Israel often likes to brag that it is ostensible “the only democracy in the Middle East.” Considering that this “democracy” is a ethnic-supremacist state that discriminates against 23% of its citizenry because they are Arabs and continues to illegally occupy and expropriate the land of 4.5 million Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, the “democracy” claim was always hollow.

The Arab press is now freer than the Israeli press.

Although Israel has never been a plenary democracy, it does maintain democratic structures for its Jewish citizens. It is indisputable that for decades Israel had (and still does) a vibrant and relatively free press. Political accountability is evident in Israel as much as it is absent in Arab countries: Former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert is facing corruption charges, the former president Moshe Katz had to resign to face rape charges, and the son of the former prime minister Arial Sharon still in prison after being convicted of corruption as well (corruption has become a common feature in modern-day Israeli politics so much so that a majority of Israelis believe that being corrupt is a likely result of serving in public office).

But even for its Jewish citizens, that democratic order is beginning to wear thin. Israel has always maintained state censorship laws to block national security sensitive information from being publicly traded (in Israel, anyhow). But in recent months, that previously narrow application has extended into matter of public moral.

During Israel’s bloody assault on the Palestinians of Gaza in December 2008-January 2009 - the United Nations accuses Israel of deliberately killing hundreds of Palestinian civilians, including over 400 children - the Israeli government (as was later justified by an official) clamped down on press freedom in an effort to maintain public support for the air assault and invasion (it is no certainty that the Israeli public would have opposed the massacre of Palestinians even if the press was critical).

Because of the government’s actions during the so-called Operation Cast Lead, the American monitoring organization Freedom House (which has a right-wing slant) for the first time labeled the state of Israel as “Partly Free” in their rankings of world freedom (”Free,” “Partly Free,” “Not Free”.) The Israeli government, predictably, dismissed the report as “ridiculous”. When I visited Freedom House’s website to provide documentation, I found that Israel’s status was changed (without a note of explanation) to “Free” again. If Freedom House had made a mistake previously, there would have been a correction listed, but, alas, there wasn’t. Freedom House is known to contain a many neo-conservatives, whom are all strong supporters of Israel, on its staff (board, ect...). I have little doubt that it was pro-Israel lobbying that lead to the dishonest and political (and non-explanatory, thus apparently secret) change in Israel’s status. Unfortunately for Freedom House, its previous documents listing Israel as “Not Free” still exist and offer proof that that was the initial and honest judgment.

Here’s a Freedom House press release dated May 1, 2009:

“Restrictions on journalists and official attempts to influence coverage during the Gaza conflict led to Israel’s Partly Free status.”

And here is Freedom House’s “Freedom of the Press 2009” report which on pages one and two lists Israel as “partly free,” respectively:

Press freedom suffered in a number of Free media environments in 2008, as Israel, Italy, and Hong Kong all slipped into the Partly Free category. . . .

Threats to media freedom are apparent even in established democracies and very open media environments. In 2008, two countries (Israel and Italy) and one territory (Hong Kong) that had been ranked in the Free category slipped into the Partly Free range as a result of threats to media independence and diversity.

And, in case you needed more proof, here is further evidence that Israel was listed as “Partly Free” as documented in the press: Agence France-Presse, the Jerusalem Post, Foreign Policy magazine, and The National just to provide a brief illustration.

Given its own thorough documentation, Freedom House clearly ruled that Israel is “partly free.” This was a decisive judgment by scholars and monitors that has now been secretly altered for no other reason than political favoritism. And those neo-conservative Zionists at Freedom House thought they could whitewash Israeli press repression after publication and no one would notice. Some of us are investigative. In case you did not already, now is the time to start recognizing that although Freedom House does publish excellent report on world freedom, there is a partisan, political aspect to the organization that sometimes infects the scholarship. Such dishonest rewriting and political propaganda is a blight on Freedom House which, like many institutions in Washington, has let pro-Israel forces corrupt it into becoming an apologist and liar for and behalf of Israel (and Israel’s supporters have the temerity to complain about the “dishonesty” [a baseless charge] of human rights organizations that criticize it).

Freedom House is not alone in noting the decline of press rights in Israel. The Paris-based Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has also downgraded Israel in its annual report on world press freedom (beyond Israel, 2008 was a sad year for journalists). The state of Israel can no longer claim the title of being home to the region’s freest press corps as Lebanon, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates are now ranker freer than the Jewish state:

Israel placed No. 93 out of 175 countries on a 2009 international index of press freedom, released by Reporters Without Borders (RSF) on Tuesday. The 2009 ranking meant Israeli lost its place as the top country for press freedom in the region, falling behind Kuwait at No. 60, Lebanon at No. 61 and the United Arab Emirates at No. 86.

And it is not just journalists, Jewish journalists (since Arabs, journalists or not, are always repressed) who are being stifled by a growing authoritarian state:

Israeli activist Ezra Nawi was sentenced to a month in prison today on trumped up charges that he assaulted a police officer in July 2007 while protesting the demolition of a Palestinian home in the South Hebron Hills.

After the sentencing Nawi told Ynet:

“The court has been permitting the occupation for years, they are trying to stop me at all costs. The judge doesn’t scare me, and neither does the 30-day sentence. This is testimonium paupertatis to the court, I tried to stop criminal activity, and I ended up having to pay two officers who acted brutally. This is the Israeli reality.”

America’s Founding Fathers astutely noted that a republic at war could not survive for long. War and colonialism are enemies of a free people since a nation tyrannical aboard cannot for long remain free at home. Eventually, the growth of executive power and of the military that come from war will be used to suppress dissent at home. The enemy will not be just some far off “Other” but anything that challenges the supremacy of the ruling warring elite. This is what is happening to Israel today. The occupation is breeding a more authoritarian domestic state. Israel cannot forever remain a free society if it forever remains at war. The consequences for Israeli Jews indifferent or supportive of the occupation is that their own freedoms will be start (they already have) be limited. The free status of Israel is dependent on peace; Israel, free or not, is dependent on peace in order to survive. Many Israelis, blinded by self-righteousness and hubris, fail to see what the occupation has done to their nation and their characters. It may be too late for Israel by the time they recognize their plight.