The Hasbara paradox in the Gaza war
The current conflict between Israel and the Palestinian group Hamas has made clear an especially important change in the strategic development of modern wars. Weapons became supporting players in the real battle that takes place far from the combat zones and whose objective is not to conquer territories, but rather to gain sympathy and support, or Hearts and minds, according to the military jargon.
The war strategy of controlling the narrative has existed for at least 40 years but gained relevance in the digital age with the new role played by information in shaping the general public’s perceptions about military combats. As people’s main sources of information are the press and digital platforms, journalism has become a key component in conditioning news flows about ongoing wars within social communities.
Narrative control is known in military circles and among war strategy specialists by the Hebrew term Hasbara (1). The Israel Defense Force was the first Western army to incorporate this form of psychological action in its operations manual. The Americans tried to use Hasbará in Vietnam but failed because they were unable to develop a narrative capable of arousing the sympathy of the Vietnamese. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appears to be making the same mistake.
What has been happening in the Gaza Strip since the beginning of October is not a war in the traditional sense of the term, because there is only one conventional army in action. The extremist group Hamas initially used terrorist tactics for a surprise hostage attack. The episode served Israel to put Hasbara into action by seeking to condition the way the world would come to perceive retaliation for the Hamas attack. But the reaction was so violent and produced such shocking images that the perception of the horror of the bombings against civilian populations in the Gaza Strip neutralized initial sympathies for the Israeli side.
A psychological weapon
Narrative control strategies in war conflicts go deeper than military propaganda and counterpropaganda techniques. In these, the objective is to impose attitudes and political positions favourable to one of the sides in confrontation. Those responsible for propaganda manipulate facts and data to impose on the public a way of seeing the ongoing war. Narrative control focuses on changing the values used by people to support their opinions and positions. Instead of imposition, it uses subtlety, to prevent people from feeling manipulated, using media such as the press, to gain credibility.
The enormous disproportion between the military personnel in action in Gaza and the West Bank would indicate an easy and quick victory for Israel, but the war of narratives provided a relative balance between the contenders. Hamas, even at a considerable disadvantage, is favoured by the dissemination of images of cities devastated by bombings, civilians desperate for nowhere to flee and children injured or killed.
Although large, globalized media conglomerates are sympathetic to the Israeli cause, they end up creating conditions for the expansion of narratives that help Hamas. This happens because of the old journalistic technique of impacting audiences with shocking images and facts. It is the paradox embedded in Hasbará, whose results depend more on intelligence than on the strength of imposing propaganda.
It is a very efficient narrative in terms of attracting sympathy and undermining political support for Israel, as shown by the evolution of the positions of member countries of the UN Security Council, the Biden government, Israel’s main ally, and the spread of localized protests, such as what happened at companies like Google and The New York Times. Netanyahu fell into the same trap as the Americans in Vietnam when images of children victims of the war led the world press to publish articles that nullified the results of achievements on the battlefield.
Technologies changing the wars
The increased effectiveness of controlling narratives in war conflicts is a direct consequence of the widespread use of digital information and communication technologies (ICTs), and the process of ideological polarization underway in many countries. The intensification of news flows through the internet helps to fuel polarization and increases people’s participation in the public debate.
Here we have another paradox of narrative control techniques. Polarization increases separation and antagonism between conflicting parties. The ultra-conservative side feels more comfortable using imposition and force, as it cannot live with the diversity of positions and the complexity of political, social, and economic challenges. When it comes to winning hearts and minds, narrative control ends up being used more by the opposing side, even though Hasbará was created by conservatives.
(1) More details in the text published by the Middle East Policy Council. An Israeli Hasbara manual can be accessed HERE.
P.S. Text based on a Portuguese original version and translated by Google Translator and Grammarly
