Two weeks ago, Israel’s outgoing Cabinet Secretary Gidon Sa’ar wrote to the country’s cable television authority requesting that it block Arabic broadcasts of a program purportedly based on the anti-Semitic “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”.
So far Sa’ar has not received a reply.
Israel and the United States have both protested to Cairo over broadcasts of the program, which was made in Egypt.
Egyptian state President Hosni Mubarak has subsequently gone on the record defending the program entitled “Rider Without a Horse”. It is not based on the Protocols, he said.
Whether the program is anti-Semitic or anti-Israeli is open to debate. Certainly there have been several quotes from the program suggesting a less than pro-Israeli/Jewish line.
But for today’s column the debate is not over the content, but rather the idea of freedom of speech in the State of Israel. Should a democracy prevent the flow of information, even when it can be inciteful against that country?
The United States prides itself on allowing freedom of speech – even when the orators are blasting Uncle Sam.
On the other hand, Iraq, Syria and China shoot dissidents.
Israel is in a very difficult position. Since the relatively recent advent of cable and satellite, Israeli homes can receive programming emanating anywhere from Egypt to Abu Dhabi and Qatar. Those interested in receiving Palestinian TV can also do so.
Many of the stations on offer provide 24-hour attacks on Israel. As you can see from www.themedialine.org, the coverage carries no balance and presents Israel as a demonic enemy of the region.
But does that mean that Israel should prevent its one million Arab citizens from seeing the material?
Sa’ar clearly thinks so. Others on the left of the political spectrum, particularly those working to improve Jewish-Arab relations, disagree. While saying they are unhappy with the contents, they say it is wrong for a democracy to restrict freedom of speech and freedom of access to information.
This is part of a multi-decade debate in Israeli society concerning the fears of some that the Israeli-Arab population could prove to be a Fifth Column some way down the line. The authorities here are constantly struggling with the question of whether to treat the Israeli-Arabs as equals. While truly believing that all citizens should be equal, there is always a fear as to the level of loyalty of the Israeli-Arab to the State.
Right or wrong, moral or otherwise, it is the reality.
During the last two years, dozens of Israeli-Arabs have been arrested and found guilty of involvement in terrorism. True, they are a drop in the ocean, but ask any Jew in Israel and they will tell you they do not know which Arab is decent and which is prepared to stab them in the back.
It is with this highly-charged situation in the background that Israeli decision makers are having to discuss the Protocols and the wider issue of access to information.
It is perhaps hardly surprising, therefore, that Gidon Sa’ar has been waiting two weeks for a reply, and, quite possibly, could find himself waiting for some time to come.
Alternatively, perhaps his letter is lost in the mail.