My then-boss, Gareth Evans, and I wrote this piece for openDemocracy on 4 April 2007. In it, we looked at the "responsibility to protect" doctrine in light of some encouraging new global public opinion research and what it meant for crisis-areas such as Darfur. It was subsequently republished in a number of newspapers, including the Swiss Le Temps.
=======
Trying to draw sustained international media attention to violent conflicts and mass atrocities around the world is a depressing business. The subject-matter is deeply disturbing, attention-spans are limited, and it is often hard to tell if publics are taking any notice in a way that is likely, in turn, to make their governments more responsive.
On Darfur, for example, non-governmental organisations such as the International Crisis Group have been ringing alarm-bells for over three years, yet effective international action to stop the state-sponsored violence has not materialised.
But new evidence suggests the message is getting across, at least on one level.
Wednesday, 4 April 2007
Thursday, 29 March 2007
The EU's Inexcusable Pardon for Serbia
My Crisis Group colleague, Sabine Freizer, and I wrote this piece for the European Voice, which ran it on 29 March 2007.
=======
Given the widespread negativity about further EU enlargement, it is curious that the EU is poised to lower the bar for Serbia, which Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn said earlier this month could achieve candidate status by 2008.
Indeed, it is more than surprising – downright shocking – that the EU proposes to waive preconditions that the most notorious war criminals in Europe are arrested and transferred to the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in The Hague.
For years, talks with Serbia over a stabilisation and association agreement (SAA) were strictly dependent on Belgrade’s full co-operation with the tribunal and from December 2004 to April 2005 this conditionality bore fruit. Serbia transferred 16 indictees before SAA talks began in May 2005.
But that is precisely when co-operation stopped.
=======
Given the widespread negativity about further EU enlargement, it is curious that the EU is poised to lower the bar for Serbia, which Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn said earlier this month could achieve candidate status by 2008.
Indeed, it is more than surprising – downright shocking – that the EU proposes to waive preconditions that the most notorious war criminals in Europe are arrested and transferred to the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in The Hague.
For years, talks with Serbia over a stabilisation and association agreement (SAA) were strictly dependent on Belgrade’s full co-operation with the tribunal and from December 2004 to April 2005 this conditionality bore fruit. Serbia transferred 16 indictees before SAA talks began in May 2005.
But that is precisely when co-operation stopped.
Tuesday, 27 March 2007
New Angles for Darfur
This originally appeared on my Reuters AlertNet blog on 27 March 2007.
=======
I just finished a short round of meetings on Darfur with European journalists, and one thing that emerges over and over again is how desperate editors are for new angles on the issue. So, with the help of Reuters AlertNet, I would like to set up a contest to find new stories highlighting the issue.
The problem in getting more coverage for Darfur has never been finding journalists willing to cover it, and today -- as opposed to a couple years ago -- the problem isn't even convincing editors it's a critically important story. The difficulty is in finding new angles from which to cover the issue.
=======
I just finished a short round of meetings on Darfur with European journalists, and one thing that emerges over and over again is how desperate editors are for new angles on the issue. So, with the help of Reuters AlertNet, I would like to set up a contest to find new stories highlighting the issue.
The problem in getting more coverage for Darfur has never been finding journalists willing to cover it, and today -- as opposed to a couple years ago -- the problem isn't even convincing editors it's a critically important story. The difficulty is in finding new angles from which to cover the issue.
Saturday, 17 March 2007
US and Iraq: Post-Pottery Barn Rules
I posted this on my Reuters AlertNet blog on 17 March 2007.
=======
Former Secretary of State Colin Powell’s ominous pre-war warning, "You break it, you've bought it", set the tone for the public debate on Iraq for years to come. How ever bad Iraq got, the US would have to deal with it, because the American-led invasion had released numerous unforeseen, though hardly unforeseeable, consequences.
If last week's New York Times interview with Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is any indication of where the American public debate stands today, and the new guiding principle really is, as she says, "the American people are done with Iraq", then the era of the "Pottery Barn rules" has given way to something much worse.
=======
Former Secretary of State Colin Powell’s ominous pre-war warning, "You break it, you've bought it", set the tone for the public debate on Iraq for years to come. How ever bad Iraq got, the US would have to deal with it, because the American-led invasion had released numerous unforeseen, though hardly unforeseeable, consequences.
