Wartime Journalism: Mohammed Omer on Gaza

7 Aug

thI visited North Vietnam in 1968, and had meetings with its leaders in the midst of the ongoing war, which resulted in receiving the outlines of a proposal for ending the conflict on a basis more favorable to the United States than what was finally negotiated by Henry Kissinger seven years and many deaths later.  Because I was among the early anti-war visitors to Hanoi and may have been the first with a combination of academic credentials and some access to American decision-makers there was great journalistic interest inmy experience. I was approached on my return by mainstream journalists from major newspapers and TV networks, especially those who harbored growing doubts about the war, resulting in a series of interviews given prominent media attention for several days.


Yet I was deeply disappointed and disturbed by the experience, and the journalistic ethos that it revealed. The mainstream interest was totally focused on what I had been told by the North Vietnamese leadership about their receptivity to a peaceful resolution of the conflict. This preoccupation was, of course, understandable, but what I found so distressing at the time was a total disinterest in my accounts of the total vulnerability of the Vietnamese people to the onslaught of high tech weaponry, the resulting suffering and devastation, as well as the absence of military targets in the Vietnamese  countryside where the only structures were churches and hospitals. I was deeply affected by this exposure to the human fabric of warfare, as well as by the Vietnamese spirit of resilience and perseverance coupled with an absence of bitterness toward the American people in part a reflection of the way Vietnam was governed at the time. School children were taught that it is not contradictory to view the government of the United States as an enemy and yet maintain friendship with American people and the best of their national traditions. Throughout the war, I found it remarkable that Vietnamese school children were taught to regard the American Declaration of Independence as a step toward human liberation that deserved universal affirmation.


What I encountered in Europe and the United States when I tried to convey these impressions to journalists, especially those who were unashamedly liberal in their critical outlook toward the war, was a total disinterest in the (in)human face of the Vietnam War. Their concerns were confined to the realist agenda about how the war was going and whether the Vietnamese were serious about their posture of seeking peace via diplomacy on the basis of a political compromise rather than through victory on a battlefield outcome. The more I reflected on this, the more I came to realize that the journalistic ethos as applied to foreign policy was indifferent to the wartime suffering of the enemy population and a humanitarian catastrophe of massive proportions.


This deep seated indifference had several components. Above all, it reflected the nationalistic limits of empathy, which highlights sufferings of our side, and essentially ignores the losses of the other side, an extension of the friends/enemies dichotomy that underlies the realist paradigm. At most, the losses of the enemy other will be reported as statistics, but except in rare circumstances, without much human context to exhibit the terrible impact of war on the civilian population of a country that is subject to the sort of one-sided onslaught that afflicted Vietnam for so long.  A second explanation had to do with the imperial mentality that dominated Western journalism whether liberally inclined or not, which dissented from the war not because it violated the UN Charter or international law or was an affront to fundamental morality, but either because it was not producing a victory or was not worth the cost in American lives and resources. It is this realist calculus that is filtered through a nationalist optic that helps understand the peculiar form of liberalism that prevails in the United States and endorses the pernicious postulates of  ‘American exceptionalism.’


A third explanation had to do with the overt commitment of Western mainstream journalism to a style of reportage based on facts, nor feelings or opinions, both of which are distrusted because of their supposedly subjective character.  The primary journalistic claim in this tradition of professionalism is ‘the news without spin.’ In this respect, my post-Vietnam interviewers were acting ‘professionally’ given this canon as any display of empathy for Vietnamese suffering would be discrediting to their claims to stand outside the circle of controversy when reporting the news. Not that such disengagement was unbiased, hiding rather than acknowledging its nationalist and realist framings.


