Could Images of the Famine in Gaza Change Israeli Public Opinion?

When the Israel Channel 12 recently broadcast a segment of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, voice and interviews dealt with the problem of the image of Israel in the world and how it lost control of the narration. “You cannot explain the humanitarian situation in Gaza from the Israeli side. The situation in Gaza is very difficult, the pictures are very difficult, people do not know what to do.”

But the photos that appeared in the report spoke more loudly than any words. They have shown children with empty utensils competing for food at an auxiliary station, and children with their ribbed cages appear through thin skin, and a mother staring empty as she holds a sick girl between her arms.

When the Israel Channel 12 recently broadcast a segment of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, voice and interviews dealt with the problem of the image of Israel in the world and how it lost control of the narration. “You cannot explain the humanitarian situation in Gaza from the Israeli side. The situation in Gaza is very difficult, the pictures are very difficult, people do not know what to do.”

But the photos that appeared in the report spoke more loudly than any words. They have shown children with empty utensils competing for food at an auxiliary station, and children with their ribbed cages appear through thin skin, and a mother staring empty as she holds a sick girl between her arms.

For people all over the world, such images are not new – Television reports, newspapers of newspapers, and social media have covered the growing hunger crisis in Gaza. In fact, throughout the war, they were treated with images of death and destruction. But for the Israelis, the report submitted by Channel 12, which broadcasts the most watched news in the country, presented a rare glimpse of the human suffering that occurred in Gaza during the past 22 months of the war.

“There is already there, for the first time and after a lot of pressure, visual evidence of hunger in Gaza in the main Israeli media,” said Ayala Panevsky, an Israeli media researcher at City Saint George, at the University of London, who conducted a study of Channel 12 in the first few months in the war. “But it is implemented mainly as part of the enthusiasm of propaganda. The basic facts on the ground are constantly challenged, and even when hunger is recognized in Gaza, it is presented as a problem of enthusiasm or as a sophisticated and painless way to develop Israel.”

In fact, Channel 12 report was a great drawing for some viewers. When the YONit Levi showcotted part with the signal, “maybe it is time to understand that this is not a failure in public relations. It is a moral failure, and we need to start from there,” she was criticized.

As the war soon entered its third year, the Israelis may eventually be ready for the most important coverage. In a poll conducted by the Israel democracy Institute (IDI) recently, only 34.5 percent of Israeli Jews said that the media was advancing largely or very largely, “the real situation of the residents of the Gaza Strip.” Even the respondents who got to know that they are a right wing expressed a high level of doubt, although this may be because they consider the media unreliable regardless of what is reporting it.

In any case, Channel 12 is not alone in a style and the content of this axis in covering the Gaza war. The question is whether the change will affect public opinion – or on the contrary, whether the media now realizes that public opinion has changed and adapted accordingly. Either way, the hunger crisis in Gaza could be a moment of Sabra and Shatila for Israel.

The Sabra and Shatila massacre occurred in September 1982, during the first Lebanon war in Israel. The Israeli forces that occupy Beirut allowed Christians to enter the Palestinian refugee camps, as the latter slaughtered up to 3,500 Palestinians while the Israeli soldiers looked. These atrocities – and the horrific images that appeared from the camps – were a huge demonstration against the war in Tel Aviv, attracted an estimated 400,000 people, and was about 10 percent of the entire country’s population at that time. The pressure at home and abroad was forced on the Israeli government to evacuate the forces from Beirut, and to form the state investigation committee to examine the role of Israel in the killings, and to officially end the attack (although the Israeli forces have been in southern Lebanon for years after that).

There are definitely similarities between then and now. Either way, the widespread general support of the wars was dispelled when it erupted as the fighting continued and the Israeli losses rose. In the case of the 1982 Lebanon war, it was the horror of Sprra and Shatila that ultimately turned the audience. Pictures of the hunger crisis in Gaza may lead to a similar dynamic now, although it will require a change in the sea at the Israeli views: according to the IDI poll himself, more than three quarters of Israeli Jews said that the government should not take little or not to consider Palestinian suffering when organizing military operations.

