Rather than stating the legal fact — that under international law, East Jerusalem is unequivocally recognized as occupied Palestinian territory — the article resorts to the misleading euphemism that Israel “captured” East Jerusalem, deliberately evading the legally accurate term “occupied.”
May 9, 2025
To the Globe and Mail and Associated Press editorial team,
I am writing on behalf of Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME) to express serious concern about the framing and misleading language used in your recent article, which states that “Israel captured East Jerusalem in the 1967 Mideast war” and that “Israel has annexed east Jerusalem and considers the entire city its unified capital.”
This language is highly misleading and falls short of the ethical standards expected in responsible journalism.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has made it clear that Israel has “occupied”, not “captured” Palestinian territories:
The sustained abuse by Israel of its position as an occupying Power, through annexation and an assertion of permanent control over the Occupied Palestinian Territory and continued frustration of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, violates fundamental principles of international law and renders Israel’s presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory unlawful …. This illegality relates to the entirety of the Palestinian territory “occupied” by Israel in 1967.
Rather than stating the legal fact — that under international law, East Jerusalem is unequivocally recognized as occupied Palestinian territory — the article resorts to the misleading euphemism that Israel “captured” East Jerusalem, deliberately evading the legally accurate term “occupied.”
The use of “captured” vs “occupied” misleads readers into thinking that Israel has a legitimate claim to Palestinian territories, rather than acknowledging its illegal occupation. Palestinians are the indigenous peoples of Palestine – and media outlets should not be complicit in enabling the kind of language that softens Israel’s illegal colonization of Palestinian land.
I urge your newsroom to correct this mischaracterization now and in future coverage by using language consistent with international law and journalistic ethics, clearly stating that East Jerusalem is occupied, not “captured.”
Second, the article uncritically repeats, without raising skepticism, Israel’s unilateral claim that the entire city of Jerusalem is its “unified capital,” adopting the language of the occupying power — while erasing both the Palestinian claim to East Jerusalem and the overwhelming consensus in international law.
The UN Security Council Resolution 478 explicitly declared that Israel’s claim of sovereignty over East Jerusalem — is “null and void” and has no legal validity under international law.
The article also fails to mention that Palestinians view “East Jerusalem as the capital of a future independent state to be established in the territories occupied since 1967” — a perspective that needs to be added for journalistic balance.
Given that AP is a wire service providing articles to numerous Canadian media outlets, I call on The Globe and Mail to rigorously scrutinize and revise, as necessary, any misleading or soft language sourced from AP.
In solidarity,
Lynn Naji
Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East