Not All Invasions Are Equal - Brief Article

Progressive, The, May, 2000 by Matthew Rothschild

At least nine times in the last eight years, Turkish forces have invaded northern Iraq to attack Kurdish rebels. These attacks--carried out with F-16s and helicopters made in the U.S.A.--are in clear violation of international law. But the U.S. government supports them, and the U.S. press barely takes notice.

The most recent invasion began in early April, with "more than 5,000 Turkish troops backed by air jets and helicopters" crossing into Iraq, according to a 274-word dispatch from UPI. AP weighed in with 325 words, which The New York Times helpfully trimmed back to fifty-nine.

The only detailed story I saw on the invasion was in The Guardian of London on April 3. Reporter Chris Morris wrote, "Almost anywhere else in the world, thousands of heavily armed soldiers crossing an international border would be big news," Morris wrote. "But this latest Turkish incursion into Iraq will be greeted with barely a murmur in the West."

Morris was right. The Clinton Administration endorsed Turkey's actions, and the U.S. media was all but mum. Morris underscored one irony: Turkey is bombing Kurds in Iraq "with U.S. and British planes providing protection." That's because northern Iraq is still a no-fly zone, which the United States insisted upon, ostensibly to protect Kurds from being attacked--by Baghdad but not by Ankara.

Since Turkey is a key U.S. ally in the region, Washington has no interest in seeing this story covered. Bill Clinton doesn't go on TV denouncing the Turks; Madeleine Albright doesn't wag her finger; and the U.S. press is AWOL, even though the hypocrisy of U.S. policy is patent.

"U.S. respect for territorial sovereignty is quite selective," says Chris Toensing, editor of Middle East Report in Washington, D.C. "When it's a close ally of ours that's breaking the law and crossing borders, we don't act, and we don't say anything."

Rare Praise:

* Michael Isikoff and Gregory Vistica, writing in the April 3 edition of Newsweek, note that U.S. policy toward Colombia shifted after a White House pollster brought data to Clinton showing that the public was blaming Democrats for drug use in America. "As it turned out, the poll was hardly the idea of a disinterested party: Newsweek has learned that it was commissioned by Lockheed Martin.... As the maker of P-3 radar planes used to track drug smugglers, the company had been pushing for heavy increases for drug interdiction."

* Steven Pearlstein's February 28 page-one story in The Washington Post revealed one of the most shocking bits of news I've read in a while: Police in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, allegedly have picked up "drunk or drug-addled Indians" and dumped them in the countryside in the middle of winter, where they have frozen to death.

Quick Hits:

* John F. Burns, writing a front-page story in The New York Times on March 30 entitled "Israeli Exit Plan Worries Lebanese Militia." Note the adoring description of Israel's illegal invasion of Lebanon: "When Israel invaded Lebanon in 1978 to halt Palestinian attacks across the border, many Lebanese flocked to throw flowers on Israeli tanks, while others, now militia veterans, say they took up arms alongside the invaders as the only force that seemed capable of bringing order."

* Weekly face-off, March 27 covers: Newsweek: "Visions of Jesus." Time: "Do-It-Yourself.Com." U.S. News & World Report: "porndotcom."

* Hyperbole Award: The subhead of an AP story by Calvin Woodward on the Presidential race, which appeared in the March 10 Wisconsin State Journal: "Analysts Say Voters May Face Profound Ideological Differences Between the Two Presidential Candidates." And who were these analysts? One was from the Heritage Foundation, the other from the Democratic Leadership Council.

Matthew Rothschild is Editor of The Progressive magazine.