Introduction

In the Western sphere of consciousness, few things are visually represented less
accurately then the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. How do we imagine and visualize each
side, historically? Typically, Palestinians are regarded and treated as terrorists, such that
images of the kuffiyah, the Arab scarf, are so symbolically representative of violence that
when I wear one from Palestine my friends often jokingly refer to me a terrorist. Israel,
on the other side, are usually portrayed as a democratic society amongst a sea of hostile
nations, and so their image is usually one of a group of people who are defending their
homeland after a long history of oppression. Objective history plays only a small part in
the treatment of the conflict in Western media, especially American, except for the
constant underlying remembrance of the Holocaust that has rightfully haunted Western
society since the end of World War II. Accuracy of reporting has become a problem, to
the point of some stations purposely omitting words from their broadcasts (footnote said),
and often the images used in new reports bolster the idea of an inherently violent
Palestinian entity. In academia, the topic is rarely addressed, and there is a history of
academic repression of professors who try to initiate an open discussion of the conflict
(footnote). Because of these conditions, combined with America’s uniquely close
relationship with Israel (footnote), overall consciousness of the issue in an objective
sense seems to be strikingly absent from the average Americans mind, and so this project
hopes to create a new and accessible lens for studying the issue. I intend to readdress the
history visually, through posters created by both groups of people. In analyzing
propaganda created by both Israelis and Palestinians we are able to deconstruct ideologies
and self-identification of both people, consequently revealing power structures and
dynamics that are typically left out of the mainstream discussion today. Often cited in this
essay is the book Shared Land/Conflicting Identities: Trajectories of Israeli and
Palestinian Symbol Use, in which Robert C. Rowland and David A. Frank analyze the
rhetoric, myths and symbols used by both sides of the conflict in great detail. Their ideas
created starting off points for me to apply to the images, most of which I found in the
archive called the Palestine Poster Project, and online database that this project wouldn’t
have been possible without.

Basic Chronology of Events in the Israel/Palestine Conflict

1881 Eastern Europe pogroms inspire Zionism

1897 First Zionist Congress identifies Palestine as the site for the Jewish Homeland
1915-1916 Hussein-McMahon Correspondence, Britain promises a home for Arabs in
Palestine
1916 Sykes Picot Accords, Middle East land secretly divided between Britain and
France
1917 Balfour Declaration, Britain promises “national home” in Palestine for Jews
1922-1948 British Mandate, League of Nations awards Palestine, Jordan and Iraq to
Britain, Syria and Lebanon to France.
1929 Temple Mount conflict, beginning of prolonged conflicts over religious sites
between Arabs and Jews
1936-1939 Arab Revolt, 3 year long general strike turned violent rebellion.
 Approximately 5,000 Arabs and 400 Jews killed. Find citation
1939-1945 World War II and Holocaust, six million Jews murdered. The Haganah
begins the smuggling of Jews from Europe to Palestine to provide refuge
from the Holocaust.
1944-1947 Zionist battle against British control of the area.
1947 End of British Mandate, British leave Palestine, UN General Assembly passes a
Partition Plan dividing the British Mandate of Palestine into two states.
The Jewish leadership accepts the plan, but the Arab leadership rejects it.
1948 Zionist-Arab war, Zionists defeat Arab military.
1948 Establishment of Israel, beginning of al-Nakba, 750,000-800,000 Palestinians flee
and are driven out of the land.
1964 Fatah and Palestinian Liberation Organization are formed, headed by Yasir Arafat
1964-1968 PLO Charter created, maps an essentially Arab Palestine
1967 6 Day War, Israel defeats combined Arab forces and occupies the Sinai Peninsula
and Gaza Strip from Egypt, East Jerusalem and the West Bank from
Jordan, and the Golan Heights from Syria.
1969 Arafat becomes chair of PLO
1970 Black September, Jordanians and Palestinians battle and Palestinians are expelled
from Jordan into Lebanon
1973 Yom Kippur War, Egypt attacks Israel
1974 Palestinian National Council declares policy of supporting the formation of a state
on “any part of Palestinian land”.
1977 Menachem Begin elected prime minister of Israel
1978 Camp David Accords, Egypt and Israel agree to withdrawal of Sinai in exchange
for peace
1982 Israel invades Lebanon, estimated 17,825 killed and around 30,000 wounded.
1987 Palestinian intifada (uprising) begins, Violence, riots, general strikes, and civil
disobedience campaigns by Palestinians spread across the West Bank and
Gaza Strip.
1988 Palestinians call for two-state solution
1989-2010 Palestinians launch various suicide bombing attacks on Israel, often killing
civilians
1991 Madrid talks, international community attempts to start a peace process
1992 Yitzhak Rabin elected prime minister of Israel
1993 Oslo Accords signed. Agreement of mutual recognition.
1994 Cairo Agreement, Israel withdraws from Gaza
1995 Rabin Assassinated, Peres becomes prime minister.
1996 Benjamin Netanyahu of Likud elected prime minister of Israel.
1999 Ehud Barak of Labor party elected prime minister of Israel.
2000 Camp David Accords fail.
2000 Ariel Sharon of Likud party elected prime minister, visits the Temple Mount,
igniting the second intifada, named the Al-Aqsa intifada.
2002 Israel begins construction of the wall surrounding the West Bank.
2003 Mahmoud Abbas appointed prime minister of Palestine
2005 Completion of Israeli disengagement from the Gaza Strip
2006 Hamas wins in elections, comes to power in Gaza Strip
2007 Hamas and Fatah split.
2008-2009 Israel launches Operation Cast Lead, around 1,400 Palestinians in Gaza
killed, 14 Israeli casualties
2010 U.S. launches direct negotiations between Israel and The Palestinian Authority,
talks fail when Israel refuses to extend a moratorium on settlement
building

