BBC team's tense encounter with sanctioned Israeli settler while filming in West Bank
"I think it's Moshe Sharvit," said Gil Alexander, 72, a devout religious Jew who tries to protect Palestinian shepherds from intimidation by Jewish settlers.
Over the last year we've been documenting his work with shepherds in the northern Jordan Valley, in the Israeli-occupied West Bank.
The man approaching us was placed under sanctions by Britain and the EU last year after they said he had used "physical aggression, threatened families at gunpoint, and destroyed property as part of a targeted and calculated effort to displace Palestinian communities".
In a case reported by our colleagues at BBC Eye Investigates last year, a Palestinian grandmother alleged that Moshe Sharvit had forced her to leave her family home in October 2023. Ayesha Shtayyeh also said he pointed a gun at her head and threatened to kill her.
Confronting violent settlers in the occupied West Bank, together
Extremist settlers rapidly seizing West Bank land
"We've been here for 50 years…What have I ever done to him?" she asked when BBC Eye interviewed her.
She said her family's troubles began after Moshe Sharvit established a so-called 'outpost'- a settlement that is illegal under both Israeli and international law - chasing away the family's sheep, damaging property and constantly threatening them. The alleged incident with the gun was the final straw.
Moshe Sharvit did not respond to BBC Eye's requests for a response to Ayesha's account.
Back on the mountainside, the man accused of this violence stopped his car and approached us. Nodding towards Gil Alexander he asked us: "Do you know he's a very dangerous guy?"
When our translator explained to Moshe Sharvit we were from the BBC he said: "Ah the BBC… great lovers of Israel…" He went on to call us bad and dangerous people.
Addressing our translator he said: "So, do you understand that they're the people who are most dangerous to the State of Israel?"
Then he phoned the police, asking them to come to the scene. When he wasn't calling the police he filmed us filming him.
Moshe Sharvit and Gil Alexander represent starkly different visions of Israel's future.
Moshe Sharvit believes all of the West Bank - which settlers and the Israeli government call Judea and Samaria - were given by God to the Jews.
In this he is supported by senior ministers in the government, including the Minister of Finance, Bezalel Smotrich, and the Minister of Public Security, Itamar Ben-Gvir. Both men are settlers and leaders of far-right ultranationalist parties.
Smotrich has said Gaza will be "totally destroyed" and that its people will be "totally despairing, understanding that there is no hope and nothing to look for in Gaza and will be looking for relocation to begin a new life in other places".
The 'other places' he envisages are foreign countries. Ben-Gvir, who is responsible for the police, has convictions for inciting racism and supporting a terrorist organisation.
Israel's Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, relies on the support of the far-right settler movement to keep his government in power.
He criticised the sanctions imposed on Moshe Sharvit and other settlers, saying his government viewed the move "with great severity". US sanctions against Moshe Sharvit were dropped when President Donald Trump came to power.
The UN's top court ruled last year that Israel's occupation of the Palestinian territories is against international law and that all settlement activity is illegal.
Israel rejects this and argues that settlements are necessary for security, citing lethal attacks by Palestinian gunmen on settlers, such as the killing of three people last January in the West Bank.
Settlement expansion is anathema to Gil Alexander. He considers himself a Zionist, but within the existing borders of Israel.
These are the frontiers that existed before it seized the West Bank in the 1967 Middle East war, after neighbouring Arab countries launched a surprise attack.
He is part of a network called the Jordan Valley Activists – Moshe Sharvit calls them "anarchists" - offering solidarity, and working for peaceful co-existence with the Palestinians.
"What they [the settlers] want to see happen," Gil Alexander told us, "[is] that it will be an area completely free of Arabs. It isn't Moshe. It's all the people above him who sent him here. Meaning from the top".
Moshe Sharvit's desire to have the Jordan Valley empty of Palestinians is shared by the leader of the regional council, a government-supported body, David Elhayani, who has visited the sanctioned settler.
