Jordan and al Jazeera

I'm watching on al Jazeera right now Yassir Abu Hilala saying that the police broke up a big demonstration in support of the Professional Associations, and that the police are preventing the Arab satellite television stations from covering the demonstration.   (UPDATE:  here's an English story)

This is a small thing, but it points to something which should be extremely worrying to those excited by recent developments in the Arab world.  Jordan is demonstrating its mastery of a lesson from Beirut which most analysts have neglected:  al Jazeera and the Arab satellites convey power on protestors.  Remove the Arab satellite television cameras, and you seriously reduce the power of popular protests.  This isn't entirely new - Jordan and other Arab governments have long tried to prevent satellite television stations like al Jazeera from covering such protests - but it is likely to increase now that these regimes feel even more vulnerable.  Crackdowns on the Arab media by Arab states are a very likely consequence of recent events. 

Here's where American policy over the last few years has been especially counter-productive.  As a result of years of Bush administration hostility towards al Jazeera and the Arab satellites - including its sanctioning of the closure of al Jazeera offices in Baghdad and its own hostile rhetoric towards al Jazeera (for details and links, just follow my Arab media archives) - it will be very, very difficult for the US to effectively object when these Arab governments crack down.

Comments

[Ryan]

When you say it will be difficult for the US to "effectively object" to these crackdowns, I assume the "effectively" refers to more than "un-hypocritically." I'm curious what an "effective" objection would be?

[the aardvark]

Well, hypocrisy does matter - if Arab governments do not believe that the US wants Arab media freedom, they are unlikely to pay much attention if American officials do say anything critical.

Actual policy preferences matter too - assumed in the above is that the US would actually make such objections. There has been virtually no evidence to suggest that this is in fact the case. This has been a major blind spot all along in the "democracy promotion" enterprise.

But those two points aside, what would make an effective policy would be a public, clear commitment to media freedoms which is followed through with and backed by concrete actions: we expect our friends, like our enemies, to respect media freedoms, and we will complain and punish (diplomatically, economically) those who do not. This would enter into the calculations of Arab leaders before they crack down in the first place - is it worth angering the US to keep this protest off of al Jazeera? Currently that's not the case.

[Ryan]

You make some good points, but I wonder if the US can forgo an explicitly pro-media-freedom stance for a less-hypocritical pro-political-opposition-freedom stance? Admittedly, this is a hard argument to make, since the Jordanian government could say the opposition does enjoy freedoms, as demonstrations against the ruling powers is allowed in the first place. But lumping this issue with political freedom rather than media freedom could conceivably do some good, no?

Also, a follow-up question for the aardvark: as the situation in Iraq gets better, which, hopefully it will, do you see the US having less need to deny/censor Al Jazeera? Does media freedom have any hope in the near (and optimistic) future?

Thanks!