Fear of Al Jazeera (Al Jazeera Phobia)

by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem

Ever since Al Jazeera satellite channel began broadcasting, it has faced repeated campaigns from Arab regimes, and sometimes from certain individuals here and there. Its offices have been shut down by a number of regimes — Jordanian, Egyptian, Saudi, Palestinian, and Moroccan among them — its staff face continual harassment and threats, its offices face attacks, and the latest chapter was the Palestinian Authority’s suspension of its media activity. Nor has Al Jazeera been spared the sins of foreign states such as the United States and Britain. If we were to conduct a comparative study, we would find that Al Jazeera is the Arab media outlet most subjected to repression, pursuit, defamation, and slander by the regimes and their allies, and it thereby enters a history distinct from that of other media outlets — a history future generations will remember.

It appears the Arab regimes’ discomfort with Al Jazeera stems from its broad presence among Arab peoples, particularly among intellectuals, and from its being relied upon by a wide public as a primary and essential source for following events and their developments. Several surveys conducted across various Arab countries show that Al Jazeera commands the attention of about 60% of Arabs watching educational and debate programs and news bulletins, while the strongest official satellite channels command only about 5% of their local audience. Arab channels trying to compete with or rival Al Jazeera command about 10% of viewers, despite the vast sums of money allocated to them.

The Trust Factor

Al Jazeera’s wide reach across the Arab arena, and among Arabs outside Arab countries, points to the public’s trust in it, in its style, and in the information it provides, whether educational or news-related. The Arab person has grown extremely wary of media, having learned over time that he is constantly subjected to distortion, lies, and deception, and has learned that all the “victories” Arab leaders achieved through the media were, in truth, nothing but crushing defeats across various military, social, economic, and intellectual fields. The Arab has moved beyond the era of illusions manufactured by Arab media, deafening his ears and turning away from listening to Arab news bulletins, whether broadcast or printed, to the point that Arab newspapers hold little value anymore, save for the obituary page, the crossword, and the horoscope. There was once a time when the Arab turned to the BBC’s Arabic service to find out what was happening in the Arab homeland, and also turned to Radio Monte Carlo and Israel Radio.

The rush toward Al Jazeera indicates that the barrier once standing between the Arab and Arab media has been broken, and that the Arab has begun to witness a different kind of media, one that tells him the truth, or at least part of it. There is no opening segment on Al Jazeera’s bulletin about the activities of the Arab king or president, nor about his wife’s activities, her pregnancy, or her birthday, no honor guard parading before the leader, no commanders mounting a tank to cover their flight from the battlefield, no drums and chants extolling the leader’s greatness. The Arab rush toward it indicates that Al Jazeera won people’s trust not because it belongs to this person or that, but because it gave the Arab the opportunity to see for himself, and the opportunity to become acquainted with different points of view. It is precisely this trust that provokes the Arab regimes, always pushing them into positions and measures that produce the opposite effect, raising Al Jazeera’s popularity and increasing people’s desire to search for reasons why.

The picture looks bleak for the Arab regimes when they see that the public watches the official channels only to catch a drama series, a film, or a soccer match, turning to other channels, Al Jazeera foremost among them, whenever it searches for the truth. This trust in Al Jazeera comes at the expense of what the official channels broadcast, and constitutes a great embarrassment for official media figures who parade before power, sending them into hiding from those who question or mock them. This means: the more trust grows in a non-official channel, the more Arab leaders’ anxiety grows, and the more their ability to box the Arab mind into a particular corner recedes, and the mental confinement they practice on people comes undone.

The Siege of Al Jazeera

Qatar has faced enormous pressure from Arab states such as Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia to shut down Al Jazeera, or at least place it under tight oversight and bind it to editorial lines that reduce its ability to convey differing opinions and events — but Qatar has held firm. Some cast doubt on the Qatari regime’s stance, saying it is a regime aiming at some evil they cannot quite pinpoint, given that it is a regime friendly to the United States and maintains relations with Israel. But criticism of Qatar’s policy does not appear to have produced results that negatively affected Al Jazeera, perhaps for reasons related to how the Arab views the Arab regimes, and to his thirst for hearing narratives other than the official narrative, and analysis other than the official analysis.

Qatar’s lack of responsiveness to the Arab regimes pushed them to take various measures against the channel, its staff, and its offices. But this did not besiege the channel so much as it raised people’s affection for it, and perhaps the Arab regimes ought to learn that whoever earns their anger, repression, and abuse gains rising popularity and praise from ordinary people. It is clear that the Arab intelligence services do not convey an accurate picture to their leaders, and it is likely they write reports that misrepresent the truth, giving leaders the illusion that repression produces positive results. Or it is possible — the more likely possibility — that the leader and his security apparatus find nothing before them but to drown themselves in illusions of achievement.

The measures against Al Jazeera are not balanced, and do not express sound, mature judgment — they are the measures of the fearful, the terrified, who sees a curse chasing him and tries to hide. Al Jazeera strikes panic into the Arab regimes, and they nearly agree, unanimously, on their war against the channel, hoping to be rid of it. This is logical, because the truth, or part of it, is frightening to the Arab ruling regimes, and broadcasting it publicly constitutes a great stride toward awakening Arab awareness, and mobilizing various forces to work toward changing Arab conditions. Revolting against conditions, or working toward change, requires awareness, and awareness is the enemy of authorities that oppress people, repress them, and squander their wealth, and that are ashamed of what they do and say.

The siege of Al Jazeera is not confined to the Arab regimes — it has extended to the United States and Britain. America bombed Al Jazeera’s offices in Afghanistan and Iraq, and Britain expressed its displeasure with the channel. Even Israel decided, at one point, to ban its officials from meeting with Al Jazeera.

