Harriet Sherwood sees another ulterior motive for Israel’s operation in Gaza

On Nov. 12 we posted about a report by Harriet Sherwood on Nov. 11 about the “escalation” in Gaza which suggested that the upcoming Israeli elections were quite possibly motivating Bibi Netanyahu to consider a major military operation in response. 

“In the south, dozens of rockets and mortars were fired from Gaza between Saturday evening and midday on Sunday by militants from Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other organisations. 

Netanyahu warned that the military was ready to intensify its response to rocket fire from Gaza following the escalation of attacks and counter-attacks.

The round of violence followed a similar spike almost three weeks ago, which subsided after intervention by Egyptian mediators. But some observers believe Netanyahu may be more inclined to order a robust approach in the runup to Israel’s general election on 22 January.”

Sherwood attempted to buttress the claim by suggesting that Operation Cast Lead, in 2008-09, was similarly launched just before an Israeli election.

Operation Cast Lead, the three-week assault on Gaza in which about 1,400 Palestinians were killed, was launched in the build-up to Israel’s last election in 2009.” [emphasis added]

The Guardian’s ongoing live blog on the current conflict included an audio interview with Sherwood (who at the time was waiting to cross into Gaza), by the Guardian’s Haroon Siddique (posted at roughly 10:30 Israeli time), in which she walked back a bit from that claim.  

However, at the 3:55 mark in the audio (embedded below) Sherwood suggested another possible cause for the conflict: The Palestinian Authority’s current bid to gain non-state membership at the United Nations.

The degree to which the Israeli government’s current military act is motivated by a simple desire to protect its citizens from enemy rocket fire, as any other nation in the world would most certainly do, evidently didn’t factor in to her analysis.  

9 replies »

  1. I have ever posted on the Guardian site before, or should I say tried to post. Every single thing I posted, about 5 in all were removed!! Probably because on a few I slammed Mondoweiss.

  2. The workload of the Palestinian movie industry must be really huge

    As the fighting goes on, it appears that in the war taking place on social networks, Hamas has resorted to faking casualties. The organization (using Twitter handle @AlqassamBrigade) uploaded pictures of civilians injured in the Syrian civil war, claiming they were hurt by Israel’s airstrikes in Gaza.

    They have some benevolent critics from Syria.

    In an interesting twist, a number of Syrian opposition supporters called Hamas out for recycling the pictures, but noted they were doing so in order to help in their war with Israel.

  3. Every single thing I posted, about 5 in all were removed!! –
    The Guardian is a propaganda organ and practices censorship.

    Does Sherwood suggest that Hamas bombs Israel to please Gaza’s population and ensure continuing Hamas,er,rule?

  4. Any serious discussion of Israel’s bombing of Gaza needs to consider the influence of the upcoming Israeli elections. If you had checked you would also have found similar references in coverage by CNN (, the New York Times ( and Haaretz (, among others.

    Are these newspapers ALL trading in “ugly smears” about Israel – or is that accusation only reserved for the Guardian?

    • Correct. The Israeli electorate never would vote for a government who sits on its collective arse and don’t protect them due to criticism by Jew-haters masquerading as human rights warriors at EAPPI.

    • How about we commence “discussions” with the fact that over 120 rockets & mortars were.fired at Israel preceding this operation, over 1200 since the beginning of the year, while you, the EAPPI, and other “human rights crusaders” were eerily silent.
      Cry, and wail “elections” as much as you please.
      That won’t change the fact that Israel is committed to the safety of its citizens, who have a right to live peacefully which YOU don’t acknowledge.