reflectivepundit

When Journalists become Hostages

By Brigitte L. Nacos

Following the release of two Fox News journalists from their captivity in Gaza yesterday, Washington Post columnist Howard Kurtz writes today under the headline "Journalism's" Rising Risk Factor" about the indeed increasingly dangerous predicament of members of the fourth estate who report on wars and other conflicts. This risk is backed up by grim numbers in another Washington Post article by  Doug Struck.The case of the two Fox News journalists illustrates as well how difficult it is for news organizations to report on kidnapped colleagues. Whether to devote a great deal or not an extraordinary amount of coverage to such hostage situations is indeed an important question. But to find the right answer is equally as difficult in all hostage cases. When terrorists take hostages, they want publicity and the opportunity to send some kind of message. And when they capture members of the press, they hope for special media attention.

Terrorism and the Issue of Targeted Killing

By Brigitte L. Nacos

In an extensive Washington Post article headlined "In Israel, a Divisive Struggle over Targeted Killing," Laura Blumenfeld reports on the pro and con discussion among Israelis surrounding targeted killing missions against prominent members of Palestinian and Lebanese terrorist groups. For some, targeted killing is the most effective weapon against terrorism; for others, this method is morally wrong since it involved most of the time the death of civilians as well. What about the sentiments of Americans, when it comes to "neutralizing" anti-American terrorist sponsors and the leaders of terrorist groups?

Other Europeans Must Follow Italy's Example

By Brigitte L. Nacos
In his book No End To War: Terrorism in the Twenty First Century, Walter Laqueur wrote that "the idea that the surrender of the territories and the emergence of a Palestinian state would have a decisive effect on the incidence of global terrorism is far-fetched." In his view, the "radical Islamists have a bigger fish to fry [than Israel]; they aim at the punishment and if possible destruction of America and western civilization." Staying away from such a clash of civilization scenario, Germany's Interior Minister Wolfgang Staeuble said the other day in an interview with Die Zeit that part of the Arab world believes falsly that the existence of the state of Israel is the cause of the region's problems and injustices.
Imagine for a moment that the Israeli-Palestinian problem was solved or that Israel disappeared from the map of the Middle East: Would global terrorism stop as well? The answer is no.

What to Make of Al-Jazeera

By Brigitte L. Nacos
"I've been a proponent of al-Jazeera, despite its tendency to spin coverage, because it was the first step toward real broadcast journalism in the Arab world..." I second this assessment by Washington Post columnist David Ignatius in his column "Al-Jazeera's Tricky Balancing Act." There is no doubt that the coverage of this global network is biased in favor of the predominent views in the Arab and Muslim world--especially with respect to its pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli position. But al-Jazeera has also ruffled the feathers of governments, religious leaders, and the masses in the region.

JonBenet Murder Case and News Judgment

By Brigitte L. Nacos

If you really want to know what's wrong with television and the talking heads of shows that pretend to be about public affairs, just take a look at the way the TV-networks and local stations as well hyped the arrest of the self-confessed killer of JonBenet Ramsay, the miniture beauty queen. After getting plenty of mileage out of this case in the last decade, the questionable confession of a publicity seeking man became the most durable "breaking news" of the week. Obviously, those "deciding what's the news," to refer to the title of Herbert Gans's excellent book, recognized the new hook into the old case as having more potential to lift ratings than the current and far more relevant news from Iraq and elsewhere. In fact, the elite print press, too, kept the story alive. Thus, on Saturday the Washington Post carried a JonBenet story on its front page.

The Israeli-Hezbollah Conflict: Who Won?

By Brigitte L. Nacos

When hundreds of people die, many more are injured, and residents are driven out of their neighborhoods, nobody wins. Nevertheless, as the cease fire between Israelis and Hezbollah continues to hold, for the time being that is, leaders on both sides have claimed victory. But polls, reported today, indicate that a solid majority of Israelis believe that neither side was victorious or that Hezbollah won. And while I haven't heard of Lebanese voices giving the victory to Israel, some observers in Lebanon call the result of the armed conflict a draw. In reality, we simply do not know whether the outcome will be more beneficial for one side or the other.

Separation of Press and State?

By Brigitte L. Nacos
Under the headline "A Growing Separation of Press and State" Washington Post reporter Dana Milbank laments today the new distance between the President and his White House on two counts: First, because the White House press quarters are being renovated, reporters moved into temporary facilities elsewhere in Washington, and second, because President Bush travels increasingly without a press plane into the hinterland to sell sunny assessments of his policies without facing the national media. Wouldn't it be marvelous, if Milbank's headline had it right in one respect, namely, a press truly separate from media-savvy White Houses, departments, and agencies--a news media not acting like a beast that is tamed by being fed the official lines of the day by the disciplined stay-on-message crowd?

The Propaganda War between Al Qaeda and Hezbollah

By Brigitte L. Nacos

"We have a ringside seat not only to radical Islam's war on us, but to what's really emerging as a civil war between radical Sunni Islam and radical Shia Islam." What Daniel Benjamin told Matthew Stannard of the San Francisco Chronicle may apply in terms of violent clashes to what is unfolding in Iraq but not--at least not for now--to the rivalry between the Sunni terrorist organization and their Shiite counterpart Hezbollah. However, as I told Mr. Stannard, we may witness the beginning of a propaganda war between Al Qaeda and Hezbollah from which each side wants to emerge as the predominant challenger of what both call the "Crusader-Zionist" threat. One wonders whether the timing of the reported terrorist plot against transatlantic airliners had anything to do with this rivalry.

The Foiled Terror Plot: What Can We Learn?

By Brigitte L. Nacos

When terrorists drive fear into their target societies, they cause all kinds of rather useless reactions and misjudgments. Thus, the Washington Post reports today that the Homeland Security Department was praised for its response to the discovered terror plot. One wonders, why a Department with the sole mission to protect the homeland deserves praise simply for elevating the useless color-coded terror alert and detailing pretty much the same additional airport security measures as those implemented in the United Kingdom. The real question is whether federal, state, and local governments have taken the right measures to prevent further terrorist strikes.

The Exploitation of Al Qaeda for Partisan Politics

By Brigitte L. Nacos

The defeat of Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut in his party's primary by anti-Iraq war Democrat Ned Lamont alarmed the Republican leadership so much that Vice President Dick Cheney warned his fellow-Americans that the ouster of Lieberman could encourage "Al Qaeda types." White House press secretary Tony Snow sounded like Senator Joe McCarthy when he called Lieberman's Democratic opponents "the extreme left." Cheney, Snow and other Republicans engaged in gross politics as they charged anti-Lieberman Democrats as being soft on terrorism and national defense--obviously their theme and hope for the upcoming election campaign.