Phil Taylor's papers
|
BACK TO : Al Jazeera controversy
Al Jazeera's Unwitting Role in the 'Unrestricted' Afghan War by Dr. Ehsan Ahrari Dr. Ehsan Ahrar 
Al Jazeera's Unwitting Role in the 'Unrestricted' Afghan War, Oct. 25, 2001 Special to CDI Modern-day Chinese war-fighters - those contemporary heirs to one of the world's oldest civilizations - recently articulated the notion of "unrestricted warfare." This concept denotes that in coming years, wars between countries will be fought with little regard to international borders. Such wars will engulf all walks of life and will have many fronts. In an unrestricted war, soldiers may wear no uniforms, but aside from carrying conventional arms, they will be armed with computers. "Warriors" of this type of war will also have sophisticated understanding of international banking, commerce, and trade, since international transfer of finances will be highly crucial to bankroll such a "war." The unrestricted war will be largely asymmetrical. The two other significant aspects of unrestricted war are the use of terrorism and information war. The latter concept includes the use of mass media for the purpose of propaganda and dissemination of ideas to the remotest corners. It is part of a battle to win the hearts and minds of the international community, a practice labeled as "perception management" in the military community worldwide. Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda - the organization that is allegedly involved in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the United States - have emerged as effective practitioners of unrestricted war, especially in the realm of information warfare. In an information age, no one country-not even the lone superpower with all the technological sophistication-can claim monopoly over global dissemination of information and propaganda. The Western world has thus far been very familiar with the "CNN factor." In addition, the Asian, African, and Latin American countries have known the "BBC factor." But these media were regarded as largely articulating Western perspectives in the non-Western Third World. Such a reality has been very important, especially during military conflicts, many of which have sprung up in those regions in the past century. The Qatar-based Arabic language network, the Al Jazeera, has emerged as an important actor from the non-Western world in this unrestricted war involving Afghanistan. In the 21st century, the Arab world seems to have started a process of catching up with the West in the dissemination of information, which has thus far been tightly controlled by authoritarian rulers. The Afghan crisis of 2001 - what U.S. George W. Bush has referred to as the "first war of the new century" - will be remembered for its independent coverage by Al Jazeera television network. The United States does not quite know how to handle this development. There is little doubt that the Bush administration has been unhappy with the role of this network, which is providing a 24-hour and live coverage of this conflict. U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell, has reportedly complained to the Emir of Qatar, Sheik Hamad Al-Thani, that Al Jazeera is spreading anti-American propaganda. Two reasons underlying this complaint immediately come to mind. First, al Qaeda has been frequently using the Al Jazeera network to internationally relay its perspectives on the Afghan conflict. In the Islamic world at large, these messages are being watched with high interest. There is little doubt that for the first time in the post-Cold War years, the United States finds itself intensely competing to disseminate its own message on the conflict to the non-Western, but especially to the Islamic, world. Second, Al Jazeera's journalistic position - the fact that it is not only providing extensive coverage of the Taliban and the bin Laden side of the story, but has refused to accept the U.S. definition of "terrorism" - has been a source of great annoyance to the American side. The Bush administration strongly objects to Al Jazeera's version of "objectivity." The United States perceives a strong element of bias in the overall coverage by Al Jazeera of the Afghan conflict. Since Bush has staked out a position that in this "war" on terrorism, "either you are with us or with the terrorists," Al Jazeera's seeming exercise of objectivity is at least equated to being "anti-American." However, the Bush administration is careful in handling its criticism of Al Jazeera, lest a harsher criticism of a news organization backfires as modern day exercise of "McCarthyism." To be sure, Al Jazeera has been providing full coverage of the U.S. side of the story - a practice that that network has maintained even on the highly contentious Arab-Israeli conflict in the charged environment of the Arab countries. However, since it is equally efficient in disseminating the bin Laden side of the story, the United States seems wary of losing the information war against transnational terrorism. In the final analysis, the role of Al Jazeera in the ongoing Afghan conflict poses a larger question. As the ardent advocate of democracy and free speech worldwide, can the United States advocate the closing of Al Jazeera - as it has reportedly asked the Emir of Qatar to do - without being accused of hypocrisy when it does not suit its own strategic interests? Al Jazeera's defense in this ongoing controversy was spelled out in the following statement: "We will never change our strategy of covering news wherever it is. The viewers are our only judge." The speaker was not an official of the American democracy, but the Emir Al-Thani of Qatar. By Dr. Ehsan Ahrari Independent Strategic Analyst |