In his weekly show, washingtonpost.com staff writer Jefferson Morley
conducts a freewheeling tour of the best of Internet news sites from
Afghanistan to Beijing to Mexico City to Paris to Zimbabwe.
A high-level Washington power struggle over U.S. policy toward Iran is driving the espionage investigation of the powerful American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), according to international online observers.
Read today's World Opinion Roundup:Behind the AIPAC Probe, Neocons Seen Battling Rivals (World Opinion Roundup, Sept. 7)
World Opinion Roundup brings the diversity of the global online media to
your screen, presenting today's news and views from journalists,
pundits and commentators from every continent. We'll talk about America
in the eyes of the world, compare journalistic practices, analyze
politics and perspectives, examine the nature of news and debate styles
of journalism.
A transcript follows.
Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.
_____________
Jefferson Morley: Welcome all. We have lots of questions today. I'm going to start with discussion of today's column about civilian casualties in Iraq, then we'll turn to other stories in the news.
_______________________
Montclair, N.J.:
My impression of coverage of Iraqi casualties in the media is that it is generally ignored. Every day we hear how many Americans are killed, but most often specifics of other deaths are generalized as 'people', if mentioned at all. I think it is critical that the Total toll on human life be kept in the forefront in order for the world to have a realistic view of the tradgedy that we have inflicted on the nation of Iraq and on the families of our own American soldiers.
Jefferson Morley: Unfortunately, I think you are right that Iraqi civilians casualties are generally ignored. My sense, though, is that this has changed a bit in recent weeks as the fighting has spread in Iraq.
_______________________
Laurel, Md.:
Why does the U.S. media (especially the cable news shows) ignore the thousands of civilian deaths and terrible injuries in Iraq since the war began? Has the Bush administration been successful in keeping this story off the airwaves?
Jefferson Morley: My guess, and it is only a guess, is that TV news avoids the subject of Iraqi civilian casualties out of the beliefs that 1) such casualties are "inevitable" 2) Americans aren't interested and 3) supporters of the war would criticize them. Beliefs 1) and 2) are not true, in my view. Belief 3) probably is true.
The Bush administration has been successful in keeping this story off the airwaves by simply refusing to talk about the subject. "We don't do [enemy] body counts," said Gen. Tommy Franks.
_______________________
Iraqi Casualties:
Not that this matters to the average American apparently, but the figures on civilian deaths in Iraq are likely even higher than you stated in your article.
This past spring, the New England Journal of Medicine published a study that found that 14 percent of US troops in Iraq reported killing at least one civilian while there. Doing the math, with about 200,000 U.S. troops having served there that comes out to roughly 30,000 civilian deaths. About 1600 per month, or over 50 every day. Or more than one every half-hour.
This does not count civilians who have died from lack of medical treatment because basic infrastructure was destroyed in the war. Or the people (mostly children) being permanently maimed by preventable diseases, malnutrition, and various wounds.
At one time I (foolishly) thought that Americans would not accept mass murder in their name. Unfortunately, I was very wrong.
Jefferson Morley: Thanks for your information. I trust that it is accurate. Even allowing for overreporting, this study would support the notion that estimates of Iraqi civilian casualties should be higher.
Is that New England Journal of Medicine study online? If you forward a link, I will post it so interested readers can judge for themselves.
_______________________
Pittsburgh, Pa.:
Thanks for your article about Iraqi civilian casualties.
You wrote: "But overseas reporters and commentators emphasize the issue more than their American counterparts and play up civilian casualties in ways the U.S. media rarely pursue."
Whether anyone would admit it or not, isn't that because American media, especially TV, and politicians see American lives as more valuable than Iraqi lives? It clearly was the case when it came to showing the war dead. US networks refused to show dead GIs, but were quite willing to show slain Iraqi soldiers.
During the war, whether you watched CNN, Fox, ABC et al, there was scant notice given to Iraqi civilian casualties. It's as if none was killed.
Even when Republicans and Dems (including Kerry) talk about casualties, Iraqi civilians are never mentioned. And the U.S. military and this administration live under the delusion and keep touting that in every attack, all those bombings of Falluja, only insurgents are killed. Which is ludicrous. Even when civilians are killed by an "mistake" bombing, our military's first reaction is to deny the whole incident even if there's news footage of it.
