Good guys, bad guys: Images of the Australian Soldier in East Timor. Media International Australia,...

Denise Woods

GOOD GUYS, BAD GUYS: IMAGES OF THE AUSTRALIAN SOLDIER IN EAST TIMOR

ABSTRACT II is said (hal pic/ures fell a thousand words, bullo Malaysian Prime Minister Dr Mahu/hir, {he images of Australian soldiers poinling guns a/ suspected militiamen in East Timor made one word stand auf: 'belligerenl', Images that meullt one thing in Australia represented quite different and often opposite meanings in Soulheosl Asia. III the Australian press, the Australian soldiers were cons/rucled as 'the good guys' helping out a neighbouring country in trouble. The press in some SOlltheast Asian countries told quite a different siory - that of the Australian soldiers as intimidating and therefore the 'bad guys' o/Ihe region. Through a textual analysis of these images, Ihis paper examines file ways in which the Australian soldiers have been represellled ill Ihe press in Southeast Asia. This paper also discusses the role the reading o/these images played ill negoliatillg Australia's role in East Timor and the region.

In late September 1999, less than to days after Australian troops landed in East Timor, Malaysian Prime Minister Dr Mahathir commented that Australian troops were behaving too 'belligerently'. At a United Nations press conference in New York, Dr Mahathir was reported as saying:

I saw pictures of Australian troops pointing guns at almost anybody. Is it necessary to point guns at people who are obviously unarmed? (New Straits Times, I October J 999; Romei and GaITan, 1999)

Dr Mahathir was referring to media images of the Australian soldiers apprehending suspected pro-Jakarta militiamen in East Timor. Such images appeared regularly on television news and in the press during the period of the Australian-led peacekeeping mission to East Timor. The arbitrary signs in these visual texts of the guns, the soldiers and the militia meant different things to different people. The Australian media portrayed the Australian soldiers as the 'good guys' - the heroes and heroines in this tale of violence and destruction. To Dr Mahathir and others in Southeast Asia, these same images often had quite different and opposite meanings. The Australian soldiers with the pointed guns were the 'aggressors' and therefore the 'bad guys'.

In this paper, I will examine these differences in interpretations and appropriation of the same kinds of images in Australia and Southeast Asia. Through a textual analysis of newspaper photographs of the Australian soldiers in action, the construction and representations of the soldiers will be examined. Deconstruction of these visual texts will also be carried out to analyse the various ways in which the images could

No. 98 - February 2001

143

144

be read, taking into account the roles of culture and ideology. Finally, I will look at the effect of these visual representations and images on Australia-Asia relations.

The images analysed in this paper are newspaper photographs from five different newspapers. The Australian was used to identify how the Australian soldiers were presented in an Australian national newspaper. The other four are newspapers from Southeast Asia. Two Indonesian dailies were used in this project, the English language Jakarta Post and the Indonesian language newspaper Kompas. The Straits Times of Singapore and New Straits Times of Malaysia were also examined. These newspapers from Southeast Asia were selected to include Indonesia and several close neighbours of Australia. They also represent a diverse range of papers in tenns of their relationships with their respective governments.

The New Straits Times was part of Malaysia's biggest media company, The New Straits Times Press Bhd, which was consequently taken over by Realmild. Control of Realmild is in the hands of businessman Abdul Rahman Maidin, who is favoured by the political leadership (Wong, 2000: 125, 126). In the opinion of Dr Chandra Muzaffar (sociologist and opposition politician): 'The NST [New Straits Times] has made Dr Mahathir into a sacred icon, beyond reproach and beyond criticism.' (quoted in Wong, 2000: 133) The Singapore Straits Times is also part of a large media company, Singapore Press Holdings, a government-linked company which owns all the newspapers in Singapore. According to Rodan (2000: 174), this consolidation of ownership provides the Singapore government with a powerful capacity to control the domestic newspapers.

While the New Straits Times and the Straits Times are closely connected to their respective governments, the two papers from Indonesia do not appear to be as closely related to the Indonesian government. Kompas is Indonesia's most prestigious and largest-selling daily, and is also part of a large company, the Kompas-Gramedia Group. This paper may not be linked to the government, but has in the past acted cautiously on sensitive political issues (Sen and Hill, 2000: 57). The Jakarta Post is one of Indonesia's English-language newspapers. It is regarded as a reliable paper which is relatively independent (Sen and Hill, 2000: 60). The nature and relationship of these papers to the various governments would undoubtedly have had an impact on their reporting of East Timor.

