media as part of a society involved in

intractable conflict has been influenced but the ethos of

conflict and transmitted messages in its spirit, media

9

also helped shape the ethos of conflict, as a cardinal

societal channel for transmitting information to society

members. There are several factors that add to the

explanation of this.

First, the coverage of violent conflict when the

journalist is a member of one of the conflicting parties

invokes a professional dilemma: The journalists’

traditional paradigm – objectivity and neutrality – is

challenged and confronted by the journalists’ patriotic

sentiment and their ethnic and cultural belonging. But

also there has ben a change in the journalistic norm,

where the value of objectivity has weakened and more

emphasis on drama, authenticity and live action, so that

reporting from the field can be patriotic (recall

embedment) or critical (showing the suffering of the

enemy side), all in service of doing drama and

authenticity (Liebes and Kampf 2009: 436). At one hand

the professional community calls upon the journalist to

tell a story that will be, or appear to be, factual,

objective and balanced. These values are still at the

core of the journalistic profession’s ideology, but

become meaningless as acknowledging emotional involvement

– including feeling fro the suffering on both sides of a

conflict – stand ins contrast to objectivity. The genre

of objectivity has become weaker and the journalist is

free to use more of a quasi-news genres calling upon the

emotional detentions, such as human interest stories, in-

depth interviews, articles in weekend supplement, talk

10

show and so on (Liebes and Kampf 2009: 436). In additions

to this, the national-cultural community calls upon the

journalist to take part in the conflict, to be its

representative and its weapon, in the battle of images

and soundbites. In fact, journalists are members of two

communities simultaneously: the professional community

and the national one. Each community’s ideology often

contradicts the other; one might say that the journalist

is caught between Nation and profession (Zandberg and

Neiger 2005:131). The journalists are torn between two

contradicting desires: the professional desire for

objectivity and the national desire for solidary

(Zandberg and Neiger 2005: 131). The authors (ibid)

argues that journalist faced with a sudden violent event

that are perceived as threatening to the very existence

of the state and society, their belonging to the national

community overpowers their membership to the professional

one, before they reframe end return to a more

professional coverage.

In the Israeli society, in contrast to other societies,

the situation of conflict and threat to national security

is not a temporary one which ends with a return to

“normal” life and with the media’s reversion to operating

freely according to the accepted journalistic norms in

routine times. The Israeli society has been caught up in

a conflict, which threatens its security for decades,

and, this affects the functioning of the media in Israel

in periods of “emergency” and “routine” periods alike

11

(Sharvit and Bar-Tal (n.d))

Second the Israeli media has a history of serving as a

patriotic instrument for the state and in its early years

(until the 70) they where under influence and supervision

by the political leadership, and accepted this and

cooperated with it (Bar-Tal and Teichman 2006:141). In a

society that is involved in an intractable conflict and

has developed an ethos of conflict the media conveys

messages reflecting beliefs, which constitute the ethos

and refrains from conveying messages contradicting those

beliefs (Sharvit and Bar-Tal (nd):2). Societies that are

engaged in an intractable conflict tend to enlist the

media in the societal effort of coping with the conflict

(ibid). According to Sharvit and Bar-Tal (n.d: 6-7)

mechanism like the editors comity, military sensor chip,

accreditation of military correspondents, inspection and

regulation of the electronic media by political elements

created a situation where media was not free. For

instance the Israeli medias was forbidden to interview

any of the Palestinians leader until the recognition with

the Oslo process in 1993, and any interview with someone

from the territories had to be approved by the director

of broadcasting authority (Bar-Tal and Teichman 2005:

144) In addition to this the media themselves preferred

government sources and establishment positions, serving

in mobilizing and education the public in maintaining

morale, a role the media accepted willingly. From 1970-

1990 a change in the ethos of conflict, together with a

12

shift in the ownership in media from political to

commercial and the right wing Likud coming to power in

1977, shifted the situation. All Israelis no longer

shared the perceptions of the ethos of conflict, there

was not consensus over confrontations with the Arab world

and the media no longer partook in the government’s war

efforts but reported critical to the security forces

(Sharvit and Bar-Tal (n.d): 7-8). But despite the Israeli

media becoming an important role as an instrument for the

Oslo peace process, they continued to prefer official

positions, especially in situation of crisis and as a

result continued to convey a ethos of conflict (Sharvit

and Bar-Tal (n.d): 9). Because a major role of an ethos

of conflict is to assist the society in coping with the

conflict, it is not surprising that violent events –

which are perceived as proof – generate greater adherence

to the ethos of conflict. The media, being part of the

Israeli society, is also influenced by these possesses,

reflects them and reinforces them (Sharvit and Bar-Tal

(n.d):10).

