Home   >   Opinion   >   Article     

The peaceniks are guilty of double standards

January 31 2003

The spin in the Iraq debate does not emanate only from the White House, explains Michael Scammell.

While much has been made by anti-war commentators of the supposedly "dishonest" public relations campaign being run by the Bush administration to win support during the Iraq crisis, isn't a double standard at work here? A quick look at the actions of protesters in opposing war against Iraq suggests they are as skilled as any government in the use and finessing of public relations techniques.

Consider the following rather savvy PR tactics being used to support the anti-war cause:

Tactic 1: Attract high-profile celebrities to your cause. In the US, the anti-war movement persuaded Hollywood actor Sean Penn to visit Iraq on a "fact-finding" mission (unfortunately this turned into something of a PR disaster for the peace movement when Saddam tried to portray Penn's visit as support for Iraqi claims that it had no weapons of mass destruction). Lacking the marque value of a Sean Penn, local anti-war groups have signed up soapie stars such as Alison Whyte, John Woods and Kerry Armstrong. The ability to attract media coverage seems to be a greater guiding principle than any real understanding of the issues.

Tactic 2: Sign up God and claim the moral high ground. US presidents are often criticised for invoking God whenever they announce their involvement in international conflicts. The left often claims such pronouncements reflect a typically myopic "God Bless America" view of the world. But clearly the habit is catching. The anti-war Uniting Church minister Peter Matheson contributed a whole column to The Age this week extolling the virtues of his cause based on the consensus of support from church groups around Australia. "God Bless the peace movement," perhaps? Of course there is always a credibility problem when religious leaders start claiming God is on their side - after all, don't Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda claim the same thing?

Tactic 3: Use selective truth. In any PR war, truth is the first casualty. Bush has been criticised for his selective emphasis of Saddam's weapons of mass destruction while ignoring rogue nations such as North Korea. But is the peace movement any less selective? It chooses to emphasise America's unilateral intentions, without offering any alternative for dealing with Iraq.

Tactic 4: Keep it simple, stupid. Bush has been criticised for using simplistic slogans - "the axis of evil", "the war against terror" - that avoid deeper analysis. Not to be outdone, the anti-war movement has been pushing the line "it's all about oil". While any discussion of Iraq must include oil as an issue, it is simplistic to suggest this is the only factor of any significance while ignoring the pernicious nature of Saddam's regime.

Tactic 5: Use war to bolster your political cred. George Bush and John Howard have both been accused of opportunism in using the Iraq crisis to stir nationalistic tendencies and bolster their support at home (this is actually a curious argument given that polls suggest both leaders have lost some popular support over the issue). But a similar critique could be applied to politicians on the left opposed to a war. Consider how Carmen Lawrence has used the Iraq crises to bolster her power base within the ALP Left. Similarly Simon Crean, who no doubt sees his opposition to Australian involvement in any war as a way of buying back into a mainstream Labor supporter base disenchanted by the party's "me-too" policies last year on refugees.

Yes, there is some truth to the notion that the Bush drive for war is PR-finessed - a news report this week points out that the White House has employed an advertising executive to create a "Brand America" to "sell America to the Arab world". But isn't the anti-war movement being dishonest in pretending they are not trying to do exactly the same thing?

"Brand America" maybe, but one should not forget "Brand Peacenik" as well.

Michael Scammell is a former media officer of the US consulate in Melbourne.



Also in Opinion

Truth mustn't be a casualty

The blood of the dead will be on our hands

Sometimes, just sometimes, our politicians do deserve praise

Why the ATSIC gravy train must be derailed

Horse trading as US, France vie for votes

Getting it right on the economy

How they fooled us on East Timor

Sadly, Kennettism is alive and well

Summers doesn't know what we want

A plea from the people of Iraq

Beware this plan for our port

The lessons of North Korea

US must wipe away the shame of its past

Last shots before the shooting starts

Open the window before it's too late, baby

Howard's plan is to stealth-bomb health

When the power and the people are polls apart

The trouble with Labor

Still afraid of Virginia Woolf

Hollywood comes to the boardroom

Bush, Saddam and a game of chicken

Bush is calling for a show of cards

The real culprits in the internet pornography scandal

How the PM is hurting women

The AgeMost viewed articles
From midnight AEST

  1. Rose makes sure it counts