WORLD MEDIA WATCH FOR DECEMBER 24, 2001

BUZZFLASH NOTE: Once again, these are the views and perspectives of the individual papers, not of BuzzFlash or Gloria. They offer BuzzFlash readers a way of reading what other nations are saying about the crisis, whether we like it or not.

http://www.buzzflash.com/mediawatch

1//The Moscow Times, Russia--A YEAR OF HARD LESSONS FOR THE MEDIA (“Looking ahead to 2002, I expect that the state will continue to try to strengthen its control over the media and that there will be more pressure applied to "opposition" media outlets.”)

2//The Dawn, Pakistan--PRECIPITATE ACTIONS (“One hopes saner counsel will prevail in New Delhi and it would realize the horrible consequences flowing from a further escalation of the confrontation between the two South Asian nuclear powers.”)

3//The Pioneer, India--MEASURED RESPONSE “(New Delhi has done well not to fall into Islamabad's trap but to act in a manner that puts the ball in the court of those countries urging restraint upon it,…. It has, however, not ruled out further action.”)

4//The East African Standard, Kenya--WHY NOT SPARE SOMALIA THE RAVAGES OF WAR
(“But in the final analysis, it is really simple - the Somali warlords are willing to co-operate with the US. For all their other sins, why not give them a chance and spare everyone the ravages of war? As things are, this region has far too many wars to keep it going.”}

*************************************************************


1//The Moscow Times Friday, Dec. 21, 2001. Page 8
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2001/12/21/006.html

OPINION/COMMENT--A YEAR OF HARD LESSONS FOR THE MEDIA
By Manana Aslamazian

(Manana Aslamazian is general director of Internews-Russia, a non-profit organization which provides support to independent regional television broadcasters. She contributed this comment to The Moscow Times.)

The main events of 2001 in the Russian media have undoubtedly been the change of ownership at NTV, with Gazprom-Media taking control o the channel from Vladimir Gusinsky, and the ongoing legal problems surrounding the Boris Berezovsky-controlled TV6, which is currently undergoing bankruptcy proceedings. What conclusions are to be drawn and what lessons to be learned from these events?

It is clear that state officials have become less tolerant toward so-called opposition media outlets and are adopting a more interventionist approach than was the case a few years ago. What's less clear, however, is the level of the state administration at which these interventionist impulses are conceived. Media companies (in particular television companies), therefore, need to take all precautions -- insofar as is possible -- to ensure a maximally risk-free existence.

This means, first, not borrowing or accepting money with political or other strings attached, which could lead to an unhealthy state of dependence and the attendant negative consequences. The case of NTV and Media-MOST provides the most graphic illustration of the risks associated with getting involved in this game. And second, media companies need to make sure that all their legal paperwork is in order so that they are not an easy target for attack on legal grounds.

(SKIP)

So, the main lesson to be drawn from the events of this year is that media companies have to do everything within their power to minimize their exposure and vulnerability to pressure and "attacks" from regional and federal authorities…However, not even regional governors would dare to openly close down a television station for providing critical or oppositional news coverage -- they will always look for some legal technicality or other pretext. So the task is to deprive the authorities, as far as is possible, of any such pretexts.

In terms of the news and current affairs content of national television, this year has seen the differences between channels diminishing. On the plus side, this points to greater professionalism and a more balanced approach to reporting. On the negative side, it is an indication that channels are exercising more self-censorship and worrying excessively about how the authorities will react.

It is not easy to assess the role of Press Minister Mikhail Lesin. For a government official he gets too emotional and involved in situations where he should remain firmly above the fray. He would do well to adopt a more neutral stance. Lesin is undoubtedly a clever and effective manager, as well as being a good operator. However, he is pulled in different directions and this is evident in his behavior. On the one hand, as a former businessman he supports the freedom of the media and views things through the prism of the free market, while on the other hand the laws of
political survival dictate that he behave loyally. For a number of reasons, I don't think he wants to strip TV6 of its broadcasting license, but that does not mean that he will stick his neck out in order to protect the channel to the bitter end.

Looking ahead to 2002, I expect that the state will continue to try to strengthen its control over the media and that there will be more pressure applied to "opposition" media outlets.

(SKIP)

To conclude, the main dangers faced by the media industry are the strengthening role of the state, economic instability (with the attendant loss of advertising revenues), and a failure to learn the lessons of this year and to learn from the mistakes that have been made. In general, the media community would do well to pay more attention to its common interests, act with greater solidarity and to be fully cognizant of the potential dangers that lie ahead.


