Five years ago this month, Said and Cherif Kouachi stormed the Paris offices of the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo and, in a nightmare lasting just minutes, killed 12 people. In the days that followed, millions marched in France and elsewhere to express solidarity with the murdered journalists.
For Europeans, the Charlie Hebdo killings represented the first mass attack on journalists close to home. #JeSuisCharlie (“I am Charlie”) became one of the most popular Twitter hashtags ever. Press freedom was trending.
However, since then, the fight to defend journalistic freedom has flagged, and public mobilization has proved to be fleeting — including in the case of Charlie Hebdo.
In January last year, the magazine’s staff complained in an editorial that people no longer wanted to hear about the shootings.
“Perhaps you should move on,” they were reportedly told.
This apparent indifference has a lot to do with what many believe Charlie Hebdo represents: the freedom to express yourself in a way that might provoke others. This freedom has come under even more pressure in the past five years.
Such a trend is evident in the responses directed at journalists who shine a light on unpopular or inconvenient facts and opinions. They are exposed to a daily barrage of attacks on their integrity, including by important political leaders.
In the US, President Donald Trump has repeatedly referred to journalists who are critical of him as the “enemy of the people.” At a news conference two years ago, Czech President Milos Zeman brandished a replica of an AK-47 inscribed with the words “for journalists.”
By indulging in such behavior, these and other leaders normalize attacks against members of the press, and they are very much under attack.
According to Reporters Without Borders, 49 journalists worldwide were murdered last year because of their work. (The annual average for the past five years is even higher, at 81.)
In addition, the number of journalists who were arbitrarily detained rose to 389 last year. Threats on social media, against female journalists in particular, are an everyday occurrence, and journalists are routinely beaten up, teargassed or robbed of their equipment.
Violence against journalists is an assault on an essential pillar of democracy. As long as these attacks continue, it is not “time to move on” at all.
On the contrary, it is time for EU leaders to wake up and better protect journalists at risk. Efforts like the PersVeilig initiative in the Netherlands, in which police, public prosecutors, the journalists’ union and editors collaborate to counter violence against journalists, should be implemented across Europe.
Politicians who verbally attack journalists must be held accountable, and media organizations should do more to show solidarity with colleagues at rival outlets.
More generally, there is an urgent need for greater awareness and a stronger public defense of journalism’s value for society. There have been successful examples of this in recent years. The murders of journalists Jan Kuciak in Slovakia and Daphne Caruana Galizia in Malta sparked mass protests that forced these two nations’ prime ministers to resign.
In addition, the investigation by UN special rapporteur Agnes Callamard into the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, a columnist for the Washington Post, raised public awareness of the criminal behavior of the Saudi Arabian leadership.
These cases needed — and received — long-term attention. Still, who has heard of Norma Sarabia from Mexico or Eduardo Dizon from the Philippines, who also paid the ultimate price for practicing their profession? Nigerian journalist Jones Abiri went to prison for the second time last year on trumped-up charges, while a Nicaraguan photographer recently said that he has stopped working as a journalist for the time being, because it meant risking his life every day.
Who is standing up for these lesser-known figures?
The justice system should give higher priority to prosecuting attacks against journalists, yet a series of resolutions adopted by the UN General Assembly and Security Council has yielded limited results.
A better way to end judicial inaction would be to establish an internationally mandated investigation committee, which also would clear the way to resolving the hundreds of cold cases of journalists killed for doing their job.
Dozens of journalists are murdered every year, and in nine out of 10 cases, the perpetrators walk free. As long as such impunity exists, it pays to kill journalists.
Five years ago, we were all Charlie. Today, let us also be the hundreds of other journalists who have been killed since then.
Leon Willems is director of Free Press Unlimited.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
There are moments in history when America has turned its back on its principles and withdrawn from past commitments in service of higher goals. For example, US-Soviet Cold War competition compelled America to make a range of deals with unsavory and undemocratic figures across Latin America and Africa in service of geostrategic aims. The United States overlooked mass atrocities against the Bengali population in modern-day Bangladesh in the early 1970s in service of its tilt toward Pakistan, a relationship the Nixon administration deemed critical to its larger aims in developing relations with China. Then, of course, America switched diplomatic recognition
The international women’s soccer match between Taiwan and New Zealand at the Kaohsiung Nanzih Football Stadium, scheduled for Tuesday last week, was canceled at the last minute amid safety concerns over poor field conditions raised by the visiting team. The Football Ferns, as New Zealand’s women’s soccer team are known, had arrived in Taiwan one week earlier to prepare and soon raised their concerns. Efforts were made to improve the field, but the replacement patches of grass could not grow fast enough. The Football Ferns canceled the closed-door training match and then days later, the main event against Team Taiwan. The safety
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
Strategic thinker Carl von Clausewitz has said that “war is politics by other means,” while investment guru Warren Buffett has said that “tariffs are an act of war.” Both aphorisms apply to China, which has long been engaged in a multifront political, economic and informational war against the US and the rest of the West. Kinetically also, China has launched the early stages of actual global conflict with its threats and aggressive moves against Taiwan, the Philippines and Japan, and its support for North Korea’s reckless actions against South Korea that could reignite the Korean War. Former US presidents Barack Obama
RSS