Page 12 - Conflict, Terrorism, and the Media In Asia

Introduction

Benjamin Cole

Today in states across Asia, a range of different forms of violent political
transaction operate through the mass media. This includes separatist movements
driven by various ethnic, nationalist and religious factors; revolutionary groups
seeking to subvert the state; inter-communal violence; and terrorist groups
pursuing a variety of national and regional objectives. The majority of these conflicts
are indigenous in nature, involving national groups seeking specific national
objectives, although the interconnections between combatant groups in different
countries in Asia were progressively strengthened during the 1990s, partly as a
result of the expansion of the al Qaeda network (Gunaratna 2003). The nature,
origins and drivers of these conflicts are often very different, but what each type
of conflict has in common is the role that the media plays as an interlocutor
between the government, combatants and society.
The dissemination of information by governments through the media used to
be a cornerstone of nation building and political control, but unfettered access to
media communications is increasingly facilitating challenges to established
regimes by activist and militant groups. Acts of terrorism and political violence
are acts of communication that are not just ends in themselves but part of a wider
process of communicating a message and generating a desired response. The
media is the principle mechanism by which those communications are dissemi-
nated, but it is more than just a passive conduit for relaying messages. The media
is a political actor in its own right and is capable of playing a number of political
roles, which include agent of stability, agent of restraint (through monitoring and
challenging governments) and agent of change (McCargo 2003: 3–4).
For those engaged in political violence the objective is to use violence to
acquire heightened attention from the public, political elites and policy making
circles, as a trigger to promote debate on their objectives. Violence serves as a
universal key to focus media attention and gain publicity (Nacos 2002: 99),
thereby enabling non-state combatants to set the media agenda. It is through
setting the media agenda and influencing political debates that combatants
transform their violence into political power (Schaeffert 1992: 63).
Brigitte Nacos defines the relationship between the media and terrorists as a
‘marriage of convenience’ in which terrorists need the media to communicate
their messages, and the media reports terrorism as a means of boosting their