However the transition form an intractable conflict to a

peace process requires the recruitment of the media to

transmit new messages, which can contribute to creating a

social atmosphere supportive of political and military

moves aimed at resolving the conflict by peaceful means

(Sharvit and Bar-Tal (n.d):5). Medias role in creating

and contributing to this new atmosphere is considerable

and important for the peace to be able to take place. For

13

example, the media can convey positive information about

the past enemies, describe their humanity, and reinforce

the peace messages and present new information to shed

light on the high price exacted by the conflict and the

advantages by peace. The Israeli public are extensive

consumer of mass media information about the conflict and

information about the conflict and rival is accepted

unquestionably, without any validation or critical

assessment, and finally the information about security

and conflict is often very emotional involving, often

arousing negative emotions (Bar-Tal and Teichman 2005:

142-143)

According to Sharvit and Bar-Tal (n.d) the ethos of

conflict appeared in the Israeli media in many periods,

in different forms, in the context of different concrete

issues, and at varying levels of dominance. In contrast,

messages opposed to this ethos appeared with high

frequency in certain periods (such as in the 1990s) but

appeared rarely in other periods (such as in the state’s

early years). It can be assumed, then, that the ethos of

conflict will continue to be given expression in the

Israeli media in the future as well. According to US

special Envoy and leader of The Kerry mediations, Martin

Indyk, the negotiations where made difficult by public

opinion on both sides, and that the two societies where

physically intertwined and psychologically separated,

that neither side believed the other one wanted peace or

seemed to understand the concerns on the other. (Indyk

14

2014). In this occasion I want to look at whether or not

the Ethos of conflict was present in Israeli media during

the Kerry Negotiation and could have contributed to the

failure of the peace talks or at least had an impact on

public opinion that would make the Israelis opinion ready

for peace.

Selection and Method

I have chosen to look at articles in Israeli media in the

period from 20 of December 2013 to 14 of January 2014. In

this period there was increase in terror attacks against

Israeli citizens, a release of Palestinian prisoners

(terrorists), the peace process was in a stalemate due to

disagreements about the security-deal and Netanyahu had

problems holding his coalition together. Given increased

terror, security concerns and release of terrorists it is

interesting to see if the ethos of conflict is present in

the media at a time and whether messages supporting the

peace talks have room.

I chose the English versions of two biggest daily

newspapers in Israel, as they probably have the most

impact on pubic opinion and are assumed to most probably

mirror public opinion. The Israeli HaYom’s online daily

newsletter http://www.israelhayom.com (hereafter

Israelihayom) contains of a translated selection of

articles from the daily edition and has from around 20 to

30 daily articles included commentaries. It is further

considered to be a right wing, Netanyahu supporting

15

paper, which survives not because of its commercial

revenues but contributions. The Yedioth Ahronot is Israel

biggest commercial daily subscription based Newspaper and

its online English version is called

http://www.ynetnews.com (hereafter Ynetnews) and is

deemed a centrist left oriented publication. After having

printed relevant articles form the period from both

publications, in all a 102 articles, I found that the two

publications had about the same amount of coverage of the

conflict, 52 articles in the Israelhayom and 50 articles

from the Ynetnews. Even if some articles could be placed

in several categories, sorted into main categories

resembling the Ethos of conflict I found that the

publications had covered the issues about evenly. In the

category Justness of own goals and believes about peace:

Israelhayom 23 and Ynetnews 16 articles. Security:

Israelhayom 4 and Ynetnews 9. The category Victimization,

terror and delegitimization: Israelhayom 20, Ynetnews 19.

Self-image: Israelhayom 4 and Ynetnews 4. Security and

Patriotism: Ynetnews 2 and Israelhayom 1.

Containment of analysis

Since I don’t know Hebrew I had to choose the online

version and my analysis therefore do not include where in

the paper, in what section a message is placed or how the

headlines play together with pictures and other articles.

Still the Israelhayom was a newsletter and the editorial

choices in the selection of articles that went into the

16

Newsletter, what section they where placed in and what

placement they had gotten (that to a certain extent

resembles that of a newspaper page) and was therefore

fruitful. What they choose to cover, what the headlines

focus on and the related commentary opinions told a

story. Unfortunately the newsletter had a sparingly use

pictures and subtitles; also the choices of sources, the

lack of alternative views together with commentaries,

conveyed a message. As for Ynetnews that is an online

publication the editorial choices in the context of

placement together with other articles, and commentators,

partly vanished. But I could still look at the choice of

headlines and how the subject where covered. Also in this

publication the articles were more web-friendly in the

way that the articles in themselves facilitate vertical

reading, with the use of subtitles, pictures and links,

witch made the textual analysis richer.

