Ukrainian Refugees, like those welcomed in Przemysl in Poland on March 23, 2022, have been described as civilized and looking like us
(Credit: Ayhan Mehmet/Anadolu Agency)
Harun Nasrullah
Several remarks by reporters and media pundits describing Ukrainian refugees as more “civilised” and “looking like us” compared to other refugees from non-European war-torn countries have been condemned as “smacking of blatant racism” and sparked a wide-scale backlash.
“[Ukraine] isn’t a place, with all due respect, like Iraq or Afghanistan, that has seen conflict raging for decades. This is a relatively civilised, relatively European – I have to choose those words carefully, too – city, one where you wouldn’t expect that, or hope that it’s going to happen,” were among some of the controversial comments.
CBS News senior foreign correspondent Charlie D’Agata made that statement while reporting from Kyiv on February 25, a day after Russia began its large-scale invasion of Ukraine.
On social media, his comments were met with mockery and outrage, with many pointing out how his statements dehumanise non-white, non-European people suffering in conflict.
‘If this is D’Agata choosing his words carefully, I shudder to think about his impromptu utterances,’ wrote award-winning author Moustafa Bayoumi for the Guardian.
Adding, ‘After all, by describing Ukraine as “civilised”, isn’t he telling us that Ukrainians, unlike Afghans and Iraqis, are more deserving of our sympathy than Iraqis or Afghans?’
The head of Afghanistan’s largest media company also lambasted D’Agata for his “utterly stupid and ill-informed statement.”
“Afghanistan was also a peaceful and “civilised” place in 1979 before the Soviets invaded and it became a battle zone between the West and the Soviet bloc. Ditto for Iraq before the American attack in 2003,” said Saad Mohseni, Director of Moby Media Group,
However, D’Agata is not the only journalist to see the plight of Ukrainians in these terms.
David Sakvarelidze, a former Deputy Prosecutor General of Ukraine, told the BBC: “It’s very emotional for me because I see European people with blue eyes and blond hair being killed every day.”
Rather than question or challenge the racist comment, the BBC News Channel presenter, host, Ros Atkins, flatly replied, “I understand and respect the emotion.”
Atkins later apologised for not asking Sakvarelidze about his remark, tweeting: ‘Towards the end of a long and emotional answer. I made several attempts to interrupt while trying to be respectful of the guest’s feelings and his situation. While I did that, he made a comment about race that, at the moment, I failed to pick up. I entirely agree with those of you who’ve messaged to say such comments shouldn’t pass without challenge.’
Excusing himself though, Atkins added that he hoped ‘if you’re a regular BBC viewer, you can tell that I always try my best to do fair and rigorous interviews. Here, though, I missed a question that needed to be asked. Thanks to those of you who picked me up on it. You were quite right to.’
Not to be outdone, across the channel, journalist Phillipe Corbé told France’s BFM TV, “We’re not talking here about Syrians fleeing the bombing of the Syrian regime backed by Putin. We’re talking about Europeans leaving in cars that look like ours to save their lives.”
An ITV journalist reporting from Poland said: “Now the unthinkable has happened to them. And this is not a developing, third-world nation. This is Europe!”
Referring to refugee seekers, Al Jazeera anchor Peter Dobbie chimed in with his view: “Looking at them, the way they are dressed, these are prosperous… I’m loath to use the expression… middle-class people. These are not obviously refugees looking to get away from areas in the Middle East that are still in a state of war. These are not people trying to get away from areas in North Africa. They look like any.”
Al Jazeera’s PR Twitter account quickly apologised for its presenter’s “unfair comparisons” between Ukrainians fleeing the war and refugees from the MENA region. “The presenter’s comments were insensitive and irresponsible. We apologise to our audiences worldwide, and the breach of professionalism is being dealt with.”
And writing in the Telegraph, Daniel Hannan explained: “They seem so like us. That is what makes it so shocking. Ukraine is a European country. Its people watch Netflix, have Instagram accounts, vote in free elections and read uncensored newspapers. War is no longer something visited upon impoverished and remote populations.”
The US-based Arab and Middle Eastern Journalists Association (AMEJA) was also deeply troubled by the coverage, recently stating the matter: “AMEJA condemns and categorically rejects orientalist and racist implications that any population or country is ‘uncivilised’ or bears economic factors that make it worthy of conflict.”
“This type of commentary reflects the pervasive mentality in western journalism of normalising tragedy in parts of the world such as the Middle East, Africa, South Asia, and Latin America.” Such coverage, the report correctly noted, “dehumanises and renders their experience of war as somehow normal and expected.”
Co-editor of Black British Lives Matter, Marcus Ryder, said, “Stories that directly highlight that this conflict is more dramatic because ‘Ukraine is not a ‘Third World’ country’ can feel like a ‘dog whistle’, with “not a ‘Third World’ country’ really meaning ‘white’. Similar points have not been made when reporting on any of the numerous African, Asian, or South American countries that sit above Ukraine’s 133rd global ranking in terms of GDP per capita.”