Israel strives to re-brand image

[ProgressiveMuslim]

(snip)

...Yet Israel is inextricably associated with conflict and war, and perceived by some critics as arrogant and cruel in its treatment of the Palestinians and its creation of settlements on occupied land which are deemed illegal under international law.

"Unfortunately, perceptions of Israel have always been nasty," Israeli deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon conceded in an interview. But he insisted it was "not Israel's doing."


"LOSING BATTLE"

In a bid to improve perceptions abroad, former foreign minister Tzipi Livni launched the "Brand Israel" initiative in October 2006. "It's time to bridge the gap between the real Israel and its international image," she said at the time.

Advocates hope the project is advanced by the new government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, who is accused by Israeli Arabs of racism.

"I think people do not know Israel. They will see a very prosperous, vibrant and open society living under the rule of law," said Ayalon. "Branding Israel is a way to bring who we are, without the prisms of political agendas, to the masses."

On Monday, President Peres said: "Criticism of the Jewish State is also tinged with chilling anti-Semitism" a disease whose "cure is incumbent upon those who perpetrate it."

But some Israelis say anti-Semitism cannot explain everything.

"It doesn't matter how many times we convince ourselves and our staunch allies that we are not war criminals, and that those who try to portray us as such are incorrigible Jew-haters," wrote Anshel Pfeffer in the liberal daily Haaretz.


http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersEdge/idUSTRE53M5Z720090423?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0

[rpannier]

1. They could do like Blackwater and change their name

On a more serious note...The Haaretz is correct. Not all critics of Israel are anti-Jewish, neo-Nazi's.

Avigdor Lieberman does not help the situation in any way, shape or form.

He is the poster child for what is wrong with Israel.

[bemildred]

2. Buy yourself a clue Danny, it is your doing.

You all are smack in the middle of it, and pigs will fly before you walk away innocent.

[shira]

14. you are so right....if only Israelis rolled over and died, the critics would love Israel once again

[bemildred]

17. No, I said they are smack in the middle of it, and it is their doing.

It's fatuous to suggest they just stumbled into this. Pigs will fly before Israelis roll over and die, and you know it, and I did not say anything of the sort. This refusal to accept any responsibility for the situation will not serve Israel well.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

3. Change the substance, and the style will change itself.

But with Israel the problem is the product, not the merchandising.

[imdjh]

4. I think of Israel as a place of innovative farming techniques, interesting technology, cont,

....ancient artifacts, and skilled defenses against dangerous neighbors.

I suspect that of those people who would like to peacefully visit Israel but who don't out of fear, 99% would not name the Israelis as the source of their fear.

[Howardx]

5. how out of touch are the israelis?

rebrand their image, as if thats all that needs doing.

[shira]

13. yeah, don't they know they shouldn't be allowed to defend themselves? GOSH!

[Donald Ian Rankin]

23. They shouldn't be allowed to maintain their illegal settlements.

Fighting to do that is *not* defending themselves, it's agression.

[shira]

24. always an excuse

Sorry, but ending "settlements" or occupation in Lebanon 2000 or Gaza 2005 did not lead to a decrease in terror - but instead an increase. In both cases, Israel is not allowed to defend its civilians. Neither would they be allowed to defend if there was a total disengagement from the W.Bank, and we all know it. As soon as Israel would start firing back at W.Bank Hamas/Fatah, folks like yourself would claim the "zionazis" are deliberately targetting children in the W.Bank and Israel would be forced to stop before being able to stop the aggression. You'd then have some other excuse as to why Israel shouldn't defend its citizens.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

25. No, removing 10% of the occupation did not end the war.

As I've pointed out to you repeatedly before.

Claiming that it should have done is just nonsensical.

[shira]

28. if a complete 100% pullout from the W.Bank, back to the 1948 armistice green line happens

and the W.Bank turns into Gaza part II with rockets flying into and onto Jerusalem and Tel Aviv - does Israel then have a right to defend itself without being stopped first by the same international community that prevented Israel from effectively stopping Hizbullah in 2006 and Hamas 2009?

Just wanna know.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

29. Absolutely, provided it doesn't kill vast numbers of civilians while doing so.

I'm not optimistic that it wouldn't, but provided it didn't, in those circumstances it would finally have the right to take military action against the Palestinians, and its claim that a two-state solution isn't viable might start looking slightly less absurd.


BUT, the chances of that being what would happen in the circumstances you describe are slim.

[shira]

30. so lemme get this straight

Let's pretend Israel pulls completely out of the W.Bank and back to the armistice lines of 1948, the PA attacks as they have been doing from Gaza, and Israel defends in pretty much the same way they did in 2006 and 2009 against Hizbullah and Hamas....the international community will still have every right to single out and condemn Israel (as they would no other country in the same circumstances) and therby force Israel to stop militarily before achieving their goal of stopping this new terror assault on Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, etc.?

[shaayecanaan]

31. this isn't the JTF

so you don't have to put "settlements" or "Palestinians" in inverted commas.

[Violet_Crumble]

32. That's a really nasty thing to say to Donald...

folks like yourself would claim the "zionazis" are deliberately targetting children in the W.Bank and Israel would be forced to stop before being able to stop the aggression.

Claiming that Donald would use the term 'zionazis' is downright nasty and below the belt. Donald is always polite to you, and he's clearly a moderate on the conflict, so you using that term like that reflects very poorly on you...

btw, why did you put dit-dits round the word "settlements"?

