By Lawrence Smallman
Friday
24 December 2004
The
US decision to list the Lebanese television station Al-Manar
as a terrorist organisation, days after a French ban
on the channel, is a mistake that sets a dangerous precedent, according to
media watchdogs.
Criticising the move to blacklist a media organisation, Reporters sans frontières,
or Reporters Without Borders (RSF), has urged Washington and Paris not to
confuse anti-Israeli broadcasts with the fight against terrorism.
Licensed
by the Lebanese government, Al-Manar has been an
integral part of Hizb Allah's political strategy.
Having
driven Israeli troops out of southern Lebanon in 2000, Hizb
Allah has sought to establish itself as a powerful political party in Lebanon
and a model of resistance to Israeli occupation.
Popular
with its target audience, the 24-hour satellite station has been used to
glorify Hizb Allah's military exploits, insisting
that military means can show results in other occupied countries - such as
Palestine.
RSF
critique
But
while RSF recognises that Al-Manar
makes no bones about its anti-Zionist stance, "putting this TV station in
the same category as terrorist groups worries us and does not strike us as the
best solution", the press freedom organisation
said.
Washington's
decision means that any journalist working directly or indirectly with the
station will be banned from visiting the US. Those already in the US are now
threatened with expulsion.
Al-Manar's bureau in Washington is to be closed and its staff
forced to leave. The decision also means that, in the event of war, the
station's journalists are "in danger of being considered belligerents and
their bureaus viewed as military targets", according to RSF.
Thin
end of the wedge
"We
fear that this measure could be just the first of many others, and that all
news media that have been accused of helping terrorist organisations
in their coverage could end up on this list, in which case there will
definitely be abuses," RSF added.
The
move to put Al-Manar on the Terrorist Exclusion List
was announced by the US Department of State on 17 December. Spokesman Richard
Boucher said the blacklisting was due to the channel's "incitement of
terrorist activity".
"If a broadcaster was turned off every time someone made offensive and
unacceptable remarks, there would be precious little television in the
world"
Aidan White,
General Secretary of the International Federation of Journalists
The
media group was removed from the satellite which beamed it into the US on the
same day, the satellite's owner Intelsat said.
Less
than a week earlier, the French authorities also ordered satellite operator Eutelsat to stop relaying Al-Manar,
saying its programming had "a militant perspective with anti-Semitic
connotations".
French
Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin had already
declared the channel was incompatible with French values, but the government
eventually cited the need to preserve public order as a reason for the
decision.
Freedom
of speech?
Banning
media channels raises some fundamental questions, however, about what should be
considered offensive, according to international journalists' organisations. Who decides which words, ideas or opinions
are acceptable for broadcast?
The
International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) described the Al-Manar situation as political censorship of the worst kind.
Unless
unpopular views are heard, all freedom of speech really means is the freedom to
say things that conform to popular prejudices, says IFJ General Secretary Aidan
White.
"Censorship
just adds to intolerance and breeds further resentment and incomprehension. If
a broadcaster was turned off every time someone made offensive and unacceptable
remarks, there would be precious little television in the world.
"This
action is disproportionate and inappropriate and will do nothing to bridge the
gulf in understanding that at present exists between much of the Western world
and some Arab media," White said.
Israel
behind ban
Other
critics have expressed even stronger criticism. Former Lyon University lecturer
Robert Faurisson says France and the US have decided
to ban the TV station because of the power of pro-Israeli Jewish lobbies in
both countries.
"Quite
simply, Israel does not want the West to see what it did in southern Lebanon,
and what it continues to do in Palestine - and has once again succeeded in
preventing an independent voice from being heard."
French Prime Minister Raffarin
defended the axing of Al-Manar
"In
France, Jewish organisations get whatever they
demand. And especially the Conseil Reprisentatif des Institutions Juives
de France (CRIF), headed by former banker Roger Cukierman,
who was very instrumental in the campaign against Al-Manar,"
he said.
The
academic added that the lobbies in both France and the US are "beyond
criticism" - journalists are terrified of being labelled
holocaust deniers. Faurisson also rejected the claim
that France was a pioneer in the right to freedom of expression.
"From
a legal perspective, we supposedly have a one-line entitlement to the freedom
of opinion, of press, of research.
"But
then we have pages and pages that explain this freedom away - freedom is so
important that it needs to be protected by dozens of prohibitions, exceptions
and bans," he said.
Lebanese
government
Speaking
in Beirut on 18 December, Information Minister Ali al-Firzli
also said the bans were due to submission to Israeli pressure.
"Rushing
the termination [of broadcasts] without considering the need to give the
channel a new chance for cooperation demonstrates the existence of a
predetermined political decision," he said.
Al-Firzli says the bottom line is that "Zionism seeks to
prohibit any condemnation of Israeli crimes ... what is needed, in the global
village controlled by Zionists, is to prohibit the condemnation of Israel's
crimes against humanity.
"They
want the world to forget the massacres of Qana and Jenin and all the Israeli organised
acts of killing and genocide," the minister added.
Lebanese
analysis
The
Lebanese foreign minister added that there should be a distinction between
anti-Zionist and anti-Jewish reporting.
"The
Zionist ideology and practices are condemned because they are the basis of the
Arab-Israeli conflict and the source of the tragedy and injustice the
Palestinian people are subjected to", al-Firzli
said.
"Freedom is so important that it needs to be protected by dozens of
prohibitions, exceptions and bans"
Robert Faurisson,
French academic
Meanwhile,
Hizb Allah Executive Committee Chairman Hashim Safiy al-Din has claimed
that both countries' bans are a sign of powerlessness.
"With
all their media, political, cultural and economic dimensions, the US cannot
tolerate a critical sound or image. After today, how can the French or the US
lecture us about democracy and freedom?" he told crowds of supporters on
19 December.
Al-Manar defiance
Despite
enormous political pressure on the channel, the organisation
has promised to "continue to carry the message of defending our peoples'
rights, holy places and just causes ... within internationally agreed
professional laws and standards".
And
the station has not merely continued to run videos depicting the Statue of
Liberty as a knife-wielding ghoul and juxtaposing US President George Bush
along with Adolf Hitler with the caption "two
faces of evil", it is also championing a popular response.
About
50 private cable operators in Beirut have already stopped the distribution of
French channel TV5 in solidarity.
"Our
grouping held a meeting on Saturday and we decided to stop the distribution of
TV5 in solidarity with Al-Manar," Ihab Samir, co-owner of LTV cable
in the Ras al-Nabah central
residential neighbourhood, said.
He
said the association, made up of the "the distributors of cable
services", took the decision "to halt TV5 in Beirut as a first step,
as we are making contacts with other companies in other Lebanese regions".
And on Saturday, Lebanon warned that it was still considering reprisal measures against French and US media, though it continues to re-broadcast TV5 on Lebanese state media outlets.