'The Financial Times' et 'The Economist' très hostiles à Israël

Pour ceux qui veulent en savoir un peu plus sur ce sujet (Le 'Financial Times': très dur avec Israël mais soft avec l'Arabie Saoudite), nous conseillons la lecture de l'article de l'intellectuel américain Marty Peretz, un démocrate, paru dans le TNR :

The Financial Times and the Satanization of Israel (Le Financial Times et la diabolisation d'Israël)

Marty Peretz cite cette phrase d'Andrew Sullivan, d'il y a dix ans, sur The Economist, également très hostile et dédaigneux envers Israël et qui appartient au même groupe de presse (Pearson) que le Financial Times (London fog) :

"D'autres vestiges de "Brittery" abondent, y compris la condescendance [britannique] habituelle envers Israël. Voici une phrase reprise d'un éditorial du 10 avril [1999] sur les Balkans: "de telles atrocités comme l'expulsion et le meurtre de masse des Albanais kosovars se sont déjà produites ailleurs - en Bosnie, au Rwanda, en l'Union soviétique, en Palestine et dans bien d'autres endroits aussi, et les épurateurs ethniques s'en sortent impunément." La Palestine? En un tour de main, le magazine assimile la création d'Israël à la terreur stalinienne."

Marty Peretz remarque que l'insistance du FT à considérer, contre toute logique, que Tel Aviv est la capitale de l'État d'Israël :

"My favorite instance of FT bias is its insistence on calling Tel Aviv the capital of the State of Israel. In this little obsession can be seen the newspaper’s resistance to 61 years of fact that the functioning and symbolic capital is Jerusalem. Its cabinet sits there. Its legislature meets there. Its Supreme Court renders judgment there. Foreign diplomats present their credentials there, however much some of their governments would prefer that ceremonial and official business be done in Tel Aviv. No Christian church--Armenian, Russian Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Coptic, Abyssinian, Anglican, Lutheran, or Mormon--thinks it can do its business with Israel in Tel Aviv. And even the Muslim waqf knows that its grand and routine dealings are to be carried on in the city where David and Solomon reigned. But, if you read the FT, you would think otherwise. OK, the FT is on the Arabisant side of this historic quarrel. But, if it can’t get the most essential facts right, what worth can we assign to its news and views in which complexity and intricacy are the norms?"

Quant à l'hostilité du Financial Times et du Economist - qui ne sont évidemment pas de gauche mais plutôt des défenseurs du capitalisme, il note au sujet du groupe Pearson propriétaire des deux publications :

"As you understand, I’ve been pondering Pearson and its ugly prejudices against Israel for some time. Why is this array of lies, now festering on the British left, still entrenched in one of capitalism’s most trusted publishing companies? I have no response to this urgent query.

But I have--actually, just by chance--discovered one possible explanation. Marjorie Scardino, an American who is now the chief executive of Pearson and was for years the head of affairs at The Economist, has a weird association with a weirder charity which also is preoccupied with the long Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is the Jimmy and Rosalyn Carter Center, on whose credit card the former president travels. It has been supported by so many Arab governments and Arab zillionaires that one can hardly trust its views. But it does have views ... on nearly everything. Still, its opinions on Israel put it near the frontier of crackpots. And, I guess, that’s where Ms. Scardino is also comfy."