Illustrating Zionism: Pre-1948 through the Formation of Israel

Zionism as an ideology and a movement arose in the second half of the nineteenth
century “as a response to the twin problems of anti-Semitism and the threat of loss of
identity through assimilation (36R&F)”. In its broadest definition, Zionism represents
support for the self-determination of the Jewish people in a sovereign Jewish national
homeland. Over time, diverse ideologies emerged within Zionism, but the main factor
that each shares in common is the claim to historic Palestine as the national homeland of
the Jewish people. The homeland is often referred to as Eretz Yisrael, a term that literally
translates into The Land of Israel that originates from the Hebrew Bible. It usually
references the “mythic connection between the Jews and the geography of Israel.
(Rowland and Frank, 12)” by implying the Biblical connection between the people and
the land

Since the first century CE, most of the world’s Jews lived outside of Eretz
Yisrael. In 1920, the League of Nations released An Interim Report on the Civil
Administration of Palestine, which describes the population of around 700,000 people
living in the area of Historic Palestine.

“Four-fifths of the whole population are Moslems. A small proportion of these

are Bedouin Arabs; the remainder, although they speak Arabic and are termed Arabs,
are largely of mixed race. Some 77,000 of the population are Christians, in large
majority belonging to the Orthodox Church, and speaking Arabic. …The Jewish element
of the population numbers 76,000. Almost all have entered Palestine during the last 40
years. Prior to 1850 there were in the country only a handful of Jews. In the following 30
years a few hundreds came to Palestine. Most of them were animated by religious
motives; they came to pray and to die in the Holy Land, and to be buried in its soil. After
the persecutions in Russia forty years ago, the movement of the Jews to Palestine
assumed larger proportions. Jewish agricultural colonies were founded. They developed
the culture of oranges and gave importance to the Jaffa orange trade. They cultivated the
vine, and manufactured and exported wine. They drained swamps. They planted
eucalyptus trees. They practised, with modern methods, all the processes of agriculture.
There are at the present time 64 of these settlements, large and small, with a population
of some 15,000.”- add grey to footnote
 This poster, published in Russia in 1917 prior to the elections to the general
assembly or Russian Jewry, translates into “Vote for the Zionist List (No. 6), all who
believe in the rebirth of our land through Hebrew labor”. A woman in Biblical garb,
wearing a white robe and a red scarf and sash, gathers wheat in the foreground while men
in similar ancient costume watch from behind. In the book Blue and White in Color:
Visual Images of Zionism, 1897-1947 the scene and costume are cited to be references of
the Old Testament Book of Ruth, an anecdote involving cultivation of the land as well as
ancient Hebrew property rights and familial values. In the background, an empty yellow
field extends behind the figures and the woman in the foreground stares contentedly into
the distance as she breaks from her work.
One of early Zionism’s main challenges was reconciling how to connect Jews
immigrating from dissimilar and distant societies and cultures all around the world. Eretz
Yisrael became a tool that often functioned not only has a bridge between different
cultures of the Jewish Diaspora, but also between Jewish ancient and modern identity.
Here, it is illustrated as Ruth of Moab as she interacts with the land. The physicality of
this land, mixed with the Judaic Biblical allegory represented in the poster, creates the
“rebirth of the land through Hebrew labor”. This functions to connect the new immigrants
in Israel, to each other as well as to the land, often cited by early Zionists as “a land
without a people for a people without a land”.
The assertion of the land as being empty, awaiting its rebirth, was false, as alluded
to by the Interim Report cited earlier. Accordingly, the implication that this image was a
contemporary depiction of the land of historic Palestine is false as well, in order to create
a validity and legitimacy for the Aliyah, or immigration of the Jewish Diaspora into the
land of what would become Israel. The image is almost entirely an image of an ancient
scene, implying an ignorance, or at least lack of acknowledgment, for the history of the
land since the ancient times of the Old Testament.
These mythic connections are the main symbols present in the history of Labor
Zionism, which used biblical stories to lay the foundation for a new society of Jewish
workers and pioneers. The movement, headed in its early stages by David Ben Gurion,
took on a socialist characteristics in order to further its ideology that only through
collective physical labor could the land of Israel be redeemed.

