"This article presents false balance, pretending that the two sides are at all similar. Israel’s military is one of the most powerful in the world, and certainly the most powerful in the region. There is no symmetry between the power of Israel and Gaza or Lebanon. There is no symmetry in the level of destruction faced in these places."
May 13, 2024
To:
Mark MacKinnon, Globe and Mail
Sandra E. Martin, Globe and Mail
Dear Mark MacKinnon and Sandra E. Martin,
I’m writing to express concern about your coverage in the article, “Northern Israelis evacuated in October wonder if they’ll ever return home as Hezbollah attacks continue,” by Mark MacKinnon published in the Globe and Mail on May 12, 2024.
First, the article treats the suffering of Gazans and Israelis from near Lebanon’s border as similar. The worst example of this occurs in the following paragraph:
In the south, Israeli troops have entered Rafah, the last city beyond their control in the Gaza Strip. There’s also a ceasefire offer that on Monday Hamas said it was ready to agree to, holding out the faint possibility that the fighting could come to an end, at least temporarily, and allow both Gazans and residents of southern Israel to return to their homes.
There is a clear difference between what Gazans and residents of southern Israel will return to. 370,000 homes in Gaza have been damaged and almost 80,000 more destroyed, according to the New York Times. For all Gazans, returning home means returning to utter destruction, whether it is of their own home or their neighborhood.
This article presents false balance, pretending that the two sides are at all similar. Israel’s military is one of the most powerful in the world, and certainly the most powerful in the region. There is no symmetry between the power of Israel and Gaza or Lebanon. There is no symmetry in the level of destruction faced in these places.
I insist that it be clarified that thousands of Gazans will have no home to return to.
Your claim that Rafah is the “last city beyond [Israel’s control] in the Gaza Strip” gives a false sense that Israel’s campaign in Gaza has resulted in their control of all other cities in Gaza. Such a claim makes it seem as if Israel has been successful in its campaign, when in fact there are reports that Hamas has returned to areas previously claimed by Israel. The question of control and the sustainability of this operation is central, and to cover the campaign in such a way that portrays it as a success simply awaiting the last domino to fall is untrue and misleading for your readers.
Please clarify that Israel does not “control” all cities in Gaza except for Rafah.
Next, I am alarmed that you note civilian deaths of Israelis but omit Lebanese civilian deaths. Your paragraph on this matter reads:
Eighteen Israeli soldiers and nine civilians have been confirmed killed by Hezbollah fire in northern Israel over the past seven months, while 289 Hezbollah fighters have been killed by Israeli strikes, according to a count by Lebanon’s L’Orient-Le Jour newspaper. Almost 100,000 Lebanese have reportedly been driven from their homes on the other side of the border.
Reuters reported that as of May 5, 2024, “More than 250 Hezbollah members and 75 civilians have been killed in Israeli strikes on Lebanon since October, security sources there say.” You also leave out that L’Orient-Le Jour also reported that “Israel’s attacks have repeatedly killed civilians and health workers, prompting international condemnation from organizations qualifying some strikes as apparent war crimes.” They are referring to a Human Rights Watch report that an Israeli strike in Lebanon that killed first responders was unlawful.
Please update your article to include Lebanese civilian deaths to make it balanced. Consider also including context about war crimes, which would have been highly appropriate in this case.
Finally, I am concerned about the casual language used to describe the belief of many Israeli interviewees that their state ought to invade and annex parts of Lebanon. In one section, the article reads:
Some of the evacuees living in the Dan Hotel find themselves hoping for a war that would see their country’s army enter Lebanon and create a “security zone” in the south of that country that would prevent Hezbollah from ever launching the kind of attack that Hamas carried out on Oct. 7, which killed more than 1,100 Israelis.
Vague phrases like “security zone” obscure what is being advocated. Such actions would constitute violations of international law and represent an extremist position. An ordinary reader would likely miss this nuance, as you have done a poor job of making clear the implications of these positions.
Sincerely,
Jason Toney
Director of Media Advocacy, Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East