Ironically, it’s one issue on which even politically diverse pundits – other than those who agree with their counterparts abroad that Israel deserves every military and rhetorical attack it gets – seem to agree. The only real distinction between them is where they place the blame for the sorry situation.
But even this generally enjoys consensus, with the main target being – what else? – the government. It’s the Israeli public’s go-to culprit for all internal and external ills, after all.
As prime minister for the past 12 years, Benjamin Netanyahu is thus treated to the lion’s share of the finger-pointing. Today, with fruitless coalition negotiations leading to a feared fifth round of Knesset elections, the so-called “absence of a government” is also faulted.
Some critics argue that Israel’s difficulty in countering hostile press coverage and Twitter blitzes is due to the clipping of the Foreign Ministry’s budget and wings, with embassies around the world short-staffed. And this isn’t even taking into account that Gilad Erdan is serving two crucial ambassadorships, to the United Nations and the United States, simultaneously.
Others claim that the Foreign Ministry’s effort to coordinate with the Strategic Affairs Ministry, the Government Press Office, the Israel Police and the IDF to present a cohesive message about the justice of Operation Guardian of the Walls,Israel’s latest campaign against Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists in Gaza, is too little, too late.
Even the enlistment of Israeli celebrities with masses of followers on Instagram and TikTok has caused some raised eyebrows. It’s all well and good to have gorgeous models and star athletes defending their country in heartfelt clips, but they aren’t the greatest authorities on matters of consequence.
Then there’s the complaint that many Israeli figures interviewed on foreign channels have less-than-stellar English or heavy accents that make it hard to understand what they’re trying to convey.
The despondence on the part of people who feel helpless in the face of the onslaught against Israel as it’s being bombarded by rockets is totally understandable. They feel at a loss for tools to confront the rampant inversion of good and evil, whereby bloodthirsty killers in a terrorist-run enclave – whose rulers oppress, abuse and use their people as human shields – are depicted as morally superior to the only real democracy in the Middle East.
All of the above serves to explain why an Israeli expat acquaintance whom I haven’t seen in years contacted me on Facebook last week to bemoan “how we are portraying ourselves” internationally.
“You should be doing our hasbara,” she said. “It’s absolutely horrible.”
As flattering as it was, her plea was amusing. I replied that I already spend my days defending Israel in print, podcasts and other genres.
She had something else in mind, however. What she clearly meant was that I should be employed by the government to represent it in an official capacity, rather than working on the sidelines for a private company paycheck.
Our exchange reminded me of the last time that I wrote about why bad public diplomacy isn’t Israel’s problem, and the numerous other instances when I have expressed wonder at those who look to the government to engage in endeavors that are best undertaken and achieved without its intervention.
Five years ago, almost to the date, the annual State Comptroller’s Report highlighted the government’s failure to combat the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement. According to Judge Yosef Shapira, author of the report, no significant victories had been won in the battle against BDS as a result of inter-ministerial bickering.
OF ALL THE critiques of the conduct of Israel’s public institutions, this one was the most ridiculous. Though it’s healthy for an independent body to monitor government activities, certain unfortunate traits of the latter are so inherent that it’s almost laughable to point them out for rebuke. It’s certainly futile to expect them to change.
Democratic governments, by nature, are inefficient bureaucracies. This is true in general and of countries like Israel in particular. Indeed, despite its well-deserved “Start-Up Nation” status, the Jewish state still operates like a socialist apparatus, with a cultural mentality to match.
Though equipped with more than ample evidence that private enterprises get things done better and more cheaply than state-run ones, Israelis still have trouble letting go of the illusory comfort of the nanny state on the one hand, and the oft-unreasonable tantrums against it on the other. So, while the bulk of the populace has been mobilizing around the common cause of eliminating the Hamas rocket threat, it is nevertheless whining about hasbara.
Here’s the rub, though: No amount of PR, regardless of its quality, can counter anti-Zionism and its root, antisemitism.
This has been apparent since the aftermath of the 1967 Six Day War, when Israel shifted in the eyes of the world from David to Goliath. During the decades since then, the only thing that’s changed in the propaganda war is the advent of the Internet. Before this means of instant mass-communication was available, Israelis and champions abroad would wail about the “embarrassing” presentation made by this or that native Hebrew-speaker in a foreign television interview.
Meanwhile, nobody seemed to notice that the Palestinian representatives in the same studios ranted incoherently in equally terrible English, while spewing bald-faced lies. In other words, content and substance were irrelevant to those viewers who saw Israel – the collective Jew – as the villain of the story.
Nor does knowledge about Israel and its history necessarily alter perceptions. One need only observe the ideological splits within the country itself to realize that exposure to the same information does not lead to uniformity of thought.
In this context, another friend comes to mind. Though he and I have similar educational and professional backgrounds, live in the same area, watch the same news and entertainment programs and read the same books and articles, we hold diametrically opposed positions.
He insists that Israel is an “apartheid state.” I not only reject that description as utterly false, but can’t fathom how any rational, intelligent person, particularly a citizen of that state, could possibly believe it.
No doubt, he thinks this about me in the reverse. In addition, as someone who sees Israeli hasbara as propaganda, he’s not likely to wish for it to improve. What we have in common, however, is that neither of us is swayed by the discourse of the other.
How, then, can millions of less-informed people around the globe be expected to be hit with some kind of a light-bulb moment when surfing the web? Let’s not forget that for every beautiful actress and stunning soccer star standing up for Israel, there are hundreds in the other camp. Ditto for the IDF’s videos and memes.
This is not to say that hasbara is pointless. On the contrary, it serves a critical, two-fold function that cannot be underestimated: arming the many “lone warriors” caught in the anti-Israel crossfire with intellectual ammunition, and providing solace to the silent majority of supporters insecure about raising their voices in the midst of the hate-filled cacophony.
Italian-Israeli journalist Fiamma Nirenstein, author of Israel Is Us and 12 other books, is bashed in Europe for her outspoken assertion that delegitimizing Israel is tantamount to sanctioning its enemies’ goal to wipe out the Jews. But she is also hailed as a hero by those who hunger to hear their convictions forcefully articulated and reiterated.
Which brings us to the actual aim of Israeli hasbara, which has always gotten a bad rap, often unfairly. Jew-hatred and its offshoots can’t be conquered through public diplomacy, whose objective should not be to persuade foes, but rather to sing to the choir. This purpose, rarely even mentioned by hasbara advocates, is the one most deserving of focus and emphasis.