Newsmakers of Arabia

It is gravely worrying that Britain's Daily Mirror newspaper reported the United States president, George Bush, entertained thoughts of bombing the Qatar headquarters of the television news channel Al Jazeera in April last year and was talked out of this by British prime minister Tony Blair.

In the absence, as yet, of documentary evidence, it would be premature to pronounce Bush as guilty. However, the alleged conversation is not inconsistent with the catalogue of US obsession to control the international information order. Besides, the British government's draconian efforts to thwart media from publishing the memo on the Bush-Blair tete-a-tete, rather arouses concern.

An integral aspect of the Cold War was the fierce fight for domination of the airwaves. Indeed, the collapse of communism in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe can to a significant extent be attributed to the West's success in this sphere. Ronald Reagan, as US president, ascribed his Soviet counterpart, Mikhail Gorbachev's acceptance of détente and introduction of glasnost and perestroika to this superiority of the West.       

BBC's external radio comprises of services in over 40 languages other than English, funded by the British Foreign Office (Foreign Ministry). During the Cold War, the East European wing was nothing but skilful propaganda to penetrate the hearts and minds of people under communist rule.

Organisations such as Voice of America (VOA) — virtually a part of the United States State Department — Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty, both operated by the American Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), indulged in the same activity, but not with BBC's finesse and in the case of VOA, with distinctly less favourable results.

Regions immediately east of the ‘iron curtain’ could receive terrestrial television signals from the West, as well. Then, with the advent of satellite TV, the scope incision opened up further. Of course, these and the radio transmissions could only be intercepted at great risk.

Moscow tended to reply in kind, but was somewhat unsophisticated in its approach. Only its camp followers in the West swore by its assertions. A notable feather in the Soviet cap, though, was the spread of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) in Western Europe, though its broadcasts cannot wholly claim credit for this.

Eventually, it was simply unviable to deny an educated and intelligent populace freedom of information and entertainment. The broadcasts from the West inevitably prompted inhabitants in the East to compare the two existences. Therefore, it was not surprising they opted for the Western model when push came to shove.

The trans-national combat to corner public opinion persists. China, North Korea and Cuba remain western, especially US, targets. But radio has been overwhelmingly replaced by satellite TV since the 1980s or the arrival of Cable News Network International ( CNNI).

In the first outbreak of hostilities between the US and Iraq in 1991, CNNI was the only available satellite news channel. Iraqis, historically sceptical of their national media, had a tendency to trust BBC's Arabic Service for not just overseas developments, but news about their own country. During and after the conflict, the hegemony of Bush House, CNNI and (from 1992) BBC World — ensured that the Anglo-American perspective held sway over Iraqis. This is not to suggest that that either BBC World or CNNI were disingenuous. But unpalatable Iraqi opinion was rendered limited airtime. Moreover, most other Arabs were inimical to Iraq's conquest of Kuwait in the first place.

When the US embarked on its invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003, several Arab news channels, most prominently Al Jazeera, had hit the scene. Iraqis not only had a choice, but were more comfortable with their indigenous bouquet. Thus, as the audiences for BBC World and CNNI dwindled, so did US influence over the Iraqi masses.

The Bush administration  is not above suspicion in respect of either a cruise missile decapitating Al Jazeera's office in Kabul or a bomb landing on this channel's Baghdad bureau.

Al Jazeera, airing an Arab interpretation of events, is a thorn in the side for Bush. It does not always get it right; indeed, at times it may have got it horribly wrong. But there is no evidence to establish that it is the mouthpiece of either Al Qaeda or any other terrorist group. Admittedly, it is a network on a learning curve in a part of the world inexperienced in terms of media freedom. But it endeavours to be independent.

As leader of a country where vast sections of media stoop to being doormats of the administration on issues such as the US involvement in Iraq, Bush has no locus standi to question the editorial policy of Al Jazeera. On the contrary, the world has a right to know the truth about this dangerous man.

The writer is editor-director, RayMedia, London