Earlier this week, the Israeli Knesset approved a bill — 70 in favour, 10 against — to ban foreign media in Israel if they pose a threat to the country’s security.
The law did not single out any specific news organisation, so it could in theory include the likes of the BBC and CNN. But almost immediately, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made it clear who the intended target was with a message on X, declaring, “The terrorist channel Al Jazeera will no longer broadcast from Israel. I intend to act immediately in accordance with the new law to stop the channel’s activities.”
According to the Israeli government’s narrative, Al Jazeera is a mouthpiece for Hamas propaganda. Last October, Israeli Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi accused Al Jazeera of exposing Israeli soldiers to potential attacks from Gaza, telling Israel’s Army Radio, “This is a station that incites, this is a station that films troops in assembly areas [outside Gaza] … that incites against the citizens of Israel.”
Being accused of supporting terrorism is nothing new for Al Jazeera.
In 2014 I was one of three Al Jazeera journalists convicted of terrorism offences in Egypt, so Israel’s argument is familiar. Back then, we were covering the unfolding political crisis that flowed from the Arab Spring uprising. We had fulfilled our professional responsibilities by talking to all parties of the conflict, and that included the group that had formed the last government, the Muslim Brotherhood.
Like all decent reporters, we had their contact details, and while we were careful not to broadcast incitements to violence, we also had a duty to present their stories, political arguments and perspectives as fairly and critically as the Egyptian government’s.
In other words, it was not propaganda. It was good journalism. But for the Egyptian government, anything that humanised its enemies or explained their worldview undermined the government’s political logic, and so our work became branded as “terrorist propaganda”. That’s how we wound up with seven-year prison sentences.
So it is with Al Jazeera in Gaza. The network has been there for years, with skilled and experienced Palestinian journalists who have a deep understanding of the story and a network of contacts unrivalled by any other international news organisation. They also have bureaus in the West Bank and Jerusalem.
On October 25, an air raid killed the family of Al Jazeera’s Gaza bureau chief Wael Al-Dahdouh, including his wife, son, daughter, grandson and at least eight other relatives. Al Jazeera broadcast Al-Dahdouh as he walked into the morgue to view the bodies of his family, offering a glimpse into the grief and loss experienced by many Gaza residents.
Then in January, an Israeli airstrike hit a car carrying three journalists, including another son of Al-Dahdouh’s, who was a cameraman with the network, an Al Jazeera colleague, and a freelancer. All three were killed.
So it is no wonder that the network covers the plight of Palestinians with detail and empathy that Western news organisations often lack. And given the necessarily Arab-centric worldview from its headquarters in the Qatari capital of Doha, it is also hardly surprising that Al Jazeera is robustly sceptical of Israel’s position.
Is it biased? Perhaps, but far less than news organisations with reporters in Jerusalem and nobody in Gaza. If anything, that makes it more important for Israel and the rest of the world to watch and understand. Understanding is not the same as endorsing, but surely peace is impossible without appreciating why the people you are fighting behave the way they do.
As the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists pointed out in a statement, “The new law grants the government the power to close any foreign media outlets operating in Israel, posing a significant threat to international media within the country. This contributes to a climate of self-censorship and hostility toward the press, a trend that has escalated since the Israel-Gaza war began.”
Israel often portrays itself as the only democracy in the Middle East, and the only government in the region to tolerate critical media. This latest law threatens to undermine those claims.
“Israel often portrays itself as the only democracy in the Middle East, and the only government in the region to tolerate critical media. This latest law threatens to undermine those claims. “
I’d say that these claims have been shown as the untruths they are long ago, no?
The refusal to allow foreign journalists to enter Gaza? The killing of more journalists in 6 months than in any other conflict? What about the targeted destruction of Palestinian hospitals, schools, universities, museums? Cemeteries?!? Not to mention the continuing occupation and oppression of Palestinians, the almost two decades long blockade of Gaza, the illegal settlements, or the countless Palestinians Israel has displaced, maimed, killed and starved throughout its 75 years of existence.
Very sadly a lot of truth in agatek’s statements, post Oct 7th. Netanyahu retained power (to avoid prison) by bringing together a cabal of extremist’s following the last election. The extremists who are now giving the IDF orders. If another election was held Bibi would be on his way to carceral institution.
However, HAMAS fights in civilian clothing, making it hard to distinguish good from bad, it uses innocent Gazan residents of all ages as shields, it has built its defenses in or below hospitals, schools, any public building and infiltrated charities like UNWRA and so on. A tricky enemy to target. HAMAS’s criminal gangs have stolen aid form overseas and resell it to Gazan residents to fund their leaders who live in Türkiye , Dubai in luxury. Nice guys eh?
There is not much evidence of the things you assert. But there has been quite a bit of evidence over time of Israeli soldiers using (Palestinian) civilians as human shields. We also know that at the start of the 20th century Zionist gangs had their lairs below public buildings like schools. Hamas has infiltrated UNRWA? Israel has been claiming that for a while but it’s yet to be proven. Also, considering that Israel is always presented with a list of potential UNRWA workers and approves or rejects them… well, they’re pretty bad at their job if UNRWA is ‘infiltrated’ by Hamas as you claim. The claims of Hamas stealing aid come from Israel as well so I’d be sceptical here too considering how many of Israel’s claims have been proven to be false.
Probably not original, but the other day I coined the phrase, to have ‘gone the full pretzel of cognitive dissonance’
Ah yes, a country where even the mildest criticism of the government results in someone playing the anti s3mitic card.
How can anyone regard Israel as a democracy when they have several million citizens denied a vote under their apartheid system.
Rubbish. Suffrage is extended to all Israeli citizens over 18 years, assuming they have registered to vote, as in Australia. This includes the
20+ % of citizens who are Arabs. And by the way Israel is the “most democratic” state in the Middle East, though it has elected a far-right Government, for the time being.
Talking of democracy check out who you can vote for in Iran, that funds their pals HAMAS. You can only stand if you are approved by the Government, i.e. male and religious and definitely not gay.
Yet Israel is condemned, quite rightly on occasions, whilst HAMAS, evidently freely elected in Gaza is praised by inference.
We need to stop pretending that Israel is a liberal democracy. Remind me how many Palestinians they had in extended administrative detention that they swapped for some of the hostages?
Many of whom were boys in their teens.
But they were ‘attempted murderers’ (for throwing stones at tanks and armoured bulldozers).
With all due respect for Mr Greste, and I have a lot, illiberal scarcely seems anything like an adequate word. Murderous scum seems more appropriate, or perhaps fascist.