Friday, July 22, 2005

Despots don't like questions

I am regularly slagging off journalists and newspapers but every once in awhile someone rises above the herd and asks the hard questions in the hard way. Are there repercussions? Absolutely, but congratulations to Andrea Mitchell for taking a petty despot to task for his policy of genocide.
Mitchell, NBC News' diplomatic correspondent, was part of a press contingent following Rice on her visit to the war-torn African country. Sudanese officials already didn't want her there. Mitchell said she was shoved as she entered a room where Rice and el-Bashir were posing for pictures. Reporters were only allowed in at the State Department's insistence, and were told not to ask questions.

Mitchell, in a telephone interview after leaving a Sudanese refugee camp and arriving in Israel, said that attitude emboldened her. "It makes me even more determined when dictators and alleged war criminals are not held to account," she said. "If our government is going to establish a relationship and push for a new beginning as Sudan reforms itself, they have to live up to international standards. A free press is part of that process."

Although el-Bashir has denied government involvement, the U.S. and international organizations say his government has equipped militiamen to massacre villagers in the rural Darfur province. "Can you tell us why the violence is continuing?" Mitchell asked, as a Sudanese official said "no, no, no, please." "Can you tell us why the government is supporting the militias?" she asked. After getting no reply from el-Bashir, she asked, "Why should Americans believe your promises?"

It was then that she was forcibly removed. "It is our job to ask," she said later. "They can always say `no comment' ... but to drag a reporter out just for asking is inexcusable behavior." Afterward, Mitchell said she was "angry, embarrassed, humiliated" and upset that she had become part of an attention-getting incident. "Reporters don't want to become part of the story," she said. Rice demanded an apology from the Sudanese government for the incident and, an hour later, the government's foreign minister called her on her airplane. Mitchell, the wife of Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, said no one from Sudan has gotten in touch with her. "I would rather see them live up to their promises," she said. "What they did to me is not important. They can't control my life."

I am with Mitchell. If I had to choose between empty words of an apology totally devoid of meaning or that a despot lives up to his promises for responsible governance. Responsible governance wins every single time.

(Tipped off by Neale News)

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

This is not a facetious question:

Can you point to ANY responsible government or governance?

K. Shoshana said...

It is my understanding that King Solomon's rule was pretty responsible....but responsible governance is an ideal and like most ideals it is something worth striving for even if it is not obtained immediately in the here and now.

Certainly, I don't look to Canada as a model of responsible governance, but, there is a huge world of difference in governance by Al-Bashir and Paul Martin's liberals. Neither is necessarily desirable but I would take Martin's poor governance over Al-Bashir's final solutions and subterfuge any day.