All of which brings me to Mohammed Omer’s extraordinary Shell-Shocked: On the Ground under Israel’s Gaza Assault, published by Or Books (New York & London) in 2015.  The book consists of dispatches from the war zone by a young prize-winning journalist who has been telling the world about the Gaza ordeal for almost ten years, since his early 20s. Omer’s prior reporting earned him the Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism in 2007, recognizing the excellence of his reportage on Gaza (‘a voice for the voicelss’). After receiving the award in The Netherlands, Omer on his return home received a brutal reception at the Gaza border by Israeli security guards being beaten so severely as to endure serious injury that required specialized surgery. With the help of a Dutch diplomat and medical treatment Omer restored his health while studying in overseas universities, yet opting to return to Gaza rather than to enjoy a life abroad as an honored exile. Omer wrote this book while doing his best during the 51 day war of 2014, what Israelis called Operation Protective Edge, to tell the world about the war from the perspective of those enduring it, that is, the civilian population of Gaza. Shell-Shocked raises many issues worthy of commentary but here I will limit myself to issues bearing on the style and ethics of professional journalism.


In essence, Omer does not have the option of detachment from the ordeal of war in the manner of the liberal journalists who I describe above as covering the Vietnam War as an instance of failure for American foreign policy. Omer by choice and circumstances refused to be detached, but that does not mean that he cannot be trusted.  On the contrary.  As Omer explains, “..I’m a journalist, and I owe it to my people and the Israeli people to get to the truth. I choose to stay in Palestine, my beloved home, with my wife, son, mother, father, siblings. I am not willing to let Israel or Zionism exterminate me.” (28) He has a Dutch passport, and could leave, and lament the fate of Gaza from afar, and who could blame him for doing so. Obviously, the choice is not an easy or simple one. He observes at one point, “I wish I could airlift my wife and son (3 months) out of here. But this is my ancestral home; what else can I do?” (26) In describing the effects of the war, minimizes his own struggle to stay alive, courageously confronting life-threatening dangers on an hourly basis so as to fulfill his role as the eyes and voice of the Palestinian people enduring the ultimate horrors of war.


Part of what separates Omer from even the most empathetic of foreign journalists, for instance Max Blumenthal, is his embeddedness in the history and realities of life in Gaza. Even if he were to leave, his family would be surviving under the heavy weight of the Israeli assault. He can never escape emotionally from his deep attachment to Gaza. Again his words are the best evidence of the authenticity and importance of his journalistic witnessing: “..I am offended, not only as a human, as a Palestinian in Gaza and as a father, but also as a journalist in Gaza. To get a story, I navigate a sea of body parts and blood each day, much it the remnants of people I know: my neighbors, friends and community. Unlike international reporters, those of us from Gaza don’t simply report. We live and die here.” (23) Of course, the last part of this passage is not entirely fair. Many brave international correspondents have risked their lives and paid the highest price on some occasions. I recall the great French reporter, Bernard Fall, being blown up by a mine while walking on a Vietnam beach, or more recently, the grisly 2014 TV beheading of the American journalist, James Foley, but Omer’s distinction still generally holds. The outsider who enters such a cauldron of political violence puts his life at risk, yet in almost all circumstances, can after awhile withdraw from the combat zone, resuming normalcy, although some journalists are subject to a kind of ‘fever of war,’ and only feel truly human when in the close vicinity of mortal danger. I remember Peter Arnett telling me in Hanoi on my second trip there in 1972 that after covering many major wars he only felt fully alive when doing first-hand war journalism, but the New Zealand born Peter, although animated and brave, never allowed the suffering of the civilian population to get to him, managing a detachment in the Western style, supposedly letting the facts do all the talking.


In important respects, this is also what Omer does, but with an undisguised sharp normative edge. The book consists of describing the daily ordeal experienced by the citizens of Gaza living under the fury of the Israeli attacks with no way of finding secure sanctuary, often relying on their own words to give the details of their struggles for survival and to recount their harrowing loss of loved ones. In this spirit Omer makes the reader almost feel what it must be like not to find food on the shelves of the neighborhood store or not to afford the spike in prices that follows from growing scarcities or not to have safe drinking water for growing children or not to be able to escape the confines of one’s house, which is itself never out of the danger zone.  And most of all, what it feels like to cope with the unspeakable death and maiming of family members and neighbors as a result of Israeli military tactics. These graphic descriptions of what the 51-day war meant for specific residents of Gaza constitutes the basic reportage of Shell-Shocked.


