In the midst of Israel’s ongoing fight for survival against Iranian-backed terror groups—including Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon—international perceptions of the conflict remain deeply influenced by the deliberate spread of misinformation. This phenomenon, perpetuated by self-styled academic and political experts over decades, has led to the global acceptance of some of the most consequential falsehoods in modern Middle East history.
This article explores how the myth of a distinct, ancient ‘Palestinian people’—as opposed to a regional Arab identity—was constructed, the mechanisms through which it gained currency, and the enduring harm it does to realistic peace efforts and historical truth.
Historical Context: The Evolution of a Myth
Before the 20th century, the territory now comprising Israel and parts of Jordan was known as Judea and Samaria. Under Ottoman and later British rule, the area was home to a population consisting of Jews, Arabs, and other minorities. There was no recognized sovereign ‘Palestinian state’ and no documentation of a unique Palestinian identity outside the broader Arab population. British Mandate records frequently used ‘Palestinian’ to refer to all residents—including the Jewish community.
This began to change only in the 20th century, particularly after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the establishment of the British Mandate. The concept of an exclusive Palestinian identity acquired political impetus as Arab rejectionism grew against Zionist aspirations for a Jewish state, and later, the State of Israel.
Arab leaders initially rejected the idea of ‘Palestinian’ nationhood, seeing the land as part of a wider Arab homeland. However, following Israel’s independence in 1948 and, crucially, after the 1967 Six-Day War when Israel gained control of Judea, Samaria (the West Bank), and Gaza, the term began to be weaponized in the battle for hearts and minds worldwide.
The Role of Media, Academia, and NGOs
The PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization), founded in 1964, played a pivotal role in reframing the regional conflict as one between indigenous ‘Palestinians’ and ‘colonial’ Jews. In tandem, Western media and academic circles started championing this narrative, not least as the era’s anti-colonial sentiment found a new focus after Europe’s withdrawal from the Arab world.
High-profile academics and activists authored books and articles presenting a seamless Arab history in the area, often ignoring inconvenient facts about pre-state Jewish life or the rejected Arab attempt to destroy Israel in 1948. International coverage, notably during wars or uprisings, frequently blurred the distinction between terrorist actions and civilian casualties, fueling sympathy for the Arab side while portraying Israel’s defensive actions as aggressive.
UN agencies, particularly after the 1970s, adopted politicized terminology and policies. UNRWA’s definition of a Palestinian refugee broadened uniquely, allowing the status—and related grievances—to be perpetuated for generations. International resolutions referenced the ‘rights of the Palestinian people,’ despite the lack of a precedent for a sovereign Palestinian state prior to 1948.
The Weaponization of History and International Law
The perpetuation of this myth has devastating effects. Terror organizations such as Hamas justify attacks—including the October 7, 2023 massacre, the deadliest antisemitic atrocity since the Holocaust—by invoking liberation for an invented people and reversing ‘occupation.’ Despite the region’s complex legal status, NGOs and some UN bodies misapply international law, labeling Judea, Samaria, and Gaza as ‘occupied Palestinian territories.’
Israel’s presence in these areas emerged only after defensive actions in 1967. No Arab state or international agency recognized sovereign Palestinian rule there before then. The population of today’s Gaza, for example, consists largely of families relocated following wars initiated by Israel’s neighbors against its existence.
The Impact on Peace Efforts
Efforts to negotiate peace have repeatedly been stymied by leaders who embrace victimhood narratives while rejecting coexistence. Despite repeated Israeli territorial withdrawals—such as from Gaza in 2005—terrorist organizations exploited power vacuums to launch attacks rather than build peaceful societies. The Palestinian Authority’s failure to accept final-status offers—paired with the continued teaching of anti-Israel narratives in schools—perpetuates the foundational myths and obstructs genuine reconciliation.
Modern Implications: Misinformation Fuels Further Conflict
Western policymakers and populations, relying on narratives originating in distorted historical accounts, often pressure Israel for unilateral concessions while downplaying threats posed by terror groups or Iranian proxies. University campuses, NGOs, and media organizations have become hotbeds of disinformation, often repeating talking points that obscure or rationalize terrorism.
The October 7, 2023, massacre highlights this tragic dynamic. Despite irrefutable documentation of Hamas’s atrocities—including executions, sexual violence, mutilation, and abductions—some international voices rush to equivocate, minimizing Israel’s right to self-defense and amplifying unsubstantiated or invented allegations against its military. This pattern is repeated whenever Israel responds to ongoing rocket barrages or cross-border attacks by Iranian-backed militias.
Moral Clarity and Historical Integrity
Reporting on this conflict demands moral and historical clarity. The persistence of the myth of a long-standing Palestinian nationhood is not only a profound misunderstanding of the region’s demographic and political evolution; it is a weapon deployed deliberately to delegitimize Jewish self-determination and the unique status of Israel as a sovereign democracy surrounded by hostile entities. Such misinformation enables terror groups to justify atrocities and prolongs the suffering of innocent civilians on all sides.
It also leads to gross injustices, such as the moral equivalence drawn by some between innocent Israeli hostages and convicted terrorists released in prisoner exchanges. The clear distinction between victims of terror and perpetrators must be maintained, rooted in both fact and international law.
Conclusion: A Call for Responsible Journalism
In the age of viral misinformation and instant news, the responsibility of journalists, historians, and policymakers is more crucial than ever. Only by critically examining the origins and impacts of these powerful, false narratives can the world hope to promote honesty, foster realistic expectations for peace, and defend the rights of all people—Jewish and Arab—to live in safety and dignity.
Israel’s ongoing defensive actions must be understood in light of the larger war imposed upon it by Iran and its terror proxies. As new crises erupt, news organizations must insist on verifiable information, avoid simplistic or politicized labels, and expose the historical manipulation underlying so much anti-Israel activism.
The world’s attention must not waiver. Only through disciplined truth-telling—the antidote to decades of expert-fed deception—can the prospects for actual justice and peace in the region be preserved.
