Blurring the Lines with Human Shields

Recently there has been a lot of talk about civilian casualties in the Libyan civil war. Terms like “indiscriminate shelling” are thrown about, painting Muammar Gadhafi’s troops as abject villains. I have no intention of painting them as otherwise, but something keeps coming to mind when I read such reports: why are we only hearing about indiscriminate shelling in rebel-held towns?

To turn this situation on its head, let us look at recent press regarding reform protests in Syria:

Syrian security forces fired bullets and tear gas Friday on pro-democracy demonstrations across the country, killing at least 49 people — including a young boy — in the bloodiest day of the uprising against President Bashar Assad’s authoritarian regime, witnesses and a human rights group said.

49 people killed? That’s terrible. Including a young boy? Those monsters! How could they… wait a minute, hold up there. Who the heck brought a young boy to a protest against a brutally-repressive dictatorship? Against a regime headed by the son of a man that reputedly massacred 10,000 to 40,000 people under similar circumstances in 1982? The Syrian security forces may well be callous, inhuman monsters to fire on a crowd of protesters, but somebody was seriously negligent to let their son attend such a thing. I’m not blaming the victim here, I’m just assigning a fraction of the blame to the people that were supposed to be responsible for him.

Going back to Libya, it seems that rebels have holed up in a close-quarters situation that exposes the local civilians to an undue amount of risk. If they had taken up positions outside the city, Gadhafi’s forces probably wouldn’t be attacking the city. They are using the city and its inhabitants as a shield, in hopes of staying the hands of their adversaries and stirring up the international community against their dictator’s atrocities.

A bit from Al Jazeera on this subject that caught my eye:

Marine General James Cartwright, vice-chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the drones can help counteract the pro-Gaddafi forces’ tactic of travelling in civilian vehicles that make it difficult to distinguish them from rebel forces.

Those dastardly pro-Gadhafi jerks are using civilian vehicles to sneak out of the city. Because it makes them look like… Yeah, it makes them look like rebels. Because the rebels are hiding themselves amongst the civilians. Which makes the civilians look like targets.

Let’s keep in mind that both sides had a hand in this.

7 thoughts on “Blurring the Lines with Human Shields

  1. meesha.v

    these countries have a well-honed skill of playing the West and Western press to get the reaction they want. The problem is that in many cases the West wants to be played in order to accomplish whatever goals they have in mind. The Libya ordeal is no less shady than Iraq and hopefully Obama will get the same treatment as Bush would.

  2. meesha.v

    No I meant protests,comparisons with hitler, attempts to prosecute for war crimes,or at least talk about it. There is no doubt in my mind that obama gets re-elected, and will not be prosecuted for anything. That’s why i can’t stand partisan politics on right and left -failure to be consistent.

  3. Burrowowl Post author

    All of the above was already happening before the attacks in Libya, Meesha. Just look at pictures of any “Tea Party” rally with more than 200 participants and you’ll see all of the above. Protests? Check. Hitler comparisons? Check. Calls for prosecution? Check (same link). Throw in some witch-doctor imagery to roughly equate with the “GW Bush is a monkey” imagery, and everything’s pretty well in-place.

    Back to your original comment, though, I’m a little unclear on how those countries that are so well-honed at playing the West and the Western press would find it in their interest to make themselves look like civilian-killing monsters? The protests in Syria and the rebellion in Libya have been public-relations disasters for both incumbent regimes from a relations-with-the-West perspective. If anything the Western press has been slavishly pro-rebel in all cases, beating the drums for outside action to overthrow the bastards in power.

  4. meesha.v

    There is a big BUT here,not just anyone BUT the same people who criticized bush should criticize obama, if they hate wars, foreign involvement, etc.
    The incumbent governments may have a PR disaster, but the rebels have a PR win. I heard on NPR a report about Libyan rebels having a complete PR operation with journalist handlers, press releases, etc. They managed to get the West to support them in Libya and Egypt without making any promises, political allegiances and even disclosing (or having) any plans. That counts for something. It’s not inconceivable that the riots are a calculated PR sacrifice to accomplish certain goals and put the incumbent governments into a lose-lose situation.

Comments are closed.