2//The Dawn 23 December 2001 Sunday 07 Shawwal 1422
http://www.dawn.com/2001/12/23/ed.htm

EDITORIAL: PRECIPITATE ACTIONS

Pakistan has done well not to up the ante in the current crisis in Indo-Pakistan relations. By deciding not to recall its high commissioner in New Delhi, Islamabad has refrained from taking an action that could have only aggravated the already tense diplomatic and military situation in the subcontinent. That India should have decided to recall its envoy in Islamabad and snap all rail and bus links goes only to show the state of mind the Indian leadership is in. It has taken this decision in spite of the risk inherent in hasty and precipitate actions at a time when the crisis needs caution and restraint on both sides.

Since Dec 13, India has done everything except trying to establish the truth behind the attack on the parliament building on that day. One after another, it has rejected all offers by Pakistan to defuse the tension: Pakistan pledged to take action against groups alleged to be involved in the attack if only India would provide proof. Islamabad also offered a joint inquiry and the US offered the FBI's services for determining the truth behind the Dec 13 attack. New Delhi rejected them all. Instead, it has continued to demonstrate what a Pakistan spokesman called its "unifocal" state of mind by continuing to blame and slander this country. It has also ignored all pleas by friendly countries to refrain from taking unilateral actions that could worsen the crisis.

(SKIP

Pakistan's decision not to withdraw its envoy is well-judged and serves the cause of sanity. The world has noted that Islamabad is not contributing to the tension generated by India; instead, it is
maintaining its cool and doing all it can to avoid a worsening of the already tense situation. It is quite possible that the Indian leadership may not be wanting a war. But it is certainly playing a dangerous game whose consequences it ought to know. Pakistan cannot remain unmindful of India's troop build-up that includes the deployment of 500 tanks along the Sindh-Rajasthan border alone. The danger is that a mutually threatening build-up could lead to an accidental war that no one may want.

Left to itself, India would do nothing to ease tension; instead, it would continue to indulge in its favourite sport of Pakistan-bashing and keep the tension alive. This is hardly compatible with the cause of the US-led world coalition, which is still not through with the anti-terrorism operations in Afghanistan. It is time India's friends in the West, especially the US and UK, acted swiftly to counsel restraint and circumspection to New Delhi. Pakistan, on its part, is not in a jingoistic mood at all - it cannot be, given the situation along its western border. The world knows this. One hopes saner counsel will prevail in New Delhi and it would realize the horrible consequences flowing from a further escalation of the confrontation between the two South Asian nuclear powers.


3//The Pioneer New Delhi Monday, December 24, 2001
http://www.dailypioneer.com/secon3.asp?cat=\edit1&d=EDITS

EDITS MEASURED RESPONSE
The Pioneer Edit Desk

The Government's decision to recall India's high commissioner to Pakistan and terminate the plying of the Samjhauta Express and the Delhi-Lahore bus service, has not come a day too soon. Warnings and expressions of anger over Pakistan's continued perpetration of terrorist outrages against this country have had absolutely no effect; the Lahore and Agra summits in February 1999, and July this year respectively, have been utterly barren. Nor have those countries, particularly the United States which currently leads a multinational coalition against terrorism, succeeded in making Pakistan mend its ways. Some concrete action had, therefore, to be
taken, especially after the dastardly attack on Parliament on December 13, to convey to Islamabad that India's restraint could not be taken for granted and its patience was not infinite.

Equally, something had to be done to assure the country's people-whose anger, rising steadily over the years, had become explosive following the death of security forces personnel in the attack on Parliament-that the Government was going to act. In the event, the measures taken, while leaving no one in any doubt that India was not afraid to act, are not of such a nature as would trigger a war which this country is keen to avoid despite its intense anger against Pakistan's continuing perfidy. Indeed, Pakistan's ruling military junta, facing a serious threat from fundamentalist Islamic elements in the Army and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and the terrorist militias, which are furious over its participation in the US-led coalition against terrorism and what they consider to be its betrayal of the Taliban, Osama bin Laden and the Al Qaida, may well want a war with India to unite the country behind it and consolidate its position. Since a direct offensive by Pakistan's armed forces would attract severe international condemnation, the attempt would understandably be to prompt terrorist militias like the Lashkar-e-Toiba,
Jaish-e-Mohammad, Al-Badr Mujahideen and the Harkat-ul Mujahideen to perpetrate such outrageous terrorist strikes as would provoke India to declare war.

New Delhi has done well not to fall into Islamabad's trap but to act in a manner that puts the ball in the court of those countries urging restraint upon it, giving them more time to prevail upon Pakistan to end its cross-border terrorism. It has, however, not ruled out further action.

