It’s an old story now. Following a pattern established in the Vietnam War era, the right conveniently blames an unpopular war being fought against the wishes of a majority of Americans on the “liberal bias” in the American Media. Every reporter is automatically pegged as a potential traitor just for reporting from a war zone, a tactic which explains the right’s virulent reaction to Jill Carroll’s release from captivity.
Unless reporters in Iraq only print the stories spoon fed to them by their Pentagon minders, anything they publish which could be conceivably construed as negative will be proof of their support for the terrorists. Indeed the right takes a peculiar sort of pleasure in imagining that reporters, influenced by their liberal bias, are conspiring against America’s interests in Iraq by failing to report the abundant “good news” all around them, if only they’d open their eyes to look at it.
A typical example of this type of right wing screed where all the troubles in Iraq are the fault of the liberal media’s failure to report the good news can be found today in the pages of the Chicago Tribune, under the byline of one Dennis Byrne, a conservative newspaper columnist and pundit. Here’s an excerpt from his op-ed piece:
Those of us who haven’t been in a war zone criticize the work of war correspondents at our own peril. Yet, for all the assertions that little or no good news is to be found in Iraq, it is simple to find some on the Internet from, for example, the U.S. Agency for International Development, which is helping rebuild Iraq. (Why is it called “rebuilding” Iraq, when it was a sorry state before the war? Shouldn’t we be talking about “building” Iraq?)
Billions of dollars of highway and other public works projects; new safety nets for the poor and vulnerable, entrepreneurial opportunities, a free press, leadership training–all requisites for successful self-government. For all the stories about power shortages, for example, how many explain that they are partly the result of exploding demand, a good sign of economic progress?
According to Mr. Byrne, those reporters are really falling down on the job. There’s a plethora of good news he can find just by using Google from the safety of his Chicago area home. What’s wrong with the reporters in Iraq, anyway?
Well, unfortunately, the real trouble is with the stories missed by the liberal media claimed by Mr. Byrne. Let’s take a closer look at his so-called examples of “good news,” shall we?
Continued on the flip side . . .
Beginning with the Good News of . . .
Iraqi Reconstruction. No one disputes that billions of US taxpayer dollars have been spent on Iraqi reconstruction efforts, but that’s hardly a good news story. Many, many of those reconstruction projects have been unmitigated disasters, with this story about unbuilt health care clinics (covered in detail by Chris’s front page post earlier today) only the most recent example of failure. Indeed, because of the deteriorating security in Iraq, billions intended for reconstruction had to be diverted to pay for security costs incurred by contractors, rather than for actual project construction.
In addition, the entire reconstruction effort has been rife with corruption. This story, based on the government’s own internal investigation of Halliburton is but one of many similar instances of fraud, overcharges and misleading progress reports by government contractors taking a ride on the Iraqi reconstruction gravy train.
Considering all these problems with the system of oversight, security issues and graft, is it any wonder that Bush shut down payment for all further reconstruction efforts in Iraq earlier this year? That’s right, Mr. Byrnes, the US government is now completely out of the Iraq rebuilding business:
BAGHDAD — The Bush administration does not intend to seek any new funds for Iraq reconstruction in the budget request going before Congress in February, officials say. The decision signals the winding down of an $18.4 billion U.S. rebuilding effort in which roughly half of the money was eaten away by the insurgency, a buildup of Iraq’s criminal justice system and the investigation and trial of Saddam Hussein.
Just under 20 percent of the reconstruction package remains unallocated. When the last of the $18.4 billion is spent, U.S. officials in Baghdad have made clear, other foreign donors and the fledgling Iraqi government will have to take up what authorities say is tens of billions of dollars of work yet to be done merely to bring reliable electricity, water and other services to Iraq’s 26 million people.
Maybe Mr. Byrne didn’t get the memo. Or maybe he just didn’t do a thorough enough Google search. I’d hate to think Byrne deliberately lied about what he actually found online regarding Iraq’s reconstruction.
Then there’s Byrne’s reference to . . .
Iraq’s Safety Nets. It’s a little hard to know for certain what exactly Mr. Byrne is referring to here. Maybe he’s referring to Iraq’s health care system, though you have to wonder how that is a good news story in light of this report:
Iraq health care ‘in deep crisis’
Iraq’s health system is in a far worse condition than before the war, a British medical charity says.
Doctors from the group Medact conducted surveys with international aid groups and Iraqi health workers in September.
They exposed poor sanitation in many hospitals, shortages of drugs and qualified staff and huge gaps in services for mothers and children. [..]
“The war is a continuing public health disaster that was predictable – and should have been preventable,” the group says.
“Excess deaths and injuries and high levels of illness are the direct and indirect results of ongoing conflict.”
Groups like the medical charity Merlin and the UN aid organisation Unicef were among those whose staff provided information.
They paint a picture of a health service struggling to cope and, because of the continuing violence, a population often afraid to leave their homes to seek medical help. […]
Medact accuses the UK and US governments and Iraqi authorities of denying “the true extent of harm” to Iraq’s civilians.
It also says health relief and reconstruction efforts have been bungled through mismanagement and corruption.
Now admittedly, that’s from a story dated November 30, 2004, but it doesn’t appear that much has changed in the subsequent 16 months to make one optimistic about the future of the Iraqi health care system, at least not at this point in time.
Editor’s Note: The following are the remarks of Dr. Entissar Mohammad Ariabi, a pharmacist from Yarmook Hospital who is part of an Iraqi women’s delegation touring the United States, organized by CODEPINK and Global Exchange. She spoke on March 18 in West Palm Beach, Fla.
Many people thought that after the U.S. occupied our country and the sanctions were lifted, the health care of the Iraqi people would improve. But the occupation has made it worse. […]
After our hospitals were bombed and looted, millions of dollars were given to contractors to repair them. We suggested that this money be used to buy things that we urgently need, but the contractors refused and instead bought furniture and flowers and superficial things. Meanwhile, we suffer from a critical shortage of medicines, emergency supplies and anesthesia, and there is no sterilization in the operation rooms. […]
Diseases that were under control under the regime of Saddam Hussein, diseases such as cholera, hepatitis, meningitis, polio, have now returned to haunt the population, especially the children. Death due to cancer has increased because treatment programs stopped and medicines are not available. The health of the Iraqi people is also devastated by environmental contamination due to the destruction of our water and sewage systems.
The health of women, particularly pregnant women, has deteriorated. Many pregnant women suffer from malnutrition. […]
Before the occupation, with all the problems we had under sanctions, Iraq ranked number 80 in the worldwide list of deaths of children under 5. Today, we have jumped up to number 36. UNICEF has said that the rate of severe malnutrition among Iraqi children has almost doubled since the occupation.
We have also lost our most important resources — our doctors. Iraqi doctors are under attack from all sides. Many have been killed or very badly beaten or arrested by the American troops. In Fallujah, the hospital was bombed and doctors were killed inside. In Haditha, the Americans arrested the doctors in the hospital and beat them very badly. […]
With the chaos that has reigned since the invasion, over 200 Iraqi doctors have been kidnapped for ransom. […]
In all, more than 1,000 doctors have left the country. Many of them are our most experienced, most specialized doctors.
So, if it isn’t Iraq’s health care system, to which “safety nets” is Byrne referring? Maybe it’s these, described in a rather dry World Bank country brief on Iraq issued recently:
Almost 25 percent of the population remains highly dependent on food rations (the Public Distribution System). Other formal safety nets cover less than 15 percent of the population. Fuel, food, and utility subsidies, only some of which are explicitly budgeted, are equivalent to at least 50 percent of GDP. Unemployment is estimated at 27 percent, and unemployment among young urban men is twice as high. Underemployment is also massive, as 170,000 new job seekers enter the market every year. Women’s labor participation is very low even by the MENA standards.
Doesn’t sound like much of a safety net, when it covers less than 15% of the population. And with 25% of the population still dependent on food rations from the government, and rising rates of childhood malnutrition and mortality, you have to think Iraq’s social welfare system has a long way to go before it can claim to be a success in the eyes of ordinary Iraqis.
But what about . . .
Iraq’s Free Press. Isn’t the establishment of a free press in Iraq good news the media should be shouting from the roof tops? Well, all things considered, maybe not. After all, this is the same Iraqi Press in which the Pentagon has been planting propaganda “happy news stories” written by US soldiers by paying Iraqi papers to print them. Not exactly the sort of thing we should be proud of, is it?
And then there was this story from November 2003, when the Coalition Provisional Authority and Iraq’s Interim Governing Council were actively censoring news from Iraq in the Arab media:
Freedom of the press is beginning to smell a little rotten in the new Iraq. A couple of weeks ago, the Arabic Al-Jazeera television channel received a phone call from one of U.S. Proconsul Paul Bremer’s flunkies at the presidential palace compound. The station had to answer a series of questions in 24 hours, its reporters were told.
“They insisted that if we didn’t go to them, they’d come for us,” one of Al-Jazeera’s reporters told The Independent. And come they did – to drive the station’s employees to the palace, where they were handed a sheet of paper asking if they had been given advance notice of “terrorist attacks” or had paid “terrorists” for information.
Al-Jazeera – along with its rival channel, Al-Arabiya – had already been denounced by the U.S.-appointed Governing Council, currently led by the convicted fraudster Ahmed Chalabi, and punished for allegedly provocative programs by being banned from the council’s press conferences for two weeks.
