When the New York Times revealed on June 23 that the US had secretly monitored millions of international bank transfers without court approval since 2001, the White House response was predictable.
"The disclosure of this program is disgraceful," said US President George W. Bush. "We're at war with a bunch of people who want to hurt the United States of America, and for people to leak that program, and for a newspaper to publish it does great harm to the United States of America."
Vice President Dick Cheney was more adamant: "Some in the press, in particular the New York Times, have made the job of defending against further terrorist attacks more difficult by insisting on publishing detailed information about vital national security programs."
The White House press secretary, former Fox News reporter Tony Snow, raised the ante, warning journalists "to think long and hard about whether a public's right to know in some cases might override somebody's right to live."
As the message percolated through Republican ranks, it became more threatening.
"Nobody elected the New York Times to do anything," fulminated Representative Peter King of New York, who chairs the Homeland Security Committee. "And the New York Times is putting its own arrogant, elitist, left-wing agenda before the interests of the American people."
King demanded that the Times be prosecuted. Senator Pat Roberts, head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, wondered if the press -- the Times story was followed up by the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal -- had compromised national security. Finally, Senator Jim Bunning told Kentucky's Courier-Journal: "In my opinion that is giving aid and comfort to the enemy, therefore it is an act of treason."
This was red meat to conservative bloggers and broadcast pundits.
"Sometimes you have to wonder if the New York Times is on the al-Qaeda payroll," pondered anklebitingpundits.com.
Even given the possibility that Republicans are pandering to their conservative base in a volatile election year, a familiar pattern quickly emerged.
"Somebody's calling the shots," says Lucy Dalgleish, executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. "If I had to make a guess it's coming straight out of Karl Rove. It's coordinated very well. It's targeted. It has a surgical feel to it. That's Rove."
The key phrase here is the mantra parroted by the Bush administration -- "national security." In the past couple of years, these words have been used repeatedly by officials in clashes with the media, restive since the bungled response to Hurricane Katrina and the worsening war in Iraq.
The government first invoked national security in the Valerie Plame affair, when a leak revealed the CIA agent's name. The official witch hunt for the culprit -- which included sending New York Times reporter Judith Miller to jail for refusing to reveal her source -- boomeranged when charges were filed against Cheney's aide, Lewis "Scooter" Libby.
Next, the New York Times found itself demonized after it reported that the shadowy National Security Agency (NSA) had been secretly spying on Americans since 2001. Now the Times has revealed that the agency has access to confidential details -- including names and account numbers -- of international money transfers via the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication.
Bill Keller, executive editor of the New York Times, and Dean Baquet, the editor of the Los Angeles Times, cite the media's public interest obligation to scrutinize government as justification for the story.
But to anyone who has watched the White House's duel with the media, the affair has a deeper resonance.
"The media is currently the only effective check on the administration," says Jonathan Turley, professor of constitutional law at George Washington University.
He believes Congress has virtually abrogated its oversight role. In contrast to the Watergate scandal, when Congress, the courts and the press confronted the White House, he says this time the media are acting alone.
Hence the orchestrated political campaign "to chill the last institution that is openly criticizing the president," he said.
But he believes this strategy will fail and risks a public backlash.
"The American media has deep and firm roots," Turley said.
"It has been tested before by other presidents, like Richard Nixon. It has never backed down. And it is not going to back down to George Bush. It may be that we are headed towards a major confrontation," he said.
Admittedly, the media often seemed timorous after Bush launched his war on terror. The New York Times disgraced itself when Miller's stories gave credence to the White House contention that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Nor did they rush the NSA domestic surveillance story into print.
"Far from being reckless, they were too conservative," Turley said. "They sat on that story for a year when most experts view the NSA surveillance program as a clear, well-defined crime."
Turley, who recently testified before the House Intelligence Committee on whether Congress should pass more repressive laws to curb the press, believes the White House wants to intimidate journalists.
"This is a president who relishes the idea of absolute authority. And a free press constantly reminds him he is not an absolute ruler. The media is the ultimate pebble in the president's shoe.
"He has largely dismissed it in the past. But it seems to bother him more and more. And now he's turned to Congress and asked, `Who will rid me of this meddlesome press?'" Turley said.
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.