Iran and the lessons of Iraq

Report by Duncan Stanworth from the News Xchange 2007 conference in Berlin on 25 October

There are echoes of the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq in the media's coverage of Iran, with "drumbeats" being sounded over Tehran's nuclear policies, the News Xchange 2007 conference in Berlin has heard. Delegates were asked whether journalists had learned the "lessons" from Iraq, including the reporting of claims about weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq and alleged links between the Saddam Husayn regime and Al-Qa'idah. Moreover, grave concerns were raised about the current coverage of Iran in the Western media. Robert Greenwald, the US-based documentary maker whose internet video "Fox Attacks Iran" presents apparent parallels between US TV news coverage of Iran today, and Iraq in the run-up to the 2003 invasion, said the scenario was being relived. The US administration had a "laid-out plan, trying to scare us, seeking to put it [the Iran issue] in an emotional context". But conservative commentator Michael Ledeen, author of "Iranian Timebomb", said he detected no plan to attack Iran, adding that bellicose speeches were nothing new. Martha Raddatz, chief White House correspondent of US network ABC News, said the media had to look at its pre-Iraq War behaviour: "We have to raise our eyebrows about anything regarding WMD."

Lack of backbone

The media had displayed a lack of backbone over Iraq, said former BBC journalist and current Fox News presenter Anita McNaught. "The shock was to discover that we knew just what the US and British governments knew. They drew different conclusions. We lacked the courage to call their bluff." Fox had had a "hotline to the White House", she added, and would trumpet apparent successes in the search for WMD. The BBC ran with these stories, before "learning restraint". Other speakers bemoaned what they saw as a lack of context and perspective in coverage of Iran. Jon Snow, from the UK's Channel Four News, said the media had to deconstruct the "monolith" that was Iran. He asked why there had been no mention that 40 per cent of foreign insurgents in Iraq were Saudi, not Iranian. The theme was echoed by Greenwald. He said the "framework" for discussing Iran was limited to "when to bomb, how to bomb".

Politicians "setting the agenda"

Europe-based Iranian blogger Hossein Derakshan went further, saying the preamble to war had started in the media. The "propaganda" was not limited to Fox, but came too from the likes of the New York Times and Boston Globe newspapers. He questioned the frequent use of the phrase "nuclear ambition", which, he said, was employed alongside the "demonization" of Iranian President Ahmadinezhad. Al-Jazeera head Wadah Khanfar said politicians were setting the agenda. Money was needed in order to present the context. But this presented difficulties. Martha Raddatz said it was difficult to get in and out of the country, and that it was hard to get answers. Networks were already stretched by the need to cover Iraq, and resources were finite. With more chest-beating over Iran on the cards, some speakers urged the News Xchange journalists not to repeat the recent past. "Don't let our country lead us into another tragedy," Greenwald pleaded. "Covering Iran properly is one of our greatest obligations to humanity," Snow added.

Source: BBC Monitoring research 25 Oct 07

Comments

[Gordon Thomas]

I see that the Fifth Estate is full of navel gazing self importance-and what a surprise to find a BBC 'journalist' to be spinning a yarn or three.

What makes you think you and your organization was 'correct' in the first place? Have you actually read Hutton, Butler,the ISG Survey or anything else relating to Iraq or Iran?

Al-Jazeera head Wadah Khanfar said "politicians were setting the agenda",which indeed they might after all they are our elected officals-you are not.

Perhaps if you can drag yourself away from your self important navel gazing you can apply your 'knowledge' to these questions?

-Explain The 'Great Prophet' Exercise by the IRGC in November 2006 and how it might be interpreted as 'dangerous posturing'?

-Explain why a country with huge oil reserves and refining capabilities is rationing petrol?

-Explain why that Baseej is cracking down on 'anti-socail' elements and extra-judical killings?

-Explain why the Shehab 3 SLBM system was proudly displayed in Tehran in August?

-Explain why the IAEA is being given the run around?

-Explain why Chlorine Bombs have been used in Iraq?

-Explain where all the documentation,weapons,and equipment relating to WMD went to BEFORE,DURING and AFTER OIF?

-Explain why Mr Zarqarwi was in Baghdad before the war travelling around one of the most controlled countries on earth?

-Explain the BBC's narration and failure to explain these facts to the viewer/listener,and why it fails to live up to its charter?

I look forward to your responce with interest.Perhaps you can come and visit us at

http://bbc-biased.blogspot.com/

BTW-'Beyond the Frontlines'(which I assume is the basis of this puff piece) is an overindulgent piece of clap trap-I know because I've read it.