However,
even though the destruction of the Ehime Maru was merely
the most recent instance of US military recklessness towards
civilians – and particularly foreign ones – editorial
writers and columnists have been extraordinarily sparing
in their indignation. To be sure, there have been the pro
forma demands for a full "inquiry" as well as
earnest advice to the Bush Administration to do whatever
is necessary to soothe Japanese ruffled feathers. But, with
few exceptions, the pundits have been quiet. No one has
even raised the issue of the vaunted professionalism and
effectiveness of the US military. When it comes to the military,
the media can always be relied on to act as cheerleaders.
During the bombing of Yugoslavia journalists did not think
it unusual that we bombed a refugee convoy, pulverized a
passenger train in broad daylight, blew up the offices of
Serbian state television, and even destroyed the Chinese
Embassy in Belgrade. Preposterous NATO claims that it was
only hitting military targets were accepted at face value.
So why should journalists now trouble themselves over the
deaths of a handful of Japanese fishing students? While
the New York Times fulminated for months about the
lascivious groping at Tailhook demanding court-martials
all round and mass dismissals, the loss of life as a result
of the US military failing to follow standard safety procedures
elicits little more than a yawn.
The
facts in the Ehime Maru case are shocking enough: The 16
civilians who were aboard the USS Greeneville during the
emergency surfacing maneuver were major contributors to
the USS Missouri Restoration Fund – a group dedicated
to restoring the battleship on which Japan surrendered in
1945. The pointless emergency surfacing exercise was carried
out not in the middle of the ocean but in a busy area of
the Pacific – 10 miles south of Honolulu. The USS Greeneville
was two miles outside the Navy submarine training area,
which is marked on navigation charts. The submarine was
not operating the active sonar at the time of the collision.
(National Transportation Safety Board officials say that
for more than 10 years the Navy has rejected recommendations
that submarines utilize active sonar when operating in coastal
waters.) One civilian sat at the helm of the submarine and
another pulled the levers during the sudden ascent.
According
to NTSB official John Hammerschmidt, the submarine had detected
the Ehime Maru 71 minutes before smashing into it. One crew
member now admits that the civilians were distracting him
as the submarine was preparing to surface. The fire control
technician, who plots the submarine’s position using sonar
contacts in order to prepare to fire at targets, told investigators
his duties were interrupted less than an hour before the
collision. "He ceased this updating of the CEP (Contact
Evaluation Plot) because of the number of civilians present,"
said Hammerschmidt. He also says that the submarine’s sonar
room should have been staffed with two qualified sonar operators
and a supervisor. Instead, there was only one trainee, an
operator and a supervisor. In addition, the submarine’s
sonar repeater was not working. (This device allows the
submarine’s top officers to watch nearby sonar contacts
on a monitor as they work at the periscope.) Hammerschmidt
incidentally is also the man who came up with this prize
quote: "The accident certainly is unusual. In terms
of civilians being in those positions – I’m not sure
that’s unusual." Well, that’s a relief.
There
is, of course, a reason for this media insouciance. Arrogant
and reckless conduct goes with the territory of being the
"lone superpower" and the "indispensable
nation." Since there is no one out there to challenge
us, why shouldn’t we do exactly as we want? And, since we
are "indispensable" surely a few foibles can be
forgiven? But there is another and more sinister reason
for this indifference, something we only became aware of
as a result of this accident. Apparently, it has been the
policy of the US military for some years now to cultivate
wealthy and influential people, particularly journalists,
by inviting them to take part in military exercises. The
Navy has apparently hosted an estimated 25,000 civilian
guests over the last two years on its West Coast vessels
alone. The idea is to show off our military wares to wealthy,
ignorant but self-important civilians with a view to winning
their support for even more lavish funding of the Pentagon.
So dazzled are the visitors by all the high-tech gadgets
on display, by the death-defying skills of our servicemen,
and by the elaborate military maneuvers worthy of a Hollywood
summer blockbuster that they become ardent lobbyists for
the military.
According
to a story in the Los Angeles Times, "the Navy
hopes the on-board experiences will win over civilians who
are ‘active and influential in their community, business
or government,’ according to Navy policy. Reporters and
editors from The Times, for example, have participated.
A 1989 directive by the chief of naval operations said taking
civilians aboard must be ‘in the furtherance of continuing
public awareness of the Navy and its mission.’ As part of
the effort, public relations officers aboard individual
ships often provide news releases and pictures of visitors
on the vessels to local media." It is now common practice
for Navy commanders to encourage journalists and other lobbyists
for the military to steer the submarine during their visit.
Thus
when the next US military intervention takes place influential
people will be on hand to rally the public in support our
brave men and women in uniform. Never mind the issue of
whether the United States has the right to bomb a country
that has done nothing to us, the important thing is to be
behind our troops. One has to say that as far as journalists
are concerned this Pentagon policy has been remarkably successful.
Journalists are notoriously susceptible to flattery, and
especially so when they are elevated to the status of civilians
"active and influential in their community, business
or government." According to the Los Angeles Times,
"Commanding officers, eager to win such civilian support,
often flaunt the abilities of their vessel and crew, according
to retired military officers. ‘The submarine captain does
put on a show,’ said retired submarine Adm. James Bush.
Of all the maneuvers, the emergency surfacing, which the
Greeneville did, is the most knock-your-socks-off dramatic,
Bush said." It certainly knocked the socks off the
passengers and crew of the Ehime Maru.
One
wonders about further revelations. During the bombing of
Yugoslavia it turned out that the US military was actually
working inside the CNN offices. Military personnel from
the Fourth Psychological Operations Group based at Fort
Bragg, in North Carolina, were installed at CNN headquarters
in Atlanta. A Major Thomas Collins of the US Army Information
Service confirmed the presence of these Army psyops experts
at CNN, saying, "Psy-ops personnel, soldiers and officers,
have been working in CNN’s headquarters in Atlanta through
our program, ‘Training with Industry’. They worked as regular
employees of CNN. Conceivably, they would have worked on
stories during the Kosovo war. They helped in the production
of news." While confirming the story CNN, needless
to say, denied that these Army psyops personnel decided
news coverage or wrote news reports.
In
much the same way, the Navy assures us that civilians pulling
the levers during an emergency maneuver had nothing to do
with the destruction of the fishing trawler. But why was
the military working at the CNN offices? Soldiers have no
business being in the offices of any reputable news organization
– particularly while the United States is waging war.
Similarly, civilians, particularly journalists have no business
wandering around aircraft carriers and submarines, goshing
and gushing at whatever they are shown. And they most certainly
have no business pulling levers and executing dangerous
maneuvers.
Why
would the military be ensconced in a newsroom other than
to influence news coverage? Why would journalists be invited
to take trips on submarines other than to make sure that
they become advocates for the military? We have a military
directly involved in the production of news. And we have
journalists directly involved in the production of war.
During the next US military expedition we will learn that
journalists actually pushed the button that released the
cruise missiles. Doubtless, the Pentagon will inform us
that the media had nothing whatsoever to do with the selection
of targets. And CNN will reassure us that pushing buttons
on an aircraft carrier in no way impedes objective news
gathering. It will be the final fulfillment of the military-media
complex.
Please
Support Antiwar.com
Send
contributions to
Antiwar.com
520 S. Murphy Avenue, #202
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
or
Contribute Via our Secure Server
Credit Card Donation Form
Your
Contributions are now Tax-Deductible
