Earlier this year, Pearls and Irritations ran an account of the 50th anniversary of my first major foreign news assignment, the Six-Day War. This is about another 50th anniversary assignment, the Russian Revolution. The centenary is next month. (more…)
John Tulloh
-
JOHN TULLOH. The female revolution at ABC News.
‘But the women (foreign correspondents) were (likelier than men) to be more thoughtful in looking at the wider context or human side of stories. In short, they were inclined to be nosier and would go the extra mile to pin down or dig deeper into an aspect of a story’. (more…)
-
JOHN TULLOH. “Hell on earth” lies just across the Indian Ocean
If you travelled from Western Australia north-west across the Indian Ocean, the first country you would encounter has been described as ‘Hell on Earth’. You will find there civil war, famine, drought, refugees, destruction and a blockade for starters. Now it has a cholera epidemic. No wonder it has been called the worst story in the world which nobody is talking about. (more…)
-
JOHN TULLOH. Fear, paranoia and anxiety in Turkey one year on from the failed coup attempt.
As one opposition MP noted: ‘Turkey has been wrapped in a cloak of fear and anxiety’. Paranoia as well, he might have added. (more…)
-
JOHN TULLOH. Six days of war and 50 years of conflict.
For Palestinians, Nakbar Day means the day of catastrophe. It is commemorated on May 15, the day after the anniversary of Israel’s independence in 1948. It remembers the 700,000 Palestinians who fled or were evicted from their homes and land partitioned by the UN for the new Jewish state. (more…)
-
JOHN TULLOH. My first foreign news assignment 50 years ago – the Six Day War.
This article was first published in Foreign Correspondents’ Association Australia and South Pacific website. Next week, John Tulloh will be writing on the 50th anniversary of the Six Day War.
It was mid-afternoon Sydney time on a winter’s Monday 50 years ago that events were set in train which to this day remain a major running news story. On June 5, 1967, Israel staged a pre-emptive strike against Egypt to launch what became known as the Six-Day War. It ended with Israel more than trebling the land under its control stretching from the Golan Heights in Syria all the way to the Suez Canal. (more…)
-
JOHN TULLOH. The winds of change in Iran.
‘Iran’s nation chose the path of interaction with the world, away from violence and extremism’. President Hassan Rouhani on his election victory looks forward to a fresh new era for Iran. (more…)
-
JOHN TULLOH. Jockeying for the big prize in Iran
‘Trump’s rhetoric towards Iran is so harsh that to have someone on the other side who is equally harsh might provoke an unintentional confrontation’. (more…)
-
JOHN TULLOH. Trump’s first 100 days – so what?
The media have been besides themselves in anticipation of Donald Trump’s first 100 days in the White House this weekend. It’s as if this is some magic marker by which to judge his next 1359 days in the Oval Office. It is meaningless. (more…)
-
JOHN TULLOH. Turkey – Erdogan’s day of judgment.
Turkey’s voters face a momentous choice: whether they want their president to have the dictatorial power of a potential tyrant or one whose authority remains curbed by parliamentary government. (more…)
-
JOHN TULLOH. The NBN – Another Inconvenient Truth
‘The nbn network is Australia’s exciting new landline phone and internet network. It’s designed to give you access to fast, reliable phone and internet services, no matter where you live’. NBN Connect Kit. (more…)
-
JOHN TULLOH. What will Malcolm Turnbull and Julie Bishop say to Benjamin Netanyahu?
It would be intriguing to know the position Malcolm Turnbull and Julie Bishop intend to adopt in talks when the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, visits Australia this week. It comes a week after Netanyahu had startling discussions with Donald Trump. The neophyte US leader on the Palestinian question did not seem too bothered what happened as long as both sides could reach ‘a deal’. Two-state, one-state, whatever! The two sides should work it out, he said, or perhaps get some of the friendlier Arab states involved, eh? (more…)
-
JOHN TULLOH. The simplistic naivete of Donald Trump
We certainly live in far more interesting, if not astonishing, news times now that a Manhattan real estate developer occupies the White House. We wake up each day wondering what was the latest personal whim Donald Trump chose to exercise while we slept. (more…)
-
JOHN TULLOH. Erdogan aims for the long haul as an Ottoman-style ruler.
Not long ago, when events in Turkey were as unsettled as they are now, its military leaders would have stepped in, toppled the government and taken draconian control to restore order. But President Recip Tayyip Erdogan seems safe for now, having emasculated the military leadership after the failed coup last year, sacked much of the judiciary and bureaucracy, jailed opponents and perceived rivals, cowed the local media by locking up editors and journalists and currently imposing a local news blackout. (more…)
-
JOHN TULLOH. Just a case of Israeli ‘chutzpah’ or the action of a village tyrant?
The apoplectic rage of the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, was something to behold. How dare the U.N., an organisation he takes little notice of anyway, condemn his ever expanding housing program for Jewish families in the contested West Bank and how dare the U.S. not even bother to veto it as has been the custom. (more…)
-
JOHN TULLOH: Fidel’s ghost teases Washington.
John Tulloh argues that for Trump to renege on Obama’s changes, would be fraught with legal problems, specially for those businesses which have already invested tens of millions in infrastructure in anticipation of Cuba becoming more accessible. (more…)
-
JOHN TULLOH. U.S. finally starts to ease its Cold War punishment of Cuba
It is astonishing that an impoverished speck on the rump of the most powerful country in the world has managed to intimidate it for more than half a century. Cuba, only 144 kms off the coast of Florida, has had to suffer Uncle Sam’s unforgiving wrath because it became a Communist regime, locked up opponents and did not hold free elections. Tough trade and travel embargoes were imposed by Washington. Residents of the land of the free for decades have been banned from going there and woe betide if you were caught with one of Cuba’s famed cigars. But in recent years there has been some forgiveness. If Hillary Clinton becomes the next U.S. president, she has promised to end the embargo. However, the last word will not be hers. It is Congress which has that authority and it is showing no sign of softening its stance. (more…)
-
JOHN TULLOH: Vladimir Putin reaches back to the past to define his and Russia’s future.
Tsar Vladimir Putin plots his place in Russian history.
