It’s true that journalism is the first draft of history. And it’s also true that it takes some distance in time before we can look at events and place them in a proper historical context.
But it’s also true that journalism has a responsibility to put developments into a meaningful context for readers.
Here.
Now.
If all you write about are trees, you miss the forest.
Palestinian violence has risen in the last few days, both in numbers and intensity. We’ve seen stabbings from Jerusalem to Tel Aviv, from Kiryat Arba to Afula. Individually and collectively, these attacks are terrorism.
What are the common denominators?
- The assailants are Palestinian.
- The victims are Israelis (or non-Israeli Jews).
- Although the Palestinians acted alone in the sense that you don’t need a terror infrastructure to obtain a knife and stab someone, these attacks aren’t happening in a vacuum. Palestinian leadership acquiesces to terror while Palestinian media glorifies it, and Palestinian activists on social media whip it up.
Fatah is already distributing pro-terror leaflets, and Fatah gunmen made their first public appearance in Ramallah in seven years. Hamas “allowed” a mob of Palestinians to surge across the Gaza border.
The international community buys into Palestinian claims that this uprising is a response to alleged Israeli intentions to change the Temple Mount’s status quo. The Temple Mount was a convenient pretext for the Second Intifada when then-opposition leader Ariel Sharon visited the holy site in 2000. After 15 years, the Temple Mount’s still a terrific excuse even though Suha Arafat admitted her husband, Yasser Arafat, planned the Second Intifada all along.
The UN has unilaterally given the Palestinians a lot of trappings of statehood, and in his recent speech to the UN, Mahmoud Abbas blamed Israel for all the problems with the peace process would certainly get Palestinians incited enough.
Characterizing the Israeli-Palestinian situation as a “wave” or “cycle” of violence is a disservice to readers. Nobody would call Baltimore’s Freddie Gray riots a “surge in urban violence,” nor would anyone call Europe’s refugee crisis an “uptick in Arab migrancy.”
The First Intifada (1987-1991) was characterized by stones and street clashes. The Second Intifada (2000-2005ish) was characterized by suicide bombings and drive-by shootings. This Third Intifada is, so far, about lone-wolf attacks featuring knives and screwdrivers, but Hamas may be implicated in a bombing near Maale Adumim this very morning.
I hesitated before writing this because the intifada label means acknowledging we’re in for a long struggle. It’s more comfortable to continue hoping that the terror will peter out. After all, it’s only been a week since the attacks began. But I see no signs that Mahmoud Abbas or the PA security forces can or want to calm things down. The genie’s out of the bottle.
I have a responsibility to HonestReporting readers to call it as I see it. I can’t, in good conscience, describe the situation as anything but.
Israel’s facing an intifada.
UPDATE: We had a very spirited discussion in the office, and my colleague, Yarden Frankl, disagrees. Check out his dissent, It’s Terrorism, Not an Intifada, and post your comments too.
Featured image: CC BY-SA flickr/Esteban Chiner with additions by HonestReporting
Before you comment on this article, please remind yourself of our Comments Policy. Any comments deemed to be in breach of the policy will be removed at the editor’s discretion.