ON BEING 'BELLIGERENT' The first pictures of the Australian troops appeared in newspapers the day after they landed in East Timor on 20 September 1999 as part of the International Forces for East Timor (Interfet). In the period leading up to the East Timor referendum on 30 August 1999, there were widespread reports of pro-Jakarta militia killing supporters of the independence movement. After the referendum, levels of destruction and violence increased. When the Indonesian army (TNI) appeared unable (some would argue unwilling) to stop the violence, calls were made by countries such as Australia for peacekeepers to be deployed to East Timor.

Media Intemationat Australia incorporating Culture and Pot icy

Headed by Australian Major General Cosgrove, more than 7000 troops from over 20 nations participated in this peacekeeping mission. Interfet was created by the United Nations 'with a mandate to use "all necessary measures" to stop the killing and facilitate humanitarian aid' (Straits Times, 21 September 1999). They were also obliged to enforce the results of the East Timor elections in which an overwhelming number of people voted for independence.

As part of their mandate to stop the killings, Interfet troops stopped and checked suspected militiamen for weapons. It was this process which provided media images of the Australian soldiers pointing guns at seemingly unarmed men. And it was these images of the troops in action that sparked Dr Mahathir's comments about the 'belligerent' behaviour of Australian troops.

Dr Mahathir was, however, not the first in Southeast Asia to voice concerns about the behaviour of the Australian troops. On 23 September 1999, the Indonesianlanguage newspaper Kompas published an article addressing the actions of the Australian troops. Titled 'Milisi "Peace-keeping'" (Peace-keeping Militia), this article questioned the role of the UN peacekeepers and, as the title suggests, likened their 'aggressive' actions to those ofthe militia whom they were supposed to be disanning. The article systematically described a number of photographs by Associated Press (AP), Agency French Press (AFP) and Reuters, as well as CNN television footage that depicted the heavy-handed actions of the Australian soldier. Questions were asked about the aggressive tactics used by the Australian troops. According to the article, such actions might incite hatred instead of restoring peace. The article also questioned why the East Timorese Falentil freedom fighters had not been asked to give up their anns.

Other reports on the behaviour of the Australian troops were published in newspapers in Indonesia. Some of the reports were quite unbelievable from an Australian point of view, referring to Australian soldiers torturing militiamen and burning them alive. The pictures of the gun-pointing Australian soldiers led to comments abolLt 'White Australia' and how such behaviour was just a reflection of the attitude of white supremacy. Colonial references were also made. Political analyst Salim Said said: 'Howard is like a 19th-century European standing on a beach and thinking he will have to watch out for the little brown uncivilised neighbours that lie to the north.' (Walters, 1999) Reports of the 'Howard Doctrine' published in The Bulletin magazine reinforced this perception. The Bulletin article reported Howard's view that Australia should have a role as a deputy peacekeeper to the United States in the region. The images of the Australian troops and reports of the 'Howard Doctrine' reinforced 'an Australian identity quintessentially European' (Walters, 1999).

Concerns of Thai military officials were reported in the New Straits Times and Straits Times on 25 September 1999. This was a few days before Dr Mahathir made his comments. According to these news reports, Interfet's deputy commander


145

146

----------------

from Thailand, Major General Songkitti Chakkrabhat, 'was concerned about the "aggressive" approach taken by his commander (Major General Cosgrove)'. The articles quoted a senior Thai defence ministry official as saying: 'We are not going to point guns at the heads of people like we have been seeing Australian soldiers doing on television. That doesn't look good - it's terrible.' (New Straits Times, 25 September 19991Straits Times, 25 September 1999) According to the official, the Thais would take more of a 'softly·softly' approach. When asked if he considered the Australian troops behaviour provocative, his reply was 'yes' (Straits Times, 25 September 1999).