One expects that within this frame of witnessing Omer reports as accurately as possible, without exaggeration or invention. From what I know of Omer (he is a friend who I have known and admired for seven years) and of the situation in Gaza from other sources, I am utterly convinced that Omer is adhering to the highest standards of accuracy in reportage, relying heavily on descriptions of the scene and the witness of those who have endured the worst  losses of loved ones, homes, livelihood. As well, his local affiliations are neutral. Omer does not belong to or identify with any political party or association. He is embedded in Gaza by life circumstances, being a member of the victimized society with deep family and community affinities, and by this identity disposed toward ending the occupation of Gaza, achieving self-determination for the Palestinian people, and the achieving a durable and just peace for both peoples.


Omer never pretends that he has no personal stake in this conflict. In introducing his book Omer gives the reader a sense of his outlook: “As for myself, I try to remain optimistic, no small feat in ruined shell of what was once a beautiful and self-sufficient coastal enclave. Our reality is predicated upon Israel’s determination to drive us from our homes for good.” (7)  More than this, Omer observes critically that “[v]ery few in the mainstream media ever talk about the right of the people of Gaza to defend ourselves, or even just to exist.” (10) Note in the tangled syntax of this sentence that Omer gets trapped between describing the right that pertains to the people and a right that belongs to himself as one of the people.  Making his political viewpoint even clearer, and from the Western journalistic ethos unacceptable, Omer acknowledges his support for BDS as raising the costs of occupation for Israel, and besides being a tactic that is lawful and nonviolent. Omer also affirms the inclusiveness of his hopes: “Speaking personally I would like to see a single state where equity and tolerance are the only way forward for Israelis and Palestinians.” (11)


Omer also makes it clear that Israel understands that from its perspective that such journalistic depictions of the effects of the war both complicate and even undermine their propagandistic portrayals of good versus evil. Omer quotes a Beirut-based TV camera man, Abed Afifi, who reacts to the intentional targeting of a journalistic colleague with these words: “Such [an] attack is meant to intimidate us. Israel has no bank of targets, except civilians and journalists.” (55) He goes on to insist that “[A]ll these attacks on civilians should not stop us from working—the world has to see what Israel is doing in Gaza.” (55) And so it has to some degree, thanks to the efforts of Omer, Afifi, and many others.


Given the Israeli use of precision missiles against clearly marked TV vans, the inference of deliberate targeting seems hard to avoid. Israel has half acknowledged this by claiming that the journalists targeted are not ‘legitimate journalists,’ a claim refuted by Sarah Leah Whitson of Human Rights Watch, pointing out that such an attack is a violation of international humanitarian law even if the journalists can be shown to be partisan. In effect, the subjectively motivated journalist is by choice and hostile perception a kind of warrior, seeking to help win that part of the war, often the decisive part, waged for control of the psychological terrain governing ‘hearts and minds,’ and hence ‘illegitimate’ in the eyes of the side relying on a military onslaught to impose its will.


Finally, I return to my central comparison between objectively styled journalism that prevails in the West and the subjectively styled approach taken by Mohammed Omer and other journalists who work from a vantage point within the orbit of extreme victimization. I recall my friend, Walden Bello, the noted author and political figure from the Philippines, saying that he didn’t have to determine whether imperialism was real or not as he experiences its reality on a daily basis, which shaped and conditioned his observational standpoint. For Omer, the reality of violent oppression does not have to be determined as it is experienced in the most intense possible ways.