Honestly, I have a sneaking suspicion it's because those who are dying happen to be Arab and/or Muslim and, sadly, this nation has a callous disregard about them and the military and this administration knows that.
Jefferson Morley: Waging war is an inherently chauvinistic enterprise, so I would agree that underreporting of Iraqi civilian casualties reflects a sentiment of national superiority. But I think fear is a factor too. The justification of the Iraq war as a response to the Sept. 11 attacks feeds the conviction that unrestrained violence is an appropriate response.
_______________________
Philadelphia, Pa.:
Hi,
You are way too kind to yourself and your colleagues. "Statistics are hard to come by?" Who's really trying? I have been waiting for months to read this story. Why aren't your statistics coming from our government? How could the goverment justify not trying to accurately ascertain these statistics? The administration is never questioned by reporters about this or even asked to provide statistics about how many civilians have died and how many of those by our hand. Thus, there is little meaningful discussion of the connection between our actions and the insurgency or our failure to win the hearts and minds of the Muslim world (supposedly a part of our post 9/11 anti-terrorist strategy). Our policy (including amnesty for those who kill Iraqi's but not for those who kill Americans) and the media's lack of reporting make it clear that only American lives matter. Why is this topic not front page news in America and why has the press been so timid when reporting this story? I truly fear that the press fears being branded traitors. Is it too late to elevate this story before the election? Are you going to try?
Jefferson Morley: Well, I said in my column whose really trying:
Iraqibodycount.net and lunaville.org are good independent sources on fatalities in Iraq.
I suspect that Iraqi civilian casualties will grow as an issue if the U.S. war effort falters. The U.S. forces have been losing ground in recent months, a process that the Bush administration apparently will not try to reverse until after the election. The effort to retake Iraqi cities now dominated by insurgents is certain to involve large U.S. and Iraqi civilian casualties. Which is probably why the White House is holding off.
This topic isn't front page news because the political leadership of this country isn't talking about nor is a significant segment of public opinion. Don't mistake the media for a political party.
_______________________
Gaithersburg, Md.:
Where do the "official" numbers of Iraqi dead during any incident come from? By official I mean the number the Pentagon will report.
Also, how often do the "official" numbers agree with those given by Iraqi sources be they in the interim government, hospitals, etc...
Jefferson Morley: There are no "official" numbers on Iraqi civilian casualties. The Pentagon does no reporting on the subject, at least none that they will share with the American people. The numbers from Iraqi and independent sources are the only numbers we have. The estimates range from the low thousands (for the early months of the war only) up to 30,000.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
This pre-emptive war is so unpopular overseas, so what is the likelihood that any of our allies will participate more meaningfully in this crisis in Iraq?
Jefferson Morley: zero, zip, nada, doughnut, ixnay, slim to none, chose your negative assessment.
There is no government in the world that will voluntarily agree to start sending its young men and women to Iraq. The United States is losing ground right now. Until that is reversed (and it is hard to see how it will be), it is safe to say that no allies will join.
My guess is that other countries in the "coalition of the willing" will join Spain, the Dominican Republic and Philippines in leaving Iraq.
_______________________
Flemington, N.J.:
My experience tells me that Americans abhor the death of Iraqi citizens. It seems however that almost the entire Middle East applauded 9/11 when over 3,000 innocent American citizens were killed by Muslims. Does anyone really think such an attack and the issues behind it could be resolved without the deaths of many innocent people, Americans or Muslims? If so, I am to this day, waiting to hear the plan.
Jefferson Morley: You are sadly misinformed if you believe that "almost the entire Middle East applauded 9/11." In Iran, Lebanon, Israel, Kuwait, Jordan, and Egypt there was widespread outpouring of public displays of sympathy for the United States after 9/11. Celebrations were limited to Palestinians. The government of Saddam Hussein was the only government in the region that did not send official condolences.
There are lots of people who think that killing innocent civilians is counterproductive to the goal of vanquishing al Qaeda. Many of them are former top generals in the U.S. military.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
So you are saying that because pro-war people don't care for the Iraqi deaths, you are not covering. What about those of us who care deeply about human lives, regardless their background?