It will be easy to say that all Israelis view the war in Gaza through the same publication. There is a solid nucleus, mainly on the right, which still reveals violence and revenge for the Hamas massacre on October 7, 2023. For the majority, the passage of time has reduced the revenge factor but a lesser act to relieve shock. The government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has done everything in its power to the fan of those fears of weakness.

The result is that the majority of Israeli Jews prefer to end the war, but not with a large margin – only 53 percent, according to a survey conducted by the Institute of National Security Studies (between Israeli Arabs, the rate is 89 percent). The Palestinian suffering is not behind the desire to end the war as it is the fact that since the fighting began again in March, the war is widely meaningless. Hamas was defeated, and the Israeli army failed to save one hostage at the time, and the number of soldiers who were killed was recently high. The burden on the reserve soldiers became unbearable, but the same poll found that the percentage of respondents who said they would encourage a family member – called them another period of reserve fighting – to report has already increased in recent months.

Netanyahu still insists that there is no hunger crisis in Gaza. But on July 27, measures were enacted to reduce delivery operations from humanitarian aid, saying that the army will stop for 10 hours a day in areas where the ground forces are not currently operating and securing trucks, while also allowing the supplies to drop in Gaza. Netanyahu made this decision due to the increasing international pressure – especially from US President Donald Trump, who admitted that the hunger crisis in Gaza is real and pledged to do something about it. The Israeli leader is unlikely to act due to a noticeable change in public opinion.

Since Trump has returned to power, Netanyahu has been arrested among the conflicting requirements of his power that he could not challenge easily. On the one hand, there is a president who forced him to stop the shooting last January, and he was calling for the end of the war; On the other hand, there are far -right coalition partners, who threaten the resignation of the government if the war ends. This dynamic was playing again this week, as Netanyahu ordered humanitarian measures to calm Trump and the international community, even when he gradually threatened the Gaza sections and its attachment if Hamas did not agree to a ceasefire and hostage.

Among these two powers, the far right has proven to be more struggling so far. It sees the invasion of Gaza and its resettlement as a major part of its Christian ideology and does not seem to disturb the human cost of bloody war and the repercussions of diplomacy. In the midst of the hunger crisis, Israeli Finance Minister Bezallil Smotrich said this week that Gaza is “an inseparable part from the land of Israel” and that the establishment of settlements is now a “realistic” option. He explained that allowing more assistance to reach the Palestinians in Gaza was a small tactical retreat on the way to victory.

It can be said that the extreme right grip on Netanyahu is stronger than ever. With polls against him, Prime Minister Muhoub is clinging to power and delaying the elections for as long as possible, but the majority of it was reduced to only 61 seats in Knesateet consisting of 120 members after he left two of the two super -Orthodox concerts earlier this month. He cannot tolerate the right -wing right partners with a bass.

Trump has been classified as Taco’s president, the person who always heads – at least when it comes to saving the threats of customs tariffs. In his approach to Israel, the best abbreviation may be linked – Trump’s attention can be dispensed easily. He has been interested in statements that call to some extent to war, stop negotiations, and to express human anxiety, and intends to transform Gaza into the Mediterranean resort, with its failure to practice any real pressure on Israel to work. Trump’s comments on the humanitarian crisis in Gaza may easily follow the same mode of instant attention without any follow -up.

If so, the only thing that will change the dynamism in Gaza is the Israeli public. It is still difficult to imagine hundreds of thousands of people who appear in Tel Aviv to show a demonstration focused on the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. The public is exhausting the war and the most famous protests against the previous October 7. Itamar bin Ghafir, the right -wing national security minister of Israel, deployed the police to deter the anti -government protests. But it is difficult to predict such things, and there may be more anger and frustration than opinion polls.

International repercussions may bring the humanitarian crisis a fundamental shift in public opinion. Most Israelis have become believers of threats and condemnation coming from Western governments, which recently included covenants by France and the United Kingdom to recognize a Palestinian state and impose economic sanctions. But what might give the average Israeli Israeli is what is happening on the ground in Europe: the Israelis who travel throughout the continent this summer caused angry protests against war and even personal attacks.

They may choose to ignore all this and consider this as other aspects of anti -Semitism and knee and knee to Israel. But the increasing explosions against Israelis and sanctions by traditional friends in Europe, as well as pictures of the suffering of Ghazan, may move the needle in favor of ending the war.