Some years ago, in collaboration with Howard Friel, I was the junior co-author of two books highly critical of the manner in which the New York Times handled foreign policy debates and reported on Middle East issues, especially the Israel/Palestine conflict. [The Record of the Paper: How the New York Times Misreports U.S. Foreign Policy (2004) and Israel-Palestine on Record: How the New York Times Misrepresents Conflict in the Middle East (2007). We reached two main conclusions: (1) the Times systematically excluded the relevance of international law whenever it was seen as impinging on American choices in the pursuit of foreign policy goals; (2) the selective presentation of evidence sought to maintain a pro-Israeli consensus and to minimize the actualities of Palestinian victimization, a pattern very evident in the news coverage, but also in the type of opinion writers who were published and those who were excluded. In this regard, the claim of objectivity and detachment were sham, and devices used to manipulate and indoctrinate the reader, a phenomenon brilliantly depicted by Noam Chomsky in his studies of ‘indoctrination in a liberal society. I remember telling my students during the height of the Cold War that if you were a Russian in Moscow you learned how to discern realities by reading between the lines but if you were an American in Washington it required much greater sophistication to gain a comparable appreciation of the news from the New York Times or Washington Post, despite their widely accepted claims of being ‘papers of record.’


In this sense, I learn more about the news and the infrastructure of opinions that are shaping its editorial assessments from the avowedly conservative Wall Street Journal than I do from reading these liberal, more sympathetic, papers of record. And without doubt I learn more from Mohammed Omer about the realities of what happened during those 51 days in Gaza than I do from the mainstream media with its hidden biases and posture of apolitical detachment. That this learning corresponds with my political and ethical inclinations makes the experience moving and congenial as well as informative, and I encourage all with concern for Palestine’s present and future to read Omer’s brave book that can also be appreciated as a documentary compilation of testimony by the residents of Gaza caught in the maelstrom of a particularly cruel military onslaught and who yet manifest that quality of sumud that has made Palestinian resilience such an inspiring human reality amid the doldrums of the early 21st century. Mohammed Omer deserves the last word: “I have written this book as a way of preserving and passing on stories that need to be told.” (11)





/* Style Definitions */
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;


18 Responses to “Wartime Journalism: Mohammed Omer on Gaza”

  1. A4 August 7, 2015 at 8:12 pm #

    It’s good to see your conclusion (1) from The Record of the Paper. International law is more secret than ECI or RD. State propaganda organs like the Times use the same trick for human rights law. In the most recent treaty body review cycle, the Times took ¶20 of the Committee Against Torture CAT/C/USA/CO/3-5 and ¶20 of the Human Rights Committee CCPR/C/USA/CO/4 and they turned it into Gideon’s trumpet,


    a heartwarming, uplifting, wholly homegrown story. The concerted suasion and legal imperatives of the UN member nations don’t exist in the Times. The peremptory norm forbidding mental torture does not exist in the Times. To airbrush out such crucial pressure is like trying to explain the Treaty of San Francisco without mentioning Hiroshima, Nagasaki, or the firebombing of Tokyo.

  2. rehmat1 August 8, 2015 at 3:45 pm #

    Dr. Falk, if my memory serves me right – Mohammed Omer was one of the witnesses at the Russell Tribunal on Palestine last year where you acted as one of the judges.


    • Laurie Knightly August 8, 2015 at 6:33 pm #

      Good to be reminded of the R Tribunal. It’s frustrating in terms of stopping the unceasing atrocities, but is also part of a recorded history amassed by highly respected participants. The photo is a jolting reminder of the population density and indiscriminate bombing.

  3. Laurie Knightly August 8, 2015 at 4:38 pm #

    The important questions regarding wars like Vietnam and Gaza are the reasons and the repercussions of the injustice. We are more inclined to read about/film battles than to have a reliable analysis/history until many years later – if at all. Besides the 60,000 dead, and 150,000 wounded Americans there were at least a million Vietnamese and the aftermath of still existent unexploded ordinances, agent orange et al. What segment of the population did the US conscript for this unjustified war? Who profited? What did it cost in lives, destruction, and money – and continues? For what? How/if is the Vietnam War depicted in our educational system? What has become of the veterans? Can the average person discuss the Vietnam War in an honest knowledgeable manner? Did we learn anything?

