Can media de-escalate conflict? Nani Afrida   ;   A Journalist, Currently A Student of International Peace Studies at the United Nations Mandated University for Peace (UPEACE) in Costa Rica

                                                JAKARTA POST,  22 Januari 2014

                                                                                                                                                                                                   

“Sir, do you have a plan to upgrade the security approach in Papua?” “No, no, the situation in Papua is still under control. It is still under civil order.” “But the situation in Papua has become worse; do you think the government will upgrade the approach in the future?” Those questions were raised by journalists to a senior military officer at the Presidential Palace on Dec. 1, 2011. It was Papuan National Day, when clashes between soldiers and Free Papua Movement (OPM) rebels are often reported.  The journalists’ questions were simple and the answers would be good for headline news stories, but I — who was also present — felt terrified. It would have been dreadful for Papuans if the government finally decided to upgrade civil order to civil emergency or martial law. But it would have been even more horrible if the decision to do so had been inspired by journalists’ questions.  As a local journalist who previously worked in Aceh, I lived under martial law in 2003-2004 and under civil emergency in 2004. The Acehnese lived in fear, cornered by members of either the Indonesian Military (TNI) or the then Free Aceh Movement (GAM). All activities were stopped and people tended to stay at home rather than risk their lives. Journalists in Aceh had to be extra cautious; otherwise, they would be summoned to military headquarters for interrogation if their stories were considered to have put soldiers’ lives at risk.  I could not understand why my colleagues asked those questions about Papua. Maybe they did not realize that their questions could have endangered Papuans, locally based journalists and soldiers, and lead to an escalation in the conflict there. Or maybe they were under their editors or employers’ pressure to get headline news. It is no longer a secret that journalists tend to make sensational news during wartime, which have sometimes jeopardized peace efforts. New technology and social media have contributed to tighter competition; thus, sensational news is an easy survival method. Peace and conflict studies cite the media’s role in three phases of conflicts: pre-conflict, during conflict and post conflict. Other players include the government, military, insurgency groups and so on. However, just like the other actors involved, the media can escalate or de-escalate a conflict. There are so many theories relating to “peace journalism” and “conflict-sensitive journalism”, but applying them depends on a journalist’s knowledge and sensitivity. Meanwhile, the media industry is focused on gaining more revenue, rather than thinking how to make peace.  Alvaro Sierra, a lecturer for peace and conflict studies, noted how journalists could also promote peace, including by acting as mediators between the two conflict parties. He cited an attempt by CBS’ famed newsman, Walter Cronkite, who had interviewed both then Egyptian president Anwar Sadat and Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin in 1977. At that time of tension between the two nations, Sadat had earlier said he would be ready to go to Jerusalem if he could prevent Egyptian soldiers from being killed. Cronkite then managed to interview both leaders, and managed to encourage them to meet in Jerusalem.  The “Cronkite Diplomacy”, as it was dubbed, was criticized as a journalist attempting to be a mediator. However, Cronkite argued that he was merely curious. He told Time magazine, “I don’t think a journalist should become involved in high-level diplomacy.” Others have cited British correspondent Patrick Seale, who is considered to have broken the deadlock in Israeli-Syrian negotiations in 2000, and the murdered Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaya, who was seen as mediating between the Russian government and Chechen terrorists when the latter held 700 hostages in 2004. Among media outlets promoting peace is the website amankiasha.com that focuses on promoting peace between Pakistan and India, which was established by two leading media houses, The Jang Group in Pakistan and The Times of India in India.  What about in Indonesia? Not only must Indonesia deal with internal conflicts due to diverse ethnicities, cultures and religions, it also faces non-conventional potential conflicts from terrorism, migrants and border disputes.  However, we rarely see the involvement of media outlets and journalists in attempting to de-escalate conflict. When I was working for local media in Aceh during 2000-2003, newspapers often displayed fully armed GAM militiamen on their front pages — a great sales strategy. But the media blow-up of the presence of GAM, regardless of the movement’s diverse strength in different areas, contributed to more massive military operations, creating more tension and casualties. Indonesia desperately needs journalists who have the ability to de-escalate conflict. A journalist should be both sensitive and creative to deal with situations, and that is not easy. Training is a must, but it should involve daily practices in areas other than theoretical discussions. Journalists must first and foremost understand the background of a conflict; to misunderstand a conflict will only escalate it, adding to the risk for locals. Media outlets should remember the duty they have to be a watchdog and peacemaker rather than acting as provocateurs. Sometimes the media forgets that heightened conflict will only result in a level of harm to itself that will outweigh any benefits derived by netting greater revenue.  During armed conflict, several media outlets have had their journalists killed, and anger from any side in a conflict against a particular media outlet that is perceived as publishing or broadcasting news that discredits them, leads to great difficulty for the journalists to access news sources.  However, the core problem for media in conflict situations is when it loses its independence or is accidentally trapped between two conflicting parties.  It is time for media outlets to think ahead and recognize that the media in general and journalists in particular should de-escalate conflict; not only for the sake of the public but also for their own interests.  The writer is a journalist and currently a student of International Peace Studies at the United Nations Mandated University for Peace (UPEACE) in Costa Rica. ●