home
Palestine page
Articulating the Unprintable: Ramzy Baroud Discusses Media Response to His Book
By June Rugh
Ramzy Baroud, veteran Palestinian-American journalist and
Editor-in-Chief of the Palestine Chronicle, recently completed a
speaking tour of the United States’ East Coast to promote his second
book, The Second Palestinian Intifada: A Chronicle of a People’s
Struggle (Pluto Press, 2006). The Second Palestinian Intifada is a
far-reaching account of key events of the past five years that
transformed the political landscape not only of Palestine and Israel,
but of the entire Middle East. With a critical eye, Baroud takes the
most controversial issues head-on: the alarming escalation in suicide
bombings, the construction of the Separation Wall, the devastating
hunger and unemployment in the Occupied Territories, the brutality of
the Israeli army, the political surprise of the Palestinian elections.
On November 12, 2007, Baroud was interviewed by June Rugh, a freelance
writer, in Seattle, Washington.
June Rugh: Good
afternoon, Mr. Baroud. Your book, The Second Palestinian Intifada, has
been widely praised by eminent scholars and intellectuals such as Noam
Chomsky, Ilan Pappé, and Norman Finkelstein. Coupled with the national
media awareness of the momentum building towards the US-based
Palestinian-Israeli peace conference, did your book tour receive
considerable attention from the press?
Ramzy Baroud: On
the contrary, the silence has been deafening. Let me clarify: The
Second Palestinian Intifada has received wide coverage in the
progressive, alternative, Asian, African, and Arab media, and has been
reviewed many academic journals, in print and online. But not one
corporate newspaper—that I know of—has touched it so far.
JR: Not one? Are you surprised?
RB: Actually, I’m not surprised at all. In Western corporate media, it
is the most predictable and consistent practice: if the narrative
doesn’t fit the dominant “liberal” ideology, it is simply omitted. And
it’s not just the media boycott of the book. Sometimes the local
newspapers refused to cover the events of my tour. Rather than straight
reportage, certain newspapers opted to publish defamatory articles and
letters to the editor that chastised the academic institutions for
inviting me to speak and deliberately misinterpreted my comments.
JR: In other words, they literally replaced your words with other
content—a kind of journalistic ventriloquism. Can you give an example?
RB: The most
disturbing case occurred around my talk at Virginia Wesleyan College,
in Norfolk, Virginia. Norfolk has a powerfully committed antiwar
community—in addition to fourteen military bases, interestingly—and I
was very much looking forward to speaking to this audience. My core
message was a call for justice for the Palestinian people based on
coexistence, coupled with global alternatives to war and racism. In my
talks, I always address other regions of concern in addition to
Palestine; notably, Iraq, Venezuela, and Nicaragua. I feel it’s crucial
to give a cross-cultural perspective to encourage the audience think
beyond the usual geopolitical limitations and ethnocentricities. Yet a
local Jewish newspaper announced the event on the front page as a
“pro-Palestinian journalist”—suddenly, I’m a speaker with a narrow
agenda.
JR: What happened when you spoke at the college?
RB: A local rabbi and his supporters came and heckled me with questions
and outrageous claims. One said that in 1880 there were more Jews than
Christians and Muslims in Palestine; another claimed that my effort to
explain the sociopolitical context of suicide bombings was the same as
endorsing the horrific attacks of 9/11. Zoberman himself accused me of
being a “Hamas sympathizer”; and since Hamas is on the US State
Department’s list of terrorist groups, his implication is clear.
JR: This brings to
mind an observation by Steven Salaita: that the discourse of mainstream
America is shaped in such a way that if an Arab expresses any feature
of political identity, he or she immediately evokes the “undefined but
identifiable terrorist.”
RB: Yes, I’d say that applies here. The Rabbi’s supporters followed me
to a second event at a local theatre, and when I refused to modify my
statements, he began a campaign of letter-writing and calling the
college and local papers, describing my message as “poisonous.”
JR: So as far as mainstream media goes, you—and your book—are either ignored or vilified. What is it that strikes a nerve? Is it the topic of Palestine, or your particular perspective?
RB: The subject of Palestine always strikes a nerve in American media.
Even more, though, the fact that I was born in a Palestinian refugee
camp in Gaza to a dispossessed family forced to leave its ancestral
village in 1948—leaving behind burned homes and bullet-riddled
bodies—does not make me a desirable voice for the “liberal” media. I
was raised in a place where I had to negotiate my daily survival among
Israeli tanks and soldiers. As a Palestinian, I advocate for a just
peace and dignity for my people, who remain hostage to the inhumanity
of the Israeli occupation; as an American, I protest my country’s
contributions to violence in the Middle East. This is not the kind of
writer that the New York Times wants to profile. It’s too far out of
their readers’ comfort zone.
JR: So, as a Palestinian, you find yourself doubly effaced: first,
by the Israeli government, and then again, by the Western press.
RB: Yes, you could say that.