    Gaza is not a separate enclave from Palestine. It’s a small area – 25 miles long and an average of 5 miles wide. Was it perchance emptied of Jewish settlers so it could be bombed at will? It’s filled with refugees forced from what is now Israel and cut off from the world. Their resistance is not just about Gaza but includes the never ending destruction and foreign occupation of their greater homeland. Their dispossession is not the result of holocaust survivors seeking sanctuary but opportunists and their unending wealthy benefactors. It shows no sign of ending but keeps expanding for an “eretz’ of unknown dimensions. Given similar weaponry like that supplied to Israel, Hamas could kill, maim and destroy like more respected armies. They do not have options like their oppressors.

    Does Omer speak of these questions in his writings?

  4. rehmat1 August 8, 2015 at 6:00 pm #

    Max Blumenthal is so-called “Liberal Jew” with an agenda. He quit blogging at pro-Hizbullah Lebanese new website al-Akhbar in June 2012 over Syria covering. Shrrmine Narwani told him: “Cry Me a River, Max Blumenthal.


    Eric Margolis, US-Canada’s veteran war correspondent and author of several books on wars and western imperialism, claimed that James Foley’s beheading was a propaganda piece to demonize Islam and Muslims.


    • Gene Schulman August 9, 2015 at 4:06 pm #

      One of the few times I can go along with rehmat1. I have full confidence in Eric Margolis’ reporting. He’s no ranter. Recent history has shown that we can’t trust or deny any of the horrors committed by the US and its cold blooded cohorts to push their agenda.

      • Gene Schulman August 10, 2015 at 4:11 am #

        Including Turkey, I might add.

  5. Kata Fisher August 9, 2015 at 8:03 pm #

    Professor Falk,

    Did you or anyone meet Horst Faas while war-reporting in Vietnam?

    Once, I had to do something and was examining his pictures.

  6. Beau Oolayforos August 10, 2015 at 9:34 am #

    Dear Professor Falk,
    Thanks again for connecting dots that many of us are too myopic to see: TV vans deliberately targeted by precision weaponry, judgements afterwards rendered as to the ‘legitimacy’ of their reportage, honest journalists beaten for telling inconvenient truths…Omer has much in common with colleagues in Mexico, who must also walk a dangerous tightrope, with no guarantee of survival. Our tax dollars have not been helpful, in either case.

  7. Laurie Knightly August 12, 2015 at 11:41 am #

    The NYT had two recent articles pertaining to wartime journalism. On Aug 10, entitled The Pentagon’s Dangerous Views on the Wartime Press, states that the Defense Dept released a 1,176-page document that includes guidelines for journalists in armed conflicts. Included are statements like – They may be deemed ‘unprivileged belligerents’ – a legal term. Also,’Reporting on military operations can be very similar to collecting intelligence or even spying’ The manual is considered a very disturbing document and it is suggested that commanders might find it convenient when they choose to silence the press.

    One wonders if the manual could relieve the govt from protecting or rescuing journalists.

    Note: 61 journalists were killed last year.

    Also NYT. Aug 12, entitled: Reporting From Iran, Jewish Paper Sees No Plot To Destroy Israel. The journalist Larry Cohler-Esses, assistant managing editor for the New York based influential Jewish newspaper, The Forward, visited Iran and stated there was little evidence that Iran wants to destroy Israel. As this accusation has been used by critics of the Iranian nuclear agreement, it is a welcome report.

  8. Margaret Kelso August 18, 2015 at 1:21 pm #

    How low can Falk go? Now Richard Falk is promoting a liar like Mohammed Omer,
    Go on the link below to see the picture of the Gazan child that Omer lies about.

    Disgusting Exploitation of a Disabled Palestinian Child
    May 11, 2015

    In the Associated Press Picture, the limbless child sits by a colorful mural in Israel’s Tel Hashomer Hospital.

    It is his home.

    Mohammed al-Farra was born in Gaza with a rare genetic disease. His hands and feet had to be amputated to save his life. He required extensive medical care. Care not available in Gaza. So he was rushed to a hospital in Israel.

    He is not the only Palestinian from Gaza being treated in an Israeli hospital. It’s just another one of those humanitarian acts undertaken by Israel that gets little press.

