HispanicVista Columnists

By Magdi Khalil

In March 2004, the United States launched the Arabic language satellite network Alhurra, the biggest news media project aimed at the Middle East since “Voice of America” was first launched in 1942.
Alhurra is operated by The Middle East Television Network, Inc., a non-profit corporation funded by the U.S. Congress through the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG). Norman J. Pattiz, Chairman of the BBG's Middle East Committee who spearheaded development of Alhurra, said, "Alhurra will present fresh perspectives for viewers in the Middle East that we believe will create more cultural understanding and respect,” adding that: "a key part of our mission is to be an example of a free press in the American tradition, and we will stand out like a beacon of light in a media market dominated by sensationalism and distortion.”

Now that eighteen months have passed, it is time to verify if this promise was fulfilled. Did Alhurra manage to offer exceptional American media coverage in Arabic? Did it further the Arab-American understanding, challenge the fierce campaign against the U.S. and restore America’s image? Did it foster democracy in the Middle East? Did Alhurra hold its own against Arab networks such as Al-Jazerra and Al-Arabia?
Unfortunately, the answer to all of these questions is negative; the network achieved none of its objectives. If Mr. Pattiz’s noble dream failed to materialize, it is mostly the fault of the Arab management team led by Mouafac Harb. The Americans put their faith in the Arab team and gave them free reign to run the television network; unfortunately, it turned out that their faith was sorely misplaced. The mismanagement and blatant abuse of power have cost Alhurra greatly, and have raised doubts about the United States’ ability to create a successful news media and maintain a competitive edge against the established Arab channels.
Alhurra is not as much American as it is Arab - with the typical flaws and mediocrity of an Arab news media. To quote Dr. Mamoun Fendi, a researcher at the Baker Institute, “Alhurra seems to be in league with the Arab media. What did Alhurra offer the Arab viewer? Nothing more than what he usually gets from an Arab news media; he was not introduced to American culture or values, and all he got was a reflection of his own, sad reality.”

To be honest, Alhurra didn’t give him “more” but rather “less” than the usual, as the Arab media specialists in the Middle East seem to concur. Their comments include: Alhurra is dull, dry and bland, lacking spirit and rhythm, a pale imitation of Al-Jazeera but without its professional flair and elegance.

No one would guess the American identity of the channel given its poor performance, and the lack of exclusive scoops or unique coverage; which is not surprising considering the ineptitude of most of its reporters. The channel sounds more like a local Lebanese channel, and indeed it has fallen in the hands of a leftover group from the civil war with attitudes and ideologies typical of that era. The Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper had labeled Alhurra “Washington’s sin,” stating that: “The US has sold the Arab audience a poor Arab-made merchandise.”

I am in the process of preparing a study of Alhurra’s performance during the last 18 months, in cooperation with ten prominent Arab intellectuals. The study will be presented to American officials who are interested in Alhurra, and who have a desire to understand its current situation and to take the necessary measures to steer it back to its original course.

There are serious flaws to consider, but one of the most alarming is the extent of power that the director – Mouafac Harb – holds, and how he had no qualms about using it to further his own agenda, at the expense of the American vision for the channel.
I presented a talk show on Alhurra for the past year. Based on this experience I am able to make the following observations:

• The first day the channel went on the air, Harb called Libyan President Khadafi a terrorist on a live program. He prevented me from interviewing Khadafi though I had already made the necessary arrangements with the Libyan President. The reason for this hostile attitude could be that Harb believed that Khadafi had kidnapped the Shiite Imam Moussa el-Sadr. Harb rejected my request to interview the Syrian President Bashar el-Assad, and I thought that he didn’t want to embarrass el-Assad, a known ally of Hizballah.

• While I was preparing for an episode about the Islamic movements in the Arab World, Harb refused a reference to Hizballah as a terrorist organization, and another reference to the Iranian revolution’s key role in spreading terrorism in the Middle East.

• The four producers of political programs on Alhurra are in charge of preparing questions, and recruiting Arab guests. Three out of the four producers are from South Lebanon and they deny that Hizballah is a terrorist organization and work according to their own agenda.

• In a news bulletin, a broadcaster used an expression borrowed from Al-Jazeera: “what America deems as terrorism,” in lieu of “terrorism.” Mr. Salama Neemat – a political commentator at al-Hayat newspaper has recorded a bulletin where the terrorists of Hamas who carry out suicide attacks against civilians were described as “Hamas activists.”

• Mr. Harb has personally told me that he cannot openly criticize the autocratic Arab regimes because he expects them to report him to the American Secretary of State, and he will be putting his job on the line. To the best of my knowledge, no reporter of Alhurra has ever been arrested in an Arab country, and the Arab regimes have never issued a protest against the network. Nothing surprising there, since Alhurra has erred on the side of caution, not tackling taboo subjects or hot issues that hold the interest of Arab citizens such as corruption, oppression, freedoms and democracy. In fact, the channel has been receiving very little attention or criticism from the Arab media as a whole lately. On the one hand, the channel hasn’t offered anything particularly worthy of attention, and on the other hand, the media in the Arab world takes its cue from the regimes that have no reason to censure the “tame” channel.

