PressEthic

Once again, journalism raises its head as the fourth estate.

Various news outlets are reporting that President Bush’s scheduled conference with Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki has been unexpectedly canceled. Most of the reports agree that a secret White House memo published today in the New York Times was a factor in Maliki’s decision to call off the meeting.

The White House, however, denies the memo’s alleged impact.

NPR reported today:

“Mr. Bush arrived in Jordan Wednesday evening, local time. He was to sit down with the Iraqi Prime Minister and the Jordanian King shortly thereafter. Instead came an announcement that the session would proceed without Maliki.

The White House denies it was a snub, saying that because the Prime Minister had met with Abdullah prior to Mr. Bush's arrival, that it made the multi-lateral session unncecessary.

"It negated the purpose for a meeting of the three of them," top White House aide Dan Bartlett said.

Did the memo have an impact on that decision? "Absolutely not," Bartlett said. “

The Times reported that “an administration official” gave a copy of the memo to one of its reporters. Written by national security adviser Sephen J. Hadley, it expressed criticism towards Maliki’s abilities to control the wave of violence in his country.

The memo read:

“His intentions seem good when he talks with Americans, and sensitive reporting suggests he is trying to stand up to the Shia hierarchy and force positive change. But the reality on the streets of Baghdad suggests Maliki is either ignorant of what is going on, misrepresenting his intentions or that his capabilities are not yet sufficient to turn his good intentions into actions.''

According to Time Magazine’s website, the memo may simply have been the straw that broke the camel’s back:

“The meeting was touted as a crisis summit designed to set a new course for tackling Iraq's mounting violence, civil war or whatever one chooses to call it; the salient point is that Iraq has spun so dangerously out of control that existing policies appear to offer no way out of the mayhem.The already slim prospects for a harmonious discussion between the Iraqi leader and an increasingly impatient U.S. administration may have been further clouded by the publication, in the New York Times, of a memo from National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley that questions Maliki's commitment and capability to take the steps the U.S. deems necessary to turn things around?”

Despite the White House’s denials, the timing between the memo’s publication and the cancellation of the meeting seems too close to deny a connection. The question of whether the New York Times made a morally questionable decision or served its duty to the American public will undoubtedly raise a lengthy discussion of ethics.

Time article

NPR piece