The reports of the Thai reaction in the Straits Times and New Straits Times were from the international news agency - Reuters. The Australian Associated Press (AAP) had also provided a report on the Thai reactions on 24 September 1999, a day before reports appeared in the Straits Times and New Straits Times. News about the criticism of the Australian troops, however, was not highlighted in The Australian. In fact, it was not until 29 September 1999 that The Australian published Indonesian criticisms of the behaviour of the Australian troops (Stewart, 1999).

Although Indonesians and Thai military officials were the first to raise concerns about the behaviour of Australian troops, it was Dr Mahathir's comments that gave the issue prominence in the Australian media. At the UN press conference in New York, where he made the comments about Australian troops being 'belligerent', he also said that Australian troops should be replaced by troops from Asia who would perfonn the job better and less 'belligerently'. The Australian newspaper quoted him saying; 'I feel it is necessary that Australia scales down its forces and allows ASEAN countries to take up peace-keeping there and handle it in a way that is less belligerent than it is now.' (Romei and Garran, 1999)

Support for Dr Mahathir came from many sectors of Malaysian politics. The consultative council head of Pas (Parti Islam Se-Malaysia, an Islamic based religious party), Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat, said at the State Pas headquarters that: 'It is better for the peacekeeping duty to be assumed by our own kin rather than unrelated persons.' (Afifin, 1999) He also said that Australians 'do not look like Asians and their country is not part of Asia and, perhaps, they look down on Asians' (Afitin, 1999). Again, reference was made to 'White Australia' and white supremacy. The Malaysian Army deputy chief (Lt Jen Datuk Abdul Aziz Hasan) expressed similar sentiments. According to him, '(t)roops from Asean countries can assimilate better in East Timor as they share many similarities with Indonesia's culture' ('The army is ready for East Timor duty under UN', 2 October 1999).

According to Dr Mahathir and his political colleagues, Australians are not Asians and therefore do not have a right to playa part in the peacekeeping force. Apart from the physical dissimilarities, Australians are seen to have a culture very different to that of Asia. Australia was therefore sticking its nose in a regional 'quarrel' that should be sorted out by the Asian family.

Media International Australia incorporating Culture and Policy

file:///999l

These comments seemed to indicate that accusations of 'belligerent' actions were not so much a criticism of the actions in themselves, but a criticism of Australia's place in the region. Since Australians are not culturally or physically Asian, there is always the suspicion that they are unable to understand Asia. The • Howard Doctrine' no doubt added to this sentiment. Australia sees itself as having a part in the region, but Dr Mahathir and Southeast Asian political leaders have always questioned Australia's ability to become a regional player. The East Timor situation has once again brought Australia's place in the region to the forefront. What could be seen as pictorial evidence of Australia's heavy-handedness not only played an important part in initiating these comments, but also served to reinforce the view of Dr Mahathir that Australia was not part of the region.

PRESENTING THE VISUAL TEXTS Almost all the photographs in the five newspapers studied for this project were from the same international news agencies - AFP, AP and Reuters. This reliance on the same news sources for photographs also r~sulted in the same or very similar photographs being used across the five newspapers. The use of similar images provided a good reference point for the discussion of the Australian troops in East Timor. It allowed for an analysis to be carricd out on how thc same images were used to illustrate different ideological positions.

According to Stuart Hall (1981), photographs are 'culturally produced' and 'ideologically inflected'. In the case of the news agency photographs, where the sources of the photographs are the same across the newspapers, it can be assumed that the 'cultural production' factor is a constant - that is, regardless of how they were eventually appropriated, the photographs had the same 'production values' or encoding. This is not to say that what goes into the selection of a shot and its framing is inconsequential. In his book Ways of Seeing (1972), John Berger wrote:

Every image embodies a way of seeing. Even a photograph. For photographs are not, as is often assumed, a mechanical record. Every time we look at a photograph, we are aware, however slightly, of the photographer selecting that sight from an infinity of other possible sights ... The photographer's way of seeing is in his [sic] choice of subject. (Berger, 1972: 10)

A press photographer would work with an audience as well as the editors in mind. Rcgardless of how individuai a photographer may feel, 'if a photographer wants to have his [sic] pictures seen and appreciated then they must be framed in a language an audience can understand' (Webster, 1980: 19). In selecting a particular shot, the photographer is involved in an active process, interpreting what photographs the audience would want or appreciate. Interpretation therefore occurs at the level of the construction or encoding of the image, as well as in the process of the reception or decoding of the image by the audience (Webster, 1980: 20). It is also up to the editors to decide which photographs to include in the newspaper that will best illustrate their stories.