It would appear that Vladimir Putin’s current modus operandi is aimed at defining his legacy. Ideally, he would like to be remembered as Vladimir the Great, the most illustrious Russian of his times. As those with the same honorific, Peter and Catherine, did, he is busy expanding his influence and trying to restore Russia to the feared and formidable country and head of an empire it once was. (more…)
-
JOHN TULLOH. The uncertain future for Turkey and Erdogan.
My friend! Leave not my homeland to the hands of villainous men!
Render your chest as armour and your body as bulwark!
Halt this disgraceful assault!
For soon shall come the joyous days of divine promise;
Who knows? Perhaps tomorrow? Perhaps even sooner!A verse from the Turkish national anthem.
More than ever before, Australian tourists bound for Turkey and Gallipoli had better be on their best behaviour. They will find this otherwise welcoming and hospitable country to be in a state of growing uncertainty regarding its future. It is part of a concerted move away from secularism in favour of Islamic policies under the increasingly autocratic style of Recep Tayyip Erdogan, its touchy president who tolerates no criticism. (more…)
-
JOHN TULLOH. Malaysia – the wolf of Kuala Lumpur.
There was much mirth in Malaysia the other day when the US Justice Department filed civil lawsuits alleging a $3.5bn embezzlement of a Kuala Lumpur fund and diplomatically referred to one of the alleged villains as ‘Malaysia Official 1’. Everyone knew who that was – their prime minister, Najib Razak. It concerns the long-running scandal of the state investment fund known as 1MDB which Najib himself set up. He denies any misappropriation of funds, resorting to the traditional defence of sweating political leaders that it’s nothing more than a smear campaign. (more…)
-
JOHN TULLOH. Shrugging off the effects of the Iraq invasion.
‘His decision to invade Iraq is easily the worst foreign policy decision ever made by an American president’.
Professor Jean Edward Smith, eminent US presidential biographer, on George W. Bush.
The other day the Sydney Morning Herald had a cartoon showing John Howard in a military uniform and holding a pop gun. Behind him were the symbolic tombstones of the tens of thousands of Iraqis, mainly ‘innocents’, who’ve died since the 2003 invasion. Howard is depicted a shrugging and saying ‘Seemed like a good idea at the time…’ That, crudely, summed up the rationale for the invasion. (more…)
-
JOHN TULLOH. Olympics and oil – a tale of two South American countries.
Back in 2009, the International Olympic Committee made a bold decision. It decided the 2016 Games would be held for the first time in South America, a continent not noted for its political, economic or social stability. Rio de Janeiro in Brazil would be the host city even though the evaluation of three others – Tokyo, Madrid and Chicago – was superior. At the time, Brazil’s economy was thundering along, overtaking Russia in strength and sitting comfortably in the world’s top 10. It was boom time in Rio. Today it is more like gloom time as Brazil’s economy contracts and suffers its worst recession since the 1930s. This should have come as no surprise in a continent synonymous with volatility. Nor is it a surprise that another South American country, Venezuela, once awash in oil revenue and wealth, should implode and now be mixing it with the world’s most hopeless economic cases. (more…)
-
John Tulloh. The Defence Department prepares for war.
The release of the Chilcot report revives a memory from late 2002 or early 2003. Washington, London and Canberra were abuzz with talk of military action against the Iraqi regime of President Saddam Hussein. President George W. Bush accused him of having weapons of mass destruction and aiding al-Qaeda, the 9/11 terrorists. The war drums were sounding. Alan Moir, of the Sydney Morning Herald, had a cartoon showing Bush in a cowboy hat whooping it up aboard a missile heading for Baghdad. Tony Blair, the British PM, was sitting behind him looking just as enthusiastic. But sitting at the rear was our John Howard looking nervous and uncertain. He was portrayed saying something to the effect of ‘Seriously, we still haven’t decided’. (more…)
-
JOHN TULLOH. 60 Minutes – the failure to think it right through. Amazing!
One of the best pieces of advice I received in 40 years of involvement in foreign television news was ‘Think it right through’. I was arguing with a colleague on a telex machine about a certain story. I was keen for it. He was cautious, hence his advice. He was right. The story was in Beirut during the civil war. It brings the memory back to the wash-up of the 60 Minutes debacle in the Lebanese capital. Channel 9 appeared to have paid no attention to the potential consequences of such a sensitive assignment in a city not known for its rule of law as we know it. (more…)
-
John Tulloh. The odd couple – the U.S. and Saudi Arabia and their uneasy relationship.
As enduring international couples go, the U.S. and Saudi Arabia must rank among the oddest. They have been kind of firm friends since 1933 when oil was discovered in the kingdom. Yet their societies are so different as President Obama might have seen for himself when his limousine drove through the streets of Riyadh last week. For starters, he would not have found a woman driver anywhere or one buckled up lest the bodily contours the seatbelt creates excite the male driver. America is a wide open democracy with rights for one and all whereas Saudi Arabia is like a feudal fiefdom where rights are limited – especially if you are a woman or non-Moslem – and it is an offence to question or challenge the king’s word. America has no restriction on religious establishments, but in Saudi Arabia only mosques are permitted. Apostasy is punishable by death.
It is money, oil, security, arms, influence, investment and even more money which keep them together. But the strains are showing. The Saudis cannot wait to see President Obama leave the White House. They feel he has let them down. No doubt, he must feel fed up with them as well. A lot of his time has been spent dealing with Islamic global terrorism, much of it inspired and even subsidised by Saudi Arabia’s Wahabism, the kingdom’s austere interpretation of the religion. A recent report in The Times said Saudi Arabia has contributed more fighters to Daesh than any other country.
The Saudis blame Obama for many things, starting with not supporting President Hosni Mubarak when Egyptians rebelled against his rule and forced him from office. Then he had second thoughts about confronting a Saudi nemesis, Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, after he crossed the line in the sand regarding chemical weapons. Next he turned his main foreign attention away from the Middle East to Asia only to return and do a deal with Saudi Arabia’s arch rival in the region, Iran. The Saudis showed their displeasure when Obama arrived in Riyadh to attend a Gulf summit last week. King Salman, having personally welcomed Gulf leaders arriving earlier in the day, pointedly sent the local governor to greet Obama. State television, unusually, ignored the president’s arrival altogether.
