How much do we know about what is really going on in Iraq?

A friend of mine who worked in the Green Zone in Baghdad, that heavily guarded bastion reserved for the Commanding General and the Coalition Provisional Authority and its successors, remarked to me that Public Affairs was re-organized while he was around to focus primarily on the folks back home. It was a U.S. Presidential election year. The over-arching objective was to keep the American public happy about progress in Iraq regardless of events. The notions that the truth might have some utility, might possess some inherent moral value, and that maybe the Iraqis should get some serious communication attention, were tossed out the window.

Shortly afterwards, Public Affairs and Information Warfare were merged. Information was now a warfighting tool and would be disseminated as such. Veracity was irrelevant in the new equation. All that counted was the effect. True, major events such as significant bombings or serious attacks could not be glossed over, or hidden completely, but such news could still be delayed, downplayed, spun or otherwise manipulated to such an extent that its impact could be severely diluted. Above all, you could buy time until some major distracting event occurred – the capture of Fallujah being a classic example.

The tendency of the US media to give government statements priority under virtually all circumstances, and to accept them more or less at face value, particularly when National Security issues are involved, has made it even easier for the US government to control the news. Then there are other instruments which can be used to keep the media from asking too many awkward questions including classifying information, and control of access to people, events, transport, security and transportation. Control of access is an extraordinarily powerful tool because without access reporters cannot do their jobs and, as a consequence, may lose them; and it is a tool that is used ruthlessly.

Such an environment of government control, coupled with the very real hazards of carrying out investigative reporting in Iraq, mean that it is highly questionable as to whether the average American citizen has a clear idea of what is happening on the ground in that country. Further, it also means that major stories about events which might be considered embarrassing to the US Government, are rarely, if ever, followed up to resolution. The following few, more obvious, examples illustrate this point. Clearly there are deeper issues concerning the conduct of the war which should also be examined.

• What is the true story of Abu Ghraib and why have no senior officers been charged?

• Why did the shortage of armored protection occur in the first place – and is it really over?

• Why do the military not keep track of both Iraqi insurgents and civilians killed and wounded – and what are the true figures?

• Why are the costs of occupying Iraq so extraordinarily high?

• Why have the military been so unsuccessful in securing even such critical routes as the road from Baghdad Airport to the Green Zone.

• Are the numerous arms dumps in Iraq secure at last?

• Are the borders still open?

The culture of secrecy and news manipulation that pervades events in Iraq does little to advance the cause of democracy in either the US or Iraq.