war p.r.

[Ivo Skoric]

These are the thoughts of Hermann Goering uttered during the post 
World War II Nuerenberg war crimes trials set up by the victorious 
Allies:
"Naturally the common people don't want war: Neither in Russia, 
nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. 
But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the 
policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, 
whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a 
parliament, or a communist dictatorship.
Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding 
of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are 
being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of 
patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same 
in any country."

Would it work the same for the U.S.?

Recent well executed special p.r. operations:

1) With no apparent gain for Israel, Sharon surrounded Arafat's 
headquarters, which ended up boosting Arafat's ever diminishing 
stature. Then, Israeli Army withdrew following the directive from 
Washington. This shows both that Israel DOES listen to the U.S., 
and that the U.S. shall not completely abandon the cause of 
Palestinian statehood - both very important if the U.S. wants to 
secure Arab nations support for its war adventure against Saddam.
2) Former NY mayor, Rudolph Giulliani, timely released his off-the-
record remark to president Bush following the last year's 
September 11 tragedy. He, also, apologized for being out of order 
in saying that he would kill Osama Bin Laden with his own bare 
hands. Tsk, tsk, tsk, that from a legal professional? Instead, now, 
he would obviously prefer OBL being killed by a lethal injection in 
an orderly fashion in the structured settings of the death row 
supermax penitentiary. But the gains in admitting this RIGHT NOW 
are pretty obvious: appeal on citizens naked anger against those 
who might want to hurt this Republic.
3) Letting the U.N. bask in its selfcongratulatory joy of reaching the 
agreement to return weapon's inspectors to Iraq, and then just 
saying "the same old stuff." True, the UN digged itself in a hole by 
agreeing to renew inspections under the same terms that did not 
produce results in the first place, and, on top of that, this all 
smacks of the same type of incompetence and indolence with 
which the UN treated the war in Bosnia in the first three years. So, 
Powell doesn't really need to say anything else but "the same old 
stuff" and whatever Hans Blix thought that he might have achieved 
is already six feet under, with a thombstone above it.
4) They are throwing flyers over Iraq. This is an old psy-ops tactics. 
Paper is cheaper than bombs. And there is no collateral damage, 
civilian deaths, no bad press. The enemy is merely humiliated, not 
hurt or destroyed. It gives him an option to accept the terms of 
surrender without any further loss. From a peace activist 
perspective, there should be no objection to throwing flyers over a 
militant, dictatorial regime. One thing written on the flyers cought 
my eye, however: there is no mention of the U.S. Instead, it says 
"coalition aircraft" as if there is a dozen countries participating, and 
not only U.S. and its junior ally, U.K. This, I think, is aimed at the 
domestic U.S. consumption. Coalition means the world, i.e. the 
U.S. is not acting alone. The U.S. is taking the role of the U.N. in 
the absence of the strong and efficient U.N. - which the U.S. do not 
really want....

ivo