147

r------------------------------------------------------

148

In a situation such a::. East Timor, the troops wer~ responsible for a variety of duties, including medical tasks and the distribution of emergency aid parcels. However, these shots were prominent only in The Australian newspaper. Pictures of the troops in battle action were predominant in the Southeast Asian newspapers. Therefore, not only is the selection of the particular shots significant, but the editorial selection process is also important. It determines what images get included or excluded from the newspapers. Often photographs are selected on the basis of their ability to complement an article, but many of the photographs also appeared on their own with captions as part of a photographic essay. While it is important to take into account the location of the photographs in relation to the articles, the focus of this paper is on the photographs and their captions.

Operational values are not neutral values. There are agendas set in the selection process:

The editor not only looks at and selects the photo in terms of impact, dramatic meaning, unusualness, controversy, the resonance of the event signified, etc ... : he [sic] considers at the same time how these values will be treated or 'angled' - that is interpretatively coded. (Hall, 1981: 232)

It is interesting to explore not only what images get selected to be printed but the way the photographs become 'ideologically inflected' when they are presented in the various newspapers. After all: 'We never look at just one thing, we are always looking at the relation between things and ourselves.' (Berger, 1972: 9) The fact that a camera's 'field of view is narrow and ensures that the viewer misses the context of what he [sic1 is being shown' (O'Connor, 1999) adds to the complexity of representation and interpretation. The editorial selection process reproduces '''in dominance" the major ideological themes of society ... It translates the legitimations of the social order into faces, expressions, subjects, setting and legends' (Hall, 1981: 234).

Hence, in the case of Malaysia, the images in the newspapers serve to reinforce the 'goodness' of social institutions such as the government and their views, which include the inability of Australia to become a part of the region. It is also in this process that captions become important in positioning ourselves to the images.

Captions play an important role in determining how images are read. According to Hall, 'the caption selects and prefers one of the possible readings, then amplifies it' (1981: 227). Therefore, while the objects in the pictures in themselves are open to different interpretations, captions act to limit the variations in the interpretation of the visual text. Hall goes on to say: 'It is a very common practice for the captions to news photographs to tell us, in words, exactly how the subject's expression ought to be read.' (1981: 229)

With the exception of a few photographs of the British Gurkhas and Malaysian troops, the photographs of the peacekeeping mission in East Timor were dominated

Media International Auslralia incorporating Culture and Policy

by images of the Australian soldiers. This is perhaps the result of Australia sending the largest number of troops and the fact that it was an Australian-led mission. The photographs of the Australian troops can be divided into three broad categories: the official photographs; the troops in action (which include the 'belligerent' shots); and, lastly, images of the troops participating in leisure activities.

The official photographs refer to posed pictures such as those taken of Australian Interfet chief Major General Cosgrove performing official duties and meeting with various officials. This included shots of him with his deputy, Major General Songkitti, and the head of Indonesia's Restoration Operation Command in East Timor, Major General Kiki Syahnakri.

Most of the photographs fall into the category of 'the troops in action'. These photographs included those taken in the first few days of Australia's deployment and consisted of pictures of Australian soldiers on their own as well in the company of the local East Timorese. The East Timorese cheering on the arrival of the Australian troops portrayed them as the 'good guys'. In an AP photograph published in The Australian (25-26 September 1999) and The Jakarta Post (22 September 1999) (see Figure I), the Australian troops, here symbolically represented by the side view of a single soldier, are being welcomed by happy East Timorese. This image takes on almost a rock star quality with the Australian soldier and his sunglasses, elevated on a stage (moving army vehicle), facing the adoring fans. The captions of these images were similar, indicating that the refugees were cheering the arrival of the UN peacekeepers.

Figure 1: Troops in action

Photograph from The Weekend Australian, 25-26 September 1999. A larger version of this picture appeared on the front page of the Jakarta Post, 22 September 1999.


149

150

Caption in The Weekend Australian:

East Timorese refugees cheer the arrival of soldiers and UN personnel at a camp in Dare.

