The Israeli newspaper, Ha'aretz, Sunday, October 25, 1998 , quotes US officials as calling Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's last-minute demand for the release of convicted spy Jonathan Pollard,
"extortion":
"U.S. furious at Israeli demand for release of jailed spy Pollard"
"The Pollard case will get a 'review,' vows Clinton" .
In the Jerusalem Post, " Roll over Jabotinsky" by Bernard Wasserstein Oct 26, 1998, describes in harsh terms Netanyahu's last minute attempt to exploit President Clinton's personal investment of time and energy in the success of the Wye River Summit: "particularly in the inept attempt to wangle the release of Jonathan Pollard (who should be an object of shame, not solicitude for Israeli governments)."
The mainstream Israeli press was unambiguous in recognizing the inappropriateness of the Netanyahu demand at Wye. In stark contrast, the US media includes almost no coverage of the Pollard incident as in any way controversial.
The Pollard case is especially sensitive as it exposes a critical conflict of interest for some US Jews who are extremist supporters of Israel. By attempting to hold the Wye Summit settlement hostage to the release of Pollard, Netanyahu has raised again the issue of whether ultra-Zionist US Jews, such as Pollard or the late ultra-Orthodox Katsch Party leader, Meir Kahana, bear primary allegiance to the US or to Israel.
Soft coverage in the US of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict presumes a lack of diversity among US Jews regarding the policies of the Israeli government. Israeli papers, including the liberal Ha'aretz, and the conservative, Jerusalem Post address a far greater diversity of opinion among Jews.
If Amira Hass' article "Terrorism and geography," Ha'aretz, 11/10/98, were published in a mainstream paper in the US, it would raise an immediate accusation of anti-Semitism. Such straight talk is surprising to ears accustomed to the euphemisms of The Chicago Tribune or The NY Times:
The following is an excellent example from that writing:
"Perhaps only the sharp tongue of the Palestinian Authority justice minister articulated what Palestinians thought of the many postponements and clarifications of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government. When Freih Abu Meddain was asked, four days before the Mahane Yehuda terrorist attack, why he thought Netanyahu postponed cabinet discussion of the Wye Memorandum again, he said, 'Netanyahu is waiting for a present from Islamic Jihad, a present from Hamas.' The 'present' has been given, and is still being used to the fullest by (Israeli) state broadcasting."
The US media attempts to please Jewish audiences with soft coverage of Israeli injustices to the Palestinians, as if US Jews are homogeneously supportive of the racist anti-Arab policies of the Likud Party of Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu. The press ignores or minimizes stories which highlight the foreign policy conflicts between the US and Israel, and spins most news to benefit the Israeli image. For example, the "land for peace" basis for the Oslo Accords is invariably represented in the US media as a "giving up" of Israeli land, a trade of Jewish land in exchange for Palestinian control of terrorism. Little or no reference is made to the fact that the land, Gaza, The West Bank, Jerusalem, and the Golan, belongs to the Arabs. It was seized in the War of 1967, and has been illegally occupied by Israel for the past 31 years.
Very little mention is made in the US media of the fact that the UN General Assembly has voted numerous resolutions over the years demanding the unconditional withdrawal of Israel military forces from the "Occupied Territories." The US has blocked enforcement of these resolutions only because of its veto in the UN Security Council.
The media stereotype of the US Jewish constituency as hardline, pro-Likud, supports the continued US financial underwriting of the extremist Israeli "settlers" and the expansion of their unproductive subsidized settlements. If American audiences were to have the benefit of media coverage of the vigorous debate over the settlements which is carried in the Israeli press, taxpayers would resist sending $3 billion in foreign aid each year to Israel for such purposes.
Return to Primary Index