The pseudo-poll and
headline published by Haaretz on Oct. 23 is now generally acknowledged
as a major mistake. The poll's manipulative methodology and shallow
questions have been dissected in newspaper columns and talk shows across
the Israeli spectrum. Haaretz was forced to publish a correction, which
was largely hidden, and Haaretz columnist Gideon Levy wrote a minimal
retraction.
However, a great deal
of damage has been done outside Israel, where this farce was used to
further the campaign of anti-Israel political warfare and demonization.
The British Guardian and Independent, the Canadian Globe and Mail
and Australia's Sydney Morning Herald ran the story accompanied by
headlines as misleading as the headline on the original Haaretz piece:
“Many Israelis support apartheid-style state, poll suggests,” and “The
new Israeli apartheid.”
The poll that generated
such attention was flawed in many dimensions. In Maariv, Ben-Dror
Yemini details many of the false claims and absurd statements it
contains. And in Haaretz, former Deputy Foreign Affairs Minister Dr.
Yehuda Ben-Meir emphasized that the actual conclusion to be drawn from
the poll results was “exactly the opposite of what's written in the
article's headline” and that the majority of Israelis were “unwilling to
live in a country with an apartheid regime.” As a “push” poll used for
crude political manipulation, and involving only 503 people, this survey
was driven by clear political objectives.
These activities are an
integral part of an ongoing campaign that began in the NGO Forum of the
U.N.’s 2001 World Conference Against Racism in Durban, South Africa.
The crudely anti-Semitic event was described by the late Congressman Tom
Lantos as “an anti-American and anti-Israel circus.” In alliance with
the Arab League and Iran, 5,000 officials from 1,500 “civil society
organizations” that use the banner of human rights, including Amnesty
International and Human Rights Watch, adopted a declaration
accusing Israel of “apartheid and ethnic cleansing” and adopted a
strategy of “complete and total isolation of Israel as an apartheid
state ... the imposition of mandatory and comprehensive sanctions and
embargoes, the full cessation of all links.” It is in this context that
the poll, the headlines that followed (based on an equally misleading
press release) and those responsible for it must be understood.
The pseudo-poll is another form of attack in this political war to demonize Israel. Responsibility
for the attack, beyond Haaretz, lies with Amiram Goldblum, a founder of
Peace Now, who runs the Yisraela Goldblum Fund (named after his late
wife), which paid for costs, under the wider framework of the non-profit
group known as “Signing Anew.” This funding, in turn, was provided by
the New Israel Fund, and Goldblum is a member of NIF’s International
Council.
In addition, according
to Goldblum’s press release, the “questions” used in this transparent
political stunt were formulated by individuals closely connected to the
NIF, the Durban Strategy and the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions
campaign. Attorney Michael Sfard is legal counsel for a number of
Israeli politicized civil society groups involved in this immoral
campaign, and Alon Liel (married to NIF’s Executive Director in Israel,
Rachel Liel) has expressed his support for so-called “targeted” boycotts
in the Guardian and in the South African media. Mordechai Bar-On and
Ilan Baruch are also members of the NIF’s International Council.
Everyone connected with
this travesty shares responsibility for the immense political damage
that has been caused. Goldblum, in particular, owes the Israeli public
an apology. And just as the NIF takes credit when its grantees impact
positively on Israel, so too, must they take responsibility when its
grantees like this do serious damage.
Gerald M. Steinberg is
president of Jerusalem-based research institution NGO Monitor and is
professor of political science at Bar-Ilan University.
No comments:
Post a Comment