There is terror of Al Jazeera, or, as Western terminology has it, there is “Al Jazeera phobia.” Many tremble at the thought of Al Jazeera, following its opinion programs and news bulletins with an attention mixed with resentment and fear, finding no escape before them but to take revenge on the channel itself, or on the individuals it interviews. Only cowards fear media — those who always work to hide what they do, and who see in the truth a curse upon their own heads.

The National Dimension

I do not see Al Jazeera as having an ideological bent, nor do I see it as biased toward this school of thought against that one. Its screen features the Islamist, the nationalist, the Marxist, the regime man and the rebel against the regime, men, women, children, and the elderly, the Arab and the non-Arab, the resister and the one who submits. It clearly tries to be as balanced as possible, giving no opinion more space than another. But through my own following of it, I see that Al Jazeera is biased toward Arab causes. It is biased toward Iraq, Palestine, and the unity of Sudan, toward Arab development in various fields, toward Arab wealth and its preservation, toward scientific research among Arabs, toward Arab freedom, and so on.

Al Jazeera contributes, intentionally or not, to developing Arab unionist thought through its many programs, and through its ability to draw in viewers. It is enough that millions from the Ocean to the Gulf watch the very same programs for a kind of collective Arab thinking to develop, in this direction or that. There may be other media channels playing this role, but the difference is clear in the sheer momentum and number of viewers. In this way, Al Jazeera has offered great service to future developments related to Arab unity, developments that will come about under the pressure of need, necessity, and logic.

The Palestinian Authority Suspends Al Jazeera’s Work

I listened closely to Al Jazeera’s coverage of Qaddoumi’s statements about what he called the conspiracy against Arafat’s life, and found in it no opinion of Al Jazeera’s own, no incitement, no bias. Al Jazeera covered the news as other media outlets covered it, bringing in analysts and commentators, particularly from Fatah, to offer whatever information or criticism they had. I did not notice Al Jazeera stepping outside professional bounds, because what Qaddoumi brought forward constituted major news, indeed a bombshell on the Palestinian scene, and it would be unreasonable for any media outlet to bypass or overlook it.

The Palestinian Authority said it had ordered the suspension of Al Jazeera’s work because of an incitement campaign it was carrying out, one that harmed the Palestinian national interest. The Authority did not say how Al Jazeera incited, did not point to a single inciting phrase, not even a wink from an anchor that might be understood as a breach of professional standards. Nor did the Authority offer a definition of “national interest,” nor present evidence of a single harm caused by Al Jazeera’s coverage of the matter, nor offer any explanation consistent with the democracy it claims to embrace.

Al Jazeera has repeatedly covered matters of concern to the Palestinian Authority, and its coverage has been comprehensive, broad, and continuous. For instance, Al Jazeera covered the siege of Arafat more extensively than any other Arab satellite channel, and likewise Mr. Abbas’s presidential inauguration, and the festivals the Authority holds, particularly those related to the Palestinian cause. Of course, it also covers many activities of Hamas and other factions, but this remains within a kind of balance, according to standards related to how relevant the coverage is to the requirements of the Palestinian cause.

But if Al Jazeera is biased, malicious, and harmful to what is called the Palestinian national interest, why do Authority officials race to appear on its screen? Why do some pillars of the Authority call Mr. Walid al-Omari, or the main headquarters in Qatar, requesting coverage of some particular activity or occasion? And why do Authority leaders answer Al Jazeera’s invitations to appear on its programs, such as “More Than One Opinion” or “Behind the News”? Holding to principle is the shortest path to peace of mind and to orderly relations with others.

I follow the activities of the Palestinian Authority and Al Jazeera’s programs related to the Palestinian cause, and I see that it is the Palestinian Authority that is doing harm to the Palestinian national interest, by my own definition, and to the Palestinian cause. There is one criticism I agree with regarding Al Jazeera — that it hosts Israelis — but does this equal security coordination with Israelis, or the pursuit of Palestinian weapons meant for resistance? Al Jazeera offers educational programs that raise the level of Palestinian and Arab awareness of the Palestinian cause, while the Authority agrees to changes in school curricula according to European demands that are, in truth, Israeli demands.

It is quite possible that the Palestinian Authority is using the suspension of Al Jazeera’s work as part of its own escape from confronting the information Qaddoumi disclosed. Many accusations have circulated against Qaddoumi and a number of media outlets, but the issue Qaddoumi raised has never actually been discussed. This is a grave and major matter, and it ought to be investigated, with an impartial commission of inquiry formed regarding it, rather than being preoccupied with accusing others. The courageous person is the one who confronts crises, not the one who flees them using outdated national slogans and rhetorical flourishes.

Al Jazeera Comes Out Ahead

Let no one think I believe all of Al Jazeera’s programs are successful, or that all of them deserve praise. Al Jazeera has its own stumbles, and does not always commit to telling the truth. I do not think it lies, but had it wanted to tell the truth, the whole truth, particularly about the Arab regimes and the activities of Arab leaders, many events on the Arab scene would have unfolded differently, and planes and missiles would not have been so patient in bombing its main offices. Telling part of the truth remains better than total absence, and certainly better than distortion.

Al Jazeera phobia serves Al Jazeera rather than working against it, despite the suffering its correspondents may endure. Every time it is shut down or barred from operating, more Arabs ask themselves why. And if the Arab cannot find out the reason, he tells himself: were it not in the right, the security services and governments would not be pursuing it.

Source: Translated from the original Arabic, “الخوف من الجزيرة (الجزيرة فوبيا)” by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem.