Framing by the Media, the Israeli Society and the Palestine-Israel Conflict

By, Hazwan Dani Abdul Kadir

In contemporary Israel, supporting the Palestinian cause requires immense courage and bravery, especially for Jewish Israelis. Prominent figures such as Ilan Pappé and Gideon Levy have been vocal in their criticisms of Israeli policies of oppression and apartheid towards Palestinians. Activists have also played crucial roles in facilitating humanitarian aid, despite right-wing Israelis often blocking such efforts.

However, the reality is stark: two-thirds of Israelis support their military’s aggressive actions in Gaza and the restriction of humanitarian aid to Palestinians. This widespread support indicates that the majority of Israelis do not recognize the issues inherent in their government’s treatment of Palestinians. For decades, the Israeli media plays a significant role in shaping this collective mindset, presenting a one-sided, biased narrative that dehumanizes Palestinians, discredits their suffering, and perpetuates the status quo of oppression and illegal settlements. Due to mainstream public support of the war on Gaza and dehumanization of Palestinians, it’s difficult to see mainstream Israelis as politically centre, or moderate. By global standards, they would be seen as on the far-right.

The average Israeli is disconnected from the Palestinian suffering due to this media framing and narrative, hence unless he or she engages in a fact-finding mission to find the truth outside of traditional Israeli media or western narrative, he or she will never see the oppressive Israeli policies towards the Palestinians as the problem.

Israeli media frequently portrays Palestinians as the “other” and reduces the complex situation to a simple narrative of “Hamas is the problem,” ignoring that Hamas does not operate in the West Bank, where Palestinians still face structural discrimination and apartheid policies. The everyday reality of Palestinians living under military rule with fewer rights than Israelis is not adequately reflected in the Israeli collective psyche.

Despite Palestinians making numerous concessions and neighboring Arab countries normalizing relations with Israel, the Israeli government continues to prevent the realization of a two-state solution. Netanyahu has consistently opposed Palestinian independence, aiming instead for full Israeli control over Palestinian territories. This stance is supported by Western countries, particularly the United States, which paradoxically endorses a two-state solution while vetoing UN resolutions supporting Palestinian statehood.

Democracy in Israel is flawed when those under its occupation are denied basic civil and political rights. The mainstream media and political discourse often employ “both-sidesism,” requiring equal condemnation of both Israel and Hamas, even though Hamas is not a sovereign state with military capabilities equivalent to Israel. This narrative places undue blame on Hamas, ignoring Israel’s central role as the occupying power responsible for systemic oppression.

From its inception, the state of Israel, through Zionist groups like Haganah, Lehi/Stern Gang, and Irgun, engaged in acts that led to the expulsion, massacre, and cultural genocide of Palestinians to establish a Jewish state. David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s founding father, explicitly supported the use of terror and land confiscation to displace Palestinians. This historical context underscores that the Palestinian natives were acknowledged but systematically displaced for the creation of Israel, a settler colonial project.

For decades, Palestinians have been forced to make concessions while successive Israeli governments continue to expand into Palestinian territories, using negotiations as delay tactics but never genuinely seeing them through. Right-wing extremist views have become mainstream in Israel, where speaking out for Palestinian rights can lead to job loss or harassment. Israel must stop externalizing blame for its actions and instead accept accountability to move forward. Being critical and reflective of Israeli government’s policies is especially important in light of an ongoing genocide case against Israel at the ICJ and the ICC arrest warrants on Netanyahu and Gallant.

Peace necessitates mutual concessions, yet Israel has consistently failed to uphold its end of agreements, such as the Oslo Accords, instead opting to caary out delay and distraction tactics. Even during the October 7 conflict, Israel rejected Hamas’ offers for hostage exchanges and ceasefires brokered by Egypt and Qatar. Israelis must accept responsibility for their government’s actions as they hold the power to resolve this long-standing conflict rooted in systemic injustice established by Israel’s founding leaders and perpetuated by successive governments.

The perception of an existential threat has been used to justify ongoing oppression and expansion. However, with many Arab nations normalizing relations with Israel, this notion becomes increasingly indefensible. Massive by the Israeli public against Netanyahu in Israel itself, raise questions about the true intentions behind the protests: aside from freeing the hostages, are they driven by a genuine desire to end the genocide and occupation, or merely to replace Netanyahu while continuing the same oppressive policies on Palestinians?

Israeli society must recognize that their government’s policies, have led to their current isolation. The conflation of state policies with Jewish identity by the Israeli government discredits legitimate criticisms and conflates them with antisemitism, which undermines genuine efforts to address antisemitism globally.

Even if Netanyahu is replaced, the underlying settler colonial project is likely to persist unless there is a fundamental shift in Israeli society’s understanding and approach. Advocacy groups like B’Tselem and Jewish Voice for Peace highlight the systemic issues of apartheid and illegal settlements as central obstacles to peace. Now more than ever it is a good time for the average Israeli to be critical of any government rhetoric to justify its actions especially when it uses fear as a tool of support by maintaining an “enemy”.

Critics of Israel, including many pro-Palestinian Jewish supporters, denounce the ongoing oppression of Palestinians. The global opposition to Israeli policies stems from their continued practices of apartheid and genocide. Israel and its government must acknowledge their responsibility for the situation and take concrete steps towards accountability and justice.

As more and more states in the West recognize Palestinian statehood on top of the 143 states that do, the international community must enforce international law uniformly, condemning and prosecuting war crimes regardless of the perpetrator. No state can be above international law, even Israel as it carries more responsibilities and obligations as an occupying power.

Commentators, media outlets, and governments need to stop fearing backlash and clearly articulate the historical and current realities of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Only through honest and comprehensive framing as well as accountability can there be a path towards genuine accountability and lasting peace.

How can there be peace, when there are 700,000 Israeli settlers living in 300 illegal settlements in the West Bank sponsored by Israeli governments, and protected by the IDF? These policies will need to be addressed and has been long been ongoing, irrespective of whether October 7 happened or not, irrespective of Israeli prime minister and governments. If they are sincere in living side-by-side with Palestinians, then illegal settlements must stop permanently.

As the world is divided between the truth and power; hence, genuine and balanced media reporting is essential to foster a deeper understanding of the conflict and addressing its root causes. Additionally, there has to be a fundamental shift in the psyche of the collective Israeli society to stop dehumanising Palestinians, to be critical of their own history, as well as of their government’s policies. Only through such measures can we hope to see a resolution that respects the rights and humanity of all parties involved.***