[Peace-discuss] He Gets It, But He Still Doesn't Get It: Reading Ethan Bronner in Athens

[Robert Naiman]

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/07/08-6

Published on Friday, July 8, 2011 by
CommonDreams.org<http://www.commondreams.org/>
He Gets It, But He Still Doesn't Get It: Reading Ethan Bronner in Athens
by Robert Naiman <http://www.commondreams.org/robert-naiman>

If you share in the project of reforming U.S. foreign policy so that it
reflects the values and interests of the majority of Americans, then you
care about the *New York Times*. Because of its role in influencing the
coverage of other corporate media, the *Times* is a key gatekeeper shaping
not only what the broad majority of the American public know about what our
government is doing in the world, but also in determining to what
perspectives about these policies the broad American public is exposed.

As a corollary, if you care about reforming U.S. policy towards the
Palestinians' quest for self-determination, then you care about Ethan
Bronner, because Bronner is the *Times*' Jerusalem bureau chief.

It was thus with keen interest that, as a passenger waiting in Athens
earlier this week to board the U.S. boat to Gaza, *The Audacity of
Hope<http://ustogaza.org/>
*, I read Ethan Bronner's "news analysis" Sunday of the Gaza Freedom
Flotilla, "Setting Sail on Gaza's Sea of
Spin<http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/03/sunday-review/03flotilla.html>
."

Bronner's job as a "news analyst" is, of course, not merely to put forward
his own personal prejudices. As an individual human being, he is certainly
entitled to his views. But as a news analyst, in addition to offering his
own perspective, he has a responsibility to give a fair and coherent account
of the views of different actors, rather than construct a caricature of one
of the actors so that he can then dismiss them. Unfortunately, it's the
latter that Bronner's piece ultimately does.

Bronner's piece is a tragic performance in the gap between the understanding
that it grasps and the understanding that it manages to hold. It is one
thing to be innocently ignorant. It is quite another to march right up to
the Tree of Knowledge, pull down a ripe fruit, chew it thoughtfully and then
spit it out because you don't like the taste. But this, sadly, is what
Bronner's piece ultimately does.

Bronner's piece begins with great promise:

Some see a parallel with the Exodus, the ship filled with Jewish refugees
that tried to break the British blockade of Palestine in 1947 and helped
sway world opinion toward Zionism.

It's a singularly potent analogy. Arguably, in the entire history of
Zionism, there is no more sympathetic image than the voyage of the Exodus.
To be crude, in terms of American public opinion, if *The Audacity of
Hope* equals
the Exodus, then "we win." Bronner recounts:

In July 1947, when Britain ruled Palestine and the number of Jews allowed in
was severely limited, the ship, with 4,500 Jewish refugees from Europe,
tried to get through. British forces boarded it, killed three people,
wounded dozens and essentially destroyed the ship as it listed in Haifa
harbor. The British ultimately sent the passengers to Hamburg. The sight of
thousands of Jewish refugees shipped to Germany soon after the Holocaust
sparked international outrage and sympathy for the Zionist cause, a key goal
of the trip.

Bronner then quotes a mainstream American-Israeli historian to bring the
analogy home:

"The Exodus showed that if the British are callous enough to send Jews back
to Germany, the only ones who should be in charge of the fate of the Jews
are the Jews themselves," observed M. M. Silver, an Israeli historian and
the author of "Our Exodus." "Palestinian forces are trying to make the same
point through the flotilla, that Israel has no right to control the fate of
Palestinians."

As a participant in the flotilla, I only have one dispute with Professor
Silver's characterization of my motivation: the subject of the sentence is
wrong. The sentence should read: "*Advocates of Palestinian freedom* are
trying to make the same point through the flotilla, that Israel has no right
to control the fate of Palestinians." The phrase "advocates of Palestinian
freedom" correctly describes the organizers and passengers on the flotilla.
This category certainly includes Palestinians, but it also includes, for
example, African-American writerAlice
Walker<http://articles.cnn.com/2011-06-21/opinion/alice.walker.gaza_1_muslim-child-gaza-gandhi>
(passenger
on *The Audacity of Hope*) and Israeli-American linguistics professorHagit
Borer<http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jun/26/opinion/la-oe-borer-gaza-blockade-20110626>
(passenger
on *The Audacity of Hope*.)

Notwithstanding that dispute, it cannot fairly be said that Bronner's piece
has not exposed its readers to a more or less accurate portrayal of the
motivations behind the flotilla. Yes, absolutely, we are contesting *specific
Israeli government decisions* about who and what can go into and come out of
Gaza and by what means. But, as important as this contest is in its own
right, it is a corollary to a more fundamental contest: in Professor
Silver's formulation, we assert that *Israel has no right to control the
fate of Palestinians*.

Unfortunately, having tasted of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge,
Bronner's piece spits it out.