In his air conditioned office about 15km (9 miles) from Moshe Sharvit's settler outpost he told us "the notion of settler violence is an invention of the anarchist, extreme left meant to harm the settlement image".
As for the future of the Palestinians, he was emphatic. They should go to neighbouring Jordan.
"This country needs to be free of Arabs. It's the only way. It's a global interest. Why global? Because the minute there won't be Arabs here it will be a Jewish nation for the Jews who won't have to hurt each other, there won't be conflict, there won't be anything."
Gil Alexander and Moshe Sharvit have a history of antagonism. During an altercation on a Palestinian farmer's land in January 2023, Moshe Sharvit says Gil Alexander tried to seize his firearm from its holster.
While speaking to our translator he produced a video of the incident on his phone.
"You can see Gil Alexander. Same hat and glasses. That's me. Here you see he grabs my gun."
Gil Alexander says he was acting in self-defence after Moshe Sharvit had grabbed his walking stick, and the phone of his friend and violently pushing it.
He says he feared Moshe Sharvit was going to use the weapon. As a result, Moshe Sharvit got a restraining order which forbids Gil Alexander from being within 2.5km (1.5 miles) of his farm.
The police have charged Gil Alexander with illegal possession of a weapon (the one he allegedly tried to take from Moshe Sharvit) and assault. The issue will be considered by the Israeli courts.
Moshe Sharvit himself is the subject of a restraining order forbidding him to approach a Palestinian family living near his outpost for six months, since March this year.
During our encounter the settler claimed that Gil Alexander had breached his restraining order by taking us to the high ground overlooking the valley. The peace activist told us later that he had mistakenly strayed just over half a kilometre inside the area of the order.
Although Moshe Sharvit's settlement is illegal, even under Israeli law, it has not been removed.
Human rights organisations and numerous eyewitnesses testify that the Israeli army and police frequently stand by while settlers attack Palestinian villages.
The violence has escalated sharply since the 7 October 2023 Hamas attack on Israel in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 kidnapped, and which triggered the Gaza war.
According to a report issued by the UN office for Humanitarian Affairs there were 1,804 attacks by settlers against Palestinians in the period January 2024 to March 2025.
The Israeli human rights group, Yesh Din (There is Law), reported that only 3% of complaints made against settlers resulted in a conviction. In six days last month - from 22 to 28 April - the UN recorded 14 incidents involving settlers that left 36 Palestinians injured.
In the tense atmosphere on the mountainside, and wanting to avoid any escalation, we decided to leave.
As we walked away, Moshe Sharvit went to his jeep and drove ahead of us, stopping where the track turned down the mountain. Our way out was blocked. There was no-one we could appeal to apart from the man preventing us from leaving.
Again, he phoned the police asking them to come. Gil Alexander phoned the police and his lawyer. Our team was worried that more settlers would come.
Then something surprising happened. I suggested to Moshe Sharvit that he should agree to be interviewed. After a brief pause, he said: "Bring the camera."
What followed was less an interview, than a series of declarations. He was doing the work of God, he said.
Why did local Bedouin shepherds say they were very afraid of him? I asked.
"No, that is a lie. They're telling stories so the world will think we're crazy. It's not true. It's all lies that are built on lies of dozens of years of lying…" he said.
"The Arabs, since the formation of the country and before - all the past 77 years they've been preoccupied with harming the people of Israel, harming the land of Israel and causing the nation of Israel to be miserable and pitiful. But they don't understand that the harder they try, the Lion will wake from his sleep and within one day we'll end this story."
He repeated the analogy of the Lion later in the interview saying, in what sounded like ominous words, that the Palestinians were "pushing the lion so hard into the corner that there will be no choice left but to finish this story".
"7 October was small. One day it'll be big."
As for peaceful co-existence such as Gil Alexander supports, he said there was "no such thing as peace with enemies who try to destroy you".
Moshe Sharvit's brother Harel was killed fighting in Gaza in December 2023.
His world is the pastureland, the stony hills of the Jordan Valley, his sheep and cattle, the bed and breakfast he has opened.
