Through Different Lenses
Comments (2)
| TrackBack (71)
The Search for Truth in Iraq
By Ahmed Nassef
Over the past few weeks, I have been wallowing between times of abject horror and loss at what is happening to the world and other times when I have glimpses of hope and faith, usually when I am spending time playing with my son, or reading the writings of people whom I respect who have not been taken in by all the falsification around us.
But the sadness remains and envelopes so easily: images of children forever lost to their mothers and fathers; people treated as less than human, ready for the killing and the beating; priceless treasures, ancient texts, and holy books looted and burned; lies upon lies being repeated and believed by people who should know better.
To an observer whose sole source for what is happening in the world is American television, my gloom and doom sentiments seem utterly out of place.
After all, the world is a better place: Iraqis have been liberated from an awful tyrant, the US military showed remarkable restraint in its attempts to safeguard civilians during the invasion, America has won an important battle in its war on terrorism, and the world is finally safe from Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction. And soon, US fighting men and women will be returning home while Iraqis choose a democratic government that will likely become a beacon of freedom for the Arab world.
But if all this were indeed true, then we must ask another question. Why do so many people around the world, the vast majority of the people on this planet, see things so differently from the majority of Americans? Why do the vast majority of Europeans see the US as the world's biggest threat to peace? Why do only 48% of British, 34% of Italians, 14% of Spaniards, and 12% of Turks have a favorable view of the United States?
It can’t be that billions of people in the world are born with an innate hatred for all things American. To the contrary, youngsters from Cairo to Amsterdam flock to the latest Hollywood blockbusters, proudly sport American brands (or their cheaper imitations), and devour American fast food with great zeal.
Less than two years ago, vast numbers of people and their governments, from Paris to Damascus to Moscow, stood united in solidarity with Americans in the wake of the World Trade Center tragedy (French President Jacques Chirac was the first foreign head of state to visit the US after the attack).
The opposition can also not be explained away by simplistic allusions to French, German, or Russian financial interests in Iraq: the only sure way of assuring financial windfall for these countries after the inevitable removal of Saddam Hussein would have been to wholeheartedly support the US position.
If they’re not crazy, and they’re not idiots, then why do so many people stand opposed to the current US campaign in Iraq, even after the apparent military victory.
It comes down to information.
Throughout the war, the US position was given ample voice in the international media. Even the much maligned Arab satellite news channels like Al Jazeera, Abu Dhabi TV, Al Arabiyya, and Al Hayat/LBC regularly broadcast live press conferences from CentCom headquarters in Doha, Qatar and Donald Rumsfeld’s press briefings from the Pentagon. Senior American officials were frequent guests on all these outlets.
But the rest of the world watched a different war than the one Americans watched.
Rumsfeld’s outrage at the parading of American POW’s on Iraqi television was tempered for many around the world by the knowledge, that just days before, Iraqi POW’s captured by US soldiers had seen similar treatment, and that the Pentagon showed no concern for Geneva Conventions when they published pictures of Guantanamo prisoners masked, kneeling, chained, and wearing goggles, ear muffs, and heavy gloves. "There is no obvious explanation of these measures except an attempt to degrade the man," Jim West, Amnesty International’s chief medical officer said at the time. Although West’s assessment may not have been given much press here in the US, it rang true for many around the world.
As US generals were singing the praises of their sophisticated pinpoint accurate weapons, the rest of the world was shown images of civilian carnage in Basra caused by US and British bombing. Those images of children whose heads were torn apart coupled with the many stories of stray cruise missiles landing in Turkey, Iran, and Saudi Arabia gave people a different understanding of the accuracy of the US arsenal.
So it was no surprise that when Brig. Gen. Vincent Brooks deflected responsibility for the consecutive bombings of two Baghdad markets, resulting in the deaths of dozens of civilians, many around the world were circumspect. When a few days later, The Independent’s Robert Fisk discovered pieces of the missile that caused the devastation, complete with the serial number imprinted by its manufacturer, Raytheon Corporation, the continued denials by the Pentagon seemed hollow and cruel. As usual, you would have been hard-pressed to hear about Fisk’s discovery if you were tuned to the US corporate media.
While Americans were exposed to embedded reporters like Geraldo playing Indiana Jones and drawing battle maps on the sand, most viewers around the globe were also treated to other images of the invading troops: pictures of soldiers beating unarmed Iraqi civilians, stories (told by their British counterparts) of American soldiers shooting indiscriminately, tales of the wide use of napalm and depleted uranium, interviews with weeping men telling of their sisters and daughters being sexually harassed by “coalition” forces.
As CNN’s Aaron Brown was glowing over the romantic image of the embedded war journalists, independent journalists, or unilaterals, were telling horrific stories of being targeted by US forces. Whether these unilaterals were Arabs, Israelis, Portuguese, or British, the message was clear (to paraphrase President Bush’s famous declaration following the September 11th attack): you are either embedded with us, or you are with the enemy.
The looting and burning that followed the American conquest of Baghdad and resulted in the destruction or disappearance of priceless antiquities from one of the world’s oldest civilizations only exacerbated the sadness and helplessness many Arabs and Muslims felt.
As the American military occupation digs its heels in Iraq, American TV viewers are confused by the images of Iraqis who are opposing the US presence. Weren’t they just celebrating last week? Why are they being so ungrateful?
But the venerable anchormen, back in their safe confines in Washington, New York, and Atlanta, are just as dumbstruck themselves. And until the US media can reclaim its journalistic integrity, the truth will be one more casualty of this war.