If last week's New York Times interview with Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is any indication of where the American public debate stands today, and the new guiding principle really is, as she says, "the American people are done with Iraq", then the era of the "Pottery Barn rules" has given way to something much worse.
Monday, 12 March 2007
Would You Live in Kosovo?
This appeared on my Reuters AlertNet blog on 12 March 2007.
=======
Anyone who has followed Kosovo over the past decade or so knows that public debate on both the Kosovan and Serbian sides is fairly limited. It can seem like two monotones talking past each other: commentary in the media follows those familiar conflict mentality fall-backs of ancient history lessons and attempts to reinforce "our" victimhood. Only rarely does any local commentator really come up with something new to say, despite -- or perhaps because of -- the fast-approaching final status decision. This weekend in Belgrade was one of those rare moments, when a very refreshing opinion piece appeared in a key Serbian newspaper.
=======
Anyone who has followed Kosovo over the past decade or so knows that public debate on both the Kosovan and Serbian sides is fairly limited. It can seem like two monotones talking past each other: commentary in the media follows those familiar conflict mentality fall-backs of ancient history lessons and attempts to reinforce "our" victimhood. Only rarely does any local commentator really come up with something new to say, despite -- or perhaps because of -- the fast-approaching final status decision. This weekend in Belgrade was one of those rare moments, when a very refreshing opinion piece appeared in a key Serbian newspaper.
Thursday, 8 March 2007
Worst Crisis Question of the Month
This was a short post on my Reuters AlertNet blog on 8 March 2007. Sadly, sharing the experience didn't help.
=======
As Media Director of the International Crisis Group, I obviously answer a lot of journalists' questions about various conflicts. Some might even say it's part of my job. Of course, nearly all the journalists who call me are deeply interested in the conflicts they are covering and have sharp questions. On rare occasions, however, I get something thrown at me that is so outrageously crass or ill-informed that it bothers me for weeks. Perhaps by sharing it, I can purge myself of the memory.
=======
As Media Director of the International Crisis Group, I obviously answer a lot of journalists' questions about various conflicts. Some might even say it's part of my job. Of course, nearly all the journalists who call me are deeply interested in the conflicts they are covering and have sharp questions. On rare occasions, however, I get something thrown at me that is so outrageously crass or ill-informed that it bothers me for weeks. Perhaps by sharing it, I can purge myself of the memory.
Tuesday, 6 March 2007
1000 Journalists Dead
This originally appeared on my Reuters AlertNet blog on 6 March 2007.
=======
A comprehensive study released today finds that 1,000 journalists and news media support staff have died as a result of their reporting over the past ten years. On average, that’s two a week. The new report, entitled Killing the Messenger, was produced by the International News Safety Institute (INSI) and draws on an impressive number of sources, including input from the International Federation of Journalists, the Committee to Protect Journalists, the International Press Institute, the World Association of Newspapers, and Reporters Without Borders.
Apart from the headline figure, other key conclusions were
-- Only one in four died in war and other armed conflicts. The great majority died in peacetime, covering the news in their own countries.
-- Most of those killed were murdered because of their jobs; eliminated by hostile authorities or criminals.
-- Nine out of ten of their killers have never been prosecuted.
Inquiry Chairman Richard Sambrook, Director of BBC Global News, says in the executive summary: "The figures show… it is virtually risk free to kill a journalist. In many countries, murder has become the easiest, cheapest and most effective way of silencing troublesome reporting, and the more the killers get away with it the more the spiral of death is forced upwards."
"This is the most shocking fact at the heart of the inquiry. Impunity for the killers of journalists, who put themselves in harm's way to keep us all informed, shames governments around the world."
And the situation seems to be getting worse. The inquiry found that the news media death toll has increased steadily since 2000. The last full year covered by the report, 2005, was a record with 147 dead. It has since emerged that 2006 was even worse, with 167 fatalities, according to INSI's annual tally.
INSI's researchers counted all news media personnel -- journalists as well as support workers such as drivers, translators and office personnel, whether staff or freelance -- provided they died because of their work gathering or distributing the news. All causes of death were included, from murder through accidents to health-related.
The report comes with a number of recommendations and will no doubt become the seminal reference point for discussions of journalist safety for years to come.
