I had expected criticism of the Arab TV channels to be based on their one-sided reporting of the war to the benefit of the Iraqi government and their determinedly inflammatory content. However, what enraged Western governments and human rights and media organizations were the images of the American prisoners on our TV screens. They considered them a contravention of the Geneva Convention, which holds nations in armed conflict to certain standards in dealing with prisoners of war.
To say that this criticism is displaced is not to defend Al-Jazeera, which has received more than its share of condemnation. But it is to reject the illogical binding of some groups to rules that do not apply to others.
If the portrayal of the American prisoners on TV was illegal, why then wasn’t the same thing said when images of Iraqi prisoners and dead in Umm Qasr where shown on TV only three days earlier? A friend confided that he had spent the first few nights of the war surfing between the American news channels, CBS, CNN, ABC and Fox — all had shown images of Iraqi prisoners and victims of the American bombardment.
We saw lines of Iraqis surrendering and being searched and guarded — the faces of many of them were clearly visible. Among them was a prisoner being given water by a soldier while two other guards stood pointing guns at his head. We also saw pictures of dead Iraqis in their trenches, faces also visible — one was leaning against a white flag.
When the Geneva Convention was drawn up more than 50 years ago — in a different technological age — it dealt with two issues: One that we all agree on, namely rejecting the display of bodies of the enemy. That these should be respected is also a specific tenet in Islam. The second issue is to do with the families of the prisoners — the prisoners’ images must not be shown out of respect for their dignity and to protect their families’ feelings.
With the speed of the development of the war and the speed of the media who, embedded with the army, transmit events as they happen, it is difficult to prevent the broadcasting of prisoners’ images. This is difficult to prevent also because of the need on occasions to prove the truth of certain contradictory claims. The images of the prisoners were used to confirm the truth of a statement — this is after all a war that is being fought in the media and the minds of people as well as on the battlefield.
If the Americans fear that the images of the prisoners will cause embarrassment to their families and hurt soldiers’ feelings, the situation of the Iraqi soldiers is even more dangerous. For them it could be a question of life or death for their families if the prisoners are identified on screen. There are anti-Saddam militias that could resort to liquidating the families of those soldiers. In addition, the Iraqi regime itself punishes those who appear to be submissive or giving up, after they are set free. Therefore, the fear of the effect of TV on the Iraqi soldiers is far greater than the justification for protecting the American soldiers. If people want to prevent broadcasting of the images of the prisoners, then all soldiers should benefit from such a ruling.
Arab News Opinion 29 March 2003
