- 20 تشرين أول 2024
- حكايات مقدسية
By: Intisar ALQSAR
In the ongoing genocidal war in occupied Palestine, the language we use shapes perceptions and influences public opinion. As we navigate the complexities of the Palestinian cause, it is crucial to reset narratives by adopting accurate terminology that reflects the realities on the ground. The importance of this linguistic shift cannot be overstated, as it contributes to a more truthful understanding of the situation in occupied Palestine.
The power of language
Language is not merely a tool for communication; it is a powerful instrument that can either obscure or illuminate reality. When discussing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the terminology used often reflects political biases, historical narratives, and cultural perspectives. Words like "occupation," "apartheid," and "invasion" are frequently watered down or replaced with euphemisms that dilute their meaning. Such language can perpetuate misunderstandings and hinder genuine dialogue aimed at resolving the conflict.
The case for correct terminology (Examples)
- Apartheid vs. Differentiated Policies: The term "apartheid" describes a system of institutionalized racial segregation and discrimination. In 2021, Human Rights Watch (HRW) characterized Israel's policies towards Palestinians as "apartheid," stating that they involve "severe abuses against Palestinians in the occupied territory" and "the systematic privileging of Jewish Israelis." This term is essential to convey the gravity of the situation and the extent of discrimination faced by Palestinians, especially concerning access to resources, freedom of movement, and political representation. By failing to acknowledge the apartheid nature of these policies, we minimize the severity of the situation and undermine the experiences of those affected.
- Israel Occupation Forces vs. Israel Defence Forces: Referring to the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) as "Israel Occupation Forces" (IOF) more accurately reflects their role in the occupation of Palestinian territories. The terminology emphasizes the military's presence and actions in occupied Palestine, fostering a clearer understanding of the power dynamics at play. The IDF's actions, often justified under the guise of national security, should be scrutinized as part of the broader context of occupation. For instance, in their periodic reports, the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) has documented widespread destruction of Palestinian homes and infrastructure, highlighting the impact of the IOF's actions on civilian populations.
- Invasion vs. Limited Operation: The use of phrases like "limited operation" or "military operation" often downplays the severity of military actions taken against Palestinians. For example, during the 2021 escalation in Gaza, Israeli airstrikes were referred to as "operations," but the scale of destruction and civilian casualties—over 250 Palestinians killed, including many women and children—revealed the reality of invasion. By using the term "invasion," we emphasize the impact of such actions on civilian populations and the ongoing violation of human rights. Drawing parallels with other conflicts, such as the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, illustrates how language can shape narratives around military actions, often downplaying the human cost involved.
- Jerusalem vs. West and East Jerusalem: Referring to "Jerusalem" without the qualifiers of "West" and "East" acknowledges the city’s status as a whole rather than a divided entity. This approach underscores the significance of Jerusalem to Palestinians and recognizes their historical and cultural ties to the city. It also challenges the narrative of division perpetuated by political agendas that seek to fragment Palestinian identity. The significance of Jerusalem is further highlighted by UNESCO's recognition of its cultural heritage, emphasizing the city’s importance to Palestinians, Christians, and Muslims alike.
- Terrorism vs. Resistance: The terminology surrounding acts of violence in the context of the Palestinian cause often provokes heated debate. The term "terrorism" is frequently applied to Palestinian resistance actions, while the broader context of occupation and oppression is sometimes ignored. By framing these actions solely as "terrorism," the complexities of the struggle for liberation and self-determination are obscured. Many Palestinians view their resistance—whether through protests, civil disobedience, or armed struggle—as a legitimate response to decades of occupation and systemic oppression. It is crucial to recognize the difference between terrorism, which targets civilians and aims to instil fear, and resistance, which seeks to challenge oppression and reclaim rights. Context matters; historical parallels can be drawn with the anti-colonial struggles in places like Algeria and Vietnam, where acts of resistance were often labelled as terrorism by colonial powers but were framed as freedom fighting by those seeking liberation.
Comparative Analysis with Other Struggles
The need for precise language in the Palestinian cause is echoed in other historical and contemporary struggles. For instance, the civil rights movement in the United States faced similar challenges in the framing of narratives. The term "Jim Crow laws" was used to describe the system of racial segregation and discrimination, highlighting the struggles of African Americans. By accurately naming the injustices, activists were able to mobilize support and foster a deeper understanding of the systemic racism they faced.
In South Africa, the anti-apartheid movement also utilized language as a powerful tool for change. Describing the oppressive system as "apartheid" garnered international attention and support, ultimately leading to significant political change. The careful selection of language in both the U.S. and South Africa underscored the importance of accurately portraying the lived realities of marginalized communities
Politicians and Media: Shaping narratives to suit interests
In the intricate landscape of the Palestinian cause, politicians and media in the West and other parts in the world (including Arab and regional regimes) play a pivotal role in shaping narratives that align with their interests, often sidelining the fundamental principles of justice and human rights. The portrayal of events in occupied Palestine frequently reflects the biases of those in power, obscuring the harsh realities faced by Palestinians and downplaying the clear violations of international law perpetrated by the IOF.
One of the most striking examples of this manipulation of narrative is the selective reporting surrounding the deaths of Palestinian children. The tragic loss of innocent lives, particularly those of children, should evoke universal outrage and compassion. However, the media often refrains from highlighting these victims’ humanity. For instance, in the aftermath of the killing of a four-year-old Palestinian girl by an Israeli sniper in Jerusalem, the coverage from certain outlets, such as Sky News, fell short of adequately addressing the horror of the situation, instead of naming her and recounting her story, some reports described her death in detached terms, emphasizing the context of "violence" without acknowledging the specific and horrific nature of the act or the identity of the victim. Sky News called this child as ‘YOUNG LADY’!
This approach reflects a broader trend where the narratives around Palestinian suffering are often minimized or framed in a way that absolves the perpetrators of responsibility. By failing to depict the victims as individuals with lives, dreams, and families, media narratives contribute to the dehumanization of Palestinians and perpetuate a skewed understanding of the conflict. Such reporting not only undermines the gravity of the situation but also dilutes the urgency of addressing the violations of international law that occur with impunity.
Politicians also play a significant role in crafting these narratives to fit their agendas. For instance, some leaders in the West frame the conflict as a mere security issue, prioritizing Israel's right to defend itself while overlooking the systemic oppression faced by Palestinians under occupation. This framing serves to legitimize the actions of the IOF, even when those actions constitute violations of international humanitarian law. The consistent reference to military operations or taking war criminal actions including starvation measurements and /or denying access to basic rights (health, water and education..etc) as "defensive measures" allows for a narrative that diminishes the reality of invasion and occupation, thus complicating efforts to hold Israel accountable for its actions.
By perpetuating these narratives, both politicians and media entities can deflect attention from the urgent need for justice and accountability. The consequences are dire; they foster an environment where human rights violations are normalized, and the suffering of the Palestinian people becomes a footnote in broader geopolitical discussions.
The need for authenticity
Correcting the narrative around the Palestinian cause is not merely a linguistic exercise; it is a matter of justice and authenticity. By using precise language, we honour the experiences and struggles of those living under occupation. It is imperative to challenge dominant narratives that seek to sanitize or distort the reality faced by Palestinians.
Resetting the narratives surrounding the Palestinian cause requires a conscious effort to employ language that reflects the lived experiences of individuals and communities affected by the occupation. As advocates, journalists, and individuals committed to justice, we must strive for accuracy and authenticity in our discourse. By adopting terminology that acknowledges the realities of occupation and apartheid, we can contribute to a more nuanced understanding of the situation in Palestine and foster a path toward meaningful dialogue and resolution.
In this endeavour, language becomes a crucial ally in the pursuit of truth and justice for the Palestinian people. By rectifying our narratives, we not only seek to illuminate the Palestinian cause but also affirm our commitment to justice for all oppressed peoples around the world.
