Jeffrey Gedmin: Poor Saddam Hussein

We have received the permission of the Aspen Institute Berlin to publish this gem of an analysis by Jeffrey Gedmin about the Saddam underwear pictures. The article first appeared in German in the daily WELT.

Poor Saddam Hussein

By Jeffrey Gedmin

Last weekend someone, presumably from the U.S. military, leaked to the tabloid press photos of Saddam Hussein in his underwear. It was a stupid thing to do. It almost certainly is a violation of the Geneva Convention. I was starting to get angry. That was until I heard Saddam's lawyer call it "an insult to humanity." Then Arab media begin to screech about human rights violations and American savagery. Al Jazeera, the popular, independent television station based in Qatar, called the photos of the former Iraqi dictator "demeaning to the people of Iraq." An Al Jazeera spokesman says the station has refrained from airing the photos because of ethical and professional concerns. This gave me pause for thought.

Of course, blaming America has become a number one international sport. Last week, Reuters reported that a Russian village, from the Nizhegorodskaya on the Volga river, woke up to find that its lake had disappeared overnight. Experts are working to try to find explanations for what sucked the water away, but some villagers have already figured it out. A woman sitting on the ground outside her house said, "I am thinking, well, America has finally got to us."

This may sound crazy, but still, this lovely lady cannot hold a candle to the absurdity and cynicism you can experience in the Arab world. Let's review. Saddam Hussein attacked neighbours, gassed his own people, threatened Israel, supported terrorism, murdered more muslims than any

human being on earth--the last mass grave discovered in Iraq earlier this month contained 1,500 bodies, most of them women and children. To get lectures about journalistic ethics from Al Jazeera is especially rich. The group that gives air time to Osama Bin Laden to makes his case for global Jihad has scruples about showing Saddam in his underwear?

The record of Al Jazeera in Iraq has hardly been a model of journalistic ethics or caring for the honor of the Iraqi people. When Al Jazeera first opened its office in Baghdad in 1997, it hired the head of Saddam's national television station to run the shop. According to documents obtained by the London Sunday Times, three Al Jazeera reporters worked for Saddam's intelligence service between 1999 and 2002. According to documents obtained by Der Spiegel, Al Jazeera's Director General back in Qatar, Muhammed Jassim Al-Ali, was among a list of Al Jazeera journalists and other employees who had been paid bribes by Iraqi intelligence. Al-Ali was later fired. In any case, coindidentally, Al Jazeera was the only media group that Saddam allowed to move around Iraq before the war without minders.

Since the war Al Jazeera has sought to offer "balanced" coverage of the "insurgency." Note that these "insurgents," Iraq's freedom fighters, are the ones who murdered a distinguished UN diplomat, kidnapped and executed Care aid worker Margaret Hassan, and slaughter innocent Iraqis day after day. The Iraqi daily Al-Sabah has even accused Al Jazeera of permitting one of its offices to be used to coordinate terrorist attacks. In one recent incident, local Iraqis harassed an Al Jazeera camera team on the street, accusing them of being sympathisers of the old regime. I feel bad about the photos of Saddam. But like a number of Iraqis, I feel worse about one or two other things. (emphasis added)

Jeffrey Gedmin is director of the Aspen Institute Berlin.

Of course, the German media are head and shoulders above Al Jazeera's biased anti-American reporting. Just remember the balanced coverage of the Abu Ghraib incidents or January's Iraqi elections...

Update: Stefan over at Politically Incorrect has a picture of Iraqis deeply insulted by the Saddam photos...

Comments

[Will]

I think Mr.Gedmin incorrectly links two things.
One: the Sun-coverage of Saddam in his (under)pants.
Two : Al Jazeera's BS journalism.

Then he goes: Look who's talking...
That Al Jazeera is despicable scum has little to do with the outrageous articles by the Sun, the photos shouldn't have happened, it's a good idea that the US administration is checking out the source.

And to find other sources who support the "insurgents" you don't have to go far: Tariq Ali does this for German publishers Rowohlt.

[Neokomplott]

Actually, Al-Jazeera is helping the middle east reform movement. For instance, the coverage of the Iraqi elections was excellent.