[Violet_Crumble]

26. That's not what Howard said...

He, as well as quite a few others, have pointed out quite rightly that a branding makeover isn't going to achieve jackshit if nothing is done to address the substance....

[Crunchy Frog]

6. Oh yeah. Netanyahu and Lieberman are the PERFECT people to create a more positive image

for Israel. :crazy:

[safeinOhio]

8. Along with those wacky settlers

[Jefferson23]

7. How ironic, the GOP is spinning similar crap,"we are not war criminals"

Sad for Israel,they sound delusional.

But what is the content of this information they are trying to get out?

"Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi, president of The Israel Project, sends information and contacts to some 7,000 across the Arab world who receive regular e-mails in Arabic.

"They are using our information," she said. "If there is a 30-minute piece on Al Jazeera and we can get in four minutes that are fair, we feel that it is an enormous victory for the possibility of a better future."

[Alamuti Lotus]

9. Throwing red paint over a bloody sidewalk

Those quoted in this piece come off as very cagey, a paranoia tinged with combatant and aggressive overtones, with an enveloping aloofness overall:--always an entertaining mixture. For their sake, it is unfortunate that PR campaigns cannot completely erase the record of actual behavior.

[Scurrilous]

10. PM spokesman: Naming Gaza op 'Cast Lead' was a PR mistake

<snip>

"Naming Israel's incursion into Gaza Operation Cast Lead was a public relations faux pas, a top government spokesman said on Wednesday.

"I didn't like the name," Mark Regev, the prime minister's spokesman for international media, told a crowd of some 150 listeners in English. "From a public relations point of view, it was a mistake."

Regev, who immigrated to Israel from Australia in 1982, said at the Modi'in municipality, "The Israel Defense Forces chooses its names by some computer or by some system which I don't understand. And the truth is that the Hebrew name Oferet Yetzuka (referring to Hanukkah dreidels) sounds lovely. It's the translation into English which sounds inappropriate."

Regev, 49, added that whenever he spoke to international media, he "never once said 'Cast Lead' because it has connotations in English that are problematic," opting instead for "the Gaza Operation" to describe the attack, which came in response to rocket fire from Gaza aimed at Israeli civilians.

"The English translation wasn't the most effective way to get our message out and it's an important point because if you can control the terminology of the debate, you can win the debate," he said."

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1080691.html

[bemildred]

11. Yep, they should have called it "Operation Warm Puppy", that would have looked much better.

Oooops, now I've let the cat out of the bag.

[Ken Burch]

12. That would've meant the IDF would all have been wearing "Snoopy" t-shirts

n/t.

[oberliner]

15. What about Enduring Freedom? nt

[ProgressiveMuslim]

16. LOL... more accurate would be "Enduring Ghetto."

[Jefferson23]

20. Oh gosh, that one nails it!

[bemildred]

18. Well, I'd rather have a warm puppy.

But I suppose that's a matter where reasonable people can disagree.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

21. I only wish Gazans had it as good as my warm puppy. :(

[azurnoir]

22. Considering the use of WP that Warm Puppy

could have come back to bite too, however Regev of course misses the point there is no PR that can clean this one up, but something with a ring to it like Operation Masada might have thrown people for moment

[Violet_Crumble]

27. Violet: Using Mark Regev as spokesman was a PR mistake...

"I didn't like the name," Mark Regev, the prime minister's spokesman for international media, told a crowd of some 150 listeners in English. "From a public relations point of view, it was a mistake."

"I didn't like his accent. It was just, like, so crass." Violet Crumble, self-appointed spokeswoman for all sorts of pointless crap, told a forum full of rather bored people in American English. "From a public relations point of view, it was a mistake. Next time they should use someone who sounds all cultured and stuff, like that Michael Parkinson guy."

Damn. This thread has inspired me to rebrand myself here at DU....

[HamdenRice]

19. The first thing they could do is stop trying to stifle debate by calling critics anti-Semites

If there is one thing that distinguishes the PR of Israel compared to the PR of other governments with image problems is that Israel sends out its supporters to suppress discussion -- through labeling critics anti-Semites when they aren't, by using institutional power (a la Alan Dershowitz), and demonizing their opponents in the ME.

They could definitely take a page from the South Africans during the last decade of apartheid. There are a lot of things you can say about apartheid South Africa, but they never said that if you criticize their system you are "anti-white." They did not try to prevent people from debating the issue. They didn't even try to demonize the black population of the country or most of the border states.

The framed the issue very forthrightly in terms of their perceptions -- namely, that they felt they could not have majority rule as long as the vast majority of black South Africans weren't yet "middle class" and as long as the ANC was supported by the Soviets. As hypocritical as that was (they had in fact destroyed South Africa's historically significant middle class) it was at least logical in the context, and their argument resonated with foreign audiences who had no particular dog in that fight.

The biggest problem with Israeli PR I see -- as someone who supports Israel's right to exist and defend itself -- is that it simply does not reach beyond a sort of "tribal," or religious pre-existing and ABSOLUTIST support base, and everyone else gets the sledgehammer. They pretty much drive away any non-Zionist supporters and don't seem to want any supporters whose support is rational, conditional and mediated with support for the Palestinian cause.

For those reasons, I believe they are doomed to lose the PR battle with any constituents other than Zionists, Christian fundamentalists and neo-cons.