PRESS FORCES A RETREAT IN THE WAR ON TERROR
__
HON. TED POE
of Texas
in the House of Representatives
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Mr. POE. Madam Speaker, recently coalition forces were forced to
retreat in their campaign against insurgents in Afghanistan when the
British Ministry of Defense extracted Prince Harry from his front line
duties. As third line in line to the British throne, Harry carries a
certain amount of importance about him, especially when he is risking
his life to make the lives of the British people and their allies
safer. Military service is not something new for the Royal Family, as
they have a long tradition of serving in the armed forces, including
direct combat duties. But why did the British military, one of the most
disciplined and well respected organizations in the world, have to pull
back? The answer was that it was betrayed by friendly fire in the
press.
An Australian magazine entitled New Idea leaked Harry's mission in
Afghanistan in late February. While the magazine has apologized, it
broke an informal agreement with the British Ministry of Defense that
called for a global media blackout on the story. Harry had been
successfully calling in coalition air-strikes against Taliban
insurgents. But with his identity and location compromised, Harry's
security became jeopardized because of the possibility that he and his
command would become specifically targeted.
Here is a "New Idea" for the press: exercise some common sense. While it is important that we as a democracy stay abreast of what is occurring in the military, there is a fine line where we have to stop and let the military do its job. This example involving the Prince of Wales shows the great security issue involving the press and the military. Not all information can be given to the general public, and when supplied with details, the press needs to be responsible and exercise basic common sense.
Here is some advice for the press to follow when given military
information. Ask the question, "Will this information possibly
endanger lives and missions?" If the answer is even close to being
"yes," then it is probably not best to publish it. What would happen
if our high ranking generals and civilian leaders had their locations
and missions revealed? We would have to completely rethink our strategy
and decisions. Missions and lives would become compromised, just as
they did for the British with Prince Harry. We need to let the military
do its job without interference.
And that's just the way it is.