Defending John Pilger's Journalism on Israel and Palestine
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Jake Lynch (with the UK, and released in 2002, called Palestine additional research by is still the issue (PISTI). In the tradition of Catherine Dix and Stuart authored documentary film-making, it ends Rees) with a long in-vision commentary by Pilger himself, framed against the Jerusalem skyline. His concluding words were: Israelis will never have peace until they recognise that Palestinians have the same right to the same peace and the same inde- pendence that they enjoy. The occupation of Palestine should end now. Then, the solution is clear. Two countries, Israel and Palestine, neither dominating nor menacing the other. In an earlier sequence, Pilger made it clear Defending John that Palestinian independence meant a state in East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza Pilger’s journalism on Strip, the territories occupied since 1967: Israel and Palestine [The establishment of the State of Israel] cost No sooner had the journalist and film-maker, the Palestinians 78 per cent of their country. John Pilger, been named the 2009 winner of Today, they are seeking only the remaining the Sydney Peace Prize, than a chorus of criti- 22 per cent of their homeland. For 35 years, cism broke out from Jewish groups objecting that homeland has been dominated by Israel. to his coverage of the Israel-Palestine conflict. This was conducted in public media and It was for films such as this – along with his included several contributions from Philip books and his regular column for the New Mendes, a social work academic from Monash Statesman magazine – that Pilger was named University, Melbourne, and a writer on the peace prize winner in succession to previ- Australian Jewish affairs. Mendes drew atten- ous laureates including Archbishop Desmond tion to a scholarly article he had published a Tutu, Professor Muhammad Yunus and, in 2003, year earlier, in the Australian Journal of Jewish the Palestinian legislator, Hanan Ashrawi. The Studies (AJJS), a critical analysis of Pilger’s last of these was met with a campaign of criti- ‘views and sources’. However, Mendes’ cism in public media and political discourse – analysis was, this article argues, based on and behind-the-scenes arm-twisting – led by misunderstandings of key concepts and groups that speak for Australia’s self-defined debates in journalism, and flawed by highly ‘mainstream Jewish community’. selective representations of both Pilger’s reporting and important historical events. This, Given Pilger’s well-known output on the Israel- and subsequent interventions, by Mendes and Palestine conflict, executive members of the others, in public debates – including those Sydney Peace Foundation, which bestows the dealing with calls for an academic and cultural award, were braced for a similar reaction this boycott of Israel – attempted to demonise time. A post on a well-known blog, The certain points of view, consigning them and Sensible Jew, seemed to presage controversy, their proponents to what Hallin (1989) called albeit in the form of a warning to community the ‘sphere of deviance’. This paper argues leaders to ‘tread carefully’ and avoid ‘frothing that this is not an ethical scholarly activity, at the mouth’. It described Pilger as a ‘far more since it risks reducing the scope of public odious character’ than Ashrawi, however, and debate, rather than expanding it, whereas attacked his journalism as ‘a joke among the Pilger’s journalism exemplifies a value-explicit serious-minded’ (Sensible Jew 2009). teleological ethic in favour of peace with justice. One of the first to respond with a comment on this blog was a scholarly writer on Keywords: Pilger, Mendes, Israel, Palestine Australian Jewish affairs, Philip Mendes. In it, he described Pilger as ‘a much worse choice John Pilger’s best-known piece of broadcast than Ashrawi’ and recommended his refer- journalism on the Israel-Palestine conflict is a eed research article in the contemporary programme originally made for Carlton TV, in edition of the Australian Journal of Jewish 48 Copyright 2010-4. Ethical Space: The International Journal of Communication Ethics. All rights reserved. Vol 7, No 4 2010 PAPER Studies: John Pilger on Israel/Palestine: A crit- There are good reasons why a journalist might ical analysis of his views and sources (2008). choose to report, as a witness, the growing In it, Mendes does not mention the passages debate over a single, bi-national state, and from PISTI, quoted above, however; and they the views of prominent contributors to that appear to contradict one of his central debate, at this time. The continued expansion claims: of Jewish settlements and the construction of Israel’s ‘separation fence’ had already created Pilger adopted what I have termed an anti- ‘facts on the ground’ leading even some well- Zionist fundamentalist perspective. This known advocates of a two-state solution to