Then the same council – obviously on Bremer’s instructions – listed a series of “do’s” and “don’ts” for all the media, ranging from a prohibition on inciting violence all the way to a ban on reporting on the rebirth of the Baath Party or speeches by Saddam. As columnist Hassan Fattah remarked about the council’s punishment of the two Arab channels, “the council and the interim council will be silent for two weeks, throughout much of the Arab world, including Iraq itself. The resistance and the terrorists, meanwhile, will still be able to say what they want. What a perfect opportunity to pour their footage onto the airwaves and capture the hearts and minds of Iraqis desperate for stability and some leadership.”
Things are no better in the American-run television and radio stations in Baghdad. The 357 journalists working from the Bremer palace grounds have twice gone on strike for more pay and have complained of censorship. According to one of the reporters, they were told by John Sandrock – head of the private American company SAIC, which runs the television station – that “either you accept what we offer or you resign; there are plenty of candidates for your jobs.”
So, our record regarding Iraq’s free press is somewhat of a mixed bag. Better than under Saddam, yes, but hardly an unblemished success story.
But then there’s
Iraq’s Economic Progress. So sure is he of finding good news here that Mr. Byrne is even willing to mention all the power shortages, and the failure to provide sufficient electrical power on a consistent basis, because that to him demonstrates proof of Iraq’s burgeoning economy. Increased demand for electrical power, he says, explains the electrical shortages, which is a sign of a thriving economy — yes? Well, not so fast. Let’s refer back to that World Bank report I quoted from earlier. Here’s what it has to say about Iraq’s economy:
Iraq . . . has the world’s third-largest oil reserves, considerable gas reserves, and ample water. But decades of conflict, and international sanctions, have reduced almost all economic indicators. Hitting a low of US$13 billion after the conflict in 2003, GDP recovered in 2004 to US$26 billion, and income per capita to US$940– one-fourth its level 25 years ago.
The main engine for recovery and growth is the oil sector, which accounts for two-thirds of GDP and over 98 percent of exports and Government revenues. Crude oil production and exports in 2004-2005 averaged 1.9 and 1.4 million barrels per day respectively, and remain below the pre-2003 levels. Oil revenues, however, exceeded the projected levels due to high world oil prices. The recovery of the oil sector propelled real growth to 47 percent in 2004. But in 2005 real growth is projected to be 3.7 percent, as oil production and exports are impeded by sabotage and dilapidated infrastructure. Growth is also driven by private spending, which was pushed up by steep increases in salaries and pensions in the past two years. But security concerns have slowed investment and raised the cost of doing business, which has undermined the Government’s ability to raise non-oil revenues. Agriculture, which has historically been an important employer, suffers from lack of investment, distorted input and output subsidies, and other controls. […]
. . . Unemployment is estimated at 27 percent, and unemployment among young urban men is twice as high. Underemployment is also massive, as 170,000 new job seekers enter the market every year. Women’s labor participation is very low even by the MENA standards. Iraq’s external debt remains over three times its GDP, after the Paris Club debt reductions. […]
Iraq’s immediate challenge is to ensure security and stability as a precondition for reconstruction and growth. As part of this, there is a need to balance medium-term reforms and foundations for growth, with immediate needs for social stability through the provision of basic infrastructure, social services, and job opportunities. . .
It all comes back to security issues, the source of all that “bad news” that Mr. Byrne and his fellow right wing travelers are so loathe to discuss, or even acknowledge. They keep insisting that there are positive stories that are going deliberately unreported, when the truth is that there isn’t much good news to report. Indeed, just being a reporter or media worker in Iraq is one of the most dangerous professions on the planet:
According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, 67 journalists and 24 media workers have been killed on duty in Iraq since March 2003.
It seems to me that Mr. Byrne should have taken his own advice when he said:
“Those of us who haven’t been in a war zone criticize the work of war correspondents at our own peril.”
But them I suppose, Mr. Byrne was too busy accepting the bland assurances of US Agencies like those found at the U.S. Agency for International Development’s (USAID) website to bother looking for anything that might confirm his rosy view of Iraq’s prospects. Maybe the reporters in Iraq he disparaged for not relying on official US government reports for their information did so less because of any inherent liberal bias, but because such reports have often been proven factually inaccurate and unreliable sources of basic information about Iraq.
Which isn’t surprising really. USAID has, as one of its purposes, the promotion of a favorable view of the United states in the Middle East. And the Pentagon’s psy-ops and disinformation campaigns regarding Iraq are well known. In effect, Byrne rests his claim on a “liberal media bias” on reports from sources that have the specific agenda of promoting the viewpoint of the United States government. Hardly unbiased.
The trouble with all the chatter from the right about the so-called missing good news from Iraq is that the only place it exists is in their own fevered imaginations. Their desire to prove “liberal bias” in the news media is so great, that, coupled with the dissonance produced by their cult worship of President Bush, they choose to intentionally ignore the truth rather than admit that they could be wrong about Iraq.
The accusation of “liberal bias” that they make is merely a projection of their refusal to face the truth about their own carefully cultivated prejudices and assumptions. It’s divisive, damaging and disheartening to see it still being employed to deny the truth about Iraq at this late date.