(SKIP)

Other measures, such as attacks across the international border and the Line of Control (LoC) in Jammu & Kashmir, on the terrorist training camps in Pakistan and Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK), can be taken after everything else has failed. In that event, it may well be war and India must be prepared for it.


4//The East African Standard December 23, 2001 (via www.somalianews.com/)
http://allafrica.com/stories/200112230006.html

WHY NOT SPARE SOMALIA THE RAVAGES OF WAR

Posted to the web December 23, 2001 (Nairobi) (Labeled “news” but reads like opinion)

Barrack Muluka

Mr Julius Sunkuli was equivocating and prevaricating on Wednesday this week. The Minister of State was addressing journalists on Kenya's position on speculations that the US is about to begin bombarding Somalia from Kenyan bases.

The minister said: "Kenya will play a positive role in the fight against terrorism". Now I do not know what "positive" means. My predicament is not made any easier when the minister says that there are no plans for an offensive on Somalia from Kenyan bases. Regardless, I am keenly aware that Kenya's leadership is the only one on the globe, so far, to have demonstrated in city streets against Mr Usama bin Laden and the terrorist force that he leads.

Do I, therefore, understand the minister to be saying that although the Americans may not have asked to use our bases to pound Somalia, should the request be forthcoming, we are inclined to accept? I also note that President Moi has read the Riot Act to Somalia's factional leaders. In unequivocal stern fashion, the President told the Somali warlords that the whole world was watching them keenly. Kenya might have to close the border with their woebegone country.

(SKIP)

…But is it possible that before getting mixed up with terrorists we could hold court with ourselves and answer a few prickly questions?

(SKIP).

No one doubts that Somalia could be harbouring Al Qaeda elements. In which case there is need to sort them out soonest. But is it possible to give the dislocated Somalia leadership the same benefit of doubt that the Talibans were given ahead of the siege of Afghanistan? There has been
legion destruction of innocent limb and life in Afghanistan. Pictures of maimed toddlers are still fresh in the global mind. If the Somali leadership were willing to turn in any suspected terrorists, would this obviate blanket military action against this limping God forsaken nation? The mess in Somalia brings tears to your eyes. Now fancy adding to these the legendary American cluster bombs.

Leaving this aside, there is a need to ask what the allied forces have achieved in Afghanistan. If the aim was to overthrow the Talibans then they succeeded. If it was to capture bin Laden and his friend Mullah Muhammad Omar, then the mission is far from accomplished.

(SKIP)

These are simply depressing words, coming as they do from the self-same cowboys who promised the world to "smoke them out of their hideouts like rats". So where is this fat rat called bin Laden? Can the fat cats tell international fliers whether they should feel any safer today than they did on September 11? Is it becoming clear that the anger that informed the war against terrorism, justified as it was, clouded the vision of those who have been at the vanguard of this war? Billions of dollars have so far been spent in the hunt for bin Laden. Bush is becoming famous for the phrase: "I want him dead or alive."

Judging from the abounding rumours on bin Laden, it is beginning to look like Bush's desire could turn out to be forlorn hope. It is emerging that a wiser method to track down bin Laden would have been through intelligence rather than hard war. But of course Washington wanted to humour her nationals in the belief that she was still the toughest cowboy in town, even after her two towers had come tumbling like the accordion. Looking for Mr Laden through a spy network was
not the kind of thing to massage the injured national ego. And yet it might just have been the thing to do.

So where do you begin looking for bin Laden now? There has been talk of the man disguising himself and sneaking to Karachi or back to Saudi Arabia. But it is doubtful that the man is daft to do such a thing. A man who hijacks four American planes one bright summer morning is not the sort of fellow to be treated lightly. They say where he is is anybody's guess? Suppose I guessed that the man underwent plastic surgery long before September 11? Suppose I guessed that having permanently changed appearance beyond recognition, he emigrated to the US, whence he bemusedly watches the goings-on and commands his worldwide army?

Bin Laden, an immensely wealthy and crafty man, has outwitted Bush and Blair. Before Sunkuli gets mixed up with him, he may wish to ask whether he is equal to the task. But in the final analysis, it is really simple - the Somali warlords are willing to co-operate with the US. For all their other sins, why not give them a chance and spare everyone the ravages of war? As things are, this region has far too many wars to keep it going.

Copyright 2001, Gloria R. Lalumia

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Help keep BuzzFlash Buzz'n!

Contribute to BuzzFlash and Get One of Our Fancy BuzzFlash Premiums!

http://www.buzzflash.com/premiums/

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *