Commentary Magazine


Contentions

We Now Know: Gaza Edition

The fog of war often means the first draft of history makes the greatest impact but needs to be corrected by later drafts. After the Cold War was over, historian John Lewis Gaddis called his updated book on the conflict “We Now Know: Rethinking Cold War History.” More famous is Kinglsey Amis’s suggestion that Robert Conquest call his new edition of The Great Terror “I Told You So, You F—ing Fools.” Yet now we have a rare opportunity in Gaza to apply what we now know to additional fighting in a war thought to be over.

With no deal reached for a permanent truce between Israel and Hamas, the terrorist organization in Gaza wasted no time in renewing its attacks on Israel today. And it’s worth wondering if the atrocious media coverage of the war, which abided by Hamas’s threats and only showed what Hamas wanted the world to see, will be any different for this round of fighting. After all, as Israeli ground troops left Gaza and journalists went with them, reporters began to admit: we now know.

We now know, that is, that Hamas was firing rockets from civilian areas and among neighborhoods where journalists were staying. That meant they were getting a twofer: reporters wouldn’t expose their war crimes and they would draw return fire from Israel that would endanger foreign journalists and Palestinian civilians. As we know from the Tet Offensive, if you can spook the reporters you can get your sky-is-falling coverage made to order.

The political world was transfixed earlier this week by a New Delhi Television (NDTV) visual report on Hamas firing from outside the reporters’ hotel. This was a broadcast that American and other Western media didn’t have–in fact, major Western media spent the war explaining why you could follow their coverage for weeks of war reporting and not see a single Hamas fighter. The NDTV correspondent has written about the experience of filming the dramatic rocket launching:

There is an important detail about that spot which I mention in our video report which may not have fully registered – this was the exact location from where a rocket was fired five days prior. It happened around midnight, so it was impossible to film. Panic ensued. The Israel Defence Force (IDF) sent a warning to two hotels across the road to evacuate; within minutes they were empty. Those in our building slept in a safe room on the ground floor. And so that spot was seared in our memory.

So when we saw the tent on the same location with two men (later three) moving in and out, working on something inside which they seemed to be burying into the ground, it wasn’t hard to conclude what this was. When they started running wires out of the tent, the final steps before covering the earth with a spade, moving some shrubbery on top and then slinking away, it was even clearer.

We had all of it on tape, but wrestled with the dilemma of what to do with it. Two considerations weighed on our mind. One, the fear which hobbles the reporting such material: fear of reprisals from Hamas against us and those who worked with us, fear of inviting an Israeli response on the spot (these have been known to miss). Two, we needed to be 100 % sure that this was a rocket launch site. So we did nothing, setting off on our assignment for the day, mulling over the material in our possession.

The concern over Hamas reprisals is real and legitimate. There has been some pushback against the criticism of reporters in Gaza for not showing an accurate picture of the war. Much of that pushback is misplaced. The argument is not that journalists are wimps for not risking their lives to fill out the narrative for the public at home, but that the media have been using the inaccurate reporting without adding the appropriate context.

It’s understandable, I suppose, why they don’t add that context. In practice what they are doing is abiding by Hamas’s rules, which require them to basically broadcast a steady stream of Hamas propaganda footage. Adding the context–explaining that they are just showing the folks at home what Hamas wants them to see–would be admitting their own lack of credibility.

We will also see–as Evelyn points out this morning–that the statistics used by international organizations, human-rights groups, and UN monitors are completely unreliable. That means the accusations against Israel are generally bunk as well. We now know. And we’ll know more. But now that we see the war might not be over after all, everyone should keep that in mind.



Join the discussion…

Are you a subscriber? Log in to comment »

Not a subscriber? Join the discussion today, subscribe to Commentary »


5 Responses to “We Now Know: Gaza Edition”

  1. MARC SALZBERGER says:

    What We Know is that Israel is Now a flopping carp, hooked, helpless, as Hamas shoots rockets at will into her, unbothered by civilian losses and confident of media and UN support.