He produced a glossy video, replete with a backing track of American country music, to promote his venture.
He spoke with contempt for the British sanctions against him. They were a new kind of antisemitism, he claimed.
"The minute someone tries to hurt me I get stronger. My spirit…I receive energies, my spirit continues on its mission, I continue advancing forward and planting roots deep into the land of Israel. I'm not bothered by Britain or America or anyone."
Then he drove away. We were free to move on. Later as we were having lunch in a café about 15km (nine miles) away, a policeman appeared, looking for Gil Alexander.
He went with the police officer for questioning. After about an hour he returned, telling us he had been ordered not to enter the Jordan Valley for two weeks. He plans to lodge his own complaint against Moshe Sharvit over the incident.
We went to Gil Alexander's home in a kibbutz inside Israel that overlooks the Valley. Gunmen from the Palestinian city of Jenin fired at the kibbutz two years ago.
Gil Alexander is not a pacifist. If he is attacked by Hamas or any other group, he will defend himself.
He said: "A son of our friends, two months ago he was killed here by a terrorist. He was a soldier in the reserves, 46 years old with six children. He volunteered for the reserves to protect me."
"If the army hadn't been there, they would have come here. He was killed while defending me. And today he is buried next to my two sons."
But Gil Alexander seemed weary as we sat drinking tea amid the bright red flowers of his well-tended garden, and the fluttering yellow flags that symbolise Israel's hostages held in Gaza.
He spoke of a beloved nephew killed fighting in Lebanon in an earlier war.
Did he not, I wondered, at the age of 72, think about retiring from the struggle and enjoying his garden? He laughed.
There was no chance of that. After two of his sons took their own lives – one was in the army, the other was about to enter the military – he had found a purpose in working for what he calls the "humanitarian" ideals of Judaism.
"After the tragedies of my sons, if I don't find meaning in life, I'll go crazy… And the things I do, are things I believe in. And these are things I also got from my father who was in the French underground during World War Two and fought for French liberation but was against any type of occupation and said, 'Occupation is Occupation.'"
Two days after our encounter with Moshe Sharvit, a lone woman peace activist filmed him banging on the window of her car and rocking the vehicle.
The woman is clearly frightened by the intimidation. Moshe Sharvit acts as if he has nothing to fear.
With additional reporting by Oren Rosenfeld and Nik Millard.
Extremist settlers rapidly seizing West Bank land
Confronting violent settlers in the occupied West Bank, together
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
5 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Israel is making sure there is no one to document the horror of its war
Since the gruesome Hamas attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, that killed about 1,200 Israelis, Israel has waged a pitiless war in Gaza. More than 62,000 people have been killed, including some 18,500 children, according to local health authorities in what is considered by many experts to be an undercount. Most of the tiny enclave is now rubble; almost all of Gaza's 2 million people have been forced to flee their homes, many repeatedly. Since Israel ended the latest ceasefire in March, it has sharply curtailed the amount of humanitarian aid reaching Gaza. Most of its population, according to the United Nations, is experiencing or staring down starvation. Advertisement Amid so much suffering, the targeting of a single journalist may seem like an individual tragedy. But coming as Israel begins an all-out assault to capture Gaza City and as Benjamin Netanyahu has said he intends to occupy all of Gaza in the face of growing global condemnation, the killing of al-Sharif, like the killing in March of his fellow Al Jazeera correspondent Hossam Shabat, marks an ominous new phase in the war. Advertisement To justify its pitiless pulverizing of Gaza, Israel has endlessly invoked the threat of Hamas, supposedly lurking in schools, hospitals, homes and mosques. Now it has begun not only accusing individual journalists of being Hamas fighters but also openly admitting to killing them in targeted attacks, based on purported evidence that is all but impossible to verify. With Gaza closed to international journalists, this new campaign has created a pretext to eliminate the remaining journalists with the platform to bear witness and terrify anyone brave enough to attempt to take the place of the fallen. It has also exposed the cruel logic at the heart of Israel's prosecution of the war: If Hamas is everywhere, then every Palestinian in Gaza is Hamas. This is truly a war with no limits, and soon there may be no journalists left to document its horror. I have long been awed by the work of journalists who find their own homeland under attack. I spent years in war zones as a foreign correspondent, working alongside some of the bravest and finest journalists I've ever encountered. We were engaged in the same work, fundamentally: trying to help the world understand seemingly incomprehensible suffering. As an American employed by an American news organization, I stood on the same front lines in Congo, in Darfur, in Kashmir and elsewhere. But I would fly home to safety, while they would remain, struggling along with everyone else to survive. Advertisement We differed in another important way as well. I chose and pursued a career in journalism. For many reporters from war zones, the profession chose them. This was the story of Mohammed Mhawish, a young man from Gaza City. When Hamas attacked Israel, he was dreaming of a career in the arts. He had graduated from the Islamic University in Gaza, where he studied English and creative writing, and hoped to write literature and poetry. Instead, he found himself working as a journalist for Al Jazeera's English-language service. 