=======
A comprehensive study released today finds that 1,000 journalists and news media support staff have died as a result of their reporting over the past ten years. On average, that’s two a week. The new report, entitled Killing the Messenger, was produced by the International News Safety Institute (INSI) and draws on an impressive number of sources, including input from the International Federation of Journalists, the Committee to Protect Journalists, the International Press Institute, the World Association of Newspapers, and Reporters Without Borders.
Apart from the headline figure, other key conclusions were
-- Only one in four died in war and other armed conflicts. The great majority died in peacetime, covering the news in their own countries.
-- Most of those killed were murdered because of their jobs; eliminated by hostile authorities or criminals.
-- Nine out of ten of their killers have never been prosecuted.
Inquiry Chairman Richard Sambrook, Director of BBC Global News, says in the executive summary: "The figures show… it is virtually risk free to kill a journalist. In many countries, murder has become the easiest, cheapest and most effective way of silencing troublesome reporting, and the more the killers get away with it the more the spiral of death is forced upwards."
"This is the most shocking fact at the heart of the inquiry. Impunity for the killers of journalists, who put themselves in harm's way to keep us all informed, shames governments around the world."
And the situation seems to be getting worse. The inquiry found that the news media death toll has increased steadily since 2000. The last full year covered by the report, 2005, was a record with 147 dead. It has since emerged that 2006 was even worse, with 167 fatalities, according to INSI's annual tally.
INSI's researchers counted all news media personnel -- journalists as well as support workers such as drivers, translators and office personnel, whether staff or freelance -- provided they died because of their work gathering or distributing the news. All causes of death were included, from murder through accidents to health-related.
The report comes with a number of recommendations and will no doubt become the seminal reference point for discussions of journalist safety for years to come.
Wednesday, 31 January 2007
Teetering Turkmenistan?
From my Reuters AlertNet blog, 31 January 2007.
=======
IWPR just published a good overview report on Turkmenistan as the country faces a presidential election and an uncertain future without the megalomaniacal Saparmurad Niazov, aka Turkmenbashi, at the helm. The death of "the father of all Turkmen" in December not only came as a shock to the Central Asian nation, it also left a gap for those in the international media and NGO world who follow the region.
Though Niazov's reign was unquestionably brutal, the absurd elements of his rule -- the gold statues; the calendars with months renamed after himself and his mother; the obligatory questions about his ludicrous book, the Ruhnama, on the exam for a driver's license -- at least provided freaky factoids to draw the outside world into the story. Without the lunacy, it's going to be a lot harder to sell Turkmenistan to editors. More than one human rights activist and journalist has commented to me in recent weeks, "In a strange way, we're going to miss him."
=======
IWPR just published a good overview report on Turkmenistan as the country faces a presidential election and an uncertain future without the megalomaniacal Saparmurad Niazov, aka Turkmenbashi, at the helm. The death of "the father of all Turkmen" in December not only came as a shock to the Central Asian nation, it also left a gap for those in the international media and NGO world who follow the region.
Though Niazov's reign was unquestionably brutal, the absurd elements of his rule -- the gold statues; the calendars with months renamed after himself and his mother; the obligatory questions about his ludicrous book, the Ruhnama, on the exam for a driver's license -- at least provided freaky factoids to draw the outside world into the story. Without the lunacy, it's going to be a lot harder to sell Turkmenistan to editors. More than one human rights activist and journalist has commented to me in recent weeks, "In a strange way, we're going to miss him."
Thursday, 7 December 2006
BBC: Worth It for International News Alone
I posted this on my Reuters AlertNet blog on 7 December 2006.
=======
While these blog pages have looked at a couple very significant media launches over the past few weeks, it is worth remembering the real value of what is still one of the greatest media organisations on the planet: the BBC. I've written about the first week of broadcasting at Al Jazeera English, and my fellow blogger Nina Brenjo has looked at the start of France 24, but the UK's public service broadcaster is also in the headlines these days because a decision is imminent on the renewal of its licence fee for another seven years.
Negotiations with the government have been going on for a while, and what it comes down to essentially is this: the BBC would like to see an increase in its funding just above inflation, and the government would like the BBC to take on some additional new tasks, including the country's switchover from analogue to digital. Timothy Garton Ash has a great piece in today's Guardian outlining the issues, and I encourage everyone, not just UK citizens, to read it if you are at all interested in media.