JR: One of the
objectives of your tour was to promote The Second Palestinian Intifada:
A Chronicle of a People’s Struggle. What is your primary goal in
getting people to read this book?
RB: To present an alternative reading of Palestinian history. To help
people realize, among other things, that Palestinians should be praised
for their courage in taking on the risks of democracy; that they should
not be forced to suffer, and a civil war provoked, because their
elections resulted in a government that is not a regime compliant to
the US government. That the terms “extremism” and “moderation,” as used
in the corporate press, are not objective concepts, but rather tied to
whether a government or political agency serves the interests of the
Bush administration. These are concepts you’ll never see in the
mainstream media.
JR: So, in a sense, you are raising awareness that an alternative narrative of Palestinian history even exists.
RB: Exactly. And this issue goes beyond me and my particular book. As
you know, well-known figures such as Jimmy Carter, John Mearsheimer and
Stephen Walt—even the usually untouchable Desmond Tutu—have recently
been victims of smear campaigns, accused of anti-Semitism and so on,
simply because they were presenting the Palestinian perspective and,
implicitly or explicitly, criticizing US and Israeli government policy.
JR: And that’s in
the public forum. It’s striking that even in academia—traditionally,
the last bastion of open debate—there is now also a systematic
silencing of alternative readings of Palestinian history. Norman
Finkelstein was essentially forced to resign position at DePaul
University; Ilan Pappé recently left the University of Haifa for
similar reasons.
RB: Even the area of
publishing is no longer safe. Pluto Press, the publisher of my latest
book, is currently fighting for the right to distribute Joel Kovel’s
book, Overcoming Zionism, in the United States. Kovel’s book was
published by Pluto Press and is distributed in America by the
University of Michigan Press, under contract with Pluto. But when the
Michigan chapter of the pro-Israel group StandWithUs denounced the
Overcoming Zionism as anti-Israel propaganda and discredited facts, the
university press stopped its distribution. In early September, the
press’s executive board decided to continue distribution temporarily;
but the incident has caused the university press to review its
relationship with Pluto Press, with a decision due in late November. A
statement from the University of Michigan says explicitly that Pluto
Press’s decision to publish Kovel’s book brings into question the
viability of the university’s distribution agreement with the
publisher. So sometimes, quite literally, the phrase “Stop the press!”
is treated as a reasonable request.
JR: In other words,
what we’re seeing is not just a chilling effect, but a deep freeze that
appears to be settling over all alternative sources of information. Do
you have suggestions for people who want to counteract this, who want
to keep these lines of communication open?
RB: Yes. It’s important to actively support progressive publishing
companies such Pluto Press, and to be aware of the attempts to shut
down distribution of their books. I’d urge everyone to go to their
website and see the books they offer. It is vital to keep information
sources flowing to counteract the deceptively complete discourse
presented in the corporate media. And be aware of other news sources:
progressive websites such as Counterpunch, and other resources such as
the Palestine Chronicle, Zmag.org, etc.
JR: It strikes me
that by referring to your book and the progressive press as
“alternative narratives,” we are implicitly affirming the primacy of
mainstream media. Yet the fact is that your book, which deals with
on-the-ground realities of the second intifada, is not “alternative,”
but central, and vital to any real understanding of the Palestinian
struggle.
RB: Quite right. In
fact, if you want a true alternative reality, I’d suggest a front-row
ticket to the upcoming peace conference in Annapolis, Maryland. That
will be a parallel universe constructed to serve the needs of the Bush
administration, with very little to do with the actual needs of either
the Palestinian or the Israeli people. It will be a media spectacle,
starring Ehud Olmert and Mahmoud Abbas as the already-disempowered
players, and with little result—except for preserving the US and
Israeli governments’ status quo, and keeping the region ruled by
military occupation, state violence, and, inevitably, terrorism.
JR: One challenging issue you address in The Second Palestinian
Intifada is the increasing violence used by Palestinians against the
Israeli military and Israeli civilians. You write that it is important
to “contextualize this phenomenon, not to justify it, but to present
the Palestinian response as a tragic yet predictable human reaction to
decades of subjugation.” Do you think it’s possible for the American
audience to get beyond the image of a suicide bomber and see the larger
phenomenon behind it?
RB: Yes, I do. I assume intelligent readers, and thoughtful readers
will ultimately be able to put themselves in the position of the
Palestinians described in the book. To eliminate violence, one must be
brave enough to examine the root causes. That requires a mixture of
humility and imagination—a mental exercise rarely required by the
corporate media.
JR: Finally, in practical terms, how can one buy a copy of The Second Palestinian Intifada?
RB: You can order the book directly by sending a check of $23 USD,
which includes shipping charges, to Ramzy Baroud, PO Box 196, Mountlake
Terrace, WA 98043, USA. If you have a PayPal account, you can send $23
USD, including your shipping address: editor@palestinechronicle.com.
-For more information on Ramzy Baroud, please visit his website at http://www.ramzybaroud.net.