Caption in the Jakarta Post:

CHEERING FOR PEACE: East Timor refugees cheer the arrival of trucks carrying Australian troops and United Nations representative at a refugee camp in Dare, outside the East Timor capital of Oili. Some 2000 refugees who fled the violence in Dili lined the road on Tuesday to welcome the peacekeepers.

Not only were the Australian soldiers warmly welcomed, they were also seen as being friendly and approachable. In another AP picture published in the New Straits Times (21 September 1999), a soldier (again wearing fashionable sunglasses) is seen 'making friends' (according to the caption) with a few East Timorese boys. The guns and the fashionable sunglasses reinforced the physical distinctiveness of the Australian troops, setting them even further apart from the East Timorese.

Other photographs of the troops in action were pictures of Australian soldiers in East Timor carrying out various duties, such as patrolling the streets and at times coming under fire. These images appeared in all the newspapers studied for this project. In several photographs, the soldiers were framed with the East Timorese, putting their actions in context of their location. Australian troops were also going through buildings searching for the militia, removing bodies of victims from various locations, carrying out security checks and searching for weapons. Some East Timorese appeared quite happy to be searched, while others looked somewhat apprehensive. Even children entering the port in Dili were subjected to security checks. In all these shots, the Australian soldiers were seen with their guns.

The 'belligerent' shots are also shots of the troops in action but, more specifically, they are shots of Australian soldiers pointing guns directly at suspected pro-Jakarta militia. These images also appeared in all five newspapers used in this case study. This particular AFP picture (see Figure 2) of the Australian soldier pointing his gun at a militiaman was published in three of the five newspapers used in the project. It appeared in Malaysia's New Straits Times (22 September 1999), Singapore's Straits Times (22 September 1999) and The Weekend Australian (25-26 September 1999) in Australia. The New Straits Times caption for the photograph indicated that the man pictured was found, along with four others, 'with a pistol, a machete and other home-made weapons in their car at the airport checkpoint'. The caption in the Straits Times was similar. In the first few days of the Australian-led peacekeeping mission, the captions from The Weekend Australian newspaper and the Southeast Asian newspapers were fairly similar. However, as comments started


to be made about the aggressive behaviour of the Australian troops, the situation changed.

Figure 2: Belligerent shots

AFP Photograph from the New Straits Times, 22 September 1999

The same photograph also appeared in the Straits Times, 22 September 1999 and The Weekend Australian, 25-26 September 1999. In The Weekend Australian, the photograph was used on the front page of a special section 'Focus on East Timor' and did not have a caption.

Caption in the New Straits Times:

CAUGHT ... An Australian soldier aims his rifle at an alleged militiaman arrested along with four others at the entrance of Dili airport yesterday. The suspects were found with a pistol, a machete and other home-made weapons in their car at the checkpoint.


151

152

-----------------------

A good example of how similar captions were used in different newspapers is provided by the captions that accompanied similar photographs of the Australian troops in three different newspapers. A Reuters photograph of an Australian soldier stopping two men on a motorbike appeared on the front page of The Australian on 21 September 1999 (Figure 3). The caption to this picture was: 'Roadblock: A peacemaker armed with a machine gun halts two pro-Jakarta militiamen on a motorbike in Dili yesterday'. The same Reuters photograph, cropped slightly differently, appeared on the same day on the front page of the Straits Times. The caption for the photograph in this newspaper was: 'Pro-Jakarta militia being stopped by Australian troops from the International Forces for East Timor, in DiU. The leader of the multi-national force said that his troops had not met any resistance but that the ravaged territory remained a risky place.'

Figure 3

,~. f .~~.;

:; .. ,"-,:,,',!~:

--

Figure 3 is from The Australian, 21 September 1999 (front page). The same photograph appeared on the front page of the Straits Times, 21 September 1999.

An AP photographer also captured this same incident (Figure 4), but from a different angle. Kompas newspaper used this picture on its front page on the same day as the other two papers. The caption for this photograph was:

Media International Australia Incorporating Culture and Policy

Arms confiscated - Only a few hours after landing in Dili on Monday, a member of the international forces for East Timor (Interfet) from Australia ... examined a pro-integration militiaman in a black t-shirt on a motorbike and confiscated a self-made rifle ... More than 2000 lnterfet troops landed yesterday in Dili and immediately spread-out to strategic positions in the devastated city to stop violence in East Timor.

