War correspondents: Do we really need them?

By Asada M Erpini

A woman correspondent from a UK newspaper who was killed in Syria on 22 February is being heaped with accolades by every Tom, Dick and Harry in the rich nations. She is being portrayed as brave and determined to get to the truth. Incidentally, she was the same individual who was booted out of Sri Lanka by the authorities for biased reporting during Eelam War IV, and was at the forefront of the band of media persons who continued with their anti-Sri Lanka campaign by her parent newspaper.

Death is tragic and no one is happy when another human gets killed. The said correspondent’s employer is reported to have advised her to leave the city of Hom as it was not safe, but she had opted to stay behind and faced the consequences: most sane people would say that the step she took was sheer folly rather than courage, bravery or a desire for truth.

The fact that does not get highlighted enough, sadly, is that hundreds of thousands of soldiers are forced to go to war and get maimed or killed defending their country. Yet, there are only a few to praise their valiant actions. The armed forces of Sri Lanka are a classic case in point. The treatment that they have received at the hands of the human rights crusaders in the West since the conclusion of the war in May 2009 is an example of the injustice dished out to men and women in uniform in the poor countries. Instead of praising them for their efforts, which liberated the country from a near three-decade terrorist curse, the so-called international community, comprising a handful of the rich Western countries, is out to pillory the members of the armed forces and those who made the right decisions as regards the course of action needed to rid the country of the killers of tens of thousands of civilians in cold blood. The saddest state of affairs is that the USA, which thinks it is clean as a whistle when it comes to the issue of the violation of human rights, is leading a group that has come together to lambast Sri Lanka at the forthcoming sessions of the United Nations Human Rights Council commencing on 27 February in Geneva.

War correspondents, as well as international NGOs involved in doing charity, survive on the misery of others. Villagers in Sri Lanka may say that their escapades are akin to maggots living off the rotting flesh in wounds. If there are no wars, there will be no news to emanate from these so-called theatres of war – an odd term to describe locations full of death and destruction, with nothing resembling any acting – and the ‘brave’ correspondents will have to look for alternative employment. Until three years ago, Sri Lanka was a prime hunting ground for these adventurers as there were bombs exploding in every conceivable corner, and then when the armed forces took the LTTE head on, there was naturally killing and misery. Since May 2009, all that the foreign correspondents were left with to talk about was how Sri Lanka was not implementing the LLRC recommendation fast enough or that there was not enough of concrete attempts for  or examples of reconciliation.

The West survives on exporting mayhem and destruction. The countries labelling themselves as developed nations foment dissension among the peoples in places that somehow had managed to carry on in their own way, and provide backing and material support to their lackeys to attack the legally constituted establishments in nations that are not ready to tow the line demanded by the West. The weapons for the so-called freedom struggles, of course, are those produced in factories in the West, a move that provides employment to their men and women. The initiators of trouble, if they fail in their endeavours, are then encouraged to leave their home countries to settle in the West, who then constitute a dependable ally to continue their work from a distance, away from their homelands.

When the destruction is complete, it is time for the peace merchants and the infrastructure rebuilders to descend en masse in the trouble spots to tell the ‘natives’ how they should solve their problems. Of course, it comes at a price: approximately 80%, or at times even more, of the so-called aid is spent on enviable salaries, accommodation in luxury condominiums and comfortable transport (in SUVs. Land Cruisers or Land Rovers) for their expatriate staff.

Do we really want live images of soldiers, their enemies or the civilians caught in the conflicts getting blown up relayed to our TVs or computer screens? Dismembered bodies or blood-soaked clothes are not among the prettiest sights that one would like to witness at any time of the day. As far as areas of conflict are concerned, what the average person would wish to see is an outcome with some form of settlement rather than the ghoulish path that the deliverance process had to traverse.

It is time that those who opted to put their heads out to be chopped when there were people waiting with raised swords in their hands to grant their wish are projected as heroes. Genuine heroism is when one risks his life and limb to save those who attacked him or ventures out to liberate the near and dear of the ones who were shooting you. The war in Sri Lanka that ended in May 2009 has numerous vivid and recorded examples of such bravery. Let us, for a change, worship the true heroes.