#82 The Palestinian Conflict and Public Opinion

The conflict between the Arab and Jewish inhabitants of Palestine is certainly not new. It started long before the creation of Israel. And the basis of this conflict, the claim on the same piece of land by two nations, has not changed through the years. The violence produced by this conflict has also been present since the day the first Jewish settlers arrived in what was then an Ottoman province. The number of casualties was lower, but only because the population itself was smaller and because their weapons were less effective.

What has changed is the public opinion expressed by the tone of the UN and the media coverage related to the conflict. At the birth of the State of Israel and until a number of years after the 1967 War the media had a positive attitude towards Israel. It painted a picture of a small country surrounded by far larger enemies that threatened without cease to annihilate it; in this view, brave little Israel was depicted not only as a courageous survivor, but also as a successful reproduction of Western social-democracy and human rights in a sea of despotism. The subject of Israeli-Arab conflict had not yet apportioned to itself more media attention and UN scrutiny than its relative importance implied it should.

The Arab Palestinians that became refugees as a result of the Arab-Jewish struggle for possession of the Holy Land in 1947-8 were the real victims of policies instituted following the war. The policy of the Arab states was to leave the problem unresolved – thereby leaving the question of Palestine open - and Israel could and would not permit the return of large numbers of refugees as such a policy would have undermined the character and security of the nascent Jewish State. The UN has created a special organization, the UNRWA, to aid the Palestinian refugees next to the UNHCR that aids all other refugees with an independent budget larger per capita than that of its sister organization.

Significant interest in the plight of the Palestinian Arabs and changes to the media’s portrayal of the refugee problem began materializing in the seventies. The figure below shows the sharp increase in the percentage of country-specific United Nations General Assembly resolutions concerned with the Middle East in 1970 and continuing over subsequent decades. In 2006 the number of resolutions related to the Palestinian conflict amounted to more than a quarter of all resolutions. During the same period of time the media gradually changed its tone, first depicting Israel as an occupying and aggressive state and later even as an apartheid state and worse. The proportion of anti-Israeli and pro-Arab Palestinian reporting increased, with some news outlets becoming effectively PR agents for the Arab view of events. This change was evident in the many reviews of the Six Day War published in 2007 and is evident currently in the way that the Gaza conflict is being reported. A clear example of such one sided reporting took place in the wake of Israel’s military operations against Qassam rockets in Gaza on the fifteenth of January; in clashes, an estimated seventeen Hamas militants were killed. Media outlets throughout the world were quick to report Palestinian claims of a massacre in Gaza, failing to note entirely or relegating to a trivial detail the fact that these were armed combatants and not civilians. Moreover, they died fighting, so the appellation massacre, although good propaganda, was not appropriate.

The reasons for this change are manifold; most have little to do with the conflict itself. The main contributors are the change in the moral perception of armed conflict by the general public in the west, the intrusiveness and ubiquity of emotive reporting, and the increasing strength of the Arab world and its PR savvy.

When Israel was established, the Second World War has just come to its end and the notion that wars could be just and necessary was still very strong in the public consciousness. There was also a deep feeling of guilt in the West with regard to the Jewish people which made it difficult to criticise the Zionist desire for an independent Jewish state. Furthermore, for nations with Christian cultures the connection between the Jewish people and the land of Palestine was quite obvious. In the 50s and 60s the western public was exposed to a series of independence wars in the European colonies and conflicts like the Vietnam War. The new generation began associating war not with heroic struggles against evil like the Second World War, but rather with petty and cruel conflicts in which superior Western powers sought to crush miserable locals struggling for a better life. For some, it became axiomatic that the West only fought wars to oppress just national liberation struggles out of racist and exploitative motives. When the Six Day War produced enormous territorial gains for Israel, it was easy to associate it with what was now considered despicable colonialism in the Western mindset and to interpret it as an act of premeditated aggression rather than as a defensive war. The rise of a Jewish settlement movement in the conquered territories further reinforced this association. Pro-Palestinian propagandists exploited this development to depict the whole Zionist movement as no more than an instance of Western colonialism. Interestingly, the territories that are now called ‘the occupied territories’ were occupied since 1948 by Arab countries yet never referred to as such until after they passed into Israel’s hands.

