-Caveat Lector-

Activist Mailing List - http://get.to/activist

ATROCITIES MANAGEMENT

Edward S. Herman

It is extremely easy to demonize by atrocities management. I became
steeped in this subject during the Vietnam War era, and even published
a small volume in 1970 entitled Atrocities in Vietnam: Myths and
Realities. The marvel of that era was how easily and effectively the
U.S. establishment and media focused on the cruel acts and killings of
the indigeous National Liberation Front (NLF, "Vietcong") and made
them into sinister killers ("terrorists"), when in fact the terror of
the U.S. and its local and foreign proxies was worse by a very large
factor. The violence of the Diem government in the late 1950s was
extremely brutal, indiscriminate, and massive; and when the US entered
the fray directly in the 1960s a new level of (wholesale terror) was
reached with chemical warfare, napalm, fragmentation bombs, "free fire
zones," and high level B-52 bombing raids on "suspected Vietcong
bases" (i.e., villages). The NLF was always more selective in its
killing, for strategic and political reasons--it had a mass base in
the countryside that it did not want to harm or alienate. The Diem
government, its successors, and the US, were less discriminating for
the same reason--they had little or no peasant support, so that
indiscriminate terror and mass killing was the understandable strategy
of aggression.

But the U.S. media featured the relatively small and selective
terrorist acts of the enemy, dramatized and personalized them with
details, and gave correspondingly slight and more antiseptic attention
to the horrendous behavior of our clients and ourselves, also
presented as defensive and retaliatory. I recall being one- upped on a
radio debate on the war when my opponent pulled out an article in Time
magazine showing a picture of two Vietnamese, hands-tied, allegedly
executed by the NLF. This may or may not have been an instance of NLF
terror, but two things were clear: the political selectivity of Time
here and in general completely distorted the overall truth regarding
terror in Vietnam, and the selectivity and dramatization made for very
effective propaganda. While the U.S. was destroying Vietnam in order
to "save" it, the U.S. media found only the Vietnamese enemy evil; the
U.S. failed there, but with the noblest intentions.

Another important result of the effective demonization of the NLF as
terroristic was to paralyse many liberals and leftists, unwilling to
be tagged as not only unpatriotic but siding with terrorists. Many
lapsed into silence; others condemned both sides, calling weakly for
restraint and compromise; and only "extremists" were willing to call
the U.S. aggression and long struggle against Vietnamese
self-determination by its right name. This paralysis and
marginalization of a principled position weakened the oppositional
movement to the war.

The U.S. also destroyed Cambodia in a "sideshow" to the Vietnam war
(1969-75), and following the devastating four year rule of the Khmer
Rouge, the US supported the ousted Pol Pot forces as the "enemy of my
enemy" (Vietnam). The U.S. media focused intensively and indignantly
on the Khmer Rouge genocide, but from 1969 to today have largely
blacked out the atrocities of the "sideshow" years, the misdeeds of
the Khmer Rouge during the period of U.S. support, and the fact of
that support. Here again, the power of media propaganda has been such
that calling attention to the U.S. role as the first phase genocidists
and its badly compromised position as Pol Pot supporter after 1978 is
virtually unheard of, and departures from an exclusive focus on KR
crimes makes one an apologist for the KR. This process extends to the
"left," with repeated illustrations in the Progressive and In These
Times, and in an Institute for Policy Studies (IPS)-Interhemispheric
Resource Center publication, Foreign Policy in Focus. In the latter
case, a 1997 essay on Cambodia by Philip Robertson focused entirely on
KR crimes, portrayed the US as a neutral party in that country and
suitable adjudicator of policy, and supplied a list of policy
recommendations for it to implement there, including U.S. support for
war crimes trials for KR leaders.

Another sideshow of the Vietnam war was the mass killings in Indonesia
in 1965-66, which destroyed the base of the Communist Party and
brought Indonesia into the U.S. sphere of influence. This sideshow was
greeted enthusiastically by the U.S. establishment. Given this
approval, and 33 years of U.S. support for the Suharto dictatorship,
atrocities management has required that the large- scale murders and
rule by violence, and the mass killings in East Timor from 1975-1999,
be kept under the rug. The U.S. media have done a great job here.
There are no UN forensic groups over there looking at bodies, and
there are no demands for ending Suharto's impunity.