"The Partition of Palestine is illegal. It will never be recognized.... Jerusalem was

and will for ever be our capital. Eretz Israel will be restored to the people of Israel. All
of it. And for Ever."
-- Menachem Begin, the day after the U.N. vote to partition Palestine.

Published between 1930 and 1940, this

poster was printed for dissemination throughout
Europe in advocacy of a Revisionist Zionist group,
the military organization Irgun Zvai Leumi
(National Military Organization in the Land of
Israel). Revisionism, a movement that began in the
1940’s and was formed primarily by Menachem
Begin, offered an approach to Zionism based on
militancy, often considered a right wing but fringe
alternative in early Zionism.
The ideology of the Irgun is clearly
illustrated; in the poster, Erez Jisrael’s formation
includes not only historic Palestine but Transjordan
as well. Transjordan was included in the land
allotted to the British after the secret Sykes-Picot
agreement of 1916, after which the land of
Transjordan was a topic of contention among the
Zionist movement. When in 1923 the British
Mandate affirmed that the area east of the Jordan
River (Transjordan) was exempt from the provisions
concerning the Jewish National Home, Begin and
the Revisionist movement rejected the decision,
eventually leading to the launching of an
underground war against he British occupation of
the land. In 1947, the U.N partition plan divided the
land West of the Jordan roughly in two halves, one
for the formation of the Jewish state and one for the
formation of a Palestinian. The Irgun again rejected the further partition of the land,
releasing a statement that asked “Have we not a homeland? Have not is boundaries been
set by God and history and the sacred blood that has been shed up in for it form time
immemorial?” (p65 R&F)
As the poster states “The Sole Solution” to the problem of establishing a
homeland was by taking up arms, symbolized in the gun that is firmly gripped by a hand
over the formation of the land. Militancy is thus mixed with mythology as a solution
towards the redemption of the land that Labor Zionism advocated for. In Shared Land,
Conflicting Ideologies, Robert Rowland and David Frank state that the militancy of
Revisionist Zionism formed as a response from the Holocaust, and so Revisionism held
that “any existing potential threat should be met with overwhelming force (R&F 65)”.
Thus, compromise was unquestionable, “land equals strength (67)”, and the conquering
of the land would bring security to the Jewish people. The Irgun became infamous for
carrying out various attacks on the British and Arab inhabitants of the land during the
Mandate period, including the bombing of the King David Hotel, which left 91 people
dead. In 1948 the new State of Israel classified the Irgun as a terrorist organization. While
it played an important role in the formation of the state of Israel, Revisionist Zionism
would not become a dominant ideology until the late 1960’s, when similar ideas became
the basis of the founding of the Herut (or "Freedom") party, which eventually led to
today's Likud party.