Jefferson Morley: I'm not saying pro-war people don't care about Iraqi civilian deaths. If they care about winning the war, they will express this concern.
As for those of you who care deeply about human lives, regardless of background, I think we have common ground.
_______________________
Anonymous:
"zero, zip, nada, doughnut, ixnay, slim to none, chose your negative assessment. There is no government in the world that will voluntarily agree to start sending its young men and women to Iraq. "
Then isn't Kerry being disingenous when he continues to claim he will "internationalize" the forces in Iraq?
Jefferson Morley: I wouldn't say he's being disingenuous. Just optimistic.
As President Kerry might be able to convince foreign leaders that a whole new approach would be worth a military committment. He certainly has much better prospects than Bush. But it won't be easy.
_______________________
Mons, France:
Do you have an idea of where the Australian columnist you cite got his figures of 500,000 to a million Iraqis killed by Saddam Hussein's regime since the first Gulf war?
I wonder how that would have been possible. Weren't the no-fly zones supposed to prevent this from happening?
Jefferson Morley: I don't know where that figure came from.
_______________________
Bethesda, Md.:
Saddam was clearly brutal, but when pro-war commentators are quick to point to Hussein killing "500,000 to a million" of his own people in his last 13 years in power, how many of those were during the Shiite uprising? If we counted southerners killed during the American Civil War, a foreign power trying to justify invading a weakened US in 1870 could have easily used a similar statistic to explain why that bloody tyrant Abraham Lincoln needed to be removed.
Jefferson Morley: My guess is that the commentator who cited this figure was including the toll from Saddam's suppression of the Shiite rebellion. I don't know if the numbers are accurate but I don't think that invalidates the comparison.
_______________________
US Politics and 2004 Election:
Which foreign news organizations do you think are doing an especially good job and/or devoting a lot of resources in covering the 2004 US Presidential election?
Have any favorite foreign commentators who seem to have a good grasp and from a detached perspective?
Links?
Thank you.
Jefferson Morley: I've gotten a couple of questions like this, so I'm going to post a few and answer them collectively.
_______________________
Monterey, Calif.:
If you wanted to get an accurate sense of what was really going on in Iraq on a given day, which Internet sites would you check?
For example, I might check The New York Times, but then also Al Jazeera and the BBC. Would you share some others and a brief description of their strengths?
Jefferson Morley: As I said in my column today, I especially profit from reading Patrick Cockburn (pronounced "Coe-burn," incidentally), the Baghdad correspondent of the The Independent of London.
I frequently check the Israeli daily, Haaretz, because of it comprehensive coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. You will read more useful and vigorous debate about that conflict in Haaretz than in the American press. Haaretz's West Bank correspondent Danny Rubenstein is essential reading for anyone who wants to understand Palestinian reality.
I also like the Daily Star of Lebanon which features some of the sharpest debate about developments in the Arab World.
Links to follow.
_______________________
washingtonpost.com: The Independent
_______________________
washingtonpost.com: Haaretz
_______________________
washingtonpost.com: The Daily Star
_______________________
New Orleans, La.:
I think that reports of Iraqi civilliam casualties are relevant. But to be fair, shouldn't those reports differentiate between those killed by Coalition forces versus those killed by the so-called insurgents? Should we not also contrast those numbers with those killed by Saddam?
Finally, it is obvious to me what your political views are in this area. But can anyone doubt that the region is better off as a whole with Saddam gone?
Jefferson Morley: I agree that reports of Iraqi civilian casualties must distinguish between U.S. forces and the insurgents. It is telling sign of popular hostility to the American occupation that some attacks that were obviously perpetrated by the insurgents are blamed on U.S. forces.
I agree to that we must keep in mind the horrific abuses perpetrated by Saddam, lest the Iraqi people think we have merely replaced is repression with that of another strong man.
Finally, yes, Iraq is better off without Saddam. But that is awfully easy to say from a distance. Saddam was a supreme criminal (and was one when Don Rumsfeld was shaking his hand back in 1983) but under his reign there was far less crime, no car bombers, and working electricity. I'm sure most Iraqis are glad he is gone but that doesn't mean they are grateful for the realities that the American occupation delivered.
_______________________
Turku, Finland:
Since the American attack on Iraq, I have found it necessary to read other news sources, besides the American media (including the Washington Post) to get a better picture of the war in its entirety--if such a thing is possible. I think it's obvious, when comparing the reports I read from the Finnish and German media, that Americans are not able to find out much about the true horrors of life in Iraq today. Perhaps...perhaps it really is worse now, in Iraq, than it was under Saddam Hussein?
Jefferson Morley: I would disagree that Iraq is worse off because of Saddam's overthrow. It has a very different set of problems now but it also has hopes.
_______________________
Columbia, MD:
While I was in Asia this summer, I have seen people trusting BBC & al-Jazeera news more for authenticity while CNN was branded as US propaganda machines by the local intellectuals there in terms of middle east news.
Whereas in USA, we trust CNN news more and consider al-Jazeera as propaganda machine. Why is that? Is Alzaera shows false news or they are showing the news that American people doesn't want to see?
Jefferson Morley: Neither CNN nor al Jazeera qualify as propaganda to me. Like most news organizations they embody and reflect the culture of their audience. In the case of al Jazeera, some Americans are offended that by the widespread hostility in the Arab world to U.S. policies in the region. They shouldn't blame the messenger.
_______________________
Lyon, France:
Why is it that the United Nations will do nothing to prevent the massacre of black Africans in the Sudan, yet the UN will shout "war crimes" every time Israelis kill a terrorist? It makes the UN appear to be both anti-semetic and anti black. Would you agree?
Jefferson Morley: No.
_______________________
Alexandria, Va.:
Writing in early.. Two things that I have seen on the BBC news that I haven't seen stateside. First, when the US was bombing "insurgents" in Fallujah, the BBC had a report on how an Afghani reporter was killed by the strike (it was recorded by his camera man). I never saw anything about this in the Post. Secondly, there has been a huge row over in the UK about James Naughtie's upcoming book in which he quotes Colin Powell telling Jack Straw that the neo-cons are "a bunch of crazies" which Straw and Powell vigorously deny. It was in the Independent and other papers, but again nothing in the Post.
I'm curious as to why these items are not reported to us. Any thoughts?
Jefferson Morley: The death of Palestinian (not Afghan) journalist Mazin Tumaisi was the subject of a page 1 story in the Post on September 13.
The Post didn't do anything on the Naughtie book, probably because the notion that Colin Powell is disdainful toward Pentagon neocons is not that surprising.
That said, I think somebody should have reported it. Maybe that somebody was me.
_______________________
San Antonio, Tex.:
Let me rephrase my question slightly:
"Finally, yes, Iraq is better off without Saddam. But that is awfully easy to say from a distance."
What is the best reporting coming out of Iraq, about Iraq, and written by an Iraqi? What is the current state of Iraqi media?
Jefferson Morley: I keep up with the Iraqi press by reading the Iraqi Press Monitor, an invaluable translation and summary service provided by the Institute for War and Peace Reporting in London.
You can also get a sense of what the Iraqi press is saying from "Informed Comment," a blog produced by University of Michigan professor Juan Cole. While Cole is opinionated, his perspective is extremely well-informed--much better informed than that of the senior levels of the Bush administration--and fair-minded. Even if you disagree with him, he's worth reading.
_______________________
San Francisco, Calif.:
I just want to comment that your feature is a valuable asset to journalism, and I am pleasantly surprised to find this today in the Washington Post Web site, though I frequently find a lot of decent journalism in the Post. Thank you, and thank you for the great links to the Independent, Lebanon Daily Star, and Ha'aretz.
Jefferson Morley: Your very welcome.
_______________________
Seattle, Wash.:
Americans should be roundly criticized for seeing this war through their own eyes. You don't have to wander far off of our shores to hear the world's opinion. Wouldn't it be a good idea at times of crisis to bring international columnists into your newspaper and help Americans to better understand the world view?
Jefferson Morley: My bosses and I agree that bringing international opinion-makers into the Washington Post is a good idea. That's why I write my column every Tuesday.
And on that note, I must sign off. If you wish to receive World Opinion Roundup via email every Tuesday, send a message to jeff.morley@wpni.com with the word "subscribe" in the subject line. Your address will not be shared with any one.
See you next week.
_______________________