'It was a feeling of obligation to my people and a responsibility to my hometown that was being destroyed in real time,' he told me. 'I never imagined myself being given the responsibility or assigned the responsibility to be writing through destruction and death and loss and tragedy.' Gaza City is a small place, so he got to know al-Sharif as they both struggled to cover the catastrophe unfolding around them. 'He was this really brave young person,' Mhawish told me. Before the war, his work had focused on culture and ordinary life. 'He reported on families having hope, families getting married, people celebrating life accomplishments, people just enjoying life on a daily basis. He never wanted or aspired to be a correspondent carrying a responsibility for his entire people.' Advertisement The work took a toll on al-Sharif. 'I remember many times where he was in public and sometimes personally with other colleagues of his in Gaza, just saying how hungry he was,' Mhawish said. 'How tired, how exhausted, how terrified and how scared -- he was really scared all the time. He was feeling that he was being watched and he's being hunted and he's being targeted.' Under international law, journalists are considered civilians. But since the beginning of the war in Gaza, at least 192 journalists have been killed, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists (I'm on the organization's board). 'At some point, I had to abandon my press vest because it no longer provided me with the protection that I was seeking,' Mhawish told me. 'In fact, it functioned as a target on my back.' Mhawish left Gaza last year. Al-Sharif's death, coming after so many threats from Israeli military officials, was an especially devastating blow. 'At the end of the day, he chose to give the sacrifice of his life,' Mhawish said. 'I am really, really tired of grieving my friends and colleagues.' When the Saudi government murdered Jamal Khashoggi, a dissident columnist who wrote for The Washington Post, inside its consulate in Turkey, it created a global outcry. Russia's detention and killing of journalists have likewise provoked outpourings of support. If the governments bother to concoct accusations - of espionage and other crimes - to justify these heinous acts against working journalists, they are usually dismissed out of hand as the ravings of autocratic regimes bent on destroying free speech. The response to al-Sharif's killing, like that of scores of other Palestinian journalists, has been different -- more muted, more likely to give equal weight to Israeli accusations despite the lack of verifiable evidence. Mhawish told me he was dismayed to see so many news organizations around the world parrot Israeli claims that his friend was killed because he was a Hamas militant. 'What's heartbreaking about this is that it tells me that there are journalists in the world who are justifying the killing of other journalists,' he said. Advertisement This is another respect in which I, as a foreign journalist, was always perceived differently from the local journalists who worked alongside me in war zones. They knew far more than I did about events unfolding in their homeland. They understood how to move safely through dangerous territory and possessed essential contacts and expertise that helped enrich my coverage. Ideally, this leads to mutually beneficial and symbiotic relationships between local journalists and their international counterparts, who often hire locals to improve their coverage. But in some places, what might be seen as expertise comes to be viewed as something darker. As a foreigner, I tend to be seen as a neutral outside observer. A local reporter, embedded in her community and enduring the same hardships as her fellow citizens, comes under more scrutiny. She cannot help being blinkered, the thinking goes, by her own suffering and root for one side in the conflict she is covering. She is, surely, a partisan. In the remarkable new documentary '2000 Meters to Andriivka,' a pair of Ukrainian journalists accompany a group of Ukrainian soldiers through a narrow band of forest as they seek to recapture a village from Russian forces. It is a claustrophobic, harrowing film, unfolding in bunkers and foxholes. At one point the film's director, the Pulitzer- and Oscar-winning filmmaker Mstyslav Chernov, notes the parallel between himself, the journalist, and the young officer he is interviewing. Advertisement The soldier, Chernov says, picked up a rifle, while he picked up a camera. Through different means, each man sought to stand up for the dignity and sovereignty of Ukraine's people. Were Chernov, who works for The Associated Press, to be targeted or smeared by the Russian state, journalists the world over would not hesitate to rally to his side and dismiss any allegations against him as propaganda. I would be among the first to join any crusade on his behalf. It is in this context that we must consider Israel's contention that al-Sharif was a Hamas militant. The evidence offered to the public is weak, consisting of screenshots of spreadsheets, purported service numbers and old payments that have not been independently verified. 