The Language of Erasure
CASE A: Current Israeli Military Coverage The New Arab reports that the Israeli military 'claimed the Palestinians it killed in Rafah were militants,' and 'later calling the Palestinians militants, without providing evidence.' This framing is consistent: deaths are attributed to 'militants,' implying legitimate military targets. This is typically presented as a self-evident truth, not a claim
requiring corroboration. CASE B: Historical Precedent – U.S. Intervention in Latin America During the U.S.-backed coups and interventions in Latin America, such as the 1973 Chilean coup against Salvador Allende or the 1980s Contra war against Nicaragua, opponents of U.S. interests were frequently labeled 'communists,' 'terrorists,' or 'guerrillas.' For instance, the Reagan administration often
referred to the Sandinista government as a 'dictatorship' and the Contras as 'freedom fighters,' despite extensive documentation of their human rights abuses (Human Rights Watch, 1985). This allowed for the justification of extensive covert operations and military aid. THE FRAMING: Semantic Disarmament In 2024, the Israeli military states a Palestinian is a 'militant' after killing them. This
mirrors the rhetoric heard during the 2002 U.S. invasion of Iraq, where all resistance fighters were broadly categorized as 'insurgents' or 'terrorists,' blurring the lines between combatants and civilians in a conflict zone. The immediate posthumous designation of 'militant' preempts calls for independent investigation and bypasses the legal framework of self-defense for occupied populations, as