The asymmetric morals of reports on Taliban war crimes

AP/NY Times:

A purported Taliban spokesman said that negotiations for the lives of 23 South Korean hostages had stalled and that militants would kill the aid workers Monday evening if the government doesn't free Taliban prisoners.

An Afghan lawmaker said the militants had upped their demands Monday, saying they wanted all insurgent prisoners in Ghazni province released in exchange for the Koreans, though Qari Yousef Ahmadi, who claims to speak for the militia, denied that was true.

Khail Mohammad Husseini, a lawmaker from Ghazni province, where the Koreans are being held, said a delegation of provincial leaders tried to meet with the kidnappers Monday but that the militants didn't show. He said the Taliban increased their demands by telephone, saying all militant prisoners in Ghazni had to be released.

Ahmadi said militants were still demanding the release of 23 Taliban prisoners but said the government hadn't signaled it was willing to do that.

''If the government won't accept these conditions, then it's difficult for the Taliban to provide security for these hostages, to provide health facilities and food,'' Ahmadi told The Associated Press by satellite phone. ''The Taliban won't have any option but to kill the hostages.''

The deputy interior minister, Abdul Khaliq, meanwhile, said Afghanistan was not prepared to make a deal ''against our national interest and our constitution,'' though he did not explicitly rule out freeing any prisoners.

...

Note how there is no condemnation or outrage in the report that, ''The Taliban won't have any option but to kill the hostages.'' One obvious option is to release them. Why didn't the Taliban think of that? Why didn't the AP reporter think of that? Why didn't the AP reporter at least convey the fact that killing the hostages is a war crime as is the demand that Taliban detainees be released in an extortionate deal for the lives of innocents. The asymmetric morals of the media in reporting this matter can be demonstrated by the inverse logic of suggesting that all Taliban prisoners will be killed if the hostages are killed. That might be the only way to peg the moral judgment of the media. Do you think with the inverse proposition that the media might at least mention the Geneva Conventions and explain why they don't apply to the Taliban, but do to our side?