“We are the actors in a revolutionary drama, protagonists in an

epic struggle: to gather in the exiles, to rebuild the wastes of a
homeland, to create a society of workers. These aims are not distinct
and separate, but in all truth diverse manifestations of one vision of
perfect redemption.” David Ben
Gurion (p 44 Rowland and Frank)

From 1948 until the 1960’s Labor

Zionism dominated the political system of
Israel, continuing to emphasize its ideology of
physical labor as a connection to the land of
Israel as part of a process towards redemption,
not only of the land itself but also of the Jewish
people. The redemption is illustrated in the
poster as an idealized farmer/pioneer, strong
and confident as he takes a break from his
work. The poster promises multiple things; it
promises vigor, land and thus sustainability,
and a community based on ancestry. It implies
not only the rebirth of the land but also the
rebirth of the man himself as he interacts with
the land. Published in 1950, it exemplifies the
pioneer of the brand new nation. He is arguably
handsome, strong, and proud of his status as an
Israeli. This was the process and the outcome
that the labor Zionist movement envisioned in
 its quest to “build the Homeland and establish
in it a Jewish state, to make a living socialism
and exalt man upon earth”. (p44 R&F) Again
the connection drawn between the new
pioneers and the physicality of the land is
emphasized in the most obvious ways
possible. In Planting the Promised
Landscape , Irus Braverman describes that
“The redemption of the uprooted Jewish
exilic subject is thus intrinsically tied to and
dependent upon the possibility of physically
reconnecting to the land of their ancestors.”
Similarly to the 1917 poster, the Palestinians
are only present in the poster in that they are
completely negated, seemingly purposefully
ignored by the word “rebirth”, which implies
a period of stagnation and emptiness.

In this poster, published by the General

Federation of Hebrew Workers (Histadrut) in
1954, the shape of the land plays a prominent
role in the poster, similarly to the earlier
Irgun poster, but shows the less extreme
ideology of Labor Zionism as compared to
Revisionist. However, when considered in
regards to the borders established in 1948, the
extremity of the image of the land becomes
questionable. It is hard to discern whether or not
the entire formation of historic Palestine is
shown, or whether it is only the borders of 1948
Israel, since the man standing in the upper right
section is covering the area that would show the
West Bank. Regardless, the ideology does not
include Transjordan in its illustration of the
state of Israel.
The men are illustrations of workers and
soldiers, one holding an axe, one holding a shovel and one in military outfit holding a
rifle. All three stand facing a different direction, asserting power over the land beneath
them. The text reads “With one hand on a weapon and one hand at work… (Nehemia
4:11)” and exemplifies an equivalency between the importance of cultivating the land and
defending the land. In this way, the Israeli military becomes normalized. Israel is one of
the few nations of the world to require military service for both men and women, and so
this equivalency can be seen as a way to equalize the importance both agriculture and
military services.
Similarly, this 1962 poster published by the Israeli Defense Forces attempts to
portray the army in a neutral and normalizing way. Translating to say “Armored Corps
 Day”, the illustration shows two children delivering
flowers to two soldiers in command of a tank. It
separates the soldiers from the context of war and
violence, placing them in an everyday scene. They
are partaking in a job of security that seems to be
easy enough for them to take to greet the children.
Most of all, it draws a connection between the
children and the soldiers, who may end up in similar
military positions.

"I am increasingly consumed by despair.

The Zionist idea is the answer to the Jewish
question in the Land of Israel; only in the land of
Israel, but not that the [Palestinian] Arabs should
remain a majority. The complete evacuation of the
country from its other inhabitants and handing it
over to the Jewish people is the answer." (Expulsion
Of The Palestinians, 132) Jewish National Fund
director Yosef Weitz, 1941