I agree with his praise of the BBC entirely, especially as it relates to news coverage. The broadcaster does have its problems, and it does alter the media market in the UK in some challenging ways for competitors at times. But still, despite its problems, the BBC is a model for independent public service broadcasting around the world, and it is one of the things that really does make the British half of me feel very lucky indeed when I hear journalists from other parts of the world talk about the difficulties they have in their media markets.
It's the licence fee arrangement that really allows the BBC to cover international news, for example, in a way that would be difficult for commercial broadcasters to sustain.
=======
While these blog pages have looked at a couple very significant media launches over the past few weeks, it is worth remembering the real value of what is still one of the greatest media organisations on the planet: the BBC. I've written about the first week of broadcasting at Al Jazeera English, and my fellow blogger Nina Brenjo has looked at the start of France 24, but the UK's public service broadcaster is also in the headlines these days because a decision is imminent on the renewal of its licence fee for another seven years.
Negotiations with the government have been going on for a while, and what it comes down to essentially is this: the BBC would like to see an increase in its funding just above inflation, and the government would like the BBC to take on some additional new tasks, including the country's switchover from analogue to digital. Timothy Garton Ash has a great piece in today's Guardian outlining the issues, and I encourage everyone, not just UK citizens, to read it if you are at all interested in media.
I agree with his praise of the BBC entirely, especially as it relates to news coverage. The broadcaster does have its problems, and it does alter the media market in the UK in some challenging ways for competitors at times. But still, despite its problems, the BBC is a model for independent public service broadcasting around the world, and it is one of the things that really does make the British half of me feel very lucky indeed when I hear journalists from other parts of the world talk about the difficulties they have in their media markets.
It's the licence fee arrangement that really allows the BBC to cover international news, for example, in a way that would be difficult for commercial broadcasters to sustain.
Wednesday, 6 December 2006
Online Iran
From my Reuters AlertNet blog on 6 December 2006.
=======
The online media in Iran have been under pressure for some time, and yet, there are also signs that the government understands the value of new media. Reporters Without Borders yesterday released a statement, noting that both YouTube and the New York Times websites were both being blocked inside the country. Wikipedia's English and Kurdish versions have been blocked for a time, and the blacklist is growing in the shadow of a general ban on high-speed Internet access imposed two months ago.
"The government is trying to create a digital border to stop culture and news coming from abroad -- a vision of the Net which is worrying for the country's future", the organisation said. "But, more generally it is a threat to the worldwide web which, instead of aiding understanding between peoples could be changed into a medium of intolerance. The Iranian government policy is not an isolated case."
Still, at least one move suggests the government "gets it" when it comes to online media. President Ahmedinejad has his own blog in four languages.
=======
The online media in Iran have been under pressure for some time, and yet, there are also signs that the government understands the value of new media. Reporters Without Borders yesterday released a statement, noting that both YouTube and the New York Times websites were both being blocked inside the country. Wikipedia's English and Kurdish versions have been blocked for a time, and the blacklist is growing in the shadow of a general ban on high-speed Internet access imposed two months ago.
"The government is trying to create a digital border to stop culture and news coming from abroad -- a vision of the Net which is worrying for the country's future", the organisation said. "But, more generally it is a threat to the worldwide web which, instead of aiding understanding between peoples could be changed into a medium of intolerance. The Iranian government policy is not an isolated case."
Still, at least one move suggests the government "gets it" when it comes to online media. President Ahmedinejad has his own blog in four languages.
Thursday, 23 November 2006
Egeland and After
I posted this on my Reuters AlertNet blog on 23 November 2006.
=======
On 4 December, UN Emergency Relief Coordinator Jan Egeland will give what will almost certainly be his final briefing to the Security Council before his departure at the end of Kofi Annan's term in office. With this "valedictory address" around the corner, it's a good time to recall -- given the theme of this blog -- the dramatic transformation in media response to humanitarian crises since Egeland was appointed to the post in 2003, and his role in that shift.
=======
On 4 December, UN Emergency Relief Coordinator Jan Egeland will give what will almost certainly be his final briefing to the Security Council before his departure at the end of Kofi Annan's term in office. With this "valedictory address" around the corner, it's a good time to recall -- given the theme of this blog -- the dramatic transformation in media response to humanitarian crises since Egeland was appointed to the post in 2003, and his role in that shift.