In analyzing I have looked at what is covered, in what

way is it covered, what souses is used (official,

alternative, opposing or enemy sources) and if other

views or opinions are presented and how pictures play

into the message. I am interested to se if the coverage

is explanatory, balanced and give the reader the full

picture.

I have also looed at if the establishment position

presented as factual and if the criticisms is presented

as opinion or not at all. Do the headlines reflect the

17

official position even if the body contains alternative

positions?

Of special interest is use of headlines, related comments

and if there is compliance between the headline and the

body. Most people do not even read the whole article and

are only exposed to the headlines, pictures, subtitles

together with headlines of related commentaries. And even

for the readers that read the article the headlines

creates a framework for understanding the article.

Beliefs of Justness of own goals and Beliefs about peace

When Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry in august

2013 launched their new mediation attempt it was met with

low expectations. Both the populations and the

commentators in the medias had low expectations if the

peace talks and if it could achieve anything. It was

suggested the parties’ motives to accept the mediation

might have been more as a face-saving device to protect

their domestic and international reputation than to

making major concession.

In covering the process of the peace talks and its

development the Ynetnews is in clear support of the peace

talks. They rally for the peace talks through posting

positive articles headlines about the foundation laid

through secret talks, hope for peace and the process. In

addition positive background articles about the solidity

of peace-talks actors in like Kerry, General John Allen

and Obama are presented to create trust in the talks.

18

Negative criticism of the talks is met with articles that

present an alternative view of hope, and articles that

warn of the threats and negative effects to Israel if an

agreement is not reached, like economical sanctions,

However the articles also support, explain, and provide

good reasons for Israeli goals and demands that can be a

hindrance to the peace talks, like the demand for

recognition and the settlement policy, while the reason

for the breakdown of the negotiation is ascribed to the

Palestinians. Together the articles sends a message that

Israel doing everything for peace and a reliable peace

partner that meets its obligations inclding releasing

terrorist, while the palestinian on their side increase

terror attacs, and are not a partner for peace as the

refuse to recognize Israel or stop the terror. While

Yaalon says Israel has no partner for peace, Libermann

sees No a chanse for a deal with the palestinaians, but

support a continued dialouge.

In serving to justify or legitimate israeli actions the

ynetnews have applied what can best be described as a

editorial prinsiple of retalitation. Headlines have a

strong tendency to explain Israeli military actions as a

act of retaliation or respons to Palestinians attac.

Exsamples of the recipie is: “IAF striges Gaza Strip,

following rocet fier at Israel” and “Mortar shells fiered

from Gaza into Israel, IAF responds”.

19

In an article1 the coverage of an insident is espesially

problematic. In the ingress two unrelated insidents (a

stabbing and a shooting) are given a causal realtionship,

like it was a act of retaliation: “Houers after policeman

is stabbed in the back, IDF shoot Palestinian attmpting

to place explosive along Gaza border fence”. You get the

impression that these incidents are related or at least

at the same place, but the policemann was stabbed in

Jeruslam. Later in the same article it is confirmed that

the Arabs said now to the peace-deal at the table; “The

group (Arab Leuage) also recjected proposed security

arrangement offered by the US in a bid to adress Israels

security conserns”, but the article is failing to mention

that Israel also rejects the security proposal. It looks

like the report is creativly forced into an editorial

line that serves to justify and legitimize Israeli goals.

The Israelhayom in contrary to the Ynetnew clearly

negative to the peas-talks and have no hope for or

believe in any peace agreement, fruther the message is

that Iran is the real issue of consern. Still headlines

and content focus much more on that there is no deal in

sight, that the palestinians are not a serious partner

for peace and have no intetions of signing any agrement.

The message is that Israel wants peace, but that security

is more important than an agreement. No agreement must be

signed unless it meets all Israeli legitimate goals and

1 Ynetnews 24.12. 2013. Gaza: “Palestinian wounde by IDF”

20

demands. Even then is should be carefulle evaluated if

Israel should sign. In the editorial commentaries that

are linked to the top storys and news storys Israeli

goals are heavily justified and any peace-deal is argued

against.