The militarization of Israeli society was a reaction against the problem they faced
of dealing with the Arab inhabitants of the land. Other reactions to the indigenous
Palestinians varied between different strains of Zionism, from denial of the existence of
the people (footnote: Much of the pre-state Zionist ideology that mobilized Eastern
European communities for the trek to mandatory Palestine was premised on the virtual
absence of inhabitants, on what was often depicted as either completely empty or
hopelessly arid land awaiting redemption by Jewish pioneer- Said 22) to the assumed
inferiority of the people (footnote).
David Ben Gurion, a prominent figure of Labor Zionism who would become the
first Prime Minister of Israel, addressed the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry in
1946 on the issue of Palestine and of its Arab inhabitants. Ben Gurion compared
Palestine to a large building of fifty rooms or more from which the Jews had been
expelled. Upon their return, they found “some five rooms occupied by other people, the
other rooms destroyed and uninhabitable from neglect.”
These five rooms, however, were made up of approximately 750,000 Palestinians
native to the land, and once their presence became apparent that the Palestinians “could
no longer be deferred or denied there was a concerted effort to devise ways of getting rid
of them; it was called transfer and is still called transfer (Said 22)”
The Palestinians began to be systematically expelled from their homes throughout
the history of Zionism, culminating in the nakba (catastrophe) of 1948, during which the
majority of Arab inhabitants fled or were forced off the land by the superior Zionist
armed forces (footnote).
 In this Israeli poster, the Hebrew text reads “The Forest Protects You - Protect the
Forest!” Inside the pine tree that a joyful soldier hugs, there are images of Army tanks
and soldiers amidst a forest of trees that shield them. Above the army scene, depicted is a
man in a hammock and a group of people gathered around a campfire. The poster
advocates for the trees of Israel to be dealt with caringly, even lovingly, because they
acted as camouflage for the Israeli army as they conquered the land. Furthermore, they
benefit everyday families and communities in the new state of Israel. The poster draws a
distinct connection between the people and the trees, again furthering the mythic qualities
of the land itself.
What the poster also illustrates is the Zionist strategy of creating a new landscape
for the new inhabitants of the area following the exodus of the Palestinians. The Jewish
National Fund’s process of afforestation functioned to create a specific landscape in
Israel made of pine trees that were non-native, and thus completely new, to the area.
Accordingly, “In the Israeli context, the pine tree has become almost synonymous with
the Jewish National Fund (JNF). JNF is probably the major Zionist organization of all
time. It is also the most powerful single organized entity to have shaped the modern
Israeli/Palestinian landscape. Over the course of the twentieth century, JNF has planted
over 240 million trees, mostly pines, throughout Israel/Palestine.” (Planting the Promised
Landscape,) Journalist Max Blumenthal describes the trees planted by the JNF as
“instruments of concealment, strategically planted by the Jewish National Fund (JNF) on
the sites of the hundreds of Palestinian villages the Zionist militias evacuated and
destroyed in 1948” (http://maxblumenthal.com/2010/12/the-carmel-wildfire-is-burning-
all-illusions-in-israel/)

Illustrating Palestine: 1948 through the First Intifada

“A nation which has long been in the depths of sleep awakes only if it is rudely
shaken by events, and only arises little by little… This was the situation in Palestine,
which for many centuries had been in the deepest sleep, until It was shaken by the great
war, shocked by the Zionist movement, and violated by the illegal policy (of the British),
and it awoke, little by little” Khalil al-Sakakini, 1923, as quoted by Khalidi p. 158

While Israeli identity was shaped by the context of creating a new state on a land
holy to the Jews, Palestinian identity was shaped by the negation of that process; the
decimation of the state on land also holy to Islam. While the Palestinians historically
never achieved sovereign power over, they still considered the land be a home.
Paradoxically, both identities are thus premised by a history of oppression and
displacement.
Prior to the beginning of Zionism, Palestine existed under Ottoman rule and was
regarded to as “Filistin”, an abstract term referring to the general rural population of an
area that encompassed all of what is now Palestine, including Nablus, Haifa and the
Galilee (Khalidi 151). Thus the people’s identity was shaped roughly by Ottoman
borders, and also by the beginning implantations of Zionism. According to Rashid
Khalidi in his book Palestinian Identity, “the growing problem of dealing with Zionism
provided Palestinians with the occasion to feel part of a larger whole (156).”.
The Ottoman empire failed to pose a solution to Zionism. To make the matter
worse, after the 1916 Sykes-Picot agreement, which divided the region up between
Britain and France, the Palestinians found their land to be occupied by Great Britain, who
soon after publically voiced their support for the national movement of Zionism in
Palestine (Khalidi 159). The time afterwards, called the British Mandate, was colored by
a series of failed pleas from to the British government advocating for the rights of the
Palestinians, resulting in a concrete national struggle that ended in “a crescendo of
violence, as fighting inside Palestine between the Arabs and Jews intensified between
November 1947 and May 1948 (Khalidi 177)” The movement culminated in the nakba,
when by 1949 more than four hundred cities, towns and villages were depopulated,
incorporated into Israel and settled with Israelis, while most of their Arab populations
were dispersed throughout the region as refugees (Khalidi 179).