'The Israeli military seems to be making accusations without any substantive evidence as a license to kill journalists,' said Irene Khan, the United Nations' special rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression, when a different Israeli airstrike killed another Al Jazeera journalist and his cameraman last year. Al-Sharif reported on their deaths. In interviews before his own death, al-Sharif pleaded for help and safety. 'All of this is happening because my coverage of the crimes of the Israeli occupation in the Gaza Strip harms them and damages their image in the world,' he told the Committee to Protect Journalists. 'They accuse me of being a terrorist because the occupation wants to assassinate me morally.' Even if one takes Israel's allegations at face value -- which I absolutely do not, given Israel's track record -- and entertain the idea that in 2013, at the age of 17, al-Sharif joined Hamas in some form, what are we to make of that choice? Hamas at that time had been the governing authority of his homeland since 2006. It ran the entire state apparatus of a tiny enclave. 'It is a movement with a vast social infrastructure,' Tareq Baconi, the author of a book about Hamas, has written, 'connected to many Palestinians who are unaffiliated with either the movement's political or military platforms.' Take it further and contemplate, based on Israel's supposed evidence, that al-Sharif had played some military role before becoming a journalist. The history of war correspondence is replete with examples of fighters turned reporters -- indeed perhaps the most famous among them, George Orwell, recorded soldiers' lives while fighting in the Spanish Civil War and became a war correspondent. These days, having served in the military is widely seen as an asset among American war reporters. Far from seeing those who served as hopelessly biased, editors rightly value the expertise and perspective these reporters bring from their experiences and trust them to prioritize their new role as journalistic observers. In Israel most young people are required to serve in the military, so military experience is common among journalists. Many will protest that Hamas is different from the military of a state. This is true. Long before its gruesome attack on Israel on Oct. 7, it engaged in horrifying terror tactics like suicide bombings that targeted civilians. Many countries, including the United States, consider it a terrorist organization. But it was the accepted authority in Gaza. Indeed, the uncomfortable truth is that Hamas owes much of its strength to Netanyahu's cynical policies, which, as the Times reported in 2023, included tacit support designed to prop up Hamas as a counterweight to the Palestinian Authority. As late as September of that year, the month before Hamas attacked Israel, his government welcomed the flow of millions of dollars to Hamas via Qatar. 'Even as the Israeli military obtained battle plans for a Hamas invasion and analysts observed significant terrorism exercises just over the border in Gaza, the payments continued,' my newsroom colleagues wrote. 'For years, Israeli intelligence officers even escorted a Qatari official into Gaza, where he doled out money from suitcases filled with millions of dollars.' Freud theorized that hysterics were an extreme version of ordinary people experiencing outsize distress in exceptional circumstances. In this way, journalists are an extreme version of the curious person who lingers and tries to figure out what's going on when everyone else, sensing danger, has packed up their curiosity and gone home. What are journalists but unusual people who decide on society's behalf to witness the unbearable? They set aside their personal safety, and perhaps find strange thrills in the horrors of the work they do and the things that they witness. There can be a kind of moral deformity in this, to be sure, but it's an important and socially recognized role. Someone's got to send word back into history. In this regard, journalists are actually not that different from soldiers. Soldiers, after all, are ordinary people given minimal training, mostly how to use their equipment and the tactical ways that one does the job. And then they set off to do a monstrous task on behalf of the rest of us, something most of us cannot possibly imagine doing. This strange and seldom acknowledged kinship is what permits a pall of suspicion to fall over the work of journalists in war zones, especially local ones, who cannot help being caught up in the events unfolding around them. Using their chosen instruments and medium, they are engaged in a struggle to protect their home and their people. It is easy to see how the other side will seek to cast them as combatants, even if they carry no weapons. But that does not mean we should believe them. This article originally appeared in The New York Times.
