For my news assignment I chose to follow the burgeoning Syrian civil war and the three news sources I used were CNN (I tend to have it on the television for background noise), Al Jazeera (probably the source of news I trust the most) and Russia Today (because it's like Fox if it had a Russian bias).
As the week went on, the violence in Syria only escalated, as pretty much all news sources covered. The most interesting thing was the increase of activity by the Free Syrian Army, especially on January 27th when the Free Syrian Army seized some suburbs in Damascus. CNN actually had reporters there and interviewed some of the soldiers and protesters. This was considered a pretty big deal and while RT played it down a little, a lot of the western news agencies, ala CNN, talked about the "beginning of the end of Al-Assad." However, by the 30th the Syrian army cracked down and retook the suburbs. All the while, large portions of the population continued to protest in the streets when they could. Soon after the UN security council brought up resolutions to place sanctions on Syria and to call for Bashar Al-Assad to step down. On February 5th, the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China vetoed both resolutions, causing an uproar in the international community. So as it currently stands there is still a great uncertainty in Syria, and it's unclear how much longer the violence will last and who will ultimately succeed.
I find the situation itself absolutely fascinating myself. It doesn't directly affect me, but it most certainly does indirectly and I have a feeling that the result of this situation and the international reaction will have very, very large ripples. Syria is absolutely key in Iran's Levant strategy, and their lose would leave them in a much weaker position that could only further agitate them. At the same time, Syria is a part of a trend of further global, and regional, destabilization that will have interesting consequences for Turkey and Israel. Also, this is only furthering divisions in the UN Security Council between China and Russia and the Western powers. It's unclear how this will play out, but it will have far reaching consequences for both the region and the larger international community.
As for coverage, Al-Jazeera probably had the most and the most in depth coverage of the event, having both a life blog and an entire part of their website devoted to it, while CNN's coverage was average with a few segments everyday and even some live coverage while Russia Today played it down somewhat. the reasons for this are multiple. Al-Jazeera, being based in Qatar, probably had the best coverage as they could more readily access sources of information as well as interview many experts. Also, Qatar as emirate has increased its involvement in the affairs of the region, and has being seeing itself more as a power broker (as can be seen with the decision to place the Taliban embassy in Qatar.) CNN is typical of American news, and has covered the situation decently but without a great deal of depth and has fallen into the Western wishful thinking that it's only a matter of time that Al-Assad will fall. The reasons for this is because they, as most westerners, would like to see the regime go, especially because of its ties to Iran. Russia Today is, well, the Putin News Network. They have downplayed the violence to a degree, but they are perhaps one of the few news agencies other than Al-Jazeera talking about the deep divisions inside the opposition. the reasons for this is because Russia Today is a reflection of Russian policy. Russia, much like China, has chosen a path of both non-intervention, but also upholding national sovereignty. The reasons are for trying to further stability, as they don't want to further destabilize the region with intervention while Iran is already agitated, but also for reasons of Real Politik. Russia doesn't want more American influence in the region,. but they also don't want to set the precedent of international involvement in nations to install liberal democratic institutions, mostly because Russia doesn't have a great track record with liberal democratic institutions.
No comments:
Post a Comment