Even if Israels demand to be reconiced as a Jewish state

is met, a peace deal might be dangerous for Israel: “What

if Abbas says the macgic words?” lamets David M. Weinberg

in his editorial comments2 : “Then Israel is expected to

bow to the

Clinton/Obama/Kerry/Abbas parameters for Israeli

withdrawal? Then Israels security requierments and

historic rights in Judea and Samaric vanish into think

air?” In other words the paper is conserned about the

dynamic that Natanyahu has set in place. In a commentary3

Dr. Haim Shine warns: “The illusion of peace is as

dangerous at war”.

In contrary to the Ynetnew the Israelhayom does not seem

to be conserned that the Palestinians is to blame, even

if they are the true reason for the breakdowns since for

Israel it is legitimate to not want a peace deal. Ruthie

Blum in a editorial comment4 says; “Abbas and his henchmen

have no interest in reaching an agreement with Israel,

certainly not one that involves Palesinian guarantees of

Israeli security. This is why they have not budgeded one

iota on the issue of Israeli military presence - however 2 Israelhayom 12. 20.13 “Then Israel is expected to bow to the Clinton says the magic words?3 Israelhayom 12.31.13. Seeing is believing4 Israelhayom 12.27.13. Housing Illusions

21

limited - in any sensitive areas, such as the Jordan

Vally. Indeed, their goal is not ot live side by side

with Israel, but to precipitate ist demise”.

The Isralihayom is especially strong on covering the

security aspects of the Jordan Vally and even stronger on

on reporting from Likuds internal affairs. An imprtant

point of covering is the internal affairs of Likud and

the conclusion that this will block any agreement. In

adittion the Israeli PM stategies are unvailed as a

cunning way to ensuring there is no deal. In an article5

where the Israelhayom goes in dept about the coalition

problems consering the security deal they reveal that

Netanyahus line is one wherby Arabs should be the ones to

recject Kerrys document. In a commentar Elliot Abrahams6,

gives us the reson: “Abbas will not agner Kerry by saying

“no”. He will take it to the Arab League and have the

Arab League say no, and then he can tell Kerry “my hands

are tied”. A unnamed sourse tells the Israelhayom 7 that

Netanyahus government is cooperating with the Americans

with the clear knowledge that the Arab side will not

accept the agreement an utlimatley Israel will not be

requierd to make conessions or evacuate settlements.

Further the Israelhayom drops small pieces of

information, that the Netanyahus choise of the “painfull”

prisoner release opposed to settelment freeze, migth be a

genious tactick to show both publics how painfull the 5 Israelhayom 01.03.14. A storm is brewing6 Israelhayom 12. 24.13. No closer to peace7 Israelhayom 01.09.14. Kerrys plan ofr Jordan Vally withdreawal is rediculous

22

peace is going to be, and by this move both opinions in

oppositon to a deal. And the opposition is catching up.

In an article8 in Ynetnews Fromer shin Bet Chief Yval

Diskin says that “the move to free Palestinian prisoners

is a disgusting and cynical move that was born out of a

desire to aviod feezing settelment construction.” In this

way Netanyahu paves his path out of the negotiations he

is pressured to partake in. The Israelhayom seem to

support this tactics but in a commetary9 David M. Wienberg

voices conserns that the dynamics of a possible “ultimate

palestinian consession” will requier a “ultimate Israeli

consession”.

From the coverage we see that even if peace has a place

and Israel wants peace, the beliefs about justness of

owns goals and that the enemy do not want peace, takes

the coverage to a place that argues against the peace-

prosess and a solution.

Belifs about security

In the end of 2013 Israel is experiencing a wawe of

terror. The IDF reports 167 insidents in december, an

increase from 82 in july10. In all there where 1,271

terror attacks in Israel in 2013, more than a doubling

from the year before.

8 Ynetnews 12.04.13. Ex-Shin bet head: Lack of peace bigger threat than Iran9 Israelhayom 12.20.13. What if Israel says the magic words?10 Ynetnews 12.25.13. Wave of Palestinian attacks evokes Intifada debate

23

Both Ynetnew the Israelhayom connects between the talks,

prisoner relaeas and increased terror in several

articles. The messages is that the peace talks leads to

an increase in terror and that Israel have the right to

defend itself. Defending Israel includes keeping the

Jordan Valley and that Israel cannot afford to rely on

other powers for security. In linking the increased

terror to the ongoing negotiations and even to the

prisoner release, Ynetnews11 reports: “source (not named)

tells that resent terror attack are being led by released

prisoners”.

The constant reporting of terror attacks and changes in

the security situation, is also underscored in a

newsletter by the Israelhayom of headlines are put

together in such a way that is sends a message that the

Americans have different standards for Jews and their own

citizens, witch can serve to the argument on not relying

on others powers 12 “ Palestinian Prisoners to be released

despite recent terror attacks ". Two headlines down we

suprisingly find that 13 “Us officials in Israel ordered

to avoid public transportation”, because of the terror

attacs.