From the event of the nakba in 1948 until the emergence of the Palestine
Liberation Organization in 1964, Palestinian identity underwent a period of stagnation
from the combined effects of the Mandate period’s failed attempts at diplomacy, the
devastating effects of the nakba, the violent military defeats by Israeli forces that
eventually formed the core is the Israeli army, and the new problems faced by the large
Palestinian refugee population. The formation of the PLO finally presented a sense of
organization that had been lacking previously in Palestinian society. It began as an armed
guerilla organization that functioned as an umbrella group for other, smaller factions, the
largest being al-Fatah.

The Palestinian identity is a genuine, essential, and inherent characteristic; it is

transmitted from parents to children. The Zionist occupation and the dispersal of the
Palestinian Arab people, through the disasters which befell them, do not make them lose
their Palestinian identity and their membership in the Palestinian community, nor do
they negate them. Article 4 of the Palestinian National Charter, 1968

In the PLO’s early logo, the text

in the green circle reads “patriotic unity -
national mobilization – liberation” and in
the red rectangle “Verily, We Are
Returning”. Similar to many Zionist
posters, the land is used as a symbol, and
that symbol is engrained with a mythic
quality by the use of Quranic language in
red. The land is again imbued with
religious importance, and the process of
returning to the land is unity and struggle.
The strategy is strikingly similar to that
of early Zionism; the land is used as a
mythic unifying factor that presents a
reason for united struggle and liberation.
In this way, a group of people
who had never been given statehood was
united in a common struggle, and so their
identity was shaped by this struggle. Underlying their identity were themes of Arabism
that connected them with the region they existed in (R&F 165), but the distinct
characteristics of the Palestinian people were that in the face of struggle against an entity
much more powerful, they resolved themselves into a people who were heroic, martyrs,
steadfast, and sacred (R&F 162). The anger and struggle the new Palestinian nationalism
identified Zionism as the enemy, and so as R&F point out in Shared Land, Conflicting
Identities, “there was no alternative but to destroy Zionism through physical force; there
was no room for compromise or rapprochement (129)” This unyieldingness is what
Robert and Frank refer to as the “tragedy of Palestinian discourse”.

“Four hundred and eighteen living and thriving Palestinian villages were razed
to the ground in 1948 by the Zionism perpetrators of the myth and the crime… Bereft of
their birthright, the Palestinian refugees carried Palestine in their hearts along with
their land deeds and the keys to their homes. Both the topography and the demography of
our reality remain alive in our collective memory and continuity” Mahmoud Darwish, as
quoted by R&F p. 123, in a speech on the fiftieth anniversary of the nakba, 1998

The Popular Front for the Liberation

of Palestine was established under the
umbrella of the PLO in 1967 as a Marxist
liberation organization. This 1968 poster, by
Ghassan Kanafani, illustrates an Arab
woman, probably Muslim based on her head
scarf, holding a rifle.
The weapon’s shape is undoubtedly
in a shape that mimics the triangular area of
land that makes up historic Palestine. In this
way, armed struggle and the return to the
land are intertwined in the Palestinian
ideology. The woman seems resolved and
steadfast in the path back to her land.
In Shared Land, Conflicting
Identities, Rowland and Frank draw a
connection between similar symbol systems
used by Palestinians in 1968 and Revisionist
Zionists as they responded to the Holocaust.
In this way, they make a comparison
between al nakba of 1948 and the Holocaust
based on how each affected the identities of
the people. While the difference in scale of
tragedy is obvious (the expulsion of the
Palestinian people surely isn’t equivalent to
the killing of six-million Jews), Al Nakba
created a similar effect on the Palestinian
people in that it “transformed the Palestinians into outsiders. The felt threatened by loss
of identity. There was no country to which they could turn. (R&F 128).
This poster can thus be compared to the Irgun poster discussed earlier. The use of
the shape of the land and the use of weaponry to advocate for armed struggle function in
very similar ways, as the aims of both groups was to establish a nation of a people on the
same land. Interestingly, R&F point out, “The similarity between the symbol system of
the Palestinian National Charter and the writings of the Irgun is remarkable (128)”