Back in Washington, relations are fragile. Congress is considering a bill which could hold the kingdom responsible for any role in the September 11, 2001, attacks. The Saudis have threatened to sell up to $975 billion in securities and other assets in the U.S. lest they be frozen by American courts. President Obama has lobbied Congress to block the bill and, if necessary, promised to veto it. But a group of families of the 9/11 victims blame Saudi Arabia and want justice.
(The majority of the 9/11 airborne terrorists were Saudis. But the commission which investigated the attacks found ‘no evidence that the Saudi government as an institution or senior officials individually funded the organisation’. However, suspicions to the contrary linger. There is now a move to release the suppressed 28 pages of the commission’s report which might answer that scepticism once and for all).
‘We’ve seen a long deterioration in the U.S.-Saudi relationship, and it started well before the Obama Administration,’ a former U.S. ambassador to Riyadh, Charles W. Freeman Jr., told the Los Angeles Times. ‘The U.S.-Saudi relationship is based entirely on interests, not values. It’s been an impossible relationship in value terms from the beginning’.
‘U.S.-Saudi relations have never been in complete harmony’, observed the Washington-based Council on Foreign Relations. One of its senior analysts, Ray Takeyh, goes further. ‘Saudi Arabia is no longer tethered to the American alliance’, he writes. ‘The House of Saud is beginning to rely on its own resources. It is hard to see what role, if any, the United States has in this evolving foreign policy’.
Saudi Arabia arouses savage passions in the U.S., especially because of the 9/11 culprits and the country’s adherence to sharia law under which primitive punishments, such as beheadings and stonings to death, are still valid.
‘The tragedy for the Arabs, especially, has been who got the oil wealth. It wasn’t the sophisticates of Beirut or even the religious scholars of Cairo, but Bedouins with a bitter view of faith. The Saudis and their fellow fanatics in the oil-rich Gulf states have used those riches to drag Muslims backward into the past and to spread violent jihad’.
So wrote Ralph Peters, a Fox News strategic analyst, in the New York Post on the eve of Obama’s visit to Saudi Arabia.
While Saudi Arabia in its huff has been trying to go its own way, most U.S. commentators say there will be no fracture in the relationship. ‘Despite all the differences, Saudi Arabia and America are not getting divorced – we need each other’, said former White House adviser and CIA analyst Bruce Riedel, as quoted in the Sydney Morning Herald. They share intelligence, the Saudis rely on America for their security, their investments in each other’s country are too big to endanger and for American arms manufacturers there is no better customer.
‘As unpalatable as cooperation with the kingdom might be for some, cutting it adrift is worse,’ wrote Nicholas Kristof in the New York Times. ‘Whatever the resentments, neither side has a realistic alternative to the other — something President Obama has clearly had difficulty reconciling himself to’.
The Los Angeles Times noted that even when the two countries were closer, Saudi Arabia was never an ally. It was a partner. ‘Both countries still need each other, but less than before’, it said. ‘They’re still partners – but colder, more distant partners now’.
FOOTNOTE. One aspect of the relationship which is booming is the PR industry. The Washington Post says the Saudis are spending millions on PR companies and lobbyists to help burnish their image and protect their interests in the U.S. ‘Saudi Arabia is consistently one of the bigger players when it comes to foreign influence in Washington’, said Josh Stewart, a spokesman for the Sunlight Foundation, which tracks money and influence in politics. ‘That spans both what you’d call the inside game, which is lobbying and government relations, and the outside game, which is PR and other things that tend to reach a broader audience than just lobbying’.
John Tulloh had a 40-year career in foreign news.
-
John Tulloh. Erdogan leads Turkey back to the Ottoman era.
It is the time of the year when we have our annual bout of sentimental reflection on the heroics of the Anzac forces at Gallipoli a century ago. One of the Turkish military commanders whose resistance wore down the Anzacs and other allies was Kemal Ataturk, who went on to be the founder of modern Turkey in 1923. His name remains so revered in Turkey for modernising his country and transforming it into a secular state that insulting his memory is a criminal act.
Ataturk would be startled at what is happening to his country today. His vision has gone into reverse. The U.S. conservative Breitbart news website has this to say about the man in his footsteps, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan:
He has been ‘using his political clout, both as prime minister and now as president, to reverse the country’s direction. He seeks to undo the miracle Ataturk created in Turkey, returning it to its old Islamic ways. Clearly, Erdogan hopes this redirection will eventually place him in the seat of power abandoned by the last Ottoman sultan. Just as Ataturk was a catalyst in Turkey’s independence movement, Erdogan has proven to be a catalyst in its Islamic movement’.
The Turkish leader is certainly a man of the moment. His country, a NATO member, is no longer the democratic example the West hoped it would represent to its Arab neighbours. Nor is it the dependable bulwark for Western interests against threats from the neighbourhood. Turkey is beset by terrorism, most of it blamed on Kurds, who make up 20% of the population. They are more restless than ever in their quest for autonomy. Erdogan is more active than ever in cracking down on them. For him, the Daesh activity just across the border in Syria is a secondary matter. Indeed his critics accuse him of supporting it. Then there is tension with Russia after the downing of one its jets. Moscow has imposed sanctions which have hit Turkish business and tourism. Ankara hoped the lifting of sanctions against Iran would lead to more business and tourism except Tehran has cosied up to Erdogan’s enemy in Damascus. Many liken Erdogan to Vladimir Putin. Both are bullies, says Daniel Pipes, of the Middle East Forum.
Yet Erdogan has given shelter to 2,500,000 Syrian refugees, more than any Arab nation, adding 3% to Turkey’s population and causing domestic disquiet. He has agreed to take back asylum-seekers who head to Greece seeking refuge within the EU in return for the EU to take an equal number of refugees off his hands. EU members were so relieved to remove the threat of being overrun again that they wasted no time in agreeing to Erdogan’s excessive financial demands. Not once did they clear their throats and mention their saviour’s increasing crackdown on long-established freedoms, especially concerning the media and judiciary. Erdogan was now Europe’s best friend, said Der Spiegel.
Erdogan is a wily figure. As a member of an Islamist party, he was elected Mayor of Istanbul in 1994. He gave an inkling of his attitude in 1998 when he read a religious poem that said of Islam:
‘The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and the faithful our soldiers’.
It was provocative enough to put him in prison for a spell. But when he became Prime Minister in 2003, he impressed Western allies with his Ataturk-like vision. He brought about an economic recovery, expanded universities and urged more women to be admitted, oversaw investments in infrastructure which created new roads, airports and a high-speed train network and reached an accord with the Kurds. Even the unworldly President George W.Bush was impressed.
However, he later neutralised the military which in the past has intervened when political matters got out of hand. Slowly he imposed a growing Islamic influence on daily life and his guiding hand turned into a clenched fist. Hijabs became a common sight. Bar-tending classes and alcohol advertising were banned. So was smoking in public places. Court decisions were ignored. The constitution which stipulated the president must be above politics was disregarded. Journalists reporting government corruption were locked up, tv stations closed down and newspapers questioning his authoritarian rule taken over by government acolytes. Insulting Erdogan is now a criminal offence even in your own home.
Unsurprisingly, Erdogan has grandiose visions for his own role as Turkey’s leader or, as is becoming increasingly apparent, dictator. As president, he took over a palace meant for the prime minister on land donated by Ataturk in Ankara for public use. It’s for the Turkish people, he declared. The fact it consisted of at least a thousand rooms was not enough for Erdogan. He is said to be adding another 300 for his own use with an elaborate security bunker.
Erdogan greeted one visiting leader at the palace with guards dressed in Ottoman-style uniforms. ‘We were born and raised on the land that was the Ottoman Empire and its six centuries of rule’, Erdogan likes to say. He has directed schools to teach the old Ottoman version of Turkish written in Arabic script, according to Canada’s National Post. It was Ataturk who introduced Latin script. Erdogan’s critics accused him of wanting to become a ruler in the style of the Ottoman sultans. Or could it be even a caliph? The last caliphate was the Ottoman one which Ataturk wasted no time in abolishing.
Despite the asylum-seeker agreement, Erdogan remains a bogeyman to EU leaders. Under it, provided Ankara complies with certain conditions, Turkey’s 79 million population will be granted visa-free travel throughout the EU as early as June. The Spectator, almost shuddering at the prospect and noting the number of fake Syrian passports in the hands of non-Syrian asylum-seekers, foresees fake Turkish passports to allow non-Turks also to roam continental EU at will. The spectre of jihadists among them will unnerve many Europeans.
As the first would-be migrants were returned from Greece to Turkey this week, Erdogan took the opportunity for taking a jab at Europe for not letting ‘these people into their countries’ by putting up razor wire fences. He asked: “Did we turn Syrians back? No, we didn’t, but they did’. It was a none too subtle reminder that, despite the EU’s desperation to appease Turkey, Erdogan now regarded himself as the good guy and Brussels had better not forget it.
The outlook all round is ominous. ’Once-dependable Turkey seems in danger of implosion’, reported the Guardian. ‘Under Erdogan, Turkey is the West’s disintegrating ally and Europe’s imaginary friend’. Daniel Pipes quotes a Turkish journalist, Burak Bekdil, saying: ‘Modern Turkey has never been this galactically distant from the core values enshrined by the European civilisation and its institutions’, which Ataturk admired. Gokhan Bacik, a professor at Ipek University in Ankara, goes further: ‘Turkey is facing a multi-faceted catastrophe (the scale of which) is beyond Turkey’s capacity for digestion’.
One would imagine that Ataturk today would still see Turkey’s future to the west in Europe with its relative stability and economic power. Erdogan disagrees. The Guardian reported that he ‘often mocks and berates the EU, once calling it an Islamophobic Christian club’. As Breitbart noted, ‘We will recognise Erdogan’s confidence that Turkey is well on the path to Islamism when maligning Ataturk’s memory is no longer tantamount to maligning Erdogan himself’.
‘If Iran today is the Middle East’s greatest danger’, says Pipes, ‘Turkey is tomorrow’s’.
FOOTNOTE. Australians heading to Gallipoli and feeling thirsty should bear in mind that, under laws introduced by Erdogan, the sale of alcohol in shops is banned between 10pm and 6am and at any time near schools and mosques. Bottles now carry warnings of the dangers of drinking alcohol. Taxes on alcohol are the toughest in Turkey’s history.
John Tulloh had a 40-year career in foreign news.
-
John Tulloh. Springtime – the season of alarm and disharmony in Europe.
United in diversity. EU’s motto.
If ever there were a line in a report to alarm European leaders, it might have been one buried in a 204-page document on the EU economy last November. It predicted that up to three million additional asylum seekers could enter the 28-nation bloc by the end of this year, according to the Washington Post.
If the influx should come to pass, it is about now when the surge will begin. It is springtime in Europe when the Mediterranean and Aegean storms abate and the seas become a tempting risk for those seeking a new and safe home. Already 110,000 have endured a winter crossing to Greece and Italy so far this year. That is 10 times the number for the corresponding period last year. Four hundred of them perished at sea.
Unlike 2015 when the EU had an open-door policy and more than one million asylum-seekers took advantage of it, newcomers will find a less welcoming reception and the Europeans in disarray about what to do about all these strangers suddenly in their midst.
The EU might like to claim unity, but now self-interest, local nationalism, the growing influence of right-wing parties and the very idea of enforced quotas where asylum-seekers should be relocated have driven several EU members to enact their own measures.
‘The EU’s ideal of free movement is collapsing under the weight of political reality’, said the Spectator in an editorial. ‘An inability to respond to this crisis is sending millions of voters to extremists, now on the march across the continent’.
Even the 2015 heroine for asylum-seekers, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, has suddenly had a rethink on her open-door embrace of them. In a move aimed at the restless electorate, she’s now warned the hundred of thousands of asylum-seekers who came to Germany last year that they are there only on a temporary basis and cannot stay long-term.
Scandinavia, which once prided itself on sheltering the oppressed, has become positively hostile to these outsiders from afar. Sweden says it intends to deport up to half of the 160,000 who arrived last year. They are deemed to be not refugees, but economic migrants. But it is hard to envisage the mass deportation of tens of thousands of men, women and children. Norway, a non-EU member, wants to deport hundreds of asylum-seekers who slipped in through the Arctic Circle border with Russia. Denmark, in a bid to deter newcomers, can now legally confiscate assets valued at more than $2000 except for wedding rings. They say this will help fund the cost of sheltering them.
Macedonia, the first country for refugees heading north along the Balkans corridor from Greece, has closed its border in order to filter the travellers. Afghans – 27% of the arrivals in Greece – have been told by Macedonia to return whence they came. Priority is given to those from Iraq and Syria. Austria is restricting entry to 580 people per day to try to choke the refugee flow. Slovenia and Croatia have followed suit.
Their moves have been branded as “plainly incompatible” with international law, according to Euronews. Some EU officials described it as tantamount to ‘giving the finger to the rest of Europe’, it added.
An EU scheme agreed last September to relocate 160,000 people among members under mandatory quotas has seen just 598 moved so far. Former communist states have said they don’t want any at all and have filed legal challenges.
EU and Turkish leaders are due to hold a summit in the next few days about what to do. Ideally, the EU would like Turkey to stop the flow of asylum-seekers across the narrow Aegean strait to Greek territory. Last year, 800,000 made that crossing. Brussels has given Ankara a handsome sum of euros – some call it a bribe – to help shelter the refugees in Turkey and encourage them to remain there. There are 2.6 million Syrians camped in Turkey, the largest concentration of refugees anywhere in the world.
Germany’s Interior Minister, Thomas de Maiziere, says the summit will be a ‘turning point’. If the EU cannot agree on a joint strategy, Germany might impose its own border controls, according to a German newspaper report. Its solution is for the EU to take in a fixed annual quota of Syrians from Turkey – perhaps a quarter of a million – in return for curbing the flow of migrants into Europe.
Greece would certainly welcome such a deal. The EU has dusted off its old policy that refugees should be processed in the first member country where they land. It has given threadbare Greece until this month to improve living conditions in centres for asylum-seekers and provide more staff to process their applications. Otherwise it might lose valuable concessions. Greece ‘will not accept becoming Europe’s Lebanon, a warehouse of souls’, said the Greek Migration Minister, Yannis Mouzalas, referring to the huge number of Syrian refugees Lebanon has taken in since 2011.
It is a problem of displaced people on a scale not encountered in Europe since the end of World War Two. Post-war peace then meant that many of these European people could return to their homes or what was left of them and rebuild their lives. But the very idea of achieving anything remotely peaceful in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria – where the overwhelming majority of today’s asylum-seekers are from – is highly unlikely.
How ironic it is that the 1951 UN Refugee Convention, prompted by the plight of those displaced by WW2 in Europe, may prove the best protection for those outsiders who’ve descended on Europe because of wars 65 years later. It seems that once you are in Europe, you’re in. Unless drastic new measures are enforced, we can expect more EU members taking matters into their own hands.
The greater the EU diversity, the less the unity.
FOOTNOTE. If there is one group who would like to see more asylum seekers than ever, it is the predators who make money from misery. The EU police agency, Europol, estimated that people-smuggling gangs netted up to $9 billion last year. A report last month described them as ‘the fastest growing criminal market in Europe’. It warned that ‘this turnover is set to double or triple if the scale of the current migration crisis persists in the upcoming year’.
John Tulloh had a 40-year career in foreign news.
-
John Tulloh. Middle East: The Arab Spring becomes the Arab Winter.
‘Arabs have rarely lived in bleaker times’. The Economist.
An impoverished Arab would have been been flabbergasted at the consequences of his single, desperate protest five years ago. It precipitated the ousting of his country’s ruler and two other Arab leaders, the greatest upheaval and carnage of this century in one country, protests in others, a war in another and now acute anxiety in other Arab capitals that the same might happen to them. The Arab was Mohamed Bouazizi, a vegetable market trader in Tunisia who immolated himself in protest at harassment by local officialdom.
His case sparked local demonstrations – the Jasmine revolution – which led to the downfall of Tunisia’s long-time leader, President Ben Ali. Emboldened, neighbouring Libyans rallied against the dictatorial rule of Muammar Gaddafi. He did not last long, thanks in part to NATO intervention. Egyptians then brought down their long-time leader, Hosni Mubarak. It became the Arab Spring. Syrians tried in vain to do the same with their leader with its terrible consequences as we all know. The protest ripples spread to Bahrain and Algeria, but they were crushed. Now the seismic effect has hit Yemen where the bloodshed is what Time called ‘the worst crisis the world isn’t talking about’.
What the world is talking about is Saudi Arabia and Iran and the ancient Sunni/Wahabist and Shia divide. Saudi Arabia will face ‘divine intervention’, said Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei earlier this month following the execution of a Shia cleric and 46 other people. The sacking of the Saudi embassy in Tehran by Shiite protesters led to the rupturing of diplomatic relations. The two countries are flexing their authority in a proxy war in Yemen where Iran is actively supporting the Shia Houthi rebels who’ve captured the capital, Sanaa, and other parts of the country. Saudi Arabia has sent in troops and bombers, but to little avail 10 months on apart from causing more of the ungodly death and misery which today we associate with the Middle East more than anywhere else in the world.
Iran and Saudi Arabia have reached a critical stage in imposing their authority and influence. The long-established political order in the Middle East may never be the same again. Iran, fresh from new respectability following its US-sponsored nuclear deal, is now revelling in freedom from most of its sanctions. Billions of frozen dollars have been released and oil exports allowed to resume for what that’s worth in today’s depressed market caused mainly by its foe. Quoted in the Australian, Fawaz Gerges, a Middle East expert at the London School of Economics, says Iran interests the U.S. both politically and economically. ‘There is a new relationship based on a new understanding of Iran’s pivotal role in the region – that Iran is here to stay’, he says.
As a result, Saudi Arabia no longer has the undivided attention of the Americans with the thawing of relations between the ayatollahs and the Great Satan. Its once powerful economy is depressed with austerity measures imposed. Youth unemployment is steadily increasing just as it was in prompting Tunisians to take to the streets five years ago. Riyadh was reported to be short of money and considering selling shares in Saudi Aramco, the state-owned oil company said to be the most valuable firm in the world. There were reports last year of dissension among the ruling royals.
‘Saudi Arabia feels with good reason more threatened than any time in its modern history’, John Jenkins, the former British ambassador there, wrote in the New Statesman. Apart from the declining oil revenue and the spread of jihadism, one reason was ‘the sustained ideological and material challenge of Iran’. Iran looms just across the Persian Gulf from Saudi Arabia’s oil-rich Eastern Province where the majority of the country’s minority Shiites live. The Saudis fear Iran will foment unrest there as well as in the nearby emirates. They did not help their cause by the execution of the prominent Shiite cleric earlier this month.
Nor did the Iranian foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, try to ease tensions. He had a blood-curdling column in the New York Times. He wrote: ‘Saudi Arabia seems to fear that the removal of the smoke screen of the nuclear issue will expose the real global threat: its active sponsorship of violent extremism. The barbarism is clear. At home, state executioners sever heads with swords as in the recent execution of 47 prisoners in one day…Abroad, masked men sever heads with knives’.
Meanwhile, there are unofficial reports that Saudi Arabia has told Israel that it is free to use its air space if it wants a short cut to bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities. Whatever next?
It is very difficult to interpret the intentions of Iran and Saudi Arabia with their traditional intrigues and devious policies. Iran is under the sway of ayatollahs who have to combine religious beliefs with practical politics. It is the same with Saudi Arabia except it is ‘one of the least transparent regimes in the world’, according to Anthony Bubalo of the Lowy Institute. Their foreign ministers are due to come face to face this month if agreement can be found about whom to invite to the talks on Syria’s future. It is difficult to envision a settlement when Iran is helping prop up Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad in return for transit rights for supplies to the Shiite Hezbollah in neighbouring Lebanon. For Saudi Arabia, al-Assad, from the Alewite sect, is a villain and has to be replaced by someone representing Syria’s Sunni majority.
If there is one matter Iran and Saudi Arabia agree on, it is routine executions. The New York Times says 700 people were put to death in Iran in the first half of last year. Figures for Saudi Arabia are hard to come by. But human rights groups claim that ‘at least 157 people were beheaded last year. Apostasy is a capital offence. The punishment for adultery can mean being stoned to death. Other misdeeds can lead to a public lashing.
The U.S. and Britain remain restrained in their observations about human rights. After all, Saudi Arabia is a prime market for their arms trade. It spends a bigger portion of its economy on defence than any other country – 11% of GDP as against 3.5% in the U.S and 1.5% in Australia. Last month, the Saudis signed a US$29 billion deal to buy 84 F-15 fighters from the U.S. and now intends to spend another US$11 billion to buy four littoral combat ships. Saudi Arabia also is home to five U.S. military bases. For Britain, it is the most lucrative customer of all for its arms companies. Iran is a potential major customer if the sanctions are eased altogether. It wasted no time in ordering 114 European airbuses to replace the state airline’s ageing fleet.
The Middle East must be the most thankless region in the world when it comes to making political deals. Its map is fractured more than ever by opposing groups jostling and fighting for power and mostly with an Islamic undertone as exemplified by Daesh (Islamic State). Then you have Israel and the Palestinians. They have been talking for decades without success except they maintain a relatively harmonious co-existence compared with elsewhere in the neighbourhood. Just as the ancient texts of the Koran are never far away in Arab disputes, so, too, have been the even older teachings of the Torah in the Israel/Palestinian imbroglio. They can be anything but helpful when it comes 21st century political negotiations.
If there is the faintest glimmer of optimism, it is the 2015 Nobel peace prize. It was won by a coalition of Tunisian unionists, employers, lawyers and human rights activists for helping to prevent the original local Jasmine revolution from descending into chaos like the uprisings in the other Arab countries.
FOOTNOTE. Spare a thought for the war in Yemen. Not only does it have what the New York Times in November called ‘a chaotic stew of government forces, armed tribes, terrorist groups and militias at war in the country’. It now has mercenaries from Colombia, Chile, El Salvador and Panama – presumably mostly Christians – fighting on behalf of the government, according to the same paper. They were sent by the United Arab Emirates as part of the campaign led by a jittery Saudi Arabia to curb further Arab revolutions.
John Tulloh had a 40-year career in foreign news.
-
John Tulloh. In praise of those who bring you the evening news.
Updated version of what appeared in Australian Cinematographer.
In the world of television news, if there is one group which can rightfully claim a grievance for lack of recognition, it is the cameramen* who bring you what it is all about: the pictures, the vision, the actuality and the reason you watch news bulletins. They are the special forces of the news industry. Unlike the reporters and producers, they have to be at the front line. Otherwise, those news reports count for little. Yet their contribution is so often overlooked. It is disappointing in an industry which likes to trumpet its successes. And now they face extinction with the gradual switch to the squirt-and-run style of video journalists (VJs).
It is probably forgotten that the cameramen at the birth of television were also the reporters just as they were in the old newsreel days. Like the famous Damien Parer and many others before them, they went out alone to cover the stories. It was then left to an editorial person back at the station to put them together. In many cases, they are still the reporters today because they still cover some stories alone.
I spent 40 years in foreign television news working for Visnews (now Reuters TV) in London, Saigon, Singapore, Hong Kong and New York before returning to Australia to run the ABC’s international television news operation. Visnews was the world’s biggest television news agency. Its reporters were its network of staff and freelance cameramen working to the London head office news desk or a regional bureau.
They were thrilling days of ferocious syndicated competition. The excitement was the anticipation of what your coverage of a major story would show and would it be better than the opposition’s. The cameramen were the key to an agency’s success. Many of them knew more about the story than the much-feted foreign correspondents and certainly had sharper news instincts to be competitive.
One such cameraman was our own Neil Davis. His war coverage from Vietnam and Cambodia was at the very frontline shot on his faithful Bell and Howell three-lens wind-up camera with a cassette recorder for sound. He knew more about what was happening than any reporter. Michael Buerk, the acclaimed BBC correspondent, made a name for himself for his poignant reporting of the 1984 Ethiopian famine. But the person who broke the story was really the Visnews cameraman, the late Mohamed Amin, whose pictures of starvation and suffering are forever remembered. But initially the credit for the story went to Buerk because he was the voice behind the pictures. Unfortunately and unfairly, that is the way the system works.
Such an example happened in August 2011 when three ABC personnel were killed in a helicopter crash near Lake Eyre. The tragedy is remembered for the death of reporter Paul Lockyer, a much-admired face and a voice known to millions. The veteran helicopter pilot, Gary Ticehurst, was also remembered to a lesser extent. But for the cameraman, John Bean ACS, somehow his name and role barely registered in the public consciousness even though he had shot the Lake Eyre documentary which they were following up on.
For me, the best news cameramen in the world are Australians. They are versatile, have a can-do attitude and an uncanny eye for the pictures that count. Many taught themselves to edit, making themselves all-rounders. One was Paul Moran from Adelaide, who was killed by a suicide bomber at the start of the Iraq war in 2003. Confronted by a strange editing machine in a small-town U.S. tv station, he got a job by assuring them that he could use the machine except it would take a day to adjust because in the southern hemisphere it was back to front. In foreign fields, Australian cameramen like Paul irritated those from countries which had strict demarcation lines between camerawork and editing. They have always been in demand as freelancers by the big international broadcasters for their all-round skills.
Yet little is publicised or truly appreciated about these people or their craft. When I see a home-grown documentary, my main interest is to find out who shot it. This can be problematic if it is on the ABC because of the insulting tendency to compress the credits and promote some upcoming program. The ABC’s 7.30 from time to time gives an on-air credit to the producer as well as the reporter. The cameraman? Not a word. Or indeed the editor for that matter.
Very occasionally it works the other way. In 1994, the ABC’s Andrew Taylor ACS won the Walkley best cinematography award for his dramatic pictures of the uprising outside the Moscow White House. The ABC reporter, Deborah Snow, was a finalist in the best coverage of a current story, but the judges deemed this and the other two finalists not worthy of an award!
The great David Brill ACS had to buy his own camera equipment and pay his own air fare and excess baggage to New York back in the 70s when the ABC appointed him as its North America cameraman. His initial accommodation was at the $14 a night Pickwick Arms. Much cheaper that way, decided the ABC management. What’s more, he had to pay for his own insurance, including when covering the civil wars in Central America. Yet he had to work full time with ABC correspondents who had been posted with all the financial and other entitlements of Australian diplomats. Some subsequent cameramen posted overseas also had a struggle to be regarded the same as a correspondent.
Somehow cameramen were regarded as lesser beings compared with their reporting colleagues. It was as if they were blue collar workers rather than someone of a higher status. In interviews at the ABC for choosing a correspondent for an overseas post, a senior editorial person would always be present in order to have a say. But they often had little interest when it came to selecting a cameraman. It was as if cameramen were all the same and you could take them for granted. Indeed often ads for these positions were for ‘camera operators’ which I found appalling. To me, operators were people on switchboards or who drove forklift trucks. Cameramen are craftsmen.
As per the Neil Davis example, many cameramen are also smart newsmen with the right instincts. David Brill went on to become a distinguished video journalist for SBS Dateline before unenlightened new management moved in. Michael Cox, who won a joint Logie with ABC reporter Geoff Thomson for their coverage of being embedded with US marines during the Iraq war, later wrote a published account. It was worthy of any correspondent. Peter Curtis ACS, then based in Moscow for the ABC, went on assignment to the Kuril Islands in the Russian far east. On the long flight back, he wrote an account of his visit which mysteriously surfaced in a University of Tasmania department as an example of journal writing. Later, with his permission, it was reprinted in a magazine for international pilots. It, too, was another beautifully observed account of a strange and distant place – just like his camerawork.
Once I was talking to another ABC cameraman based in Moscow who mentioned two or three very good story ideas in passing. I said he should mention this to the reporter to submit to the weekly planning meeting in Sydney. ‘Oh, no’, he said. ‘I’m only the cameraman’. I was appalled.
I have the greatest admiration for many of the ABC foreign correspondents I had the privilege of working with. The same applies to many Visnews and later ABC cameramen for their versatility, creativity, memorable work under pressure, courage, competitiveness and understanding as much as the reporter of what the story was all about. Alas, the halcyon days of news-gathering are over with the advent of drones, mobile phone cameras, selfie sticks, handout vision and the cold hand of the accountants. Perhaps it matters little when so much news these days consists of sterile interviews and statements set up by PR apparatchiks.
But you certainly need an experienced news cameraman and cool hand when it comes to one of the worst problems of an Australian summer: bushfires and their unpredictability. Some of the most terrifying television news pictures which stay in your mind are of raging bushfires up close. For me, another was the coverage by the ABC’s veteran Peter Sinclair of the 1998 Sydney-Hobart yacht race. He and helicopter pilot Gary Ticehurst battled through a huge storm to cover and monitor a distressed yacht far out to sea before having to return to land with just a few minutes of fuel left. Just thinking about it is enough to make you sweat.
So was the Lindt Cafe siege in Sydney in December 2014. The Seven Network won the Logie for best news coverage. It was to the credit of Seven that its senior cameraman spoke on behalf of all those involved. How appropriate that was because it was the cameramen rather than the reporters who made that a story to remember.
Some years ago, the ABC’s excellent Foreign Correspondent program published two volumes of interesting yarns of incidents, background and events relating to many of the program’s reports. They were mainly by the reporters and producers. I have often wondered why the ABC does not produce a video of the best sequences shot over the years by its news and current affairs cameramen. It could be set to inspiring music. No voiceover would be needed. Just perhaps a note of the date and location of the sequences. The memorability, sensitivity, beauty, content, imagery, drama and wonder of those pictures would be something to behold in today’s frantic world.
