Two Iranian warships approach Suez

Following a period of relative media quiet on Israel, when coverage of the Middle East shifted its focus from Egypt to Bahrain, Yemen and Libya, Israel returned to the headlines today following Iran’s planned attempt to send warships through the Suez Canal.

The media produced varied portrayals of Israel’s reaction to the Iranian move, with some characterising Israel as having legitimate concerns, and others casting Israel in an aggressive light.

In general, there was a failure to report increased tensions yesterday between Israel and Hezbollah, including Hassan Nasrallah’s threat to attack and occupy northern Israel.

Israel and Iran

Four publications led with Israel’s response to Iran’s plans to send military vessels past Israel and through the international waterway for the first time since the Iranian Revolution in 1979.

Most sensitive to Israel’s security concerns was The Guardian’s, ‘Israel monitors Iranian warships near Suez canal’ by Harriet Sherwood. The article gave a high profile to the Israeli suspicion that the vessels were to deliver weapons to Hezbollah – the standfirst read, ‘Ships suspected of carrying weapons for eventual delivery to Lebanese Islamist group Hezbollah’ – and treated Israel’s concerns about general upheaval across the Arab world as genuine:

‘Israel is deeply concerned about instability in neighbouring countries and fears that Islamist organisations are growing in influence.’

Later, the Jerusalem correspondent again described Israel as ‘deeply concerned’ about future relations with Egypt, and ‘anxious’ about what would happen to their bilateral peace accord were the ‘Islamist’ Muslim Brotherhood to be included in the next Egyptian government.

By contrast, the BBC News article covering the story framed Israel’s response as one of inexplicable hostility to a regional foe, characterising it using language of aggression rather than anxiety and concern. The headline referred to Israeli ‘anger’, and the lead stated that Israel ‘condemn[ed]’ Iran’s decision to send its ships along the route.

Unlike The Guardian, the Financial Times and The Daily Telegraph, the BBC did not cite Israel’s allegation that weapons would be delivered to Hezbollah via Syria, despite the Syrian destination being referenced twice.

The article closed with an attempt to contextualise the hostile bilateral relations between Israel and Iran, saying:

‘Tensions between Israel and Iran have continued to grow amid Tehran’s ongoing nuclear programme, which Iran insists is for peaceful purposes only.’

However, no mention was made of the Iranian regime’s repeated public threats against Israel, including that the Jewish state ‘must be wiped off the map’.

The Times’ ‘Tehran sends warship to Suez as Israel braces for war,’ on the other hand, included the context for Israel’s concern about the Iranian nuclear programme:

‘Tehran has called for the destruction of the Jewish state, while Israel has advanced plans to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities, which it says are a cover to develop nuclear weapons.’

The Financial Times’ approach to the issue fell somewhere in between, noting that, ‘Israel [also] regards Iran’s nuclear programme as an existential threat to the Jewish state’ but not advancing any reason why this is the case.

The Daily Telegraph clearly positioned itself as suspicious of the Iranian activity in ‘Iran sending warships through Suez Canal,’ describing the move by Iran as ‘a provocative flexing of muscles’. Damien McElroy and Richard Spencer framed Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman’s comments as expressing genuine concern:

‘Avigdor Lieberman, Israel’s hardline foreign minister, warned that the development posed a new threat to the country’s security.’

Like The Guardian, the article also gave profile to Israel’s suspicion that the vessels aimed to deliver weapons to Hezbollah, describing Syria as, ‘Iran’s main conduit for weapons supplies to Hizbollah, Israel’s Lebanese enemy.’

The Daily Telegraph also adopted the language of concern and not aggression, explaining, ‘Israeli officials are now concerned that whatever new government emerges in Egypt will be hostile to its security.’

Israel and Lebanon

Yesterday, tensions rose on Israel’s northern border when Defence Minister Ehud Barak, touring the region with newly appointed IDF Chief of Staff Benny Gantz, asserted that given the widespread upheaval across the Arab world, ‘[w]e must be prepared for every test’.

Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah answered these comments later the same day, warning that ‘the fighters of the Resistance [that] one day [they] might be asked to liberate the Galilee’ and claiming that the creation of Israel was ‘[t]he main problem in the region’.

Of the five broadsheets and the BBC News website, only The Times covered these developments, reporting the key points.

Just Journalism has written about the tendency of the mainstream media to under-report aggressive acts and speech by Hezbollah.

Source: Just Journalism