Why Israel loses the media war (National Post, June 23)

It happens time and again. You're watching, say, Paula Zahn on CNN interviewing Israeli and Palestinian representatives after a West Bank raid by the Israeli army. The calm Palestinian spokesman purrs, "Hello Paula ..." Then in a sad, dignified voice -- and exquisite English -- recounts the horrors his people are suffering. The Israeli spokesman -- nervous, sweaty -- tries to explain to "Dear Lady" in heavily accented, English that the IDF was flushing out terrorists. For the average viewer, superficially versed in Mideast affairs, his crude presentation and pompous manner cede yet another media triumph to Yasser Arafat.

For Israel's supporters, weak advocacy in its defence is maddening. But all viewers are ill-served by such bungling. The communications imbalance gives a misleading impression of Mideast events and casts moral doubt on the global war against terrorism.

In his new book, Still Life with Bombers: Israel in the Age of Terrorism, David Horovitz, editor of the Jerusalem Report, tackles Israel's public relations failure with brutal frankness. "From the very start of this conflict, the Israeli spokespeople and their various hierarchies [have been] criminally, even murderously incompetent," Horovitz argues. "And I use those terms with full awareness of their weight."

Raised in England, Horovitz and his American wife settled in Jerusalem in 1983. Like other idealistic Israelis, his once-dovish hopes flatlined after Arafat's repudiation of Ehud Barak's generous Camp David peace overtures, followed by the Second Intifada's mounting spiral of terrorism. Horovitz has an insider's knowledge of both the issues and the political players. A frequent media commentator, he travels the world defending Israel in a variety of public and academic forums.

Horovitz first provides ample evidence of the general anti-Israel bias in the international media, with emphasis on such Big Lie catastrophes as the bogus Jenin "massacre." Then he identifies in painful detail what Israel is doing wrong in redressing this. The basic problem at the highest political levels, he concludes, is arrogant indifference to the amateurism in its public-relations corps. To wit:

- Former foreign minister Shimon Peres dismantled much of the ministry's information hierarchy during the early 1990s. According to Horovitz's summary of the government's view, "Israel didn't need to worry about public relations because it was so clearly doing the right thing."

- Spokespersons brought before the Western media are patronage choices and often speak poor English, even though Israel boasts any number of competent, fluently bilingual specimens. For example, an underqualified woman with poor English, selected through an affirmative action initiative to promote female diplomats, was sent to London. She performed disastrously, but Israel ignored passionate pleas from the Anglo-Jewish community to replace her

- Arafat and his minions court the media assiduously and seize ownership of the narrative when breaking news erupts. Israel, meanwhile, often fails even to hold press conferences or provide crucial information until it's too late. In Jenin, for instance, Israel banned reporters for days. At the very least, an army spokesman's unit should have been sent into Jenin and provided journalists with footage to neutralize the inflammatory "massacre" allegations.

The root of all this amateurism, Horovitz says, begins in the Prime Minister's office. Ehud Barak was badly served by advisors for whom public relations should have been a priority, but wasn't, while Sharon is caught up in a siege mentality, believing everyone except the United States is so disposed to hate him that no amount of effective communications will do any good. His often-incompetent spokespeople's failures reinforce his defeatist perception.

Meanwhile, the Palestinian spokespeople -- few in number, but skilled academics with long experience in shmoozily urbane media performance -- are always on message. While democratic Israelis confuse observers with open public dissension in a clashing cacophony of extremist views from left and right, the Palestinians speak softly and respectfully in excellent English with one unified pro-Arafat voice. They sidestep unpleasant questions and often lie -- "All we want is peace!" -- but they always appear reasonable.

Israel continually walks the walk' in combat. The stakes are too high not to continuously talk the talk in the Sisyphean struggle for the understanding of the outside world. I can only hope Still life with bombers is sitting on Ariel Sharon's bedside table.

© National Post 2004