perspective regards Israel as a racist and colo- express doubts as to its feasibility: ‘With the nialist state which has no right to exist, and buttressing of seized land…[t]he idea of sepa- should instead be replaced by an Arab State rating Palestinians from Israelis, and establish- of Greater Palestine (ibid: 99). ing two states, becomes virtually impossible to do’ (Tamari 2004). PAPER The source relied on for support is a 2007 arti- cle by Pilger in the New Statesman magazine, Those remarks were made shortly before the which reports the view of the historian, Ilan International Court of Justice issued its advi- Pappé, that ‘a single, democratic state, to sory opinion that the wall was in breach of which the Palestinian refugees are given the international law. Israel’s decision to defy the right of return, is the only feasible and just court ruling might therefore have the effect, solution, and that a sanctions and boycott on the same argument, of further downgrad- campaign is critical in achieving this’. Pilger’s ing the prospects for an independent article continues: Palestinian state on the 22 per cent of Mandate Palestine that lies beyond Israel’s …A boycott of Israeli institutions, goods and internationally recognised borders. services, says Pappé, ‘will not change the [Israeli] position in a day, but it will send a Boycott clear message that [the premises of Zionism] In his AJJS article, Mendes characterises the are racist and unacceptable in the 21st call for an academic boycott of Israel as ‘based century . .They would have to choose. And on the racial or ethnic stereotyping of all so would the rest of us’ (Pilger 2007b). Israeli Jews as an oppressor people’. This claim is not sourced, but it, too, is apparently To equate this piece of reporting with the contradicted by evidence whose omission, adoption or espousal, by its author, of the from Mendes’ article, is significant, given its view being reported, shows confusion provenance. Omar Barghouti and Lisa Taraki, over the role of journalism, defined as the founders of the Palestinian Campaign for ‘disseminating newsworthy information’ (Goc the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel 2008: 45) and a form of public communication (PACBI), issued their own clarification of this distinguished in being chiefly actuated by the issue in 2005: pursuit of ‘internally defined…goals’ (Hanitzsch 2008: 73) such as ‘fairness and accu- The fact that we go out of our way to racy’ (Lynch and McGoldrick 2010: 91). Pilger’s ‘exclude from the above actions against columns for the New Statesman state his opin- Israeli institutions any conscientious Israeli ions, but they are his opinions as a journalist: academics and intellectuals opposed to their an understanding which, it is reasonable to state’s colonial and racist policies’ follows assume, is shared by his readers. They are from our realisation that there is always a clearly recounted and framed from a grey area where an academic may be reporter’s perspective. The introduction to the perceived as representing her/himself rather article as stored on Pilger’s own website than her/his institution (2005: np). states: Clearly, if an Israeli academic can be exempted In a column for the New Statesman, John from the boycott, then it cannot logically be Pilger describes his first encounter with a based on racial or ethnic stereotyping. Indeed, Palestinian refugee camp and what Nelson the other text on which Mendes relies, to Mandela has called ‘the greatest moral issue sustain this point, is another New Statesman of our age’ – justice for the Palestinians. column from 2002, also reporting Pappé’s ‘Something has changed,’ he writes, referring views, which highlights the support he to the world view of sanctions and a boycott received from other Israelis over the threat to against Israel (ITV 2007). his position at Haifa University. This, Pilger PAPER Copyright 2010-4. Ethical Space: The International Journal of Communication Ethics. All rights reserved. Vol 7, No 4 2010 49 Jake Lynch (with sees as upholding ‘the bravest traditions of arly and public writings. An attempt appears additional Jewish humanity’ and as a way to support ‘the to be underway to represent both John research by cause of justice in both Israel and Palestine’ Pilger’s journalism, and calls for a boycott of Catherine Dix (Pilger 2002a). Again, Pilger is careful not to Israel, as racist in character. This is a serious and Stuart Rees) stereotype all Israeli Jews as oppressors. charge, and one that threatens to propel its targets into what Hallin called the ‘sphere of Naomi Klein, in an influential article for The deviance… exposing, condemning, or exclud- Nation, described the international campaign ing from the public agenda those who violate for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions as an or challenge the political consensus. It marks effort to ‘boycott the Israeli economy but not out and defends the limits of acceptable Israelis’ (Klein 2009).