Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

An Unwitting War Machine?

A shocking thing happens midway through Norman Solomon's documentary film War Made Easy. . While analyzing the George W. Bush...

A shocking thing happens midway through Norman Solomon’s documentary film War Made Easy.

While analyzing the George W. Bush administration’s lead-up to the Iraq invasion, Solomon plays a news clip of Eason Jordan, a CNN News chief executive who, in an interview with CNN, boasts of the network’s cadre of professional "military experts." In fact, CNN’s retired military-generals-turned-war-analysts were so good, Jordan said, that they had all been vetted and approved by the U.S. government.

"I went to the Pentagon myself several times before the war started and met with important people," he said. "We got a big thumbs up on all of [the generals]."

In a country revered for its freedom of speech and unfettered press, Jordan’s comments would infuriate any veteran reporter who upholds the most basic and important tenet of the journalistic profession—independence.

But the relationship between the press and government in the United States during times of war is changing. In Solomon’s film, it is just one example of the collusion between the government and the mainstream news media.

War Made Easy, which is narrated by actor and peace activist Sean Penn, begins as an anti-war film that decries the Bush administration’s interventionist rationale and misinformation campaigns during the post-9/11 era. Through a montage of video clips from news shows, presidential statements, and historical footage from previous U.S. military interventions, it compares the propaganda techniques of the past with the present, and draws striking parallels.

Richard Nixon’s "Vietnamization" rhetoric, which expanded the Vietnam War instead of ending it, sounds very similar to Bush’s declaration that "as the Iraqis stand up, we will stand down."

The first half-hour of this 73-minute documentary spends too much time explaining to the audience much of what it probably already knows. But it redeems itself by delving into the tactics used by the Bush administration in managing a war of choice, and how the mainstream media colluded with the U.S. government to boost the war effort.

"Rarely if ever does a war just fall down from the sky. The foundation needs to be laid, and the case is built, often with deception," says Solomon during an interview in the film.

War Made Easy was produced and directed by Loretta Alper and Jeremy Earp for the Media Education Foundation, a nonprofit group that distributes educational programming "to reflect critically on the media industry and the content it produces," according to its website. Its board of advisers includes prominent left-wing academics such as Noam Chomsky and Cornell West.

Nearly six years after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the U.S. news media’s tepid performance during the buildup to the war has been exposed and criticized by the very establishment that was supposed to hold political officials’ "feet to the fire," as the journalistic proverb goes.

In one interview clip from Jon Stewart’s news-comedy Daily Show, CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer shrugs and says, "We should have been more skeptical," drawing a puzzled look from Stewart.

War Made Easy does not dispute the idea that the press is self-correcting, is willing to investigate its own reporting lapses (as the New York Times did after the Judith Miller WMD scandal), and issue apologies and retractions. But it warns against the ostensible collusion between press and government. In Solomon’s view, the U.S. mainstream news media is cast as part and parcel of the Bush administration’s war apparatus, an echo chamber that packages, builds support for, and, through the vehicle of "leaked misinformation," sells the war to the U.S. public.

For example, in the lead-up to "Operation Iraqi Freedom," CNN chairman Walter Isaacson sent a memo to his anchors and reporters asking them to "remind viewers why they are watching the war." As video of the cleanup at Ground Zero in lower Manhattan rolls across the screen, one cannot help but think about 9/11.

Solomon also labors over the parallels between U.S. government propaganda and how the rhetoric is now filtered into a more sophisticated media campaign, yet for all intents and purposes, fulfills the same goal. In short, it is more insidious than ever.

In one scene, he describes how a Hollywood set designer was hired to build a news set (with polished backdrop and sleek high-definition televisions) for the public relations arm of the U.S. military during the Iraq War. Presentations by military commanders and officials resemble news broadcasts. There is no discussion of the facts, and what the government says is accepted without question.