These three captions, while worded differently, encouraged basically the same reading of the image - that of the troops getting to work soon after their arrival in DilL

, ,.

I I'~' ~ C",· l- -".-".-. ,

I" '. t -: '.

Figure 4

Figure 4 is from Kompas, 21 September 1999 (front page).

Another photograph which appeared in more than one newspaper was an AFP photograph of an Australian soldier pulling the t-shirt of a suspected militiaman over his head while another soldier pointed a gun at him (see Figure 5). This picture appeared in the New Straits Times (23 September 1999) and Straits Times (22 September 1999) as well as The Weekend Australian (25-26 September 1999) a few days after the arrival of the Australian troops. The caption in the Straits Times was' Australian soldiers searching an alleged militiaman for weapons at the Dili airport'. In the New Straits Times, the accompanying caption was 'Strong Arm ... An Australian soldier pins down an alleged East Timor militiaman while another aims a gun at him in Dili yesterday'. The Weekend Australian ran the photograph with the caption 'Taking no chances: ... a soldier searches a man suspected of carrying a gun', The captions in The Australian and the Straits Times were similar in that they described the action as part of the duties of the


153

154

Australian soldiers. However, the caption for the New Straits Times, which described the action as that of the strong arms pinning down an alleged militiaman, presented the soldiers as heavy-handed. By using such words to describe the action, the viewer of the image can be influenced into seeing it as indeed 'belligerent'.

Figure 5

AFP photograph from The Weekend Australian, 25-26 September 1999. The same photograph also appeared in the New Straits Times, 23 September 1999 and the StraiLs Times, 22 September 1999.

Caption in The Weekend Australian:

Taking no chances ... a soldier searches a man suspected of carrying a gun.

Caption in the New Straits Times:

STRONG ARM ... An Australian soldier pins down an alleged East Timor militiaman while another aims a gun at him in Dili yesterday.

Caption in the Straits Times:

Australian soldiers searching an alleged militiaman for weapons at the Dili airport.


It did not take long for the captions and visual representations of the Australian soldier to change in the Southeast Asian newspapers. From being wannly welcomed, they were now seen as being unnecessarily aggressive - a change which seemed to have been initiated by Dr Mahathir's comments. On 24 September 1999, an AP picture published in the New Straits Times carried the caption: 'Even the Innocent are not Spared ... An Australian Peacekeeping soldier checking East Timorese children for weapons as they enter the port in the provincial capital of Dili yesterday'. The photograph was of an Australian soldier, seen through barbwire, searching a number of young children for weapons. The barbwire stands out in the forefront of the photograph as a symbol of imprisonment. The caption sets the scene as that of the Australian soldiers being unnecessarily heavy-handed even with innocent children. The innocence of the children are juxtaposed against the seemingly 'guilty' actions of the soldiers.

Another Reuters photograph depicting three Australian soldiers apprehending three militiamen was used twice in the Straits Times. The first time it appeared was on 25 September, above the article titled 'Thais alarmed by Aussies tactics'. The second time this photograph appeared in the same newspaper was on I October. This time it accompanied an article about Dr Mahathir's comments on the Australian troops being too heavy-handed. It is interesting to note that the Straits Times used the same photograph to accompany articles about the 'heavy-handed' behaviour of the Australian troops.

The final category of photographs comprises those depicting the Australian troops participating in leisure activities such as playing soccer with the East Timorese (Figure 6) or just sitting around relaxing. Not surprisingly, these photographs were prominent in The Australian newspaper but not in the newspapers from Southeast Asia. They showed a different side to the conflict and peacekeeping duties. In terms of news value, such images were more relevant to the Australian public. Interestingly, even 'at play', the Australian soldiers have their guns with them.

