In today's Wall Street Journal, Andrew Browne, says China has thrown out the rule book on the South China Sea by seizing a drone controlled by a U.S ship. But, he went further by saying the explanation offered, i.e that it was a navigation hazard that was picked up to make sure it did not interfere with sea traffic "beggars belief", a term that is apt even if not intended. Even the Chinese people cannot believe that China goes around picking up underwater vehicles to insure safety of the seas around them.
This is the kind of in-your-face explanation that is more prone to be from the Russian press which manufactures scenarios to explain their country's actions. Truth is a secondary consideration in this kind of narrative. Something that sounds good, and has the feel of being right, is OK even if it bears no resemblance to what actually happened.
This is similar to the Iranians taking U.S personnel off a disabled ship in the Straits of Hormuz. They offered the same kind of explanation but video taped the whole incident to belittle US forces. There was no good story that could explain that. "Rescue" sounded hollow after the tape was shown.
At times, we choose to suspend belief to avoid confrontation. We accept these stupid explanations without pointing out that they are not only untrue, but manufactured by a political apparatus that has to know they are false. We accept them anyway. Well, some do. The ability to describe the truth and discredit the lies is not just a political choice. The free press in the parts of the world that have one, should be fact checking these kinds of ridiculous claims instead of one political candidate said in 1985. Where are the New York Times and Washington Post of old that could dig out the true things and expose the lies. Now they are no different than the Russian and Chinese press, telling us a story they want us to believe instead of trying to find the truth.
No comments:
Post a Comment