Similarly, with the US "constructively engaged" with South Africa,
Israel, and Turkey over the past several decades, the South African
occupation of Namibia, assaults on the front line states, and support
of Renamo and Savimbi, Israel's invasions and "iron fist" attacks on
Lebanon, and Turkey's scorched earth policies and killings of Kurds,
could proceed for many years killing hundreds of thousands unimpeded
by any intense focus on atrocities or serious attention from the
"international community." Turkey could even offer to lend armed
support to the NATO effort in Kosovo, presumably diverting troops from
killing Kurds, without eliciting the slightest sense of irony in the
West.

Only when the Godfather needs atrocities--as with the NLF, PLO, or
Serbs--do atrocities come on line, with intense focus and indignation.
This is done with such assurance and self-righteous virtue that
liberals and leftists jump on the bandwagon and welcome the
Godfather's gracious willingness in this particular case to finally
properly lead and bring justice to the targeted villain and area. The
willingness of leftists to accept the U.S. (and NATO) as proper
authorities to decide, judge and drop bombs is nothing short of
astonishing. Some of them might the previous week have condemned the
murderous U.S. sanctions that are killing more Iraqi children each
month than the aggregate casualties in Kosovo, U.S. support of the
Turkish war against the Kurds, the U.S. bombing of the Sudan, etc.,
but still their political vision is so limited, their response to
atrocities so elemental, that they collapse intellectually and
morally. One leftist is reported to have said that the Serbs are
pulling people out of houses and killing them, implying that this
justified the NATO bombing of Serbia. On this kind of reasoning,
Israel would have been bombed after Sabra- Shatila and on many other
occasions; and of course the governments of El Salvador and Guatemala
would have been bombed incessantly in the 1980s, instead of being
supplied and protected by the US.

With Milosevec and the Serbs effectively demonized, the left even puts
forward spokespersons who openly favor the NATO bombing. Both IPS and
Mother Jones offer as an expert and spokesperson Albert Cevallos of
the International Crisis Group, who urges "the need of bombing to
bring Serbia back into the peace process," to be followed by an
international peacekeeping army in Kosovo. Mother Jones also provides
Doug Hostetter of the Fellowship of Reconciliation, who proposes that
as Milosevic is carrying out "genocidal acts" the U.S. should seek to
bring him before the war crimes tribunal. Reminiscent of the Vietnam
War paralysis, the IPS and Mother Jones leftists oppose the bombing
(Cevallos excepted) mainly because it won't work in achieving
purportedly humane goals, whose substantive primacy is taken for
granted. Not one of these experts condemns the U.S. and NATO for
tearing Yugoslavia apart, for violating international law in the
bombing, and for their political selectivity and gross double standard
in choice of innocents to be protected from crimes against humanity.

Atrocities management works, but it also requires a complementary
gross misunderstanding of the issues at stake and context of the
actions taken. The Serbs have committed terrible acts in Kosovo and
deserve condemnation; and international efforts to end that crisis are
eminently desirable. But past NATO policies have contributed to the
ongoing violence and are part of the problem--their bombing strategy
is the culmination of policies that have exacerbated the crisis. The
bombing is not merely immoral and illegal, it is part of an ugly and
destructive policy sequence rooted in self-serving geo-political
strategies. _



          JOIN THE ACTIVIST MAILING LIST
_____________________________________________________
                               *  The Activist  *
                            http://get.to/activist

 This is not about the world that we inherited from our forefathers,
     It is about the world we have borrowed from our children !!
_____________________________________________________


______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Start Your Own FREE Email List at http://www.listbot.com/


=================================
Robert F. Tatman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Remove "nospam" from the address to reply.

NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For

more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

POSTING THIS MESSAGE TO THE INTERNET DOES NOT IMPLY PERMISSION TO SEND
UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL E-MAIL (SPAM) TO THIS OR ANY OTHER INTERNET ADDRESS.
RECEIPT OF SPAM WILL RESULT IN IMMEDIATE NOTIFICATION OF THE SENDER'S ISP.

____________________________________________________________________
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at 
http://webmail.netscape.com.

DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically  by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to