Various pictures shared by researchers.
Conclusion by European Journal of Geography: Both groups use maps for political manipulative purposes by means of the titles given to the maps and the names assigned to various parts of the land and to the localities on the maps, as well as by stressing or concealing facts and figures, by using colors to accentuate or to obscure, by the use of different map projections and by the addition of illustrative descriptions.
An examination of the maps of Israel and of the Palestinians shows how each side tells its narrative of the conflict from its point of view, while disregarding that of the other side. The principle underlying these narratives is this: "My map tells the truth, while your maps are for propaganda purposes only." In effect maps display the maximum territorial demands of each side, while camouflaging the complex reality of the situation. Many maps attempt to conceal the existence of the other side. In effect they represent the ideological landscape more than they do the actual landscape.
Israeli maps erase the existence of recognized international borders and draw a picture of an "intact" state. Through maps Israel aspires to demonstrate the authenticity of its current borders. Hence, maps play a decisive role, for people tend to see maps as representing reality.
The Palestinians adopt an identical approach. The maps presented by the Palestinians reflect a lack of recognition of the existence of Israel and of its right to exist, even alongside a Palestinian state. These messages lead the public and the young people to aspire to the existence of a Palestinian state stretching from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, in place of the State of Israel. The maps depict a country that in effect does not yet exist, and reinforce the narrative that Palestinian resistance will ultimately lead to a situation in which the Palestinians will soon be in control over all of Palestine.
Conclusion by European Journal of Geography: Both groups use maps for political manipulative purposes by means of the titles given to the maps and the names assigned to various parts of the land and to the localities on the maps, as well as by stressing or concealing facts and figures, by using colors to accentuate or to obscure, by the use of different map projections and by the addition of illustrative descriptions.
An examination of the maps of Israel and of the Palestinians shows how each side tells its narrative of the conflict from its point of view, while disregarding that of the other side. The principle underlying these narratives is this: "My map tells the truth, while your maps are for propaganda purposes only." In effect maps display the maximum territorial demands of each side, while camouflaging the complex reality of the situation. Many maps attempt to conceal the existence of the other side. In effect they represent the ideological landscape more than they do the actual landscape.
Israeli maps erase the existence of recognized international borders and draw a picture of an "intact" state. Through maps Israel aspires to demonstrate the authenticity of its current borders. Hence, maps play a decisive role, for people tend to see maps as representing reality.
The Palestinians adopt an identical approach. The maps presented by the Palestinians reflect a lack of recognition of the existence of Israel and of its right to exist, even alongside a Palestinian state. These messages lead the public and the young people to aspire to the existence of a Palestinian state stretching from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, in place of the State of Israel. The maps depict a country that in effect does not yet exist, and reinforce the narrative that Palestinian resistance will ultimately lead to a situation in which the Palestinians will soon be in control over all of Palestine.