War may change, but not the casualties
On an island during the late summer of 1914, a group of Frenchmen, Englishmen and Germans had been living as friendly neighbours. As told by Walter Lippman in his classic study Public Opinion, no telegraphs reached the island, and letters arrived only once every six weeks. So, 'for six strange weeks they had acted as if they were friends, when in fact they were enemies', wrote the distinguished US journalist and adviser to presidents.
'But their plight was not so different from that of most of the population of Europe,' Lippman wrote. 'They had been mistaken for six weeks, on the continent the interval may have been only six days or six hours. There was an interval ... a time for each man when he was still adjusted to an environment that no longer existed.'
Towards the end of the first world war, US senator Hiram Warren Johnson was credited with the famous comment that truth is the first casualty of war. This is understandable, given the lack of timely and accurate information - 'the fog of war' - that has been traditionally exploited by political leaders and generals against not only their enemies, but their own population. Today, however, Lippman's 'mistakes' would not arise, at least in the richer parts of the world that are electronically wired 24 hours a day via global media networks. The neighbours on the island would know in an instant where they, or at least their nations, stood against one another.
Today's war planners no longer have the luxury of time to establish facts on the ground. They have to prepare the public ahead of time and carefully manage its perception through every phase. In a globalised world, any development on the ground can be broadcast live around the world.
So it is that the bloody conflict in Gaza has found a most intense public relations war between the consulates in Hong Kong over the local media. This is unusual for our city: many people here care little about the conflict and understand it even less. Hong Kong and Beijing enjoy good relations with all countries with a stake in the conflict, so we are not a pivotal ideological front.
Yet, since Israel began aerial bombing of the Palestinian territory last week, its consulate has been bombarding major news outlets in Hong Kong in an intense PR effort to present the country's viewpoint. These include daily e-mails, meetings with Israeli Consul General Amikam Levy and offers of more briefings and telecast conferences.
The Iranian consulate in Hong Kong has been conducting a similarly intense campaign by denouncing Israel's military action. Iran has been the main backer of Hamas, the radical Islamist group that controls Gaza and whose rocket attacks on Israeli border towns are cited by Israel as the reason for its assault on Gaza.
It is safe to assume the consulates' PR war is being waged around the world, with diplomats at the front line. At times, it is even amusing. The Israeli consulate, for example, has sent a batch of photos to the South China Morning Post showing Israeli soldiers in Gaza patting a kitten (above, right), playing with children, assisting an elderly man, and even a senior military officer shaking hands with his Palestinian counterpart.
The Iranian consulate has taken a more predictable approach by handing us gruesome photos of Gazan children injured (above, left) or killed by the Israeli attacks.
It may be a 24-hour connected world, but war is still foggy, with children - and truth - its most vulnerable casualties.
Alex Lo is a senior writer at the Post
