Genocide isn't a mistake. Which is why the media can't tell you the truth about Gaza

A new film about Hind Rajab's murder points to a deeply sick Israeli society, driven into the darkest of places by a racist ideology that says Jewish lives count, Palestinian lives don’t

The Voice of Hind Rajab, a devastating dramatised retelling of Israel’s slow-motion murder of a five-year-old in Gaza, arrives in UK cinemas next week. Please take the opportunity to see it. The vast majority of Americans were denied such an opportunity when it was released there last month.

Here’s what happened to the film in the US, via New York Times columnist M Gessen:

The Voice of Hind Rajab had its premiere at the Venice Film Festival in September and took the Grand Jury Prize, the second-highest honor. A few days later, it was screened to great acclaim at the Toronto International Film Festival.

High-profile US distribution companies came calling. But then, the producers Odessa Rae and Elizabeth Woodward told me, one by one the companies peeled off.

In the end, Woodward, who has a small distribution company, put together something akin to self-distribution. The movie opens in New York and Los Angeles on Wednesday. Elsewhere in the world this film, shortlisted for the Oscar for best foreign movie, has major distributors – but not in the United States or Israel. That’s a kind of coordination, too.

That may be the nearest you will hear the New York Times admitting to an Israel lobby and its extraordinary power to shape the West’s cultural and information landscape.

It is almost impossible to get serious criticism of the Israeli state, which (falsely) claims to represent the Jewish people, anywhere near mainstream US culture, even when it takes the form of a critically acclaimed movie, backed by Brad Pitt and Joaquin Phoenix, that received a record 23-minute standing ovation at the Venice Film Festival.

For decades, pro-Israel lobby groups have dedicated their efforts to telling us that antisemitism is rampant across the West and takes the form of opposition of Israel – a message endlessly amplified by the western media.

Note this: the “antisemitism” threat just so happens to have grown precisely in line with the realisation among an ever-widening section of western publics that Israel is operating a system of apartheid rule over Palestinians and is now committing genocide in Gaza.

The role of the lobby, so readily given a platform by the establishment media, is to conflate any resulting increase in criticism of Israel with an increase in antisemitism. The solution, it hardly needs pointing out, is to shut down criticism of Israel to reduce antisemitism.

With this logic dominant among the professional class in the West – in fact, with it serving as the price of admission to that class – it is presumably easy to warn off film distribution executives from allowing into US cinemas a film that bears witness to Israel’s killing of a five-year-old.

Hind Rajab’s murder, of course, was nothing exceptional. Tens of thousands of other children in Gaza have suffered similar fates at the hands of the Israeli army over the past 27 months, though their horrifying experiences have not been turned into a movie.

Like anyone trying to get more real information about Israel into the mainstream, I have direct experience of these difficulties myself. As a journalist at the Guardian 30 years ago, I found that my new-found interest in the Israel-Palestine issue after I had completed a masters in Middle East studies propelled me headlong into conflict with senior editors. It was an experience I had never had before, and one I was totally unprepared for.

What disorientated me at the time was that my editors were barely concerned whether a story about Israel was true or not, or whether it was interesting or not. Or whether I could make a good case based on reliable sources. It soon became clear to me that the yardstick they were employing was whether my proposed piece would undermine Israel’s moral case for being considered a self-declared “Jewish and democratic state”.

Note that the Guardian was and is exceptional compared to the rest of the British media in permitting trenchant criticism of Israel. But that criticism was, nonetheless, highly circumscribed. The paper made a clear distinction between Israel’s occupation, which it regarded largely as an unwarranted, criminal enterprise, and Israel’s status as a self-professed Jewish state.

Israel’s “Jewishness” was treated as a moral, unquestionable necessity and a safeguard against antisemitism.

In practice, this meant I could submit articles exposing the crimes Israel was committing in Palestinian areas under occupation, but only in so far as those related to the inevitable problems Israel had enforcing its “security” in the inherently insecure environment produced by its army illegally occupying another people.

Such articles were allowed on condition they did not conflict with the paper’s core editorial premise that, were Israel to leave the occupied territories and return to its internationally recognised borders, all would be well.

No articles were allowed – whether reports from the occupied territories or from inside Israel – that indicated there were inherent problems with the notion of Israel as a Jewish state, or questioned the assumption that a state defining itself in ethno-religious terms could also be a democracy.

This was the unspoken editorial formula:

• Articles suggesting that the occupied territories were a gangrenous limb that needed amputating – ok.

• Articles suggesting that the illegal occupation was a natural outgrowth of a highly militarised state, driven by an expansionist ideology of Jewish supremacy that necessarily dehumanises Palestinians – not ok.

That is the reason the Guardian, like so many others, has struggled to come to terms with Israel’s genocide in Gaza over the past two years.

Genocide, and the overwhelming support for it among Israeli Jews, hints at a sickness within the Israeli state itself and the ideology of Zionism. That dark underbelly of ethnic nationalism cannot simply be amputated, like a gangrenous toe. The whole body politic is infected. A holistic, root-and-branch solution is needed, as it was with apartheid South Africa. A process of decolonisation must be instituted, a programme of truth and reconciliation is required.

These are the reasons why the Voice of Hind Rajab did not make it into US cinemas. Because the Israeli army’s hail of bullets into the car containing Hind and her family, the Israeli army’s long delaying tactics before allowing an ambulance to tend to Hind, and the Israeli strike on the ambulance after its route had been approved – none of that can be explained by a mistake, or even a series of mistakes.

Similarly, Israel’s murder of tens of thousands of children like Hind, and the starvation of the rest, cannot be explained by a mistake.

These aren’t mistakes. Genocide isn’t a mistake. It is evidence of a deeply sick society, driven into the darkest of places by a racist ideology that says Jewish lives count and Palestinian lives don’t.

[Many thanks to Matthew Alford for the audio reading of this article.]

---

All my posts are freely accessible, but my journalism is possible only because of the support of readers. If you liked this article or any of the others, please consider sharing it with friends and making a donation to support my work. You can do so by becoming a paid Substack subscriber, or donate via Paypal or my bank account, or alternatively set up a monthly direct debit mandate with GoCardless. A complete archive of my writings is available on my website. I’m on Twitter and Facebook.