The Palestinian symbol of the

heroic warrior is exemplified in this
1970 Fatah poster. His identity is
clearly asserted in the text; it
completely revolves around his
homeland and his pathway back there.
The man masked in a kuffiyah
confidently confronting his enemy
illustrates the pathway. His identity as
an Arab is symbolized in the scarf,
mimicking the text, because not only
did the kuffiyah’s function to cover the
guerilla soldier’s faces but they served
as symbols of identity. Armed struggle
recurs as a theme in early Palestinian
nationalist posters, and in this one it
may be considered as a result of the
1967 Six Day War, which resulted in
the Israeli occupation of the West
Bank, the Golan Heights, the Gaza
Strip and the Sinai Peninsula. “My
blood” affirms the physical connection
to the land of Palestine and legitimizes
sacrifice of life for the overarching
struggle.
1967 was a distinct loss for
the Palestinian people and their neighboring countries. The war took place between Israel
and Egypt (known then as the United Arab Republic [UAR]), Jordan, and Syria. The
outcome was a swift and decisive Israeli victory. Israel took effective control of the Gaza
Strip and the Sinai Peninsula from Egypt, the West Bank and East Jerusalem from
Jordan, and the Golan Heights from Syria.
 Israel’s victories in the Six Day
War are debated to have been results
of acts of aggression on the part of
Israel, or acts of self-defense. In any
case, the land captured in 1967
continues to be one of the biggest
issues raised today. While the Sinai
was returned to Egyptian control in
1978 as part if the Camp David
Accords, the Gaza Strip and the West
Bank have continued to be under a
military occupation since then The
Golan Heights, the area of Syria
located northeast of Israel, was
unilaterally annexed by Israel in 1981.
In Antonym/Synonym: The Poster Art
of the Palestinian/Israeli Conflict,
Liberation Graphics (author?) notes
that “The CIA World Fact Book 2003
specifically states that its maps do not
incorporate any of the territories Israel
seized in the Six Day War, including
the Golan Heights, into its official map
of Israel.”, reflecting the international
communities refusal to accept the
annexation of the Golan Heights,
despite the fact that Israel continues to
enforce it. (footnote to reference to UN resolution 497)
Naim Ismael’s 1971 poster illustrates the borders of Israel at three points in
history. The darkest section represents the land that was planned to be allotted to Israel
based on the 1947 UN partition plan, which split the land roughly in half (look up
actually percentages). The second darkest area shows the land that Israel officially
annexed after its War for Independence in 1948. The lightest areas represent the land
seized after the Six Day War. The red arrows point to each four directions, and
“emphasize the fact that Israel’s tough and disciplined military forces have advanced
victoriously in all directions, even simultaneously, since its independence in May 1948.
(antonym.synonym)”
Often considered to be acts of self-defense by the international community, the
poster boldly illustrates just how aggressively Israel expanded during its first two
centuries of existence, defying countless decisions and regulations put in place by the
United Nations (footnote). By isolating the shapes of the land itself with minimal
information of the context behind the wars, the reality of expansion becomes visually
undeniable and thus harder to justify.
 Today in the West Bank, illegal Israeli settlements continue to be built, along with
Israeli-only roads and a complex series of checkpoints through which Palestinians must
comply with, resulting in the continuing depletion of land remaining under a weak
Palestinian control (footnote?). Israel controls the borders, airspace, and water supplies of
the West Bank. It withdrew from the Gaza Strip in 2004, but has since been imposing an
economic blockade that denies imports and exports necessary for everyday life in gaza
(footnote).

Intifada 1987
Post lebanon
Failure of PLO to create solutions- increased popular unity, increased pragmatism
Recognition of Israel- in posters, guns replaced with stones
Crosshairs indicate inequality
of arms
Israeli Resistance to the Occupation after Oslo

Illustrating Peace: Attempts to Visualize an Alternate Solution

“The Oslo accords were too much of a whole with several prior decades of
Palestinian dispossession, house demolitions, land expropriation and attacks on civil
society. As against that, there has been, as I said, a moral and political solidarity
building up between Palestinians all over the world.” Edward Said Memory, Inequality,
and Power: Palestine and the Universality of Human Right