• Considering that at least 50% of the political programs are presented from the Middle East, would it be possible for an Arab reporter living in that region to stand up for Alhurra’s objectives and the United States’ vision for the Middle East?

• There are reasons to suspect that the Arab Intelligence Services have infiltrated Alhurra, managing to exercise some kind of soft control over the network. I warned, early on, against this dangerous possibility in an article that I published in Watani International (25 April 2004) and sent to American officials. I was concerned then that the channel’s chances of success would be seriously jeopardized if the Arab Intelligence Services manage to infiltrate the network’s staff. (This article is also published at: http://www.metransparent.com/texts/magdi_khalil_alhurra.htm)

• Mr. Harb has mastered the art of double talk. When in the presence of American officials, he is a passionate defender of American values and interests, but that zealous attitude seems to be reserved just for these occasions. I have spent a year working in Alhurra, during which I heard dozens of Arab guests attacking the United States and Israel, and not once have I heard an Arab guest defending Israel’s right to exist and live in peace among its neighbors. On the contrary, Harb’s friend, Mr. Mahmoud Shamam, a fierce opponent of the U.S. and Israel, was a weekly guest on Alhurra and received an extravagant payment for each appearance ($1000), literally unheard of for a guest of a one-hour talk show in the Arab region. In the mean time, Mr. Shamam was making occasional appearances on Hizballah’s channel, El-Manar.

• Ironically, a biased person without vision is running the channel that is supposed to foster democracy and pluralism in the Middle East! Harb assigned the key positions in the channel to handpicked friends regardless of their diminutive professional competence. He kept tight control over the network’s operations including: programs, guests, yearly salaries and recruitment. The outcome is lack of diversity, versatility and creativity. In the absence of an American supervisory role, Harb took full charge of the hiring process and showed a blatant disregard for professional hiring criteria. At the very least, his actions are questionable; for example, there are broadcasters from Lebanon and Dubai who have not done any work for Alhurra in the last six months, but who are nonetheless paid full salaries that amount to $100,000 per year.

• Harb runs the channel as if it was private property, much like any Arab dictator without accountability, letting hostile feelings and bias interfere with professional decisions. For example, he refused to hire me though I had a favorable professional record and I have been defending American values and interests in the Arab media for more than 15 years both as a guest and a program host. When my professional record was later examined by an American official, a member of the Broadcasting Board of Governors, I was allowed to join Alhurra’s staff. A year later, my employment was terminated.

• Harb and his cronies have succeeded in creating a lobby in Washington that speaks in their defense and makes a concerted effort to thwart any attempt to evaluate the network’s performance or investigate possible lapses. The prevalent impression is that the network is off limits, and its officials are not to be touched. It was obvious, very early on, that Harb was not committed to building up the channel’s capacity, and had no vision or plans in that respect, being rather busy marketing himself to the Congress and the American administration. A resignation won’t be enough to settle this matter, Harb should be held accountable for each American tax-dollar that went into the network; he should be questioned about what’s going on in Cairo, Dubai and Beirut and answer for the network’s failure to accomplish its mission.

The decision to create Alhurra was well founded, and the channel possesses great potential as a means of American diplomacy; cultivating international relations and fostering understanding amongst cultures. However, the channel will not fulfill its potential unless it undergoes a restructuring of its objectives, human resources, programs and management. I propose the following approach:

1. A team of Arab and American media specialists should carry out a full, professional evaluation of the network in order to detect flaws, identify the means to remedy them and devise a development plan. I personally volunteer for this task, and I am currently in the process of preparing a similar study to present to Congress and to the American administration.

2. A team of outside auditors should be charged with the task of reviewing all aspects pertaining to the financial management of the network, in order to uncover any undisclosed private deals, determine if there are any unlawful connections with Beirut, and look into the rumors of corruption. The assistance of a Middle East reputed audit bureau will be required to figure out if the Arabic records have been tampered.

3. To arrange for a congressional hearing about Alhurra, to discuss the channel’s current situation and formulate future strategies.
______________________________________________
Magdi Khalil is a political analyst, researcher, author and Executive Editor of the Egyptian weekly Watani International. He is also a columnist for Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper, London, a free-lance writer for several Arabic language newspapers, and a frequent contributor to Middle East broadcast news TV. Mr. Khalil has also published three books and written numerous research papers on citizenship rights, civil society, and the situation of minorities in the Middle East. E-mail: Magdikh@hotmail.com

The opinions expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of Freedom Now News and Freedom Now Communications.