    But his story should receive media attention.

    After being treated, his Gazan parents refused to take him back. And neither the Hamas government in Gaza or the Palestinian Authority would pay for more medical care.

    So his Israeli doctors raised the funds themselves to allow him to stay at Tel Hashomer.

    The Associated Press should be commended for writing an article drawing attention to his situation. And the photograph is the best part, showing little Mohammed as a child, not a matter of politics.

    But now the picture and the story of Mohammed has been turned upside down.

    Mohammed Omer, a Palestinian journalist whose work has appeared in numerous publications, is a recipient of the Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism. Here is the criteria for winning the award:

    The award will be for the kind of reporting that distinguished Martha (Gellhorn): in her own words “the view from the ground”. This is essentially a human story that penetrates the established version of events and illuminates an urgent issue buried by prevailing fashions of what makes news. We would expect the winner to tell an unpalatable truth, validated by powerful facts, that exposes establishment conduct and its propaganda.
    Despite such a great honor, he has now been exposed for circulating on Twitter a nasty, cynical, “unpalatable” lie.

    He took the picture of Mohammed and tweeted:

    Fortunately, Omer’s disgusting attempt to exploit this child has been exposed, and the tweet has been removed. But not after the picture and Omer’s tweet were shared around the internet and seen countless times. And even though Omer was caught, how many other pictures falsely claiming to be of Israeli atrocities continue to circulate on the internet?

    Social Media like Twitter can be useful to get the facts that aren’t being covered by the media. But it can also be misused. It can become a news service with no editors and no accountability.

    Always get the facts before believing what you see.

    • Kata Fisher August 18, 2015 at 3:39 pm #

      Hi Marg,

      World is the insane place to live. There is so much deception in it that even elect are deceived.

      Why don’t you kick back and relax – focus on things that Proffers Falk did do..instead what he did not do?

      Dear Marg, – just give your self a brake and let elderly who do teach – also do so.

      I do not think tat you are equipped and I do not think that you are qualified to tell us what is authentic and what is not.

      And, if someone tells you a lie to believe – you not responsible for believing a lie? You sure are condemned when believing a lie. You should be responsible that you shall believe the truth.

      A long ago – you asked me about Christianity (or Church) – there thy have it!

    • Kata Fisher August 18, 2015 at 8:10 pm #

      I have a reflection:
      What would cause such genetical disease?
      Why such amputation would have to take place?
      Also, can the boy-child be examined and see what other genetical disorder / medical threat he may be facing in the future – or even now?

      • Margaret Kelso August 23, 2015 at 8:18 am #

        Kata, if someone knew how to stop these genetical diseases, that person would be the richest person on this planet.
        People thought Stem Cells would have possibly cured some of these diseases, but so far that hasn’t been the case.

      • Kata Fisher August 28, 2015 at 7:10 am #

        My family member was at a study of genetics and was on his way to becoming a genetical researcher, but the environment around him was unreasonably toxic. So after about eight years of a graduate and postgraduate study of genetics he had enough of it. With that, – he just decided that another direction personally be the best for his private well-being.

        Our human salvation and healing are not in Human Grace, but God and His Spirit of Grace alone and those whom he appoints and trough whom Himself extends or takes away His Grace.


  1. The Saudi Created Hell in Yemen | New Antarctica - August 8, 2015

    […] However in  all  of this we must not forget  those who   suffer now because of the political machinations  ( greed and power) . This huge humanitarian  crisis has been directly created by  the Sunni  Gulf states in Yemen. Health  services and food aid are being deliberately withheld from  areas controlled by  the Houthi,  while civilians are being deliberately targeted in  bombing runs, using U.S.  intelligence.  IN all  this seems like a re-run of the kind of brutality used for almost 80  years by the Saudi’s new-found ally,  the  Israelis, in  exterminating and terrorising  Palestin… […]

  2. TRANSCEND MEDIA SERVICE » Wartime Journalism: Mohammed Omer on Gaza - August 10, 2015

    […] Go to Original – richardfalk.wordpress.com […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: