The Economist Makes Israelis Into Monsters: Follow-Up

Barry Rubin

I wrote recently of how The Economist ran an incredible article trying to make Israelis look like horrible war criminals based on what seemed to be made up and distorted material. The one person actually quoted by name in the article was Eran (distorted to “Iran”) Segal. I sent him the paragraph in question:

“For some of Halamish’s settlers, irritated by the tear-gas that wafts into their living rooms from across the hill, this is not harsh enough. `The soldiers don’t maim enough Palestinians,’ complains Iran Segal.”

Mr. Segal responded that he only talked to the reporter about how the Friday stonethrowing–note, not the tear-gas (fired by Israeli soldiers) but the stones thrown at him by Palestinians–makes life impossible. He explained to the journalist that stones can kill.
The only thing he said about what the army should do was that if it had taken the problem more seriously in the past that the stone-throwing would have stopped. I believe Mr. Segal, who seemed genuinely shocked by the statement attributed to him. Note how his complaint about being a victim (stones thrown to injure and perhaps kill him) was changed into making him seem a bloodthirsty aggressor (wanting to maim harmless little kids who had done him no harm at all).

Whether or not the settlements should be there, the land traded to the Palestinians in exchange for peace (if that’s ever possible), or the settlements should be dismantled after a peace agreement (if that ever happens) is irrelevant. That’s for the editorial pages.

The views of people quoted and what actually happens should be represented fairly. One reporter I know who worked for a major American newspaper told me she was forbidden to write anything about settlers that might be deemed the least bit sympathetic. The narrative was that Palestinians were victims and that’s what all the stories should reflect.

Mr. Segal has been slandered, but then that’s true for all Israelis.