When the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza came under Israeli rule, media interest in and access to them increased greatly and their plight was publicised internationally. As a consequence of the violence of the Second Intifada, the Israeli security establishment enacted harsh measures to prevent terrorist attacks. Palestinian freedom of movement within the territories was severely curtailed and access to Israel for work or trade restricted. Life in areas under Palestinian control suffered from infighting and occasional Israeli incursions to limit terrorist activities. Due to the fact that these incursions frequently took place in densely populated residential areas, there were civilian casualties despite efforts to avoid this. Natural sympathy for the weaker party and pictures of seemingly ragtag Palestinian fighters and stone throwing youths confronting an apparently first rate Israeli army created a rich pasture for reporters, producing interesting, often one sided stories that moved public opinion away from Israel. The huge influence of such representations on public opinion is also recognized by the Palestinian PR machine, which has been caught staging scenes and feeding them to media outlets in order to fan hostility against Israel.

An important development of the seventies was the realisation in the Western World that it was strongly dependent on Arab oil. This recognition strongly influenced European Middle East policies and their positions on the Palestinian conflict. Moreover, the emergence of a unified block of Islamic nations under the aegis of the OIC (Organization of the Islamic Conference) mobilized the political clout and voices of over a billion people against Israel. These voices were strongly reinforced by the left which has made Israel one of the classics of their ideological struggle, casting it as the evil western/white power against the innocent non-western/non-white power. As a consequence, the Arab Palestinian cause became an integral part of all of their activities, mainly demonstrations and conferences, which are not related at all to Palestine (e.g. anti globalization). Another active channel to anti Israel opinions in the west is created by the millions of Muslim immigrants. All these voices are in turn broadcast through the media and impact public opinion.

Israel is unable to move public opinion towards a more balanced view of the conflict in large measure due to the fact that it is an open society. There is absolute freedom of speech in Israel and thus the views expressed by the media and individuals are very diverse, reflecting not one but many different understandings of the conflict. Instead of providing a clear Israeli position, Israeli society provides a multiplicity of positions which precludes the effective propagation of an official narrative for PR purposes.

As long as there will not be significant changes on the ground (like the establishment of an Arab Palestine living peacefully side by side with Israel), one can expect to continue seeing the shift of public opinion away from support for Israel.

- This article was written for and provided to the Weekend Economist by Tamara Fai

#81 Maghreb: The Neglected Terror Base

In an article, "#58 The North African Breeding Ground for Radical Islam," published here in April last year, specific mention was made of the fact that little to no attention was being given by mainstream media to the terrorist bloodshed occurring in the Maghreb region, particularly in Algeria. It appears since then little has changed. Just a few weeks back, on 02 January, 4 police officers died when a car bomb exploded near a police station in Naciria, a town east of the Algerian capital, Algiers. A much more deadly attack occurred less than one month earlier in the capital, when two suicide bombings targeting U.N. offices and a government building killed at least 37 people. As if this were not enough, in July 2007 a suicide bomber blew up a truck inside a military barracks southeast of Algiers, killing 10, and later in September, at least 28 people died after an explosives-packed vehicle rammed into a coast guard barracks in the northern town of Dellys. All attacks were claimed by a local al-Qaeda branch.

The argument used last time that ignoring these events when engaging in a so-called war on terror is not only dangerous but downright harebrained continues to hold true, but this has somehow not yet reverberated on Western leaders. This time around there is new data to highlight the importance of North Africa in the fight on terror. In a recent study, U.S. Military Academy researchers found documents that show 112 of the 595 foreign nationals who entered Iraq between August 2006 and August 2007, or 19%, were Libyans, compared to no more than 4% in previous research. The majority still come from Saudi Arabia, but countries like Libya, Algeria and Morocco are increasingly sending more fighters. In fact, basing its information on the same research, the Washington Post reported that overall, North Africans account for 40% of the foreign fighter ranks.

It is incomprehensible that the issue of terrorism in North Africa is so low on the list priorities of anti-terror units, when statistically there is a rapid increase in attacks, a growing effect on other hotspots in the world in the way of recruits, and geographically the most pertinent threat to Europe other than threats from within. Even more striking is the lack of media attention generated by the attacks themselves. Hopefully attitudes will change soon, because if not, we are silently witnessing the maturing of the next batch of enemies that need to be fought.

#80 Spotlight on ASEAN

The recent brutal crackdown on protesters in Myanmar by the military regime has led to a unified barrage of condemnation and sanctions from the West. Not so elsewhere. While China, India and Russia have rightly been accused of doing far too little to leverage their political muscle, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) should be viewed in the same light. After all, other than the United Nations, ASEAN is by far the largest organization of which Myanmar is a member.