Bronner hammers the flotilla for transporting "humanitarian aid," which he
correctly - but vacuously - says is not what Gaza needs. Indeed, Bronner
quotes in support of his point the Israeli human rights group Gisha, which
has campaigned against the closure of Gaza:

"The focus on humanitarian aid by both flotilla organizers and the Israeli
government is infuriating and misleading," Gisha, an Israeli human rights
group focused on Gaza, said in a statement. "There is no shortage of food in
Gaza, but economic recovery is blocked by sweeping restrictions."

Gisha went on to
say<http://www.gisha.org/index.php?intLanguage=2&intItemId=2050&intSiteSN=113>,
quite rightly:

The continued ban on export, construction materials, and travel between Gaza
and the West Bank contradicts the 2010 Israeli government decision to
facilitate economic recovery in Gaza. *At least 83% of Gaza's factories are
either closed or working at a capacity of 50% or less, according to the
Palestinian Federation of Industries.* The manufacturing sector cannot
recover under the present Israeli ban on export; not a single truck has been
allowed to leave Gaza since May 12. Even during the winter agricultural
season, when Israel allowed the export of agricultural produce, the
quantities were economically negligible: an average of two trucks per day,
compared to the 400 trucks a day agreed upon in the 2005 Agreement on
Movement and Access.

Israel has banned completely goods destined for Israel and the West Bank,
even though prior to 2007, 85% of the goods leaving Gaza were sold to Israel
and the West Bank.

Sari Bashi, Executive Director of Gisha, says it is infuriating that
residents of Gaza are being deliberately reduced to recipients of
humanitarian aid. *"The problem in Gaza is not a shortage of food but rather
a violation of the right to productive, dignified work. There is just one
solution that will respect the rights of Gaza residents to freedom of
movement and livelihood while protecting Israel's legitimate security
interests: Israel must lift the ban on construction materials, exit of goods
and travel between Gaza and the West Bank."* [emphasis in original.]

But in criticizing "flotilla organizers" for a "focus on humanitarian aid,"
Gisha was responding not to the actual flotilla organizers as they exist in
flesh and blood, but to the flotilla organizers as portrayed by others,
including Mr. Bronner. Having spent the last two weeks with "flotilla
organizers," having attended many press conferences, having served on the
media team of *The Audacity of Hope*, I *never saw anyone* "focus on
humanitarian aid." (Indeed, *The Audacity of Hope* carried *no* "humanitarian
aid" - it carried letters of solidarity from Americans to the people of
Gaza.) Rather, I saw flotilla organizers and passengers focus on what
Professor Silver correctly perceived: *Israel has no right to control the
fate of Palestinians*, an axiom to which opposition to all the Israeli
government restrictions on the Palestinian civilian population of Gaza - on
imports and exports, on travel for work, study, and medical care, on fishing
and farming - is corollary.

I saw people wearing t-shirts that said, "We sail until Palestine is free."
I didn't see anyone wearing a t-shirt that said, "We sail until Israel
allows more humanitarian aid into Gaza."

However, it may well be the case that correct words are insufficient here.
Indeed, Ethan Bronner managed to write a "news analysis" that slammed the
"focus" of "flotilla organizers"*without naming or quoting a single one of
them*. We go to sleep and we awake, and Ethan Bronner is still the Jerusalem
bureau chief of the *New York Times*, so it is logical to ask: could a
future flotilla arrange its symbolism in such a way that even Ethan Bronner
would be incapable of misunderstanding? What would such a Dream Flotilla
look like?

Maybe it would look like this: *pushing against every aspect of the Israeli
blockade of Gaza at once*. Such a flotilla would have some ships going in,
and *other ships coming out*, carrying Palestinian exports. Still other
ships would fish 20 nautical miles from Gaza's coast, as promised in the
Oslo Accords, rather than the three nautical miles currently allowed by
unilateral Israeli restriction. Other "ships" would farm to Gaza's border
with Israel, defying the unilateral Israeli "buffer zone." Other "ships"
would carry Palestinians from Gaza needing lifesaving medical treatment to
Palestinian hospitals in East Jerusalem, in defiance of Israeli
restrictions. Other "ships" would carry Palestinians from Gaza to study at
Palestinian universities in the West Bank, in defiance of the restrictions
of the Israeli occupation.

Maybe then, Ethan Bronner would understand. But just to make sure, perhaps
this Dream Flotilla should set sail in September, when the Palestinians are
pressing their case at the United Nations for recognition of their
independent state - a push that has at its core a very simple precept: *Israel
has no right to control the fate of Palestinians*.
[image: Robert Naiman] <http://www.commondreams.org/robert-naiman>

Robert Naiman is Policy Director at Just Foreign
Policy.<http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/> Naiman
has worked as a policy analyst and researcher at the Center for Economic and
Policy Research <http://www.cepr.net/> and Public Citizen's Global Trade
Watch <http://www.citizen.org/trade/>. He has masters degrees in economics
and mathematics from the University of Illinois and has studied and worked
in the Middle East. You can contact him
here<http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/about/contact>
.
-- 
Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20110708/8388e0da/attachment-0001.html>