None of these revelations are exactly new, but the historical parallels between Vietnam and the Iraq War are becoming increasingly clear as the United States remains for a fifth year in Iraq. War Made Easy offers a timely criticism of the media, and portends an ominous future for the U.S. news viewing public, should it sit back and accept without question the pronouncements of political leaders and evening news anchors.

Khody Akhavi writes for the Inter Press Service.

Citations

Khody Akhavi, "An Unwitting War Machine?" Right Web Analysis (Somerville, MA: International Relations Center, July 31, 2007).

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is one of the Senate’s more vocal hawks, and one of the prime vacillators among Republicans between objecting to and supporting Donald Trump.


Ron Dermer is the Israeli ambassador to the United States and has deep connections to the Republican Party and the neoconservative movement.


The Washington-based American Enterprise Institute is a rightist think tank with a broad mandate covering a range of foreign and domestic policy issues that is known for its strong connections to neoconservatism and overseas debacles like the Iraq War.


Max Boot, neoconservative military historian at the Council on Foreign Relations, on Trump and Russia: “At every turn Trump is undercutting the ‘get tough on Russia’ message because he just can’t help himself, he just loves Putin too much.”


Since taking office Donald Trump has revealed an erratic and extremely hawkish approach to U.S. foreign affairs, which has been marked by controversial actions like dropping out of the Iran nuclear agreement that have raised tensions across much of the world and threatened relations with key allies.


Mike Huckabee, a former governor of Arkansas and an evangelical pastor, is a far-right pundit known for his hawkish policies and opposition to an Israeli peace deal with the Palestinians.


Nikki Haley, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, is known for her lock-step support for Israel and considered by some to be a future presidential candidate.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

The Trumpian new regional order in the Middle East is predicated on strongman rule, disregard for human rights, Sunni primacy over Iran and other Shia centers of power, continued military support for pro-American warring parties regardless of the unlawfulness of such wars, and Israeli hegemony.


A comparison of U.S. nuclear diplomacy with Iran and the current version with North Korea puts the former in a good light and makes the latter look disappointing. Those with an interest in curbing the dangers of proliferating nuclear weapons should hope that the North Korea picture will improve with time. But whether it does or not, the process has put into perspective how badly mistaken was the Trump administration’s trashing of the Iran nuclear agreement.


Numerous high profile Trump administration officials maintain close ties with anti-Muslim conspiracy theorists. In today’s America, disparaging Islam is acceptable in ways that disparaging other religions is not. Given the continuing well-funded campaigns by the Islamophobes and continuing support from their enablers in the Trump administration, starting with the president himself, it seems unlikely that this trend will be reversed any time soon.


The Trump administration’s nuclear proliferation policy is now in meltdown, one which no threat of “steely resolve”—in Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s words—will easily contain. It is hemorrhaging in part because the administration has yet to forge a strategy that consistently and credibly signals a feasible bottom line that includes living with—rather than destroying—regimes it despises or fears. Political leaders on both sides of the aisle must call for a new model that has some reasonable hope of restraining America’s foes and bringing security to its Middle East allies.


Congressional midterm elections are just months away and another presidential election already looms. Who will be the political leader with the courage and presence of mind to declare: “Enough! Stop this madness!” Man or woman, straight or gay, black, brown, or white, that person will deserve the nation’s gratitude and the support of the electorate. Until that occurs, however, the American penchant for war will stretch on toward infinity.


To bolster the president’s arguments for cutting back immigration, the administration recently released a fear-mongering report about future terrorist threats. Among the potential threats: a Sudanese national who, in 2016, “pleaded guilty to attempting to provide material support to ISIS”; an Uzbek who “posted a threat on an Uzbek-language website to kill President Obama in an act of martyrdom on behalf of ISIS”; a Syrian who, in a plea agreement, “admitted that he knew a member of ISIS and that while in Syria he participated in a battle against the Syrian regime, including shooting at others, in coordination with Al Nusrah,” an al-Qaeda offshoot.


The recent appointment of purveyors of anti-Muslim rhetoric to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom exposes the cynical approach Republicans have taken in promoting religious freedom.


RightWeb
share