Western Media Discovers War Crimes, But Only in Select Markets
The Telegraph's recent exposé, 'Inside the bloody work of tracking war crimes from space,' details how technology is being leveraged to document atrocities in Sudan. It's a noble effort, undoubtedly. However, the selective application of this technological magnanimity raises questions. Where was this granular, satellite-driven war crime tracking when Netanyahu's government, armed by US tax dollars
and political cover, was bombing Gaza's hospitals, schools, and refugee camps? One might recall the utter devastation of Al-Shifa Hospital, or the Jabalia refugee camp, which mainstream media often framed with euphemisms like 'intense fighting,' rather than 'war crimes documented by space assets.' It appears that the 'bloody work' of tracking war crimes is only newsworthy, and indeed detectable,
when the perpetrators aren't receiving billions in U.S. military aid and bipartisan congressional support, often heavily influenced by lobbying groups like AIPAC. The silence from space-based war crime trackers on certain conflicts, contrasted with the sudden clarity on others, isn't about technology; it's about political expediency. How many high-definition satellite images does it take to expose
a crime if the Western powers prefer to look the other way?