The situation of increased terror also argues for Israeli

security goals. In an article14 Ron Ben-Yishai explain, 11 Ynetnews 12.22.13. Without prior warning, west bank terror spills into Israel12 Ynetnews 12.23.13. Palestinian Prisoners to be released despite recent terror attacks.13 Ynetnews 12.25.13. US official in Israel ordered to avoid public transportation.14 Ynetnews 12.05.13. US plan for Israel’s safety

24

legitimate and puts Israel security above all other

issues. He writes: “Israel, and rightfully so, is

unprepared to discuss the borders, water issue and land

exchange or other subjects before an agreement on the

security issue”, the article further concludes that it is

“reasonable to assume that the American proposal will not

satisfy Netanyahu and his ministers”, and finally asks

the questions of Jordan or even the US can be trusted in

charge of Israeli security. To sum up the article says

that the US, Jordan or International organizations

neither can secure nor be trusted to secure Israel, and

that Palestinian sovereignty is impossible for a number

of security threats and that Israel’s need certain

territory for security reasons.

Trough several articles in the period both newspapers

creates and editorial frame for explaining that security

and the right to defend the Jewish state, provide Israel

with right for a continued significant military actions

like occupation or annexation (especially the Jordan

Valley). The Jordan Valley must remain under Israel

control forever, Israel needs the valley and is

existential to Israel, says sources to ynetnew.com

without the paper offering alternative opinions15. However

Ynetnews unlike Israelhayom in two articles present an

alternative opinion on the subject16 “the minister of

justice say that those that declaring Israel’s need to 15 Ynetnews 01.11.14. Jordan Valley settlements hurt by boycott campaign16 Ynetnews 12.30.13. Livni: We’re living in bubble, disconnected from world

25

annex the West Bank are turning Israel into a lone

settlement in the world” and 17 “the finance minister is

saying that the State of Israel should not control

another people, its is against Jewish morality”. However

it is not surprising considering the all over coverage of

the meaning of the Jordan Valley and security concerns

that a Poll18 in January shows that “almost 70% of the

Israelis saying no to forfeiting the Jordan Valley

security presence in a peace deal”.

Security and retaliation. The two mediaas both write negatively

about annoncement of the new tenders righ after the

prisoners release. The Ynetnews critisise it on the basis

that is it becomes the reason for the berakdown of the

negotiations foregners will blame israel. In an article

in the Israelhayom a soruse called it a land mind in the

negoatiations and only negative sourses are used to shed

light on this. Hoewer even if not mentioned by any of the

papers this action fits well with Netanyahus proclaimed

policy of retaliation. The settelment annoncment can be

understood as a retaliation for the pain inflicted on the

Israelis by the prisoners release. It seems to me that

the prinsiple of retaliation however is entrenced also in

the medias, that it is hardly seen or questioned but

rather understood as some kind of universal principle of

fariness and even guides editorial choises. An exampel 17 Ynetnews 12.08.13. Lapid: Peace talks may lead to coalition realignment18 Israelhayom 01.10.14. Poll: 53,3% mistrust Kerry as impartial peace talks mediator.

26

from headines shows the recipie for this editorial

prinsipcle: “IAF striges Gaza Strip, following rocet fier

at Israel” and “Mortar shells fiered from Gaza into

Israel, IAF responds”. The message is that Israel did not

want to shoot, but have the moral right and duty to

defend itself – it was in self defence. Among the about

120 articles I read I could not find any examples of

senarios where Israel acted out anything but self

defence, but even if it is the whole truth newspapers

might adress the a dilemma around a policy of

retalitation in self-defence. But when it comes to a

retaliation respons to a Gaza border incident19, Ynetnews

responds critical to government retaliation tactics that

harms innocents: “the order (to close borders) was given

in a bid to punish the Hamas government in Gaza, but its

real victims are Gazas farmers and exproters, that where

planning a large shipment of strawberries and flowers to

the Europan market.”

Victimization

We are the victims, they wont leave us in peace and they

murder us just because we are Jews, laments sources20. In

the reports of terror attacks we find numerous accounts

of detailed and emotional descriptions from Jews

experiencing attacks21. A father tells about his thoughts

as he finds his 9-year-old daughter bloody after having 19 Ynetnews 12.25.13. Israel Closes Gaza crossing to punish Hamas, but farmers pay price.20 Israelhayom 12.26.13. After prisoner release, government vows to build.