    To spit out that hook and pull Hamas under Israel must cut a NO MAN’S LAND, at Hamas’ expense, along all or part of their common 51 km border. With every discovery of a new tunnel Israel could then enlarge that zone by a certain number of meters. So too with every rocket fired and every kidnapping and act of terror out of Gaza.

    Israel would gain the ability to respond to each and every future attack and incident without expending a single bullet. Gazans would see their already small realm shrink ever smaller, as a direct result of Hamas’ behavior and proportionate to the severity of its actions. The world’s demand for proportionality would be answered. Israel would have a measured way to punish without killing or demolishing. Furthermore, it would acquire the ability to reward peaceful overtures by contracting this corridor

    The time to institute such an NML is now, while the need for it is obvious and its moral justification undebatable.

    Of course crowds spitting rage and vitriol would deem it debatable. Nevermind them. The fair-minded will understand. The volume of anger from the rest can’t rise much higher. Those threatening boycott, disinvestment and sanctions are already exerting all their might. The Jewish state has little to lose and much to gain with such a flexible cordon sanitaire.

  2. MANUEL LAZEROV says:

    Hamas is committing a double war crime: (10 targeting innocent Israeli citizens, (2) using their own as human shields. This unprecedented barbarism may be the reason that war continues, with this latest round a testament to their despicable nihilism.
    Hamas and ISIS are in the same tradition. It’s just that Hamas is less effective, but equally dipised

  3. ROMAN SZEREMETA says:

    This para in Gaddis “We Now Know” caught my attention – he’s talking about the legacy of the First World War -
    “..it also discredited the old forms of diplomacy that allowed war to break out in the first place and that proved so ineffective in ending it.”
    Is this the same diplomacy that Obama has eagerly grasped with both hands much like a drowning man clutching at a straw!

  4. KAREN ADLER says:

    Where are the principles of these journalists? Why wouldn’t they refuse to report from the area under these circumstances? Seasoned, credible journalists’ refusing to participate in Hamas’ propaganda would say a lot.
    But journalism today has been dumbed down to the point where anyone of them tweets whatever unprofessional, inane comment comes into their head, like the CNN reporter in Sderot or Aymen Moyheddin with his outright lies.

  5. BEATRICE STEIN says:

    Reporters couldn’t report accurately because Hamas threatened to expel them, costing them their jobs, or to sue them for “inaccuracy” threatening personal or corporate bank accounts. Journalists may not have been threatened with death, an action easily managed in a war zone, but that possibility had to occur to reporters who made terrorists angry.

    But the war is over. Why are we not seeing revelations of why reporters kept quiet, and statements of the truth now that correspondents are safely home? Journalistic silence put the public on the terrorist’s side and now reporters are afraid to speak up because Israel has been blackened and the truth is so unpopular.




Welcome to Commentary Magazine.
We hope you enjoy your visit.
As a visitor to our site, you are allowed 8 free articles this month.
This is your first of 8 free articles.

If you are already a digital subscriber, log in here »

Print subscriber? For free access to the website and iPad, register here »

To subscribe, click here to see our subscription offers »

Please note this is an advertisement skip this ad
Clearly, you have a passion for ideas.
Subscribe today for unlimited digital access to the publication that shapes the minds of the people who shape our world.
Get for just
YOU HAVE READ OF 8 FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
FOR JUST
YOU HAVE READ OF 8 FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
FOR JUST
Welcome to Commentary Magazine.
We hope you enjoy your visit.
As a visitor, you are allowed 8 free articles.
This is your first article.
You have read of 8 free articles this month.
YOU HAVE READ 8 OF 8
FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
for full access to
CommentaryMagazine.com
INCLUDES FULL ACCESS TO:
Digital subscriber?
Print subscriber? Get free access »
Call to subscribe: 1-800-829-6270
You can also subscribe
on your computer at
CommentaryMagazine.com.
LOG IN WITH YOUR
COMMENTARY MAGAZINE ID
Don't have a CommentaryMagazine.com log in?
CREATE A COMMENTARY
LOG IN ID
Enter you email address and password below. A confirmation email will be sent to the email address that you provide.