There does, however, appear to be some movement at ASEAN, whose leaders are gathered in Singapore for their annual summit this week. A condemnation of the junta's violent suppression of Buddhist monks and other peaceful protesters was announced on the heels of a bold statement by Philippine President Gloria Arroyo, who said "Those who will sign the charter [committing all 10 members of ASEAN to promote human rights and democracy] agree to the objective, spirit and intent of establishing a human rights body - the full protection of human rights within Asean...Until the Philippine Congress sees that happen, it would have extreme difficulty in ratifying the Asean charter."

Despite this, signs that the government of Myanmar will be allowed to continue on the current path are much more prevalent. For one, the charter has been ratified by all ten members, despite President Arroyo's remarks. Furthermore, while host nation Singapore had invited the UN's special envoy to Myanmar, Ibrahim Gambari, to make a speech at the event, Myanmarese officials objected, and gained the support of the eight other member nations, blocking Mr Gambari's briefing. Singapore then went on to reiterate the fact that "Myanmar is an integral part of the family."

Meanwhile, the European Union adopted sanctions against 1,207 firms in Myanmar and expanded visa bans and asset freezes on the country's military rulers. This follows a move by the US to impose similar sanctions targeting the country's key timber, metals and gemstone sectors.

In other news from ASEAN, following earlier agreement to fully liberalize aviation services by 2015, the bloc agreed at the summit to also eliminate trade barriers for goods and services in an attempt to create a European Union-modeled economic community by 2015. This does not include a single-currency or the freedom of movement across borders by citizens of member states, but looking at the path taken by the EU, this might very well be the first step in that direction.

#79 Events According to the Myanmar Government

With the anti-government protests in Myanmar (also known as Burma) now turning violent, the situation in the country is reaching breaking point. The world continues to receive pictures and video footage of the events, courtesy of technology savvy youth in Myanmar who manage to bypass the restrictions imposed by the government on phones and the Internet. Global sentiment is clearly on the side of the Monks and the rest of the pro-democracy demonstrators, especially in light of the violence witnessed. The protests had been entirely peaceful, yet triggered a violent response that brings back haunting memories of the brutal crushing of protests back in 1988.

The key difference this time (besides it being Monks - the nation's greatest moral authority - and not students who lead the protest) is the ability of locals (and some foreigners) to get new footage out for the world to see within hours after the events take place. This strongly shapes global opinion and makes it increasingly difficult for the military government to control the propaganda wheel. To be sure, the government has begun to shut down cell phone providers and slow down Internet connections, but so far the opposition has managed to continue to smuggle images out of the country. This is in stark contrast to the brutal, yet efficient, response by the Junta back in a time when the Internet was not around in the country and cell phones practically unheard of.

Nevertheless, the government is trying it's best to control the flow of information, blaming the protests on "outside elements" and "corrupted, so-called monks." Meanwhile, the protests barely receive any air time on state run television. It is furthermore interesting to read an excerpt of government sponsored reporting of the events. Below is a copy of an article written in "The New Light of Myanmar" on Thursday, September 27. It can be found here: www.myanmar.com/newspaper/nlm/index.html


"The government has been striving day and night together with the people for the emergence of a peaceful, modern and developed discipline-flourishing democratic nation. As the government has been endeavouring to ensure stability of State, community peace, the rule of law and national development that are the main requirements, the national races in all regions are practically enjoying the fruits of national peace and development.

However, saboteurs from inside and outside the nation and some foreign radio stations, who are jealous of national peace and development, have been making instigative acts through lies to cause internal instability and civil commotion. Hence, some members of the Sangha, anti-government groups and saboteurs were staging protest walks. Some foreign broadcasting stations and destructionists have been issuing announcements, requests and leaflets as if the entire people were taking part in the protests participated by only some monks and people just to intensify the rowdy demonstrations.

The people who wish to earn their living in peace do not accept or take part in the protests. Thus, some saboteurs of the protest walks forcibly urged families of the homes all along their route, whether they know them or not, to provide alms and other requisites for monks. Those saboteurs told the families that if they failed to yield to their demand, the protesters would not take care of their personal and property safety. Moreover, they threatened the families demanding them to join the protest or provide financial assistance, adding, the protesters would not guarantee the security of the lives and property of the families. The saboteurs were acting like extortionists in a threatening way. Moreover, some protester monks entered homes and demanded families to offer soft drinks, urging families who could not join the strike to make donations for the convenience of administrative affairs. According to those families, they had never seen or known those so-called monks in the past and they were not their mentor monks.

Some families filed complaints about the threats to the authorities, saying that they had to pay the protesters from forty or fifty thousand kyats to one lakh as extortion money. The authorities have informed the people to file complaints in person or on line to the respective Ward Peace and Development Councils, Township PDCs or local authorities against intimidations, extortions or acts to force them to join the protest against their wish. The authorities have also urged families to make complaints against extortionists by name if they know them well and to live with security awareness."