As the ABC has had so many outstanding cameramen, it might be a dilemma to know where to start. But I would begin with current staff and nominate the work of Louie Eroglu ACS. As his many awards attest, he is a standout craftsman whose eye for striking and unforgettable image-making is a visual and poetic treat. It is the same with even his stills on Facebook. He has a magical eye which can see a memorable frame in an instant. He epitomises the professional craftsmanship of Australian cameramen.
Given that it is usually the reporters who get the credit on big stories, cameramen should not forget the old adage that a picture is worth a thousand words whereas a two-minute television news story amounts to less than 200 words.
FOOTNOTE. The main media prizes in Australia are the annual Walkley Awards. The 13 judges of the latest awards did not include a cameraman, though a stills photographer was among them. Once again, it was mainly journalists judging something they had probably never done in their lives – camerawork. Perhaps they can be excused on this occasion when the winner was Louie Eroglu. But you can be sure he would have had tough competition.
*I have referred throughout to cameramen because I have only worked with cameramen.
John Tulloh is a former ABC journalist with long experience around the world.
December 2015
-
John Tulloh. The Cost of the star-spangled arms banner.
Repost from 05/10/2015
O say can you see, by the dawn’s early light,
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight’s last gleaming,
Whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight,
O’er the ramparts we watched, we’re so gallantly streaming?
And the rockets’ red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there;
O say does that Star-Spangled Banner yet wave
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave?The words of the first verse of the U.S. national anthem are now more than 200 years old. While they explode with patriotic pride of the new nation, they also celebrate war – in this case the repulsing of the British navy when it tried to invade Baltimore harbour in 1812. Since its founding in 1776, America has had a penchant for charging off to war.
An organisation called WashingtonsBlog has come out with an extraordinary statistic: since 1776, the U.S. has been at war in one form or another for 91% of those years. Many of the early conflicts were local ones, such as the revolutionary and civil wars, fighting the Mexicans and elsewhere in Central America, the Caribbean and, of course, against its own Indian tribes. In the past 100 years, only 11 passed without Washington turning loose its military somewhere in the world.
President Calvin Coolidge once observed that the business of America was business. It is more like military business. The U.S. Defence Department is synonymous with staggering statistics: 1.3 million personnel on active duty, another 742,000 civilian employees, a budget of 1.4 trillion dollars and hundreds of thousands of different buildings over 5000 sites covering 30 million acres (or 10 times the size of sprawling Sydney). It is possibly the biggest enterprise in the world, especially for the juggernaut of business it generates.
USA Today, quoting 24/7 Wall Street, a newsletter for investors, reported that in 2011 the top 10 U.S. arms manufacturers employed a total of nearly 1,100,000 people and in the previous two years made a combined profit of $26.35 billion. There were scores of other companies also feeding on the military largesse. Their total turnover represents 2.3% of the U.S. GDP.
A study last year by Morgan Stanley, the financial services company, revealed that shares in major American arms companies have risen by four times as much in the past 50 years compared with the broader market. The Fiscal Times says the Dow Jones index of defence and aerospace companies has grown by 60% in the past two years, double the rate of the S&P. The so-called angels of death are thriving like never before.
Presidents at their peril try to reform or tame what President Eisenhower called the industrial-military complex. For members of congress, a vital electoral asset in any state is a military base or a war materiel plant. Washington is pervaded by lobbyists representing every aspect of the military economy. A naval installation in Virginia alone has more than 78,000 employees.
Jonathan Turley, professor of public interest law at George Washington University, says: ‘While few politicians are willing to admit it, we don’t just endure wars – we need war’.
President Obama has done his best to reduce the U.S. military presence in the world. By 2018, the army will shrink to its smallest size since before WW2. It will then number 450,000 compared with 570,000 in 2011. But now additional money is being spent on developing drones to replace boots on the ground.
Investors in the military-industry complex can take heart from another outlet ripe for exploitation: Homeland security. ‘Hundreds of billions of dollars flow each year from the public coffers to agencies and contractors who have an incentive to keep the country on a war footing’, says Prof. Turley. ‘The core of this expanding complex is an axis of influence of corporations, lobbyists and agencies that have created a massive, self-sustaining terror-based industry’.
The incoming Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General ‘Fightin’ Joe’ Dunford, sees the danger elsewhere. He said in July that ‘Russia presents the greatest threat to our national security. If you look at their behaviour, it is nothing short of alarming’. It was bigger than Islamic State (I.S.), he added.
The titans of the military-industrial complex are more likely to welcome a Republican presidential victory as being even better for business. Donald Trump, the front runner, calls himself a ‘very militaristic person’. His slogan of ‘Make America Great Again’ can only mean louder bugles. Carly Fiorina, a former CEO who has impressed in debates, wants more ships, a bigger army and the restoration of missile defences to Poland. Senator Lindsey Graham proposes to send in troops to deal with I.S. and to stay there as long as it takes.
Given that trouble in the Middle East is here to stay and with Russia upping the ante, China flexing its military muscle and booming export orders, no amount of upheaval in the international economy is likely to deter the military business bonanza.
Americans can be rightly proud of what their armed forces have done in areas of the world where their allies often fear to tread. But they might also ponder another statistic: the rising cost of caring for the 33,000 of their military personnel, mainly troops, who were severely disabled in the line of recent duty. The Centre for Research on Globalisation estimates the overall long-term cost will be $900 billion.
President Eisenhower ended his eight years in office in 1961 by warning Americans ‘to guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence….by the military-industrial complex’. He might as well have talked to a coyote out on the prairies for what has happened since. One of his successors concluded that it would take the occupant of the Oval Office every single day of the presidential term to have any chance of taming the Pentagon.
The Pentagon’s own website virtually confirms that it will always be business as usual. ‘The mission of the Department of Defense’, it states, ‘is to provide the military forces needed to deter war and to protect the security of our country’.
FOOTNOTE. According to British columnist Alexander Chancellor, since 1968 more Americans have died from gunfire in their home country than have died in all wars in their history. That is, from the War of Independence right through to both world wars and Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq. The total war deaths, he wrote last month, were 1,171,177 over 239 years versus 1,384,171 in murders, suicides and other gun-related incidents in just the past 47 years.
John Tulloh had a 40-year career in foreign news.