Al Jazeera has its issues, but it’s not a foreign agent

The president of the United States calls the mainstream media “enemies of the people,” which seemingly undermines a core pillar of American foreign policy — the promotion of a free press at home and abroad. He has questioned Russia’s ongoing campaign to undermine not just American democracy, but the existing international order.

Against this backdrop, it was distressing to read an op-ed, which the leader of a highly respected human rights organization, Jonathan Greenblatt of the Anti-Defamation League, compared Al Jazeera, one of the world’s most important and influential news networks, to the Russian outlet, RT.

{mosads}Greenblatt suggested that Al Jazeera be required to register with the United States government as a foreign agent. The justice department took that highly unusual step with RT last year.

As a former assistant secretary of state for public affairs, I am familiar with both outlets. There is a crucial distinction between the two that Greenblatt overlooks.

The justice department required RT to register as a foreign agent because it was employed as a weapon within the Russian government’s campaign to influence the result of the 2016 presidential election. This is precisely why the Foreign Agents Registration Act exists.

Al Jazeera covered the 2016 election in detail, from the party debates to the state primaries to the final election, just as many international news organizations did, without any suggestion of a hidden agenda.

Is Al Jazeera a propaganda arm of the Qatari government? From my experience, the answer is no. Al Jazeera has its blind spots. Many news organizations do. But it exercises true editorial independence.

Between 2014 and 2017, I served on the board of directors of Al Jazeera America, one of several Al Jazeera channels but registered as a separate corporation in Delaware in accordance with U.S. law.

In our quarterly board meetings, we focused on how to provide quality programming that an American audience would want to watch. For example, one documentary looked at the issue of immigration from both sides of the U.S. southern border, reporting both on what migrants endured to try to enter the United States and the impact they had on border communities if they succeeded.

This was award-winning journalism, produced to help Americans understand the world better, and their own country as well. Unlike RT, it was not to make any country’s foreign policy look good or bad, or advantage one political candidate over another. It offered a fresh perspective on a compelling issue of national and international importance.

Al Jazeera America ceased broadcast operations three years after its launch because it didn’t attract enough viewers to build a sustainable advertising base. Al Jazeera has since revamped its English language operations in the U.S., streaming news rather than operating a cable news channel. This was a sound business decision because Al Jazeera operates as a business, not as an extension of Qatar’s foreign policy.

Greenblatt criticizes Al Jazeera of propagating hate speech. This is a complex question.

The divide between Arabs and Jews, Sunnis and Shia, and Muslims and Christians is part of the region’s political landscape. In the course of its reporting, there are voices on Al Jazeera who question history, justify violence against innocent civilians, and condemn non-believers — in other words, people who don’t belong to their group or believe what they believe.

Welcome to the Middle East.

Yes, Al Jazeera covers what Hamas says and does. That’s because Hamas is a regional reality whether we like it or not. Reporting on Hamas is not the same thing as advocating for Hamas.

No doubt Al Jazeera can do more to distinguish constructive speech that advances legitimate debate from hate speech that undermines civil society. But to be fair, that’s easier said than done.

If you are an American news outlet, how do you cover the resurgence of the white supremacist movement without giving them a platform to advance their deplorable beliefs? That’s a difficult balancing act.

To paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld, if you are Al Jazeera, you report on the Middle East that is, not the one that you would prefer.

A number of countries in the region dislike Qatar’s foreign policy, particularly its support for the Muslim Brotherhood and its constructive relations with Iran. They try to gain leverage over Qatar by attacking Al Jazeera. That’s unfortunate.

Al Jazeera is not following the dictates of any government. It’s actually ahead of them.

Today only two regional countries, Egypt and Jordan, formally recognize Israel. Most American allies don’t — not Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, or Qatar.

Al Jazeera does. It has a news bureau in Jerusalem. It routinely interviews Israeli government officials, academics and citizens, and conveys Israel’s perspective to the people of the Middle East and beyond. If that isn’t editorial independence, I don’t know what is.

P.J. Crowley is a former assistant secretary of state and author of Red Line: American Foreign Policy in a Time of Fractured Politics and Failing States. He also served on the board of directors of Al Jazeera America.