27

been stabbed: “I realized I was living the nightmare of

everyone living here. A terrorist in the house, who has

come to kill the whole family”.

Reports of stoning of both an actress, minister and even

a baby in a car, 3 busses stoned and one tried bombed,

together with numerous report of stabbings, both by

children (a 16 year old Palestinian girl tries to stab a

solider at the Nablus gate) and towards children

(stabbing of a 9 years old Jewish girl in a settlement)

sends a message that it can happen to anyone, anywhere at

any time.

The Israelhayom22 present a report that says that

Palestinian incitement has increased during the

negotiations. According to the report the use of Nazi

elements has increased, including using Adolf Hitler.

Abbas sends message that says: “Israel has no right to

exist, certainly not as the Jewish nation. Israel’s

disappearance is inevitable and will happen soon. The

Jews are subhuman creatures and should be treated

appropriately. All forms of conflict, including

terrorism, are legitimate”. The report underpins Israel’s

increasing demand of recognition as a Jewish state, as

the only way they will be assured that an agreement will

end the long-running conflict. But in linking

Palestinians incitement to Hitler it also makes it a

direct continuation of the Holocaust, with the

21 Israelhayom 01.12.14. Security forces arrest Palestinian for stabbing Psagot 9-year-old22 Israelhayom 01.06.14. PA incitement continues: “Jews are subhuman”

28

Palestinians as the new Nazis. It is a very strong

message of victimization. And reports of Hamas praising a

buss bombing and the celebration of the release of

terrorists add to the victimization.

However the Ynetnews breaks with this covering in an

article23 where family members of a border shooting victim

says that Netanyahu is to blame for the escalation in the

region, because of the stalemate in peace talks. This

present an alternative message that it is lack of

willingness to compromise and make political deals and

not an evil incitement and victimization that is the

reason for troubles.

In article about labeling and boycott the message is that

it is unfair because Israel needs the Jordan Valley for

security reasons. The message of the article is that

Israel has no choice but that Europe does not understand

them24. In the article the term; “settelement buildt on

war-won land” instad of “occupied territiories” is used

as as a justification for Israeli policy. The tekst also

explain that many EU member states is opposing the

settlement policy, in a very confusing collusion with

issues of labeling, BDS campaigns, boycotts and

antisemittic tones in history. It creates a message of

unjust treatment of Israel from Europe.

23 Ynetnews.com.12.24.13. Family member of border shooting victim slam PM.24 In an article of 19. December 2013.

29

Finally both newspapers to reports a little peculiar

about Ariel Sharons funeral 25 26 . The coverage is linking

rocet fier to the funeral. The connection is slightly

sought and because the body dont really back up the

connection made in the headline, since the rocets comes

at a different time and relatively far from where things

are taking place, but the covering manage to get acros a

message to the reader: We can’t even bury our dead in

peace.

Anymy image/delegitimization

Accoring to Sharvit and Bar-Tal (n.d: 22) a prominent

message conveyed from Israeli media during the second

intifada was deligitimization of the Palestinans and

their leader, innate Palestinian violence and the

marginalization of Palestinian victims and disregard for

theirs suffering. In the articles I have sampeled, I find

a more differentiated enemy picture; It seems like the

two paers differnsiate between bad palestinians, the

“terrorists” and good palestinians the “workers and

ordinary people”.

A particularly strong expression of the bad palestinians

was made by articles, pictures showing palestinians

selebrating the release of prisoners, and callling

murderers heros27. Also pictures of rioting Arabs, the

containment of a desarmed bomb meant for Jews and the 25 Ynetnews 01.13.14. Two rockets fired from Gaza at the end of ArielSharon’s funeral.26 Israelhayom 01.14.14. As Sharon laid to rest, Gaza terrorist fire rocket salvo

30

many reports of terror insidensts, show the bad

palestinian. It also seems like the bad palestinians are

treated differen when it comes to how they are used as

sourses, if they are named or their surrfering is

described.

The good palestinians “normal traders and workers” have a

postive focus as reliable people, while the “bad

palestinians” are merly suspects and targest and are

often namelss. For eksample a wounded nameless

palestinian youth didn’t “get shot in his lower body” but

rather “hit in his lower extremities” 28. By the editorial

choise of using a overly teknical language, the target is

dehumanised and emotion or empathy not evoked. When

Israeli media are dealing with Polls it is also

interesting to see that it is devided between Israeli

Jews and Israeli Arabs. This reminds of a devide between

us the Jews and them the Arabs.

The coverage of the peace prosess and many

terrorinsidents further lacks in depth analysis that

could explain more about the palestinian position or

actions. In general palestinian sourses it used is more

to understate a framework of understanding or the message

of the article more than to explain their position. In

the end of december the government approves release of 26

more Palestinian prisoners. The names of the 26 prisoners

(21 murderers) and their Jewish victims is released at 27 Ynetnews 12.26.13. Mothers who lost children to terror oppose nextprisoner release.28 Ynetnews 12.21.13. IDF: Gazans placing explosive device near border fired on.

31

Ynetnews accompanied with pictures of a mourning Jew and

celebrating Palestinians. This creates a imprssions of

the palestinians as quite irrational, savage and

hartless.

However after the killing of Israli, Salah Abu Layef ,

that is killed by a palestinian sniper at his firs day at

the job, IAF in a retaliation act hist 6 targets in Gaza;29 “Sourses within Gaza Strip cliamed that in the IAF

strike, a 3-year-old girl was killed and several of her

famility members injured.” The word claimed indicates

this sourses is not reliable. However the 3 year old

Khala Shabiha is later Pictured several times in the

Ynetnews with her greeving father. Indecating that they

both are the same, innocent victims that deserves the

same amount of greif, the pictures of the dead Jew and

dead palestinian girl is accompanying each other.

In the Israelhayom the good palestinian is used as

reliable sourses in articles about Price-tag “vandals”.

In an article Price-tag Jews are obviousl less reliable

sourses while the palestinian sourses even gets a

positive reviews30. It is even mentioned that Malik Farj

leads a nongovernmental organization promoting peace and

neighborly relations in the area, and that he has lobbied

intensively to secure abucted IDF soldier Gilad Schalits

release. In another article by the Israelhayom deeming

29 Ynetnews 01.09.14, IAF striges Gaza targets after Palestinian fireat IDF.30 Israelhayom 01.12.14. IDF commanders tiers slashed a Yitzhar settlement

32

price-tag attacs as terror 31 it is reported that several

Palestinian men physically shilded settelsers form a mob,

that caught them on their way to carry out a price-tag

agains the village. The price-taggers according to the

Israelhayom even lied about the actions of their brave

Palestinian saviours. Finally in an article32 a commader

in the IDF assures that the palestinian police is

reliable in arreting and stopping terrorists that IDF

tips them about.

All in all I find that covering Palestinians in general

is postive, but that terrorists are covered in light of

their inhumanity and dehumanized in several ways.

Self image

The price-tag attackers and clearly renounced as they do

not fit with the Israeli self-image of a good law-abiding

sitizen and settelers. Contrasting this enemy and

terrorist image is the Jewish self image. In an

commentary33 in Israelyhayom Dr. Haim Shine tries to play

on it to gain support for his view: “These former senior

officials cannot be allowed to intimidate a smart, wise

and strong people”. So does the other side, in an

article34 in Ynetnews Finance Minister Yair Lapid reminds

about the high morality of the Jews: “Controlling another

people is against Jewish morality”. While Justice

31 Israelhayom 01.08.14.Ya’alon: Price-tag attacks akin to terror32 Israelhayom 01.10.14. There is no third intifada33 Israelhayom 01.06.14. Peddlers of illusions34 Ynetnews 12.08.13. Lapid: Peace talks may lead to coalition realignment

33

minister Tzipi Livni have had it with it saying35: “We

could try ignoring the world, wrap ourselves in the

justice of our cause, and support ridiculous and radical

laws that damage the peace process and democracy”.

Finally an article36 in Ynetnews says it all: “Muhammad

Abu Amshah from Beit Henoun was given humanitarian permit

to leave Gaza for eye treatment in West Bank only to

improve vision ahead of planned shooting attack aimed at

IDF.” While Israel contributes with humanitarian help to

its enemies, the enemy uses it to shoot at them.

Patriotism and unity

I did not sampel a lot of articles that experessed ideas

of patrotism and unity in the period. Although there was

a couple of stories about female soldiers and Jewish

laywer that worked for palestinian rights, I did not find

it enough to draw any conclusions. In order to say

something about this issue I would have to have had to

look at articles over a longer period. It is also likely

that this side of the Ethos was more present during a war

situation like the Protective Edge.

Conclusion

According to Sharvit and Bar-Tal (n.d): 3 Israeli media

have played a central role in disseminating and

consolidating the ethos of conflict in the Israeli 35 Ynetnews 12.30.13. Livni: We’re living in bubble, disconnected from world36 Ynetnews 12.26.13. Indictment: Terrorist Gaza sniper left Strip for eye treatment.

34

society through the period of the Arab-Israeli and later

Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In their conclusion they

say that although Israeli media today are largely

commercial and relatively free of the authorities’ close

supervision, its behavior in terms of transmitting the

beliefs of the ethos of conflict during the second

intifada more closely resembled its modes of operation

during the state’s early years. During the Intifada they

found that the majority of Israel’s media outlets viewed

themselves as being enlisted in the national effort of

the struggle against the Palestinians, backed the

government’s policy in most cases, and helped convey the

messages that the political and security establishment

wanted to disseminate. As a result, the beliefs of the

ethos of conflict reoccupied their dominant place in the

media discourse and contradictory messages were rarely

heard. However according o the authors this was not due

to a conspiracy among senior editors or a political

security establishment, but a result of the media

operating in a society and that provide a framework to

interpret and understand events within a context that is

influence by the dominant social-cultural discourse. A

circular process is thus at work, in which the media was

both influenced by the societal process and, in turn,

influenced and helped shape it (Sharvit and Bar-Tal

(n.d): 34).

I find that part of the Ethos of conflict like: Justness

of own goals, belives of peace, security, victimization

35

was clearly expressed in the media during

desember/january 2013-14, while belifs about self-image

was expressed to some extent and more debatable

delegitimizing and the enemy-image. I did not find

implications of the experssion of patriotism and unity.

However the message of peace also had room in the medias,

but was partly trumped by the all comprising and

overaching message of security. The Ynetnew that is

cheering and rallying for a peace agreement, but from a

position of justifications for Israeli societies own

goals and actions. Not willing to take a step out of the

Ethos Israeli media will fail to convince as they get

trapped in a paradigm of a conflict inducing ideology,

that points in a different direction.

Polls37 further suggest that the strong ethos of security

in the media moved the opinon in a direction that made

them less ready for peace-deal, that most probably would

involve giving away soverignity of the Jordan Vally and

take some security risks. I also find that the use of

sourses deserves more attention. There is a lot of use of

disclosed sourses, government and offical sourses and top

politicaians but few organizational, NGOs, activist or

professional sourses. I also find that balance in use of

sourses from the two sides of an issue is not payed

enough attention. And there is no or little rapporting

from the field. This might speak that the work with

37 Israelhayom 01.10.14. Poll: 53,3% mistrust Kerry as impartial peace talks mediator.

36

sourses might be difficult or problematic and acces to

good sourses misstates the Israeli journalits work?

References

Bar-Tal D. (1998): Societal Beliefs in times of

intractable conflict: The Israeli Case. The international

Journal of Conflict Management Vol. 9. No 1 (January). pp. 22-50

Bar-Tal, D. & Halperin, E. 20II. Socio-psychological

barriers to conflict resolution. In D., Bar-Tal (Ed.),

Intergroup conflicts and their resolution: A social psychological perspective

New York: Psychology Press. pp. 217-240.

Bar-Tal D. and Teichman Y. 2005. Stereotypes and

prejudice in conflict: Representation of Arab in Israeli

Jewish society. Cambridge University Press

http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?

id=14871

Birnbaum B., and Tibon A. 2014. The Explosive, Inside

Story of How John Kerry and Israel-Palestine Peace Plan –

and Watched It Crumble (online). Available at:

37

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/118751/how-israel-

palestine-peace-deal-died

Indyk M. 2014. The Pursuit of Middle East Peace: A Status

Report. The Washington Institute for Near East Policy (online).

Available at: http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-

analysis/view/the-pursuit-of-middle-east-peace-a-status-

report

Libes T. and Kampf Z. 2009. Black and White and Shades of

Gray: Palestinians in the Israeli Media During the 2nd

Intifada. The International Journal of Press/Politics 2009. DOI

10.1177/1940161209336226.

Sharvit K, Bar-Tal D. (n.d). Ethos of conflict in the

Israeli media during the period of the violent

confrontation. Available at: http://www.google.com/url?

sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCUQFjAB&url=ht

tp%3A%2F%2Fpeach.haifa.ac.il%2Fimages%2Fa

%2Fa6%2FEthos_in_the_media_English__revised_Feb06.doc&ei=

MLxrVKCQNpD5yQSGyoKQCg&usg=AFQjCNF36HW14MLdKoL304uOlZe8hF

aIFA&bvm=bv.79908130,d.aWw

Zandberg E., Neiger M. 2005: Between the Nation and the

profession: journalists as members of contradicting

communities. Media Culture Society 27: 131. DOI:

10.1177/0163443705049073

38