We Can't Win If We're Not Heard

By Robert Stewart

Sunday, October 14, 2001; Page B01

America is losing the battle of ideas within countries harboring terrorists, placing our national security at risk. The image of America is badly distorted in these countries and a new information offensive, employing what might be called "weapons of mass communication," is essential if there are to be any permanent victories in the effort to uproot terrorism and prevent further attacks here.

But we begin this new campaign at a huge and daunting disadvantage. Many people living in the targeted countries -- including the nine listed by the State Department as sponsors of terrorism -- have little or no access to news and information from the United States or any other democratic nation. Those who do have some access see and hear news almost exclusively through the filter of government censorship.

The lopsided battle for the airwaves has forged a deformed and dangerous view of America. In the days after the U.S. military began its raids in Afghanistan, Al Qaeda spokesman Sulaiman abu Ghaith appeared in a menacing video on al-Jazeera, an Arab television network, in which he said, "Those youths who did what they did and destroyed America with their airplanes, they've done a good deed." Yet no statement of comparable length from President Bush or senior American officials was aired on al-Jazeera in response.

Hatred of America abroad, like the racism and bigotry we continue to fight in our own country, is bred of ignorance. Most Muslims have no idea, for example, that the U.S. government is sending food to Muslims around the world while Saddam Hussein spends his nation's wealth building monuments to himself, abandoning his people to hunger. Nor are they aware that the United States, already the world's largest supplier of food aid to Afghanistan, will send an additional $320 million in humanitarian assistance, primarily food and medicine. President Bush, in announcing the new aid during a recent visit to the State Department, said, "This is our way of saying that while we firmly and strongly oppose the Taliban regime, we are friends of the Afghan people." Sadly, those powerful words will not be heard by most Muslims in Kabul and Kandahar.

Kosovo, Somalia and Kuwait all have seen American military might wielded to defend Muslims, while the Taliban and other sponsors of terrorism failed to lift a finger to help those they claim as their religious "brethren." But that won't make the editorial pages of Afghan, Iraqi or Iranian newspapers, nor will it be heard on their airwaves.

What will likely be heard, undoubtedly, are remarks such as those issued by the group Doctors Without Borders as the United States and Britain began the military campaign in Afghanistan. The group denigrated the U.S. airlift of humanitarian rations for the refugees fleeing the Taliban. "What sense," it asked, "is there in shooting with one hand and giving medicine with the other?" Others have criticized the U.S. humanitarian efforts, specifically the American flag and written message printed on the rations sent to refugees. But this "propaganda" serves a purpose. It shows the people of Afghanistan that while we are shooting at their oppressors, we also provide food, medicine and protection to the oppressed.

To the haters, America is a leviathan bent on the destruction of their homelands, their religion and their families. This image is nurtured by the leaders of terrorist groups and terrorist nations, without rebuttal by a free press. The efforts of the U.S. government to change that image have become a matter of national security -- so much so that Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.), chairman of the House Committee on International Relations, held a full hearing on the "role of public diplomacy in winning the anti-terrorism war." At the session, Marc Nathanson, chairman of the Broadcasting Board of Governors, testified that America has no better way of connecting with the area than through U.S. international broadcasting, which is "the most cost-effective weapon in the foreign policy arsenal."

U.S. officials are beginning to understand the importance of the war of words. Bush acknowledged as much on Thursday when he said, "We've got to do a better job of explaining to the people in the Middle East that we don't fight a war against Islam." Officials have put diplomatic pressure on Qatar -- home to al-Jazeera, which is widely available in the Middle East and Central Asia -- to level the playing field. Al-Jazeera has broadcast many statements by Osama bin Laden's supporters, and was the outlet bin Laden chose to air his videotaped statement immediately after U.S. bombing of Taliban targets began last Sunday. Secretary of State Colin Powell recently sat for an interview, and President Bush may be next to appear on al-Jazeera's influential airwaves; White House spokesman Ari Fleischer has said if Bush were asked to speak on al-Jazeera, he would "consider that."

This kind of direct access is exactly what the United States needs. Though al-Jazeera's content is not quite friendly to America -- or any Western country for that matter -- the station does circumvent the government censorship that controls much of the media in the region.

The importance of this effort is underscored by the fact that citizens of countries with unfettered access to information do not routinely call for our demise or carry out acts of terror against us. None of the nations on the State Department's list of state sponsors of terrorism, for example, has an Internet usage rate of more than 10 percent of its population, and the Internet is banned by the Taliban. Conversely, all American allies have Internet usage of more than 20 percent.

While creating new flows of information is essential, there are news sources already in place that should be fully exploited. Voice of America's weekly broadcast in the Pashto language of Afghanistan is heard by 80 percent of Afghan men, according to Nathanson's testimony before Hyde's committee. To widen that audience, American troops are dropping radios along with the food and medicine they are airlifting to Afghan refugees. Six EC-130 aircraft are in the area as well, armed with TV and radio transmitters. These planes will need to see near-constant service until a better and more permanent system of transmission can be established.

These efforts must be just the beginning of an ongoing campaign to create a balanced flow of information to those who don't know us. Without resorting to using the military to jam Afghan media outlets electronically, there is much that can be done: Bolster the content on VOA and other international broadcasts, appeal to moderate Arab leaders to make public statements on our behalf and condemn terrorism, and keep pushing for more balance on al-Jazeera and other outlets in Muslim countries.

With access to uncensored news sources, those in countries that are not free would know that Americans are not going to fly planes into their buildings, set off car bombs near their playgrounds or send suicide bombers to their dance halls. The U.S. government must be vigilant in explaining the military actions underway, and why they are necessary. It must make clear that while America is bent on prosecuting the war on terrorism, it is the terrorists themselves -- not their families or civilians -- who are the target.

Much as integration of neighborhoods and places of work and worship has helped people of different races and religions here to know each other better, so will a sustained media campaign lead to a better understanding of -- though not necessarily affection for -- America, Americans and political freedom. Bush summed it up well in his speech to State Department employees: "We will fight evil, but in order to overcome evil, the great goodness of America must come forth and shine forth."

That's a good start. But it won't be good enough if we're only talking to ourselves.

Robert Stewart is a former Army intelligence analyst who was stationed in Southwest Asia during the Persian Gulf War. He now writes about security issues.

-- Anonymous, October 13, 2001