Recently, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg described the Ukraine-Russia crisis as the most important issue between the Atlantic bloc and Russia since the Cold War. At the same time, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy warned everyone to be careful while speaking of the possibility of a war between Russia and Ukraine, saying, “The press in the U.K., Germany, France and Lithuania gives the impression that there is a war, but that's not the case."
“We don't need this panic,” he said and pointed to the Western press's warmongering.
On the cover of the Feb. 14-21 edition of Time magazine, there’s a rather chaotic photo with the title of “The Crisis That Could Change Europe Forever.” When we look inside the magazine, “war” titles are everywhere. There is even an article by Simon Shuster with the title "The Untold Story of the Ukraine Crisis." The piece starts with the sentence, “Great wars sometimes start over small offenses.” Time’s Jan. 31-Feb. 7 edition covers Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny with a special report. On the cover of The Economist’s Jan. 8-14 edition, there is an illustration of an armed Russian President Vladimir Putin. It reads, “Mr. Putin will see you now.” Doesn’t it sound just like the start of the first and second world wars?
Since the U.S. invasion of Vietnam, the role of the press in conflicts and wars has been decisive. Just remember how the public support for the U.S.’ offensive for “American interests” in Southeast Asia was deeply shocked by images of horror and brutality from Vietnam. Or remember how the provocations and perception management through the press increased more than ever before and during the Cold War era? From movies to documentaries, several tools were used to back the perception management in that period. In the Gulf crisis in 1991, another mass perception campaign, led by CNN, focused on Iraq’s toppled late leader Saddam Hussein with unrelated images of dying cormorants. The then pro-Western elites of many countries, who were not interested in what happened to the people in Iraq, were watching the image of cormorants fluttering in the oil swamp while drinking their tea thousands of miles away.
But let's get back to today. It's not much different. With the Taliban takeover in Afghanistan in the summer of 2021, the U.S. and the West failed a great test with the Afghan people. While desperate Afghans waited at the airport, BBC and CNN International were broadcasting uninterruptedly what would happen to women after 20 years of reform. The purpose of the publications, which gave the impression that Afghan women had every right and opportunity, from education to health, during the 20 years when the U.S. was in Afghanistan but lost all of them when the Taliban came, was to prevent other Western countries' backlash of the U.S.' traumatic withdrawal from the region. As a matter of fact, the women's rights issue in the East has always been a very good soft belly for the West.
The broadcasts on the Ukraine crisis are no different though. They are primarily based on creating an image of “Russian aggression” for the masses and declaring the original sinner in case of any confrontation. Overall, Russia’s theses cannot find footing in Western broadcasting, while its military buildups occupy almost every platform.
Recently, Bloomberg used the title of “Live: Russia invades Ukraine,” which remained on their website’s home page for nearly an hour. They later apologized, issuing a statement saying that the title was among the possible titles. The New York Times (NYT) issued the same headline, citing Bloomberg, without confirming the accuracy of the news. The NYT also admitted its mistake half an hour later, saying that the news was published by mistake. They said they were deeply sorry and are investigating the cause.
Of course, the Kremlin was quick to respond, describing it as “a consequence of the West's escalation of tensions.” Referring to the said news title, Moscow expressed how dangerous the tension with Ukraine is. The Kremlin further claimed that the weapon deployment in Ukraine and the troop deployment near its borders are behind the tension. Amid such a period of time, any development poses a danger, the Kremlin added, even saying that it defines the title as “Bloomberg news” instead of seeing it as ordinary fake news.
At the end of January, Reuters reported that, "Russia's military buildup near Ukraine has expanded to include supplies of blood along with other medical materials that would allow it to treat casualties, in yet another key indicator of Moscow's military readiness." The sources of the news were three U.S. officials speaking to Reuters on condition of anonymity. The report backed the U.S. warnings of the Russian preparation for invasion with its more than 100,000 troops near its borders. The reaction to the news came from Ukraine. Ukraine's Deputy Defense Minister Hanna Maliar simply described it as “lies,” saying: “This information is not correct. Such news are tools of information and psychological warfare. The purpose of such information is to create panic and fear in our society." Maliar implicitly criticized the U.S. and the U.K.
The million-dollar question is here why the Western press keeps doing it. The primary reason among several others is the Western press, as a whole, acting as a national army to protect the interests of its countries. Ironically, when other countries’ press attempts to protect the interests of their countries, the Western press directly targets them, issuing accusations about freedom of speech or other such infringements. It’s accurate to conclude that the Western process acts like a state unit when it comes to the interests of the West, NATO or the EU, and sets all the principles of journalism aside. However, for example, whenever the press in Turkey takes up a position to defend Turkey's interests in the Eastern Mediterranean, it is accused of “being under pressure.”
The reason why the press in the West behaves this way is the fact that Western media outlets have been unable to move beyond being a professional propaganda apparatus since the very beginning. Events such as World War II and the Cold War created a propagandist reflex to manipulate a subject in the press and to develop a perspective on that subject. Within this aspect, the press does not fully focus on human rights, even if the oversight harms other cultures, societies, customs or religions. Still, they never give up on their "universality" claim, which they sell to the Western elites all over the world.
