Press Action ::: Occupied Territories to Occupier's Territories?

Friday, January 17, 2003

Occupied Territories to Occupier's Territories?

By Tanweer Akram

In Judy Doenges’ “review” of Risa Miller’s novel, Welcome to Heavenly Heights, in the Jan. 12 Washington Post Book World, the West Bank is described as “Israel’s West Bank.”

Doenges’s description of the West Bank as part of Israel reminds me of George Orwell, who said:

“In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible. Things like the continuance of British rule in India, the Russian purges and deportations, the dropping of the atom bombs on Japan, can indeed be defended, but only by arguments which are too brutal for most people to face, and which do not square with the professed aims of political parties. Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness. Defenseless villages are bombarded from the air, the inhabitants driven out into the countryside, the cattle machine-gunned, the huts set on fire with incendiary bullets: this is called pacification. Millions of peasants are robbed of their farms and sent trudging along the roads with no more than they can carry: this is called transfer of population or rectification of frontiers. People are imprisoned for years without trial, or shot in the back of the neck or sent to die of scurvy in Arctic lumber camps: this is called elimination of unreliable elements. Such phraseology is needed if one wants to name things without calling up mental pictures of them.” — Politics and the English Language (1946)

It is hard to surpass Orwell’s observations about the use of language as it pertains to the mainstream U.S. media’s coverage of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, especially in the op-ed pages and on occasion even in the news reports. The ease with which Ms. Doenges could use “Israel’s West Bank” without raising any concerns of the professional fact checkers and the editors of the Washington Post is a testimony to intellectual laziness and uncritical acceptance of Israel’s discourse of conquest.

The West Bank belongs to the Palestinian people. It is illegally occupied by Israel. U.N. Security Council Resolution 242 calls for Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories. To describe occupied Palestinian territories as “Israel’s West Bank” is not only factually incorrect but it is also morally comparable to describing Poland as “Germany’s Poland” during World War II because it assumes the legitimacy of foreign military occupation.

As a newspaper that is supposed to report facts, the Washington Post ought to retain objectivity to ensure accuracy. Its use of language should not provide de facto endorsement of Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and the extremists who advocate the annexation of the West Bank to Israel.

Some further comments on Doenges’ review of the novel are warranted.

Can one seriously review a novel about a group of colonial settlers occupying Palestinian land by force and completely avoid any mention of the systematic dispossession of the Palestinian people from their land?

Anyone familiar with Amnesty International’s reports, or with the Israeli Hebrew language press would know about the actual conditions in the occupied Palestinian territories. Defenseless Palestinian refugees and civilians are bombarded from F-16s and advanced helicopters. Inhabitants are driven out from the homes as the IDF bulldozes houses. With little regard for the livelihood of the people and the environment, Israel army uproots olive trees. Detentions without trail, curfews, collective punishment and complete disregard for Geneva Conventions are quite common in the West Bank and Gaza.

And yet Doenges waxes Miller eloquently for writing about the settlers’ “spiritual adjustment to Israel and to their perceived roles as pioneers.”

Literary review that consists mainly of “euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness” and misleading description has only propaganda value and no intellectual merit.

The Post would be well advised to accurately represent facts and not succumb to the language of illegal Israeli settlers and their apologists. The Post’s fact checkers have a duty to ensure that the West Bank is not described as if it belongs to Israel. It would be quite appropriate for the Post to issue a correction.

Tanweer Akram is an economist.

More from Tanweer Akram