Media on Darfur: Detached and Dehumanised?
This originally ran on my Reuters AlertNet blog on 23 November 2006.
=======
I met with a few well-placed Darfurians a couple days ago and asked them what they thought about the international media coverage of the ongoing conflict and crisis in their homeland. There was some downbeat head-shaking all around.
One said that there simply wasn't enough coverage of Darfur, but his colleague clarified this sentiment, saying while news coverage and ad campaigns had raised the overall profile of the crisis in the West, not enough attention was given to the conflict between the government and government-sponsored forces on one hand, and rebel groups on the other. There was very little information in the mass media about the latest developments in the fighting and even less understanding of what the fighting was about.
=======
I met with a few well-placed Darfurians a couple days ago and asked them what they thought about the international media coverage of the ongoing conflict and crisis in their homeland. There was some downbeat head-shaking all around.
One said that there simply wasn't enough coverage of Darfur, but his colleague clarified this sentiment, saying while news coverage and ad campaigns had raised the overall profile of the crisis in the West, not enough attention was given to the conflict between the government and government-sponsored forces on one hand, and rebel groups on the other. There was very little information in the mass media about the latest developments in the fighting and even less understanding of what the fighting was about.
Wednesday, 22 November 2006
Al Jazeera International: The First Week
From my Reuters AlertNet blog, 22 November 2006. The station later settled on "Al Jazeera English" as its name.
=======
One week into Al Jazeera International's broadcasting, and I have to say: so far, so good. Expectations for the new English-language channel were high before its 15 November launch, but the station seems to be fulfilling its promise of attempting to reset the news agenda, including pushing more stories on previously under-reported crises. Of course, many people cannot receive the station through their cable provider yet, so for those who haven't been able to watch, here's some of what you missed.
=======
One week into Al Jazeera International's broadcasting, and I have to say: so far, so good. Expectations for the new English-language channel were high before its 15 November launch, but the station seems to be fulfilling its promise of attempting to reset the news agenda, including pushing more stories on previously under-reported crises. Of course, many people cannot receive the station through their cable provider yet, so for those who haven't been able to watch, here's some of what you missed.
Uzbekistan: Beyond Sanctions
This originally appeared in Transitions Online on 22 November 2006.
=======
The EU can do little now to change Uzbekistan’s direction, but it could be doing more to prepare the Uzbek people for the coming blows.
It was not the worst-case scenario many had feared. European Union foreign ministers did not drop Europe’s sanctions against Uzbekistan at their meeting on 13 November. But their decision to temporarily renew the punitive measures was not exactly a complete victory for human rights and regional stability either.
=======
The EU can do little now to change Uzbekistan’s direction, but it could be doing more to prepare the Uzbek people for the coming blows.
It was not the worst-case scenario many had feared. European Union foreign ministers did not drop Europe’s sanctions against Uzbekistan at their meeting on 13 November. But their decision to temporarily renew the punitive measures was not exactly a complete victory for human rights and regional stability either.
Thursday, 16 November 2006
Afghanistan: Battered Women
This ran on my Reuters AlertNet blog on 16 November 2006.
=======
Tuesday's post by my fellow AlertNet blogger, F. Brinley Bruton, reminded me of one of the most disturbing NGO seminars I've attended. It was in Kabul in the summer of 2002, and the subject was domestic violence.
The panel was a mix: an Afghan judge, an Amnesty rep and a local mullah supposedly known for his more tolerant views. It started off with a description of the suffering many women face at home from husbands (and others) who abuse them. The discussion soon turned, however, when the mullah explained his interpretation of how much, not if, the Koran allowed such things.
=======
Tuesday's post by my fellow AlertNet blogger, F. Brinley Bruton, reminded me of one of the most disturbing NGO seminars I've attended. It was in Kabul in the summer of 2002, and the subject was domestic violence.
The panel was a mix: an Afghan judge, an Amnesty rep and a local mullah supposedly known for his more tolerant views. It started off with a description of the suffering many women face at home from husbands (and others) who abuse them. The discussion soon turned, however, when the mullah explained his interpretation of how much, not if, the Koran allowed such things.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)