Items such as 'guns' playa significant role in the photographs. In order to explore their significance, we need to look at such objects from the perspective of codes. Stuart Hall suggests that, in order to understand an image, 'we must tum to the codes which make signification possible' (1981: 226) - in particular, the codes of connotation. The guns, which arc so prominent in these pictures, denote 'a weapon'. The connotations, however, vary according to cultural or ideological interpretation. From the Australian perspective, the troops are carrying guns because soldiers in a dangerous situation need to be able to defend themselves and the innocent victims of the conflict. When the Australian soldiers are seen pointing their guns, it is done as part of the job under difficult conditions. They are in such danger that they have to carry guns even at leisure. Guns can also be read as a sign of authority and carrying one signifies power. The comments made by Dr Mahathir and other Asian commentators indicated a different reading of the images of the soldiers and their guns. To the Indonesians, the Australian troops are not only part


155

156

---- --------------------------

------------------- ---

Figure 6: Troops participating in leisure activities

AFP photograph published in The Australian, 29 October 1999, with the caption:

On the ball: An Australian soldier joins in street soccer in Dili yesterday

of the UN forces but a reminder of the TNI's failure to control the situation. Big, white Australian males carrying guns are also a reminder of the oppressive colonial white man. These different interpretations explain why similar images of the Australian soldiers were read as 'heroes and heroines' on one hand and 'belligerent' on the other.

The guns become even more prominent in photographs where only the body of the soldier is framed with a gun. In two such photographs printed in The Weekend Australian and Straits Times, the head of the soldier has been excluded from the frame and the central focus of the pictures is a Timorese child. A Reuters photograph printed in the Straits Times (24 September 1999) had a soldier (framed from the shoulder down) with his gun in his hands on the left and a young boy carrying a large sack on the right. The boy's 'wary glance' (as the caption indicates) is focused on what we assume is the face of the soldier. The gun held by the soldier is prominent. In removing the bead of the soldier, this soldier loses individual identity and becomes representative of the anonymous Australian soldier. This picture also contrasts the innocent boy with that of the armed soldier. The caption for the picture in the Straits Times was: 'It is a wary glance that this East Timorese

Media Intemational Australia incorporating Culture and Policy

boy casts at an anned Australian soldier at a checkpoint in Oili on Wednesday. The capital remains tense following the arrival of a United-Nations approved multinational force to restore peace.' The caption read together with the visual text presents a message of caution and uncertainty. The boy's glance is 'wary' as he is not sure about the presence of the soldiers. We are also told that the situation remains tense although peacekeepers with guns are on the ground.

In the photograph from The Weekend Australian (25-26 September 1999), two soldiers framed from the waist down occupy the left and right comers of the photograph. In the centre is a young boy on a bicycle. While the gun is not aimed at the boy, in the photograph the tip of the gun appears to be close to the boy. Again, a child involved in an innocent activity is seen in juxtaposition to the tasks of the soldiers. The caption for the picture in The Weekend Australian was 'diggers stand guard in the ravaged city as a child looks on '. The emphasis here is on the soldiers and their role in the devastated city.

The Australian soldiers (represented here by the body of the anonymous soldier) were presented in the Straits Times as an intrusion into the childhood of the East Timorese children. In The Weekend Australian, they were presented as protectors there to give the children back their carefree lives. The captions used to accompany the photographs illustrated this difference in interpretation. In one picture, the troops' presence was questioned; in the Australian newspaper, the troops were presented as protectors.

CONCLUSION So what is the significance of the images of the Australian soldiers in East Timor? At one level, the images give us a sense of how Australia'S military presence in East Timor was visually presented in the press in Southeast Asia. At a time when Australia's relationship with the region is perceived to be changing, it enables us to see whether the ways in which Australia was 'talked about' had also changed because of this event. In many ways, the representation of Australia has not changed significantly. What East Timor as an event has illustrated is the fact that such events present yet another opportunity for long-standing ideological stance and dominant readings of the relationship to be reinforced. A photo, on its own, may not bc able to 'produce any ideological theme. But it can enhance, locate or specify the ideological theme, once it has been produced.' (Hall, 1981: 242)

To Or Mahathir and others, the pictures were an opportunity to once again question Australia's location in the region. What he saw reinforced a long-standing belief that Australia was not part of the region. Or Mahathir's comments about the 'belligerent' behaviour of the troops were also a reminder of his previous criticisms of Australia. Most recently, at the summit of the Non-Aligned Movement in Havana, Cuba, Dr Mahathir once again made his position know. He referred to John Howard's 'bullying behaviour' in relation to Australia's relationship with Southeast Asia.


157

158

Photographs may be 'a particular fragment of the here-and-now' (Postman, 1986: 72) and have a specific way of passing themselves off as 'literal visual-transcriptions of the "real world'" (Hall, 1981: 241). In many ways, seeing is believing. Images of an event 'carry within them a meta-message: "this event really happened and this photo is proof of it'" (Hall, 1981: 241). However, what the photographs are seen as 'proof of depends very much on interpretation - from verbal descriptions to the more complex issues of cultural understanding and positioning. It is this ideological and cultural positioning that detennines whether the Australian soldiers are the 'good guys' or the 'bad guys'. Photographs may present visual proof, but they are in no way objective or neutral.

Afifin, Z. 1999, 'ASEAN Should Take the Lead in East Timor Peacekeeping, Says PM', New Straits Times, I October, p. I.

Berger, 1. 1972, Ways of Seeing, Penguin, London.

Craig, G. 1993, 'Picturing the Statement: Visual Representations of the Prime Minister's Economic Statement, February [992', Continuum, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 234-56.

Hall, S. 1981, 'The Detennination of News Photographs', in S. Cohen and J. Young (eds), The Manufacture of News: Social Problems. Deviance and the Mass Media, Sage, Newberry Park, CA, pp. 226-43.

Hartley, J. 1992, The Politics of Pictures: The Creation of the Public in Ihe Age of Popular Media, Routledge, London.

New Slraits Times 1999a, 'East Timor, 4,500 Indon Troops to Stay', 25 September, p. 20.

New Slraits Times 1999b, 'The Anny is ready for East Timor Duty Under UN', I October, p. 4.

O'Connor, M. 1999, 'Ignorance is Bliss: The Media and East Timor', IPA Review, Institute of Public Affairs, Melbourne, vol. 51, no. I, accessed online, [2/06100.

Postman, N. 1986, Amusing Ourselves 10 Death: Public Discourse ill the Age of Show Business, Heinemann, London.

Rodan, G. 2000, 'Singapore: Infonnation Lockdown, Business as Usua[', in L. Williams and R. Rich (eds), Losing Control: Freedom of lhe Press in ASia, Asia Pacific Press, Sydney.

Romei, S. and Garran, R. 1999, 'Howard Returns Fire on Mahathir's Troop Attack', The Australian, I October, p. 2.

Sen, K. and Hill, D.T. 2000, Media. Cullure and Politics in Indonesia, Oxford University Press, Melbourne.

Stewart, L 1999, 'Indonesian Press Accuses Aussies of Torture', The AuSlrolian, 29 September, p. 8.

Straits Times [999a, 'Peace Force Likely to Stay for Years: Australia', 21 September, p. 12.

Straits Times 1999b, 'Thais A[arnled by Aussie Tactics', 25 September, p. 35.


Walters, P. 1999, 'Falling Out With a Neighbour', The Weekend Australian, 25-26 Septrmber, p. 13.

Webster, F. 1980, The New Photography: Responsibilily in Visual Communicalion, John Calder, London.

Wong, K. 2000, 'Malaysia: In the Grip orthe Government', in L. Williams and R. Rich (cds), Losing Control: Freedom oj the Press ill Asia, Asia Pacific Press, Sydney.

Denise Woods is a postgraduate slIIdelll in fhe School oj Media and InJormalion. Cr,rtin University.

The author would like 10 thl/llk Lepi Tarmidi and Lena Tan Jor help with the translation oj the Indonesian captiolls alld articles. She would also like to thank Krishna Sen and GeoJJCraigJor their Jeedback and advice on the p(lper. Earlier versions oj this paper were presented (1/ the Asian Studies Association oj Australia conference in lIlly 2000 alld the Curlin University Humanities Postgraduate 2000 ConJerence.

All photographs reprinted with permission. Copyright in photographs remains with the copyright holders.


159

Good guys, bad guys: Images of the Australian Soldier in East Timor. Media International Australia,...

Documents

Transcript of Good guys, bad guys: Images of the Australian Soldier in East Timor. Media International Australia,...