Epoch Times
11 hours ago
- Epoch Times
JD Vance Visits National Guard in DC; Israeli Forces Begin First Phase of Gaza City Takeover Plan
Vice President JD Vance visits National Guard troops deployed in the nation's capital, where he gives some of the latest stats on the city's crackdown on crime. Our White House correspondent shares her first-hand experience with crime in the city. Israeli forces begin the first phase of their plan to take over Gaza City. Meanwh...
UPI
11 hours ago
- UPI
Vance, Hegseth, Miller laud Guard troops, denounce capital protesters
A Humvee is parked in front of Union Station in Washington as members of the National Guard patrol on Monday after President Donald Trump last week deployed the National Guard to assist in crime prevention. Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License Photo Aug. 20 (UPI) -- As protesters chanted nearby, U.S. Vice President JD Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller visited National Guardsmen in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday amid what the Trump administration says is a crime crackdown. The three Trump administration officials greeted National Guard troops at the capital's Union Station while positioned near a table containing hamburgers for the troops, PBS News reported. "In just the past nine days, we've seen a 35% reduction in violent crime," Vance told those in attendance. "We've seen over a 50% reduction in robberies," he added. "We're seeing really substantial effects because these guys are busting their a*****." Vance said he wanted to thank the National Guard troops in person and hand out some hamburgers to show his appreciation for their efforts. Hegseth said the National Guard deployments in Washington are needed to ensure residents, visitors and those who work in the capital are safe. "The American people, the residents of D.C., deserve a safe and beautiful city," Hegseth said. "That's our mission." He called the National Guard troops "patriots who serve the country" and want to make Washington a "beautiful, safe capital." The National Guard troops are "proud of this mission" and making sure "law and order is established here in the capital," Hegseth added. He said the Defense Department is providing the resources that the troops need and working with law enforcement partners to ensure safety in Washington. Pro-Palestinian protesters gathered and chanted near Union Station, which drew a rebuke from Vance. He said the protesters "hate the idea that Americans can enjoy their communities," according to PBS News. Vance said he went to Union Station with Hegseth and Miller because criminal activity was very high there, which local officials deny. Miller added to Vance's criticism of the protesters by calling them "stupid white hippies" and said they do not represent Washington, D.C.'s residents, The Hill reported. "We are not going to let the communists destroy a great American city, let alone the nation's capital," Miller said. "All these demonstrators you've seen out here in recent days, all these elderly white hippies, they're not part of the city and never have been," Miller said. "We're going to ignore these stupid white hippies that all need to go home and take a nap because they're all over 90 years old," he added. Trump last week put the federal government in control of Washington's Metropolitan Police Department, which has been accused of falsifying crime data. Though Trump administration officials have characterized crime in the city as out of control, in actuality, crime in the district has fallen in recent years or remained flat. An agreement on Friday put the police department under local control, but Trump sought and received National Guard deployments from West Virginia, South Carolina, Mississippi, Ohio, Tennessee and Louisiana. About 1,200 National Guard troops are slated for deployment in the capital, in addition to 800 Washington National Guard troops who already are there, according to The Washington Post.
