Switching the Spotlight from War
Israel being handed a historically low rating in last year’s annual National Brands Index should come as a surprise to no one. Every news headline about Israel – whether the subject is hostages or humanitarian crises – is connected to death and suffering, even if the ensuing paragraphs are in Israel’s defense. To the Western-affiliated mind, war is a faraway atrocity, whereas nearby and more “ordinary” tragedies are far easier to overlook. Israel has been associated with the quintessential suffering Palestinian to such a high degree, it could even be said that it is now more beneficial for the branding of the State of Israel if the New York Times to run an article about violent robberies in South Tel Aviv than one describing in detail how COGAT is transporting food to hungry Gazans.
Most citizens of first-world countries don’t care much for conflicts halfway across the world, usually in favor of issues which directly affect them. The undeniable oversaturation of the current conflict – from Free Palestine protests to Free the Hostages rallies – result in active communal dissociation from controversial matters clearly too alienating to be involved in, no matter the moral and ideological differences between the two. The political center, which is invariably made up of the silent majority who is not interested in politics, is now composed of rather disenfranchised neutralists who support peace by any means necessary. This results in neutrality being mistaken for centrism, causing a there – are – good -and – bad – people – on – both – sides outlook, resulting in moral equivalency between Israel and the barbarity of Hamas. What is highly concerning is that the problem does not necessarily stem from illogical interpretations of Israel’s actions in Gaza, but rather the association of Israel with any sort of conflict in the first place, irrespective of how Israel is conducting itself. Even if there was only one Gazan civilian killed this year, their face and life story would surely be plastered on every headline and banner.
Israel’s reputation, therefore, will forever be tainted by blood libels unless Israel attempts to constantly publicize everything about itself unrelated to war. Being associated with war is damaging to the Palestinians’ reputation as well of course, but moral equivalence with Hamas supporters is not one of Israel’s objectives for the war, to say the least. In recent months, what has been murmured among many Jewish Americans for years has been repeated by high-ranking Israeli officials before rolling cameras: That Israel’s public relations skills are at an all-time low, and that large-scale renovations of strategy may be in the works – an admission made only more glaring by the fact that Israel has usually chosen to insist its public relations policies are working as intended.
It must be noted that emphasizing Israel and issues unrelated to the war should be merely an addendum to the pro-Israel activism already in place – there must be no shortage of defenders of Israel’s righteous actions on the battlefield, no lack of awareness for the hostages, and every defender of Israel’s existence should continue their fight. Publicization of Israel’s accomplishments off the battlefield must be complemented with active refutations of the countless baseless accusations constantly being made against it. But even if everyone somehow understood that Israel is fighting a war for the right reasons, anti-Zionists will still easily be able to connote Israel with destruction.
After nearly two years of being told to care about someone else’s war, the everyday Western citizen is tired of hearing about Israel and its enemies. Combating baseless claims of genocide with last year’s Deni Avdija stats may seem like lunacy, but unless we make an effort to publicize that Israel is more than a land of hostility, the constant coverage of the war will forever link Israel and the Jewish people with negativity and destruction.
