An overview of the role of leadership of the American press in matters of foreign policy

Résumé du document

How matters of American Foreign policy are dealt with by the American press? Indeed, unlike domestic affairs or State and community affairs, matters of foreign policy do not have the same echo to the general public, which is mostly unaffected by the decisions taken it this field. Does the American press play any role? Which newspaper plays a major role? Is there any attempt from the US press to improve the incline to public discussion in this field? Which part of the readership is concerned by such attempt? We will take, as an illustration, the recent issue of the International Criminal Court

Extraits

[...] Without any doubts, there is a forum on the issue which is even opened to the public. But without the proper tools, ordinary readers cannot participate and handle the terms of the debate. What about the leadership role of the press in matters on foreign affairs? As we have seen, although the two newspapers address issues of foreign politics, it is very hard to initiate any kind of public discussion on the issue. However, there is still a forum on the question in the editorial pages of both newspapers. [...]

[...] The US refusal to be part of the International Criminal Court, which entered into force on July 1rst 2002, the first ever permanent, treaty based, international criminal court established to promote the rule of law and ensure that the gravest international crimes do not go unpunished[1], is one of the latest and major illustrations to a timid American commitment to the international community[2]. In matter of American foreign policy, the President, as the representative of the USA, is responsible and organizes US stand on the issue with its administration. The Senate ‘advices and consents'. But what about the role of the American people in the general shaping of US Foreign policy; in matters which are, in general, far from the general public's concerns? What role is assumed by the American press and the media in this regard? [...]

[...] Therefore, the editorial pages of any newspapers will ask local figures to give their standpoint on those issues or to write a column advocating a matter of special interest. Public discussions are then convenient to organize because the readers master the issues at stake and because there are many ties and a good understanding of the community by the local press. On the issue of the Philadelphia Waterfront, the Philadelphia Inquirer will not have too many difficulties in getting the general public voice its opinion because people feel concerned about it as it is a matter of direct community interest. [...]

[...] The Statute of the ICC was signed in 1998. But this period (December 2000-December 2002) was chosen because it encloses the signature of the Treaty by Bill Clinton in December 2000 as well as the policies on the issue assumed by Bush administration. The Washington Post, January p A21 The Washington Post, European Courting International Disaster, June p B7 The Washington Post, Contesting the global Court, January p A22 The New York Times, Doubling the Damage at the UN, July 2nd p A20 December The co-chairman and director of the Committee on International Security Studies, American Academy of Arts and Sciences, a prosecutor at the Nuremberg war crimes trials, the Executive Director of Human Rights Watch. [...]

[...] Therefore, a large part of the American readership is excluded from any public discussion on foreign matters such as the issue of the ICC. The matter is somehow different when considering newspapers such as The New York Times and The Washington Post when addressing foreign affairs. Because of the issues at stake and because of the stand on which both newspapers are, their ability to address such matters as the position of the United States on the International Criminal Court is greater. [...]