For rare footage of the protests taken by one of our editors, be sure to look at our article #78 Witnessing the Myanmar Protests.

#78 Witnessing the Myanmar Protests

One of our editors happened to be travelling through Myanmar (formerly known as Burma) when small protests against the military government slowly began transforming into a mega demonstration not seen since the mercilessly crushed 1988 pro-democracy uprising. With the Junta having thusfar decided not to take forceful action, it was possible to shoot the rare footage found below. The video was taken on a rainy Monday afternoon on 24 September 2007 in the country's capital Yangon (Rangoon).

#77 The Perils of 'Risk Free' Debt

The recent (ongoing) crisis in the so-called subprime market has highlighted the immense difficulties of managing an economy that relies heavily on borrowing in order to create spending. The US and, perhaps even more so, the global economy is seemingly in fine shape. In the States, however, this is in great part due to increased spending made possible through the use of debt. People have had easy access to borrowed money thanks to the historically low interest rate of the past few years.

As the interest rate gradually began to rise, however, paying back these loans has become increasingly difficult. The subprime mortgage crisis is not a sub - as the name might suggest - but rather a prime example of this. Since a subprime loan is a loan that is given to people with a bad credit record, who therefore don't qualify for market interest rates and must pay a much higher rate, it is naturally mostly the poorer people who make use of it. The large number of people with subprime mortgages suddenly found that with the decreasing value of their houses, they were unable to pay the mortgage. And if you can't even pay your mortgage, you surely won't be able to spend on much else, which would cause a problem for the economy.

This poses a dilemma, as the economy must continue to be boosted through spending, but not at all costs. People need to understand that borrowed money needs to be paid back; it is not free money. This should serve as a wake up call to American consumers that relying too heavily on debt is too great of a risk. Sadly, there are always - including now - strong voices advocating debt forgiveness. Surely it cannot be so that consumers are taught that accumulating debt to the point of being unable to repay it comes without consequences? The message that big trouble will arise with too much debt must be hit home hard, once and for all. Better now, while the economy is reasonably stable, than later, when debt will only accumulate further, causing a potentially cataclysmic economic downfall of unknown proportions if China's possible bubble were to collapse.

There is some good news on the horizon, however, in the Fed's failure to take serious steps (i.e. have the central bank lower its benchmark federal funds rate from 5.25 percent) to help those affected by the crisis. It appears that Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke is trying to "teach investors a lesson," namely that the Fed will not bail out their poor decisions. This is not to say that there is no help whatsoever. The Fed has already injected tens of billions of dollars into the banking system and lowered its discount rate (the charge on its loans to commercial banks). Furthermore, President George Bush announced a plan to help struggling subprime mortgage borrowers to keep their homes via changes to the tax code.

Let's hope that a fair balance is found between the honest need to help those hardest hit and teaching a very wrong and dangerous lesson. Sometimes it is best to set an example to future potential defaulters by acting very harshly (though some would say justly as well) towards those involved now.

#76 The Hypocrisy and Short Sightedness of the American Immigration System

This coming September, driven by an ambition to increase the bloc's economic competitiveness and facing a foreseeable aging of the population and labor shortages in the next decades (expected to peak by 2050), the European Commission legislators are prepared to present for approval a proposal for an implementation of a new system of temporary resident permits to be selectively allocated to highly-qualified non-EU residents. Since this proposal would necessitate an infamously difficult to attain unanimity between the 27 member states, it is reasonable to expect a significant phase of debate. Nevertheless, it is understandable that the adoption of such a system is merely a matter of time. The legislators behind the initiative relate the recommended system to the US Green Card scheme, even dubbing it “Blue Card,” for some peculiar reason disregarding a conceptual and substantial difference between the contemplated European system and the American one - a difference that, at a closer look and comparison, divulges the relative irrationality and farce of the current US general immigration system.

The paradox of the world’s most symbolically representative immigration country - a country which even George Bush declared is “a nation of immigrants” and that thrives on its entrepreneurial newcomers - is that it is presently the one missing an open-door qualified immigration system. Legally immigrating to the United States is not easier. In fact, it is unexpectedly harder than in many other, even historically non-immigrant, developed countries; i.e. a potentially economically productive and professionally qualified or entrepreneurial immigrant candidate would find virtually no open options to immigrate by self-initiative.

The aforementioned US Green Card is either available to somebody previously resident in the country and legally permitted to stay for a longer time, or is distributed on a lottery (!), i.e. random numbers basis to unrestricted applicants over 18 from around the world. Once one is aware of this fact, it makes sense that European legislators, despite their claims, ironically, can only be color context-wise inspired by the Green Card.

Other immigration-dependent countries such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand (and recently the U.K.) have a long time ago adopted points-based open-door qualified and business immigration systems - with slight variations - without first having potential immigrants find an offer of employment or without an employer required to fund the visa, classifying migrants on their skills, personal qualities, suitable age, work experience, achievements in the field, past earnings, even achievements of the applicant's partner, and potential contribution to the countries' economies and societies in general; supported by ongoing emphasis on the economic returns of such migration, and are considering ways to expand the associated quotas even further.

Contradictorily in the US, the only initially temporary immigration option open to qualified non-residents is the H1-B visa, allowing American companies to hire, albeit with notoriously burdensome legal and financial difficulties, highly-skilled foreign workers, the limited yearly number of which has in October 2003 been groundlessly cut by US Congress from the even then insufficient 195,000 to 65,000, despite grave concerns of and active lobbying by the information technology companies.

The further deterioration of the currently inadequately cumbersome and bureaucratically thorny immigration system, inclusively for the already legally-residing aliens such as skilled employees and potentially socially valuable graduating students, and the lack of an open-door, even if competition based, legal system for qualified immigration simply leads to the only possible immigration most likely to prevail – illegal, and naturally unqualified. As opposed to the duplicity of the US state of affairs, EU justice spokesman behind the “Blue Card” proposal Friso Ascam Abbing admits that "We had better manage immigration properly as it is going to happen anyway."

Tightening and restricting legal immigration in traditionally migrant-reliant countries - the single one practically accessible for restriction - leads to it being automatically substituted by illegal, chaotic immigration. The previous statement is neither intended to denigrate the significant economical importance of illegal immigrants widely employed in agriculture, construction, hospitality and other industries, benefiting both businesses and consumers, and the Americans' dependence on them in a multitude of diverse sought-after menial and unskilled jobs, nor to advocate a need for severe curbing of unqualified immigration, since it eventually instigates continuous illegal immigration, as the need for immigrant labor has a natural tendency to be convened by supply.

The American immigration system, with its insufficient legal immigration provisions, regularly tacitly expected general pardon and consequential naturalization of illegal migrants in itself implies an initial breach of law – can it get any more hypocritical than that?

A governmental bipartisan group's recent months' attempts to manage the illegal immigration phenomenon by a - even though still strategically flawed - bill comprising of clauses for the strengthening of the south border security, encouragement of currently illegally residing immigrants to return to their home country and reapply for working permits through a system which also integrates a points-based format, where education and skills, including English ability, could contribute to an applicant’s case, and a stipulation of issuing of 400,000 further amended to 200,000 visas a year to the future temporary workers permitted to stay for two years at a time and renewed up to three times, periodically separated by a year's break between each visit, have disappointingly failed, even in spite of initial public opinion support.

The constant debate about immigration in America has an irrational inclination to pitch all issues into one large jumble, intermixing causes and consequences, revolving around all types of suspected problems caused by illegal residents, which include border issues, pressure on public services and criminal allegations, further fuelled by economically unreasonable fears that immigrants weaken the wages of the native-born citizens. Hence, public concerns about - as some economists and politicians argue - the falsely assumed negative consequences of illegal immigration and the allegedly threatened national security, exaggerated by the government's failure to satisfactorily deal with it, leads to an ignorant absence of differentiation of and antagonism towards immigrants, and consequential psychological and bureaucratic aggravation of the already ill-reputed naturalization process for the legally residing temporary and aspiring workers, making the US a decreasingly attractive destination for talented people from all over the world.

Considering current tech companies' widespread outsourcing, combined with the recently emerged phenomenon of inverse brain-drain and other developed and promising markets' ever -increasing competitiveness for talent acquisition, what kind of potential immigrants and most importantly - how is the US naively, or even better put – overly self-confidently hoping to lure in the future?

In the end, the United States, with its notoriously weak social support and welfare system can only attract generally self-reliant and motivated people who want nothing but to work industriously, be it a farm worker from Mexico or a qualified doctor from India; therefore not offering sufficient people an administratively accessible opportunity to do so will inexorably lead to the negatively perceived effects caused by the vicious circle of illegal, irrepressible immigration or alternatively, and even concurrently – economical underperformance provoked by competent personnel scarcity.

- This article was written for and provided to the Weekend Economist by Julia Socolov