Israeli PM and Iran's President as knife criminals: the Daily Telegraph view

Here's yet another British newspaper cartoon that sees Israel as a criminal entity and its Prime Ministers as murderous criminals. Only in this case, the analogy doesn't stop there. 

Here we have both President Ahmadinejad of Iran and Ehud Olmert, Prime Minister of Israel, pictured as knife criminals loitering on the streets, apparently ready for the kill. 

Moral equivalence? 

That's President Ahmadinejad, who has time after time looked forward to the day when Israel will be "wiped from the map"; Ahmadinejad, who has rejoiced in hosting a conference celebrating Holocaust deniers; Ahamdinejad who presides over a country which hangs homosexuals and tortures to death people who challenge the regime too publicly. Ahmadinejad, whose country is just working on laws which will allow for the death penalty for Iranian bloggers who put up blog posts which the regime doesn't care to see published.

And Ehud Olmert? One of the most publicly reviled of Israel's Prime Ministers, leader of a party which is soon going to be holding leadership primaries which will surely see him voted out of his party leadership. Prime Minister of a country which, despite being universally reviled by Arab and Islamic regimes across the world has nevertheless ceded formerly occupied territory to countries formerly dedicated to its destruction, and who is being widely and scornfully criticized in his own country for being willing to trade one of its most notorious convicted terrorist prisoners for the bodies of kidnapped soldiers.

So let's consider the limits of the moral equivalence in this cartoon, from today's Daily Telegraph. Both men are portrayed as knife criminals-- a street crime blight currently afflicting London, not the Middle East. But it's Olmert who's the one who's standing with his knife pointed upwards, ready for the kill, with something like a smile on his facel. He's eyeing a depressed-looking Ahmadinejad, who's gazing away and into the forward distance, unsuspecting, apparently unaware of Olmert, poised and ready to strike, behind his back. Ahmadinejad's knife is down, his hand's relaxed.

The implication is unmistakable. Israel is the greater criminal, premeditating murder, here. In this context, it looks like Israel is looking at Iran with intent to kill, whilst Iran is maybe criminally armed, but has not got Israel in its sights and is not poised to kill.

The cartoonist? Nicholas Garland, who I have previously posted on as demonizing Israel as a vicious bully attacking weaker individuals, in a cartoon he drew at the time of the 2006 Lebanon war. The adversary "victim" in that cartoon, portrayed as a slightly naughty Little Lord Fauntleroy figure, was Hezbollah. 

Ironically, Garland has said of other cartoonists like Martin Rowson, whose work he deplores:

It is a topsy-turvy world in which the freer the society, the more grotesquely its politicians are caricatured.

Seems to me to be yet another case of the pot calling the kettle black.

HAT TIP: HZ

Comments

[Imshin]

You know, I saw that cartoon in the Telegraph and I couldn't understand why it would be seen as amusing or clever or insightful. The guy with the magen david didn't look much like Olmert to me so I thought it might also be Bush. This just puzzled me even more. I think it's just a poor cartoon, that's all. It must be difficult to come up with a good one every day.

[Miv Tucker]

I'm not sure I agree - while I don't fully subscribe to Adloyada's analysis, Garland is clearly suggesting that both countries are equally responsible for the situation between them, and that both represent an equal danger to international peace, which clearly flies in the face of all the facts.

It is not Israel that calls for Iran to be wiped from the face of the Earth; it is not Israel that is hell-bent on developing a nuclear bomb to puruse that aim; it is not Israel that supports terrorism in all quarters and has declared war on the West; it is not Israel that is mired in barbarism and steeped in a cruel medieval theology; and it is not from Israel that a torrent of anti-Semitic filth pours daily forth.

[Judy]

Imshin, though there are one or two UK cartoonists who might portray Bush wearing a Magen David T-shirt as if he were controlled by Israel, Garland is not one of them. He does, though, have a track record of portraying Israel and its prime ministers as criminal.

I can't imagine even the most critical cartoonists of the UK's involvement in Iraq portraying a British prime minister as a knife criminal-- they usually go in for more scatological stuff.

I agree that it's a poor cartoon.

[Imshin]

Maybe the reason I didn't recognize it as Olmert and found it puzzling is because even if one wrongly perceives Israel as a whole as a violent entity itching for a fight, based on a misunderstanding of Israel's policies and actions (which is pretty widespread in your part of the world), the image of Olmert in gang warfare just doesn't fit Olmert's persona at all.

I think if a UK PM was under investigation for corruption like Olmert is (have you heard the latest? http://imshin.net/?p=892), the press would certainly be portraying him as a criminal, and quite rightly so.

However, I don't think anyone has to worry of Olmert's alleged criminal tendencies (which are all the result of greed) making him gun happy. Quite the opposite, in fact. This guy has led the Israeli government to make one cowardly decision after another, while somehow managing to sell them all to the public as courageous.

[Judy]

I agree. To portray Olmert as a knife criminal is ludicrous--he's really into saving his skin at all costs.

Although we've had plenty of corruption scandals, the word is never used directly about our politicians. The word used is always "sleaze". That's usually portrayed as getting money stuffed into envelopes (as Olmert is supposed to have done).

However, British cartoonists repeatedly portrayed Blair as a poodle or a dog fawning at the feet of Bush, portrayed as a chimpanzee. Now they portray Brown as a pathetic bird, some other unattractive animal or a Victorian employer.

Maybe the ferocious UK libel laws make them reluctant to portray British politicians as criminals.