Traditionally,
Israel has been unabashedly unapologetic about its use of force. Yet to claim
that it is not conscious of how the world perceives its use of force might be
inaccurate, largely because it goes to great lengths to shape the narrative
around it.
اضافة اعلان
Israel typically
attempts to portray its use of force as legitimate or in self-defense and has a
general aversion to any other narratives that can lead to international
criticism or increased sympathy with the Palestinians.
Even during the
peak of the recent onslaught on Gaza, authorities tried using disinformation by
staging weapons inside Al-Shifa Hospital to convince global audiences that the
hospital was indeed a command-and-control center for Hamas.
If Israel is indeed conscious of how the world perceives its use of force, how could one then explain its apparent indifference to the dehumanizing footage being taken and shared by its soldiers during the ongoing fighting? Here, specific reference is made to viral TikToks of Israeli soldiers kidnapping, taunting, and torturing Palestinian prisoners, “morale-boosting” concerts being put on for soldiers where hateful, genocidal, and anti-Islamic language is being used, and footage of Israeli soldiers mocking the plight of Palestinians.
Many news outlets,
including CNN, called them out for it. Israel has used more creative approaches
around its use of force in the past, such as when it pioneered the use of
rubber and then plastic bullets to disperse protests during the first Intifada
when the death toll and international pressure grew. These alternatives were
presented as non-lethal options to disperse crowds, a claim later found to be
false.
If Israel is indeed
conscious of how the world perceives its use of force, how could one then
explain its apparent indifference to the dehumanizing footage being taken and
shared by its soldiers during the ongoing fighting? Here, specific reference is made to viral
TikToks of Israeli soldiers kidnapping, taunting, and torturing Palestinian
prisoners, “morale-boosting” concerts being put on for soldiers where hateful,
genocidal, and anti-Islamic language is being used, and footage of Israeli
soldiers mocking the plight of Palestinians.
The sheer quantity
of the footage is important to note as well. It is not one or two videos that
might have been leaked unintentionally. It is in the hundreds. This seems new
and inconsistent with other Israeli practices.
Some may argue that
Israeli soldiers have always acted this way towards Palestinians but advances
in media technology and the Fourth Industrial Revolution (widespread
availability of phones and social media) have allowed for this content to be
captured and reach global audiences as is currently the case.
The alternative
explanation is that the spread of the footage is intentional. Israeli
authorities typically exercise tight control over the information they choose
to share. For example, international media outlets covering Gaza are reportedly
warned not to mention Israeli troop casualties or else they would risk arrest
and a revocation of press credentials. Likewise, recently released Israeli
hostages appear to have been prevented from speaking to the media so that they
may not say anything that would suggest they were appropriately treated by
Hamas. Unless Israeli authorities have lost control over its soldiers, footage
taken and shared by soldiers would not have been possible unless they allowed
for it.
The reason?
Deterrence. Israel wants to send a message to others elsewhere, a warning if
you will, that nothing and no one will be spared, and nothing will be
considered sacred if they get involved in the current conflict or if they plan
similar future attacks against Israel.
The utility of
footage showing unrestrained or degrading violence has long been a strategy of
warfare to instill fear in adversaries and achieve psychological advantage.
States and their militaries have typically refrained from embracing these
tactics because they consider themselves on a higher moral ground and because
practices such as filming prisoners counter the norms and conventions of
warfare.
The utility of footage showing unrestrained or degrading violence has long been a strategy of warfare to instill fear in adversaries and achieve psychological advantage. States and their militaries have typically refrained from embracing these tactics because they consider themselves on a higher moral ground and because practices such as filming prisoners counter the norms and conventions of warfare.
This is why US
authorities took swift action when photos of US forces torturing and degrading
Iraqi prisoners in Abu Ghraib were leaked in 2004. They claimed (perhaps
unconvincingly) that this went against stated policy and that these were
isolated incidents, eventually leading to the court-martial and imprisonment of
the perpetrators. Nonstate actors and terrorist groups on the other hand have
fully embraced these tactics. ISIS, for example, perfected performative
violence in Iraq and Syria by meticulously scripting and choreographing its
operations and executions such that its adversaries often surrendered before
ISIS forces entered their villages and towns.
Israeli officials
may be blinded with anger and vengeance following the Oct 7 attacks to the
extent that they do to realize that the tactic of using violence for public
messaging makes comparisons with terrorist groups more salient. Separately, it
could also be argued that the deterrent value of this tactic does not outweigh
its cost to Israel’s own interest as it is shifting public opinion globally and
causing irreparable harm to the prospects that peace with Israel could ever be
considered.
Nasser Bin Nasser is the Founder & CEO of Ambit
Advisory
Disclaimer:
Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not necessarily reflect Jordan News' point of view.
Read more Opinion and Analysis
Jordan News
.jpg)
.jpg)
