This week's word stumped me. Upon my initial Google search, which I hoped would give me a multitude of ideas on how to relate "pugilism" to French culture in some interesting way, I found this, which while intriguing and a very literal interpretation of our fisticuffs-themed word of the day, did not particularly inspire me. Besides, one does not talk about savate club...at least for now.
So then I turned to my other search results: recent news about a French soldier who was killed in Mali. Corporal Cedric Chareton, a paratrooper, was killed Saturday during a military campaign that began in January to target a group of radical al Quaeda militants who were responsible for an attack on a gas plant in Algeria. Here is an article from early on in the conflict, which details the outbreak of fighting that really accelerated the process of France's involvement in Mali. The article also seems to predict the violence that is still ongoing.
 |
| An image from the Wall Street Journal from January showing the initial occupancy by Islamist rebels vs. the French and Malian forces. The French took action to prevent a possible takeover of the capital of Bamako. |
So here's my question: is the regulation of media justified? Should the French army take this opportunity to glorify itself, or is it right to be so reserved with this information?
Katie,
ReplyDeleteThis is quite an intense topic to pick for the word but definitely falls directly into its meaning. After reading the articles and trying to come up with a "great" answer, I'm not sure if I can find one. I think that there needs to be a middle ground that is found between hiding the media from the public and boasting the triumphs that France has seen. I don't ever think it is a good idea to keep information from the people of a country and I feel they have every right to know what things their government is doing. On the other hand, I think there is a point where the media needs to stop and some details need to be kept by only those who need to know them. Personally, I don't like those who are too boastful anyway-but that's just my opinion. I think the worry at hand should be to finish the project at hand rather than waste time worrying about if enough credit is being given to the proper people. Thoughts?
Randi,
DeleteMy thoughts as well! I think that transparency in informing the public is important, but that there are certain cases where some secrecy is necessary. I think this applies especially in military situations. There are probably valid reasons not to divulge information. I think in this case, it's an example where some information is classified not because the military wants to keep it from the French citizens, but to keep the details of operation classified until such results can be confirmed.
Mali being an old Colony of France and using the French Political system has been influenced in several ways in the past by their Colonial rulers. It is therefore important for France to come to the aid of Mali in times of difficulty. On the other hand the question we need to ask is if the French military has to collaborat with the Malien army to conquer Al Quaeda or the French army needs to intervene alone?
ReplyDeleteI think it does show remnants of the colonial era that the French army has been so involved. The Malian army as well as other African armies have been involved too. I think it's important for the two to collaborate. The French certainly seem to be taking a more active role, and it's right to come to Mali's aid, but it's important also that Mali is proactive as well.
DeleteVery true Katie....Two heads are better than one.
DeleteKatie-
ReplyDeleteI like that you found a way to tie pugilism to an important current event. Personally I think that governments should be transparent whenever possible. But as you say, secrecy is sometimes necessary in sensitive and dangerous missions. Based on the BBC article you found, it sounds like France is doing some really important work to help maintain stability in the region. I wouldn't advocate boasting, but the media should make the public aware of France's military involvement in the region. Perhaps as this story unfolds we will gain a clearer understanding of France's need for secrecy -- it sounds like they are dealing with a lot of hostile rebels.
Kate, you hit the nail on the head. It's important for a government, especially in a democracy, to inform the public, but there are times when classified information is classified for a reason. I think that information should be divulged as it is necessary and when it is "safe" to do so in such delicate situations. We'll see how it pans out, but I'm sure that's what will happen. When we hear/read such words as "fanatical" in regards to what's going on, it's probably safe to say the military is more concerned with controlling the threat than divuling too much information at the moment.
Delete