|
BAGHDAD, 30 July 2003 — Only a day after US Deputy Defense
Secretary Paul Wolfowitz claimed that the Arabic Al-Jazeera
television channel was “inciting violence” and “endangering
the lives of American troops” in Iraq, the station’s Baghdad
bureau chief has written a scathing reply to the American
administration, complaining that in the past month the station’s
offices and staff in Iraq “have been subject to strafing by
gunfire, death threats, confiscation of news material, and multiple
detentions and arrests, all carried out by US soldiers...”
The unprecedented dispute between an Anglo-American occupation
authority supposedly dedicated to “democracy” in Iraq and an
Arab station once praised by Washington for its services to free
speech in the Arab world comes at a time when the US administration
appears to be laying the ground work to close down Al-Jazeera’s
operations in Iraq — along with those of the Arabia channel —
for alleged “incitement to violence”.
America’s senior occupation proconsul in Iraq, Paul Bremer, has
officially stated that he would close down newspapers or television
stations guilty of “incitement to violence” — without, of
course, explaining exactly what this phrase means.
Wolfowitz, a right-wing ideologue and fervent supporter of
Israel, is one of the cabal of advisers who pushed the US
administration into war with Iraq on the grounds that Saddam
possessed weapons of mass destruction and that the destruction of
his regime would open the way to a new, democratic Middle East. He
used the equally right-wing and Murdoch-owned Fox Channel to make
his allegations against Al-Jazeera, many of which are palpably
false. He claimed, for example, that the staff of Al-Jazeera “have
a way when they want to cover somebody favorably, including Saddam
Hussein in the old days, of slanting the news incredibly ... and
now, the minute they get something that they can use to spread
hatred and violence in Iraq, they’re broadcasting it around.”
In fact, as the station’s Baghdad bureau chief, Wadah Khanfar,
points out in his letter — addressed to Bremer, a copy of which
has been obtained by The Independent — “Al-Jazeera did not cover
Saddam Hussein favorably. Both Yasser Abu Hilala (one of the
channel’s senior correspondents) and I myself have been expelled
from Baghdad by the former regime for our reporting. The Baghdad
bureau was shut down twice by the former Ministry of Information for
unfavorable coverage, and once by Al-Jazeera itself in protest over
attempts at censorship. Al-Jazeera reporters in Iraq have even been
physically assaulted by former Information Minister Mohamed Saeed
As-Sahaf for daring to broadcast events which cast the regime in an
unfavorable light.”
Already, however, the dispute between Al-Jazeera and the US
authorities has gone beyond mere words. American troops have raided
the bureau’s offices in the city of Ramadi and arrested reporters,
harassment that has been accompanied by claims from US officers —
a certain Col. Teeples of the US 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment
prominent among them — that Al-Jazeera has advance notice of
attacks against American troops. The truth is that the station
sometimes receives unsolicited videotapes — hand-delivered to
their reception staff by unidentified men — showing the military
ambush of US convoys. In many cases, Al-Jazeera has decided not to
show the tapes — but this has had no effect on the Americans.
The history of mutual — indeed lethal — antagonism between
Washington and Al-Jazeera goes back to the 2001 bombardment of
Afghanistan when, after the Arab station showed videotape of Osama
Bin Laden, an American Cruise missile exploded in their Kabul
bureau. Then in the last days of the invasion of Iraq this year,
after the channel beamed pictures of Iraqi civilians mutilated by US
air raids and tape of American prisoners in Iraqi hands, a US jet
targeted the station’s Baghdad bureau, killing one of its senior
reporters. Al-Jazeera had earlier given the map coordinates of its
Baghdad offices to the Pentagon to prevent any accidental bombing of
its bureau. These frightening events — regarded by many of the
international Baghdad press corps as a deliberate attempt by the
Americans to murder Al-Jazeera staff — mean that the channel’s
reporters regard themselves at risk of their lives if they offend
the Americans.
Another of Wolfowitz’s claims involved the station’s coverage
of an incident in the Iraqi Shiite city of Najaf. “Al-Jazeera ran
a totally false report that American troops had gone and detained
one of the key imams in this holy city of Najaf, Muqtad Al-Sadr
(sic),” he said. “It was a false report, but they were out
broadcasting it instantly.” Wadah Khanfar’s detailed reply —
and his sense of frustration — will be familiar to any Western
newspaper editor. “Al-Jazeera never stated at any time that
Muqtada As-Sadr was detained,” he wrote. “Our correspondent
Yasser Abu Hilala, a top reporter with thirteen years experience
covering the Middle East, stated he had received phone calls from
Muqtada As-Sadr’s secretary and two of his top deputies saying the
imam’s house was surrounded by US forces after he called for the
formation of an Islamic Army. The phone calls were not only made to
our offices but to all the offices of As-Sadr’s followers in
Baghdad resulting in a massive demonstration in front of the
Republic Palace within 45 minutes which we reported, along with the
New York Times, CNN and a host of others.”
Khanfar added that “when Mr. Abu Hilala attempted to contact
the US military’s public information center they did not even know
about the demonstration going on in their own backyard, let alone
what was happening in Najaf. When the US military finally got around
to denying the encirclement of As-Sadr’s home over 24 hours later,
we duly reported it.”
The Al-Jazeera bureau chief suspects that poor translation of its
dispatches mean that “half-truths and total falsehoods about our
reporting...make the rounds in Washington, Baghdad and elsewhere.”
No doubt remembering the American missile strikes against Al-Jazeera’s
offices, he also states in his letter to Bremer that “the
mischaracterizations of our reporting made by Mr. Wolfowitz and
others are a form of incitement to violence against Al-Jazeera, the
first Arab television channel to practice professional Western-style
journalism free of the notorious censorship so prominent in the rest
of the Middle East.”
Khanfar is calling for Wolfowitz to retract his statement and
issue an apology. But the real cause of American anger has always
been Al-Jazeera’s powerful coverage of Arab and Muslim suffering
— and its ability to reflect this in millions of homes throughout
the Middle East.
And since the US government neither explained nor apologized for
its deliberate bombing of the station’s offices in Kabul and
Baghdad, Khanfar has not the slightest chance of an apology from
Wolfowitz.
|