Israeli Diplomacy Must Improve to Counter Palestinian Misinformation

By Col (Res.) Dr. Raphael G. Bouchnik-Chen     February 8, 2023

BESA Center Perspectives Paper No. 2,179, , 8 February, 2023

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Israeli public diplomacy is often severely lacking in the face of Palestinian propaganda campaigns designed to blame Israel for collateral damage that sometimes occurs during surgical counterterrorist operations in the West Bank. In the case of several recent tragic incidents in which civilians were killed, Israel missed the opportunity to leverage the dimension of doubt to its own benefit. Israel must be ready to refute and contain biased Palestinian propaganda campaigns before they become rooted in the international consciousness. 

The State of Israel has suffered several recent propaganda defeats that continue to reverberate in the international arena. They concern targeted counter-terrorism operations at the northern West Bank refugee camp in Jenin, where Israeli forces encountered furious fire from armed Palestinian elements.

There is no disputing that when Israeli security forces operate in an area saturated with Palestinian militia members who are firing against them without an orderly battle procedure, there may be operational failures, including civilian casualties.

Two such incidents were the killing in Jenin of Al-Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh on May 11, 2022, and the death on December 12, 2022 of a local 16-year-old girl, Jana Zakharna, on the roof of a building in the Jenin refugee camp. This camp, which is outside the scope of control of the Palestinian Authority, is essentially a safe haven for non-organized Palestinian terrorist elements or militias. It is a veritable no-man’s land.

In wartime, collateral damage accidentally caused during military activity in which the circumstances are clear and proven generally results in an expression of sorrow and apology from the responsible party, a response usually deemed sufficient in view of uncertain battlefield conditions. Events of this kind are well documented involving US forces fighting in Iraq during Operation Desert Storm and the Second Gulf War, as well as in Afghanistan.

The IDF, too, has found itself apologizing for operational failures, whether in Lebanon or during military operations in the Gaza Strip. On some occasions, unfortunate events of this type have hastened the end of military operations before their goals were achieved.

Given that the IDF’s activities in the West Bank are under a global magnifying glass, and every incident, however limited, receives a disproportionate response, the army does its best to avoid unnecessary embarrassments.

With that said, Israeli public diplomacy has consistently failed in its mission to cushion the army from international opprobrium. This failure paves the way for diplomatic and political blows, even when the actual circumstances of the events absolve the IDF of the accusation of having deviated from norms.

The Israeli security system must proactively thwart imminent terrorist threats from the Palestinian side. This is entirely clear and appropriate. Such action is required to address the threat from radical and Islamist elements whose charters expressly call for the annihilation of the State of Israel. The working assumption is that the driving forces of terrorism in the West Bank are the Hamas movement and Islamic Jihad, either from the Gaza Strip or from abroad.

This reality is enough to justify Israel’s countermeasures, and should be the primary argument of Israel’s public diplomacy. Israel must convey the fact that the IDF, a regular army, is facing wild and disorganized terrorist elements, a state of affairs that places Israel on the right side of the equation.

Unfortunately, the Israeli political and security leadership was careless in its handling of the incidents in which Abu Akleh and and Zakharna were killed in Jenin. For some reason, a progressive approach to the crisis was chosen: namely, admitting responsibility for the accidental killings despite the operational uncertainty that prevailed on the ground when they occurred. The logic of this approach, presumably, was that because taking responsibility is the privilege of the stronger side, doing so fosters Israel’s image as a responsible country.

This liberal approach was spectacularly counterproductive. The killing of Abu Akleh, who was a US citizen, found its way to the UN Security Council (May 4, 2022) and was later subject to a Palestinian complaint at the International Criminal Court in The Hague (September 19, 2022). It was also put on the official White House agenda, leading to a request that the FBI open an independent investigation of the incident.

These international initiatives clearly illustrate the failure of Israel’s public diplomacy. There is almost certainly no precedent in the history of international relations in which a one-off incident, however unfortunate, became an issue at the top of the world’s agenda.

This resounding diplomatic failure could have been prevented. Through a rational and well-planned campaign, Jerusalem could have neutralized much of the anti-Israel bias behind these hostile moves and even foiled them while they were still in progress.

The incident during which Abu Akleh was killed occurred in the narrow alleys of the Jenin refugee camp. Israeli soldiers, on a mission to thwart a tangible and imminent terrorist threat, were confronted by wild shooting from Palestinian terrorist elements. That being the case, the presence of journalists in the very heart of the battle, where Palestinian militants were shooting in all directions, was a form of defiance. Abu Akleh’s protective helmet and vest with the word PRESS prominently printed upon it could not grant her immunity from gunfire –particularly before sunrise, when it was difficult to see her vest.

When confronting terrorism in the fog of battle, there will always be doubt about who is responsibility when innocent people are injured or killed. This is particularly the case in view of the improvised and spontaneous nature of shooting by the fanatical militia forces compared to the orderly operations of the Israeli military forces, who are compelled to respond to wild shooting in the environment of the military operation.

In such circumstances, the dimension of doubt is essential ammunition in public diplomacy that addresses the question of responsibility for harm that befalls the uninvolved. The weaker side is to be expected to accuse the stronger of deliberate killing. This is a longstanding tactic of Palestinian propaganda, which is highly adept at manipulating the media to broadcast and endorse a false story.

<
>
<
>