Maof

We have become increasingly concerned by the media's use of inequitable and highly politicized terminology regarding the Middle East. This offensive and biased terminology was innovated by the K.G.B. in the late 60's in order to propagandize the cause of the P.L.O. This warping of language in an Orwellian fashion to serve the dictates of a political agenda was done in order to convince the world of the existence of a nonexistent “Palestinian Nation” and its right to Israel’s land and since then most of us have come to adopt terms such as “Palestinians,” “the Palestinian Nation,” “Occupied territory,” “Palestinian-Israeli conflict,” and “the West Bank,” into our everyday vocabulary. This misleading lexicon was placed into our language for the sole purpose of biasing language itself to serve the political agenda of a particular group and the use of this terminology by the press serves only to promote the agenda of one side which is contrary to the elemental principle of journalism, an evenhanded reporting of the story.

There is a place for activism, but it is on the editorial page rather than the front page. By conflating the two, the integrity of the press itself becomes open to question. By parroting the propaganda of one side in a two-sided conflict, the media shifts from reporting the story to becoming the PR outlet for one side. This is a denigration of its noble mission which is to report the news and undermines its fundamental mission in a Democratic society which is that of informing the public, rather than mixing propaganda and news together to the extent that the two can no longer be told apart as it the common practice in totalitarian states.

Furthermore accepting the principle that any particular regional minority has the right to secede and become a separate nation and to do so with the use of force would lead to the fragmentation of much of the world from Turkey to Spain and to the United States itself. While upholding such a principle only for a few select countries such as Israel makes charges of bias and double standards inevitable and difficult to refute. Thus, it is imperative that such politicized and biased terminology be dismissed as fallacious, inaccurate and incompatible with fair-minded standards of journalistic integrity.

Previously, there was never any doubt as to the historical right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel. On the foundation of the great sacred books of human civilization, the Bible, the Hebrew Torah and the Koran, in addition to many other documents of great historical and religious significance, the world accepted Israel (Canaan) as the homeland of the Jewish nation. Israel has been home to a constant Jewish presence for more than 3,300 years and in it the Jews lived under the rule of their own government for well over a thousand years. Long after this an itinerant tribe of Arabs, and other tribes, settled on the same land. They, however, never established their own governments and at no time did an Arab government rule over the land of Israel.

The geographical title of the region (an example of a region is Scandinavia or the Balkans), in which Lebanon, Syria, Israel, Jordan, and Northern Sinai are located, was transformed by Arafat into the term “Philistine.” He first used the term to name the lands that had to be given to the Arabs according to the Oslo Accords, and then to name his new Arab state. There already exists an Arabic-Palestinian state, Jordan; thus, there is no legitimate need for another such state.

Instead of Arafat’s manufactured spurious terms, the following substitutions should be made. Instead of the incorrect title of the “Palestinians” (since this connotes Arabs only and the meaning of the term includes all those who reside in Israel), there is the proper title of the “Arabic Government in Israel.” The term “West Bank” is intended to shield the true name of the region that is Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, which all legally belong to the Jewish Nation. To correct this misconception, the Arabs who reside in those areas should be referred to as Arabs of Judea, Arabs of Samaria, and Arabs of Gaza.

The so-called “occupied territory” does in fact belong to the Jewish nation with its capital in Jerusalem as stated in the Balfour Declaration signed in 1917. All of the territory of Biblical Palestine, which includes both of the East and the West Banks of the Jordan River, are called the Home of the Jewish Nation. Despite the Balfour Declaration and the Resolution of the United Nations (1947) which prove that this land belongs to Israel, all of the Arabic nations attacked the Israeli lands in 1948 and occupied Judea and eastern Jerusalem, Samaria, Gaza, and the Golan Heights.

Once again, the following are reasons for the invention of Arafat’s erroneous terminology. Arafat started by acclimatizing the region of Palestine as a name to connote the group consisting of his own self and the Arabic Government in Israel. From there he derived the terms “Palestinian autonomy” and “the Palestinian nation.” After he established those terms successfully all over the world, he then began the campaign of demanding the territory of Israel, since the title of his people meant that they had some right to that land.

Historically, the real Palestinians were the Iron Age Philistines. The Arabs and the Philistines are completely different nations and races. The Arabs arrived in the lands many centuries after the full disappearance of the Philistines. Though Arafat declared that the Arabs were the offspring of the Philistines, this is obviously inaccurate and fictitious. In addition, he declared the Jews the “occupants” of this territory, even though they had been legally residing in the region.

There exists another very common and very false term in our everyday language. This is the “Palestinian-Israeli conflict.” Though it sounds appropriate, it is truly not. It was invented to hide the truth of the aggression of the “Palestinians” and to falsely equalize their actions with those of the Israeli Government. This term unjustifiably lifts the blame from the Arabs and even more unwarrantedly gives blame to the Israeli Government. To title the “conflict” correctly, it should be called, “the Arabic nationalistic/religious aggression.”

The implementation of the biased terminology of Arafat in the press is unprofessional, nescient, and anti-Semitic. It is up to authors, journalists, editors, the media, and everyone else to refrain from using the pro-Arafat and anti-Israel terms, and to use only truthful and accurate vocabulary.

“Judea,” “Samaria,” “Gaza,” or “liberated territory” should be used instead of the “West Bank” and “occupied territory.”

“The Arabic autonomy in Israel” is correct, and must be used instead of “Palestinian autonomy.”

“The Arabic government in Palestine” needs to be implemented instead of “Palestinian government.”

“The Arabs of Judea, Samaria and (or) Gaza” is the proper term for “Palestinians” and “the Palestinian nation.”

“Arabic nationalistic/religious aggression” is correct, as opposed to the “Palestinian-Israeli conflict.”

'Journalists of the Russian-American press': V.Raevsky, A.Dymshits, S.Gandler, M.Gurevich, S.Dynkevich, A.Malievsky, V.Okun, V.Opendik, B.Rivkin, L.Fainleb, S.Frumkin, N.S.Schwartz, B.Shusteff

Edited by M. Woldman

Translated from Russian by N.S. Schwartz

Russion version

Сегодня на сайте

“An Appeal to the Editors, Publishers and Writers of the Mass Media”