"Some lament what they see as the radicalizing influence of Arab channels such as al Jazeera and al Arabiya, and certainly their one-sided reporting on the most recent Palestinian intifada and the U.S. invasion of Iraq were not models of moderation. However, these channels also provided wall-to-wall coverage of the Iraqi election, giving millions their first look at Arab democracy in action. And, as The Economist said recently, the most popular programs on Arab satellite TV are "those whose interest in posing questions, and stimulating appetites for change, is pretty frank." Talk shows on these channels have given many Arabs their first exposure to Israeli views about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict."

(Tech Central Station: Why now?)

[Kalifornia Mike]

The burning question on the lips of so many has been answered!

The question was: Boxers or briefs?

If it is against international law to publish these photos, then how does the beheaqding oor the intentional bombing of civilians fit in the rubric of international law?

As for me, I am moving to Steiermark and run for governor!

[Harald, Oslo]

Something to keep in mind here: The russian woman was making a joke, it was about the americans digging right through the earth and coming back up in russia, under the lake.

Just as some people talk about digging to China.

[Don]

"If it is against international law to publish these photos, then how does the beheaqding oor the intentional bombing of civilians fit in the rubric of international law?"

It's Ok under the Geneva Convention. Well.... actually the Geneva Convention has nothing to say about it, being written to regulate treatment of POW's in wars between nation-states. It has nothing to say about bandits.

Saddams rights were violated under the Geneva Convention. It should be investigated and hands should be slapped.

The funny thing is that the people who will foam off about this seem relatively unconcerned about all the bodies being unearthed. Many of them were equally unconcerned about the various similar sites unearthed in Poland, so at least they can't be accused of inconsistency.

[Bran]

Al-Jazeera was not the only news operation that Saddam left without minders. That hnour was shared by Lara Marlowe the ace foreign reporter of the Irish Times.
See www.blog-irish.com/marlowe.3

November 17, 2003

Not Our Lara!: Saddam Didn't Need to Check Lara Marlowe's Dispatches from Baghdad

Instapundit and PORPHYROGENITUS are nattering on about how correspondents in Iraq may be getting a skewed picture from their former Saddamista minders, whom they have now hired on as "factorums".

We don't suffer such problems in Ireland. The Irish Times reporter doing much of the on-site Iraq coverage, Lara Marlowe (Is she still Mrs Robert Fisk?) was such a good reporter that the Saddamistas knew that they didn't need to monitor her dispatches!

[frank]

Tech Central Station,
I agree that Al-Jezeera isn't universally anti-american, they're a prickly beast. I think the reason they covered the elections so well is that they're independent and a news event that size trumps all biases.

Great post. I was rolling on the floor laughing.

Also to Herald,
Thanks for the heads up. How did you find out that she was joking though? Is there a source for this?

[Kalifornia Mike]

The publishing of the photos of Saddam Hussein may or may not be in violation of the Geneva Conventions.

There is precedence for mass murder of one's own citizens. Of course, some believe the Nurembeg Trials were in and of themselves, illegal!

Of course, there are mass graves in Poland. Which criminals shall we punish? The NAZIs or the Soviets?

[Kalifornia Mike]

I suppose I should elucidate on my comment about Saddam Hussein photos possibly not being a violation of the Geneva Convention. The source of the photos is unknown.

Saddam has had visitors who are unrlated to the US military. Just for one, the International Red Cross.

[Don]

Mike,

I was merely pointing out that many of the more strident US critics have been utterly silent about the crimes of the USSR. Noam Chomsky being only the most notorious. Crimes against mankind aren't universally abhorrent to people subscribing to this school of thought - the context is all. Massive crimes of communists and Baathists go completely unremarked while much smaller transgressions by US troops are vituperously condemned.....

The point is not who to punish for the Polish mass graves (surely the criminals are beyond punishment by now). But their apologists and the successors of those apologists need to be shown for what they are. Partisans and opportunists rather than humanitarians.

[Irena Tholakis]

The Left are to blame for everything.

[James W.]

Well, at the very least, almost everything. :)

[Harald, Oslo]

Frank: She was interviewed on TV, it was pretty obvious that it was meant as a joke.
I don't have a newspaper source for it, though.