The British Broadcasting Corporation has been accused of anti-Israeli bias in its coverage of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The accusers, Trevor Asserson, a UK lawyer who was called to the Israeli Bar in 1992, and Elisheva Mironi, an Israeli lawyer, say that, while the BBC "preserves a superficial impartiality", it is guilty of "a marked and consistent pro-Palestinian bias". Below, Elias Davidsson, a Palestinian Jew, rebuts Asserson's and Mironi's claims and urges the BBC "not to let itself be bullied by the oppressors of my Palestinian brothers and sisters, whom the world should regard as the 'Jews of the Jews'".

1. Asserson's and Mironi's report begins by presenting the issue as a "conflict" with "two sides". The aim is to paint the relationship between the colonizer (Israel) and the colonized (the Palestinians) as a symmetrical conflict. This is a fallacy. There is no symmetry whatsoever between the oppressor and the oppressed. Symmetry exists when two sovereign states engage in a dispute (particularly if each state possesses the means of preserving its integrity). Symmetry does not exist between a colonial power and the colonized, between the apartheid state and the disenfranchized blacks, between the torturer and the detainee. The situation in Palestine is that of a belligerent occupier (as defined under international law and regarded so by the overwhelming majority of states) and a population prevented from exercising its right to self-determination and its inalienable rights, which are recognized by the international community. So, there is no "conflict" between "two sides", but a situation of oppression that the international community has attempted to end (but did not succeed due to the fact that the US has blocked any such attempts at the level of the Security Council).

2. The controversy regarding the label "terrorist" and the alleged refusal by the BBC to label certain Palestinian organizations as "terrorist" organizations.

The BBC is acting wisely by refusing to do so, particularly because certain states have, for political reasons, decided to criminalize these organizations. A clear distinction is made, wisely, by the BBC between the criminalization of organizations (a political decision by a handful of governments) and the finding of a court of law. The BBC is acting wisely by not espousing the claims by states against various groups as "terrorist" groups. Many states claim that their opponents are "terrorist". This does not create a duty on the BBC to espouse such claims. The term "militants" distinguishes between a label and the act committed, an approach which is both wise and in conformity with the principle of due process. (A person is not labelled as a "criminal". He may, however, be charged for crime. The distinction is important).

3. The term "occupied Palestinian land" is an internationally-recognized term used in UN resolutions dealing with the Palestine question. It is not an invention of the BBC. The BBC would find itself supporting Israel's territorial claims, were it to use Israeli terms for these territories. It may be pointed out that many Palestinians do not use the term "occupied Palestinian land" for the areas occupied by Israel in 1967, but talk about the 1967-occupied and the 1948-occupied territories. By doing so, they indicate their view that, in addition to those territories occupied in 1967, Israel has also occupied Palestinian territories in 1948, including Jaffa, parts of the Galilee and West Jerusalem. The BBC is bowing neither to the more extensive definition of occupation used by many Palestinians nor to the definition desired by the occupier, but sticks to the internationally accepted definition.

4. By using the term president for Mr Arafat, the BBC is not implying any political recognition. The term may for all purposes be honorific and recognizes simply the implied representative nature of Mr Arafat.

5. The BBC correctly refers to the Israeli settlements in the "occupied Palestinian land" as illegal. Their illegality is based on the illegality of the acquisition of territory by force, a principle of international law. The illegality of Israeli settlements in the 1967-occupied territories is disputed only by Israel and the US. These two countries do not establish BBC policy. To use another term would indicate that the BBC expresses an opinion that is not even shared by the British Government, let alone by most UN member states.

6. A number of sentences, disparaging Ariel Sharon or respectful of Arafat are mentioned in Asserson's and Mironi's report. It is not indicated when exactly, by whom and in which context they were expressed in the BBC. It is therefore difficult to judge the extent to which such sentences should not have been expressed.

7. The BBC is under a heavy constrain to report truthfully about various acts of violence committed in Palestine and Israel. It is being charged that the BBC does not balance its coverage of such acts of violence. Such charges have been levelled on the BBC not only by pro-Israel listeners and viewers but also from Palestinians and Muslims.

8. As a Palestinian Jew (person of Jewish parents born in Palestine at the time of the British Mandate), I have at times been flabbergasted by the pro-Israel bias of the BBC and its reluctance to deal with Israeli policies of outright racial discrimination (as defined in international human rights treaties) and with the racist nature of Zionism as the state ideology permeating Israeli legislation and practice. I have not the financial capacity to undertake an assessment of BBC coverage but wish to urge the BBC not to let itself be bullied by the oppressors of my Palestinian brothers and sisters, whom the world should regard as the "Jews of the Jews". I urge the BBC to give voice to those courageous Israelis and Palestinians who work together on the basis of equality against the occupation and for the right of return of Palestinian refugees, for justice and peace in their common homeland.