Oh the irony.
The PM programme on BBC Radio 4 the other afternoon included a typically emotive report by Feargal Keane on the Sudanese government's violent eviction of the El-Geer refugee camp in Darfur. He spoke to refugees who had been tear gassed and we heard from a mother who had lost her baby son in the chaos and was understandably in terrible distress (we later heard that he had been found). Mr Keane stated that the actions of the Sudanese government in forceably displacing civilians were in clear breach of international law. He left us in little doubt as to the suffering of the civilians who were subject to these illegal policies.
Following the report, Eddie Mair interviewed the Sudanese ambassador to the UK. The ambassador attempted to justify his government's conduct but his claim that the refugees had been moved on legitimately was hardly plausible. Mair discredited his arguments and accused the Sudanese of breaking international law. No one would deny that this accusation had considerable force.
On the same day as the Sudanese government was clearing the El-Geer camp using plastic bullets and tear gas, the US military was engaged in a bloody attack on the city of Fallujah.
Fallujah has been under siege for months, subject to constant bombardment. The US has forced the majority of the population to leave their homes and those who remain have been exposed to a military assault of almost unimaginable ferocity.
Over this period, I cannot recall one single media or BBC report which conveyed the suffering of civilians in Fallujah with the same force as Keane's report did those in El-Geer. I appreciate the difficulties for journalists reporting from Fallujah, but there have been reports from independent journalists in the city nonetheless which show that it is not impossible to do so.
Much of the civilian population has left in the past few months. Why have we not heard from them about their experiences of life in the city under US seige?
At the same time, we have heard repeatedly that Fallujah is under the control of foreign fighters and that its people are being held hostage. Over the past week, many reporters and journalists have stated on numerous occasions that the decision to attack Fallujah would be taken by Ayad Allawi, Iraq's "sovereign" leader, rather than the US authorities and we have heard Allawi, as well as US and UK politicians state that the aim of the assault was to liberate the people of Fallujah from foreign fighters and Jihadists. BBC journalists for example, have referred to Fallujah again and again as a "militant stronghold," echoing official justifications for the assault.
These excuses and justifications are scarcely more credible than those employed by the Sudanese ambassador for his government's crimes, but I have yet to hear them challenged by a BBC reporter or any other media interviewer in the same way that Eddie Mair challenged him the other afternoon. Further still, I have not once heard a BBC reporter or reporter for any other mainstream media outlet accuse the US of breaking international law, despite the numerous, clear breaches of the Geneva Conventions for which the US has been responsible in the assault on Fallujah.
I have not once heard a BBC interviewer or other mainstream media journalist accuse a US or British politician of crimes against humanity, which was Mair's suggestion to the Sudanese ambassador today.
Why is it that the BBC and other influential media pundits are able to convey the suffering of Sudanese civilians at the hands of government forces, but not that of Iraqi civilians at the hands of the US? Why is it that the forceable expulsion of Sudanese civilians from their refugee camps is called a crime when the forceable expulsion of Iraqis from Fallujah is not? Why are the shallow lies of a Sudanese politician so easily dismantled by BBC interviewers when those of our leaders are normally left unchallenged?
Just another in a long line of examples that indicate that double standards are at work. No change there then.
The PM programme on BBC Radio 4 the other afternoon included a typically emotive report by Feargal Keane on the Sudanese government's violent eviction of the El-Geer refugee camp in Darfur. He spoke to refugees who had been tear gassed and we heard from a mother who had lost her baby son in the chaos and was understandably in terrible distress (we later heard that he had been found). Mr Keane stated that the actions of the Sudanese government in forceably displacing civilians were in clear breach of international law. He left us in little doubt as to the suffering of the civilians who were subject to these illegal policies.
Following the report, Eddie Mair interviewed the Sudanese ambassador to the UK. The ambassador attempted to justify his government's conduct but his claim that the refugees had been moved on legitimately was hardly plausible. Mair discredited his arguments and accused the Sudanese of breaking international law. No one would deny that this accusation had considerable force.
On the same day as the Sudanese government was clearing the El-Geer camp using plastic bullets and tear gas, the US military was engaged in a bloody attack on the city of Fallujah.
Fallujah has been under siege for months, subject to constant bombardment. The US has forced the majority of the population to leave their homes and those who remain have been exposed to a military assault of almost unimaginable ferocity.
Over this period, I cannot recall one single media or BBC report which conveyed the suffering of civilians in Fallujah with the same force as Keane's report did those in El-Geer. I appreciate the difficulties for journalists reporting from Fallujah, but there have been reports from independent journalists in the city nonetheless which show that it is not impossible to do so.
Much of the civilian population has left in the past few months. Why have we not heard from them about their experiences of life in the city under US seige?
At the same time, we have heard repeatedly that Fallujah is under the control of foreign fighters and that its people are being held hostage. Over the past week, many reporters and journalists have stated on numerous occasions that the decision to attack Fallujah would be taken by Ayad Allawi, Iraq's "sovereign" leader, rather than the US authorities and we have heard Allawi, as well as US and UK politicians state that the aim of the assault was to liberate the people of Fallujah from foreign fighters and Jihadists. BBC journalists for example, have referred to Fallujah again and again as a "militant stronghold," echoing official justifications for the assault.
These excuses and justifications are scarcely more credible than those employed by the Sudanese ambassador for his government's crimes, but I have yet to hear them challenged by a BBC reporter or any other media interviewer in the same way that Eddie Mair challenged him the other afternoon. Further still, I have not once heard a BBC reporter or reporter for any other mainstream media outlet accuse the US of breaking international law, despite the numerous, clear breaches of the Geneva Conventions for which the US has been responsible in the assault on Fallujah.
I have not once heard a BBC interviewer or other mainstream media journalist accuse a US or British politician of crimes against humanity, which was Mair's suggestion to the Sudanese ambassador today.
Why is it that the BBC and other influential media pundits are able to convey the suffering of Sudanese civilians at the hands of government forces, but not that of Iraqi civilians at the hands of the US? Why is it that the forceable expulsion of Sudanese civilians from their refugee camps is called a crime when the forceable expulsion of Iraqis from Fallujah is not? Why are the shallow lies of a Sudanese politician so easily dismantled by BBC interviewers when those of our leaders are normally left unchallenged?
Just another in a long line of examples that indicate that double standards are at work. No change there then.
