The Fanonite

Unreported world journalist Sam Kiley and director Edward Watts travelled to Gaza to make a documentary which got prime time viewing on Channel 4.

I got the impression they were not experts on the Israel-Palestine conflict as they tended to repeat Israeli Government propaganda without, I think, realising or questioning.

If the title isn’t enough to show a bias (why not reign of Apache Gunships / F-16s?) then this one statement can sum the whole thing up.

“All Gazans suffer because of the rocket attacks on Israel” Sam Kiley

Wittingly or not, Kiley recycles Israeli propaganda on the recent conflict. Theres no reason to say that Israeli oppression is due to Palestinian rocket fire. Israel was shelling Gaza even as Hamas maintained over a year long ceasefire. At best you could say the situation is not clear enough to say which side is retailiating – in fact it makes more sense to say the Palestinians are retailiating. Given that Hamas had a ceasefire before being elected, after which Gaza was then blockaded, a military coup plotted against them and the Strip was shelled by Israel. All this before the rockets began.

He also then fails to point out that collective punishment is illegal under Geneva Conventions – in other words punishing all Gazans due to rocket fire is not justified and is actually a war crime.  What he should have said, at the very least, was “all Gazans suffer due to Israeli war crimes [illegal collective punishment] which aren’t justified by rocket attacks.”

With these obvious discrepencies its easy to see why the Glasgow Media Group found that people had a confused understanding of the Israel-Palestine conflict.

The following is an email written to a friend after watching the film. Theres also a small discussion on Media Lens.

Its shockingly bad. Its very ignorant of the situation in Palestine and seems to have chosen its words very carefully.

There was a ‘civil war’ in palestine.

The people of palestine fed up with Fatahs corruption (they policed the PA for Israel – in return for substancial financial reward under a cloak of peace negotiations while settlemts expanded) voted for Hamas who were the main organisation resisting Israel oppresion and who organised free schools and healthcare.

Before being elected they held to a ceasefire with Israel for a year to show they meant business – peaceful business.

Then they were democratically elected (film fails to mention this) and Israel got scared – because Hamas is not corrupt like Fatah and will make demands on them for positive change.

Israel moved to crush them immediately (blockade and shelling). And theres evidence that the US backed a Fatah military coup against the democratically elected government of Hamas. What the film calls the ‘civil war.’

check out this from Vanity Fair:
‘After failing to anticipate Hamas’s victory over Fatah in the 2006 Palestinian election, the White House cooked up yet another scandalously covert and self-defeating Middle East debacle: part Iran-contra, part Bay of Pigs. With confidential documents, corroborated by outraged former and current U.S. officials, David Rose reveals how President Bush, Condoleezza Rice, and Deputy National-Security Adviser Elliott Abrams backed an armed force under Fatah strongman Muhammad Dahlan, touching off a bloody civil war in Gaza and leaving Hamas stronger than ever.’

An exceptionally important article – Blair also assisted in this.

There were also a number of massacres in Gaza before Hamas reluctantly turned back to violence – a communication was interrupted between them with Hezbollah saying that non-violence had got them blockaded, funding cut, and massacres in Gaza (such as family on beach killed by random israeli shelling).

It also fails to recognise that Fatah rule the westbank even though they were not elected to – yet calls the situation in Gaza a ‘Hamas takeover.’

It also says Hamas has refused to recognise Israel. Not totally true.

They have said the accept that there is a state called israel that they must work with – or some compromise.

Why should anyone recognise Israel as it demands – for one thing Israel refuses to define what its borsders actually are – its like signing a blank cheque.

Its been good here and there but overall the guy is not that clued up. The title alone says it all – ‘reign of rockets’ why not reign of Apaches gunships? Just a journo who thinks he’ll get a good story I suspect without knowing too much.

Also doesn’t mention that Hamas want negiotiations – israel refuses.

Also he frames everything israel does as retaliation to rockets. Thats what the Israeli government says – the reality is something different.

He also counts the number of rockets fired into Israel – but doesnt count the number of munitions fired into Gaza – not very objective (this is Israeli Government propaganda). But of course no one cares.