By
Rostam Pourzal, Washington, DC
The
Muslim uproar against the publication of offensive cartoons has elicited calls
from respectable Western opinion to defend freedom of the press. Empathetic
voices here have gone further and suggested that Muslims should concentrate on
educating Christians and others about their culture, rather than retaliate. This
kind of well-intentioned reaction ignores the history of non-Western nations'
frustrated campaign for freedom of information and the right to communicate on a
global scale. During the 1970s, newly independent nations known as the
non-aligned movement, supported by the Soviet
Union, demanded some control over Western media's access to their
populace. Failing that, they sought a right, to be recognized at the United
Nations, for equal access to Western audiences, not unlike the parity the
developing nations now seek in trade arrangements.
The
campaign was ferociously opposed by Western corporate media and governments, who
falsely framed it as a communist-inspired effort to stifle freedom of the press.
The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization came under
attack for a report it commissioned in this regard, advocating actually nothing
but comprehensive freedom of information. The United States and Great Britain
left UNESCO angrily, charging that the organization was mismanaged and
politicized, taking with them almost a third of its budget. Other Western
governments threatened to follow suit, UNESCO caved in, and precedent was set
for today's retaliation by the Muslim world. Sean McBride, who headed UNESCO's
offending International Commission for the Study of Communication Problems, had
previously won a Nobel Peace Prize in 1974.
What
conservative and liberal circles hailed at the time as a victory for "our
values" was in fact a subversion, dressed in Cold War terms, of global media
democracy. Today few observers doubt that most Muslims, devout or secular, feel
humiliated by double standards prevailing in the New World Order. The
back-to-back rise of popularly elected governments opposed to one-way
globalization in Iraq,
Palestine, and Iran, as well as in Venezuela and Bolivia, is
indicative of a growing fervor in held-back countries for authenticity and the
right to be heard. The posturing of political leaders aside, what we are
witnessing in the form of a cartoon war is the end of Muslim tolerance in the
face of neocolonial disparities and cultural hegemony.
Having
faced a united Western media-government front at UNESCO and other forums,
nations yearning to be heard can hardly be blamed for seeing the "free" press of
NATO countries as an extension of big power hegemony. A declassified Nixon-era
internal memo, published last week in an Iranian daily, further illustrates why
Muslim public opinion does not buy Western claims of press autonomy. Nixon's top
aides, seizing an opportunity to calm the US public about Vietnam, had
this exchange in the memo to H.R. Haldeman from Dwight L. Chapin on October 19,
1969:
**[begin text] The worldly interests and
understanding of the President came out very clearly in the Shah's remarks
today. He had some things to say about the President which we should work with.
For example,
- Friendly columnists should be called today
– and given excerpts of the Shah's remarks about the President. The
interpretation along the lines of how good it is that America finally has a
president who has studied the world for twenty years and understands it…
shouldn't a president like this be given an opportunity regarding Vietnam
?
- The Monday Republican flyer should carry
the picture of the Shah and the President – with a portion of the Shah's remarks
quoted on the cover.
- Eric Severeid should be called by
Shakespeare or perhaps by Klein – and try to get the thrust of the Shah's
remarks into his show for tonight [end
text].**
Severeid
was the CBS evening news anchor at the time. Accompanying declassified documents
published in Iran --
correspondence between the State Department and US embassies in Middle East capitals – leave little doubt that American
media freely spread propaganda for US administrations. Muslims also remember how
Venezuela's and
Serbia's "free" media
conspired more recently with Washington to destabilize the legitimately
elected governments of those countries. More to the point, they are reminded
daily by Muslim defenders of press freedom how Aljazeera TV has repeatedly been
threatened and harassed – and its reporters targeted and killed-- by US forces
in Afghanistan and
Iraq for refusing to play by
Washington's
rules.
Progressive
activists should focus on the glaring hypocrisy of our "defenders" of free
press. And instead of wasting time on dissecting Islam for traces of
enlightenment, we should revive UNESCO's defeated plan to democratize the flow
of information – including cartoons -- worldwide. If Muslims get access to a
level playing field in global communications, fewer will express themselves in
south Asia's streets torch in
hand.
About
the author:
Based
in Washington, DC, Rostam Pourzal writes about the politics
of human rights for Iranian e