Outspoken Celebrities Have Little to Say About Iraq
October 6, 2002
By JOHN M. BRODER
nytimes.com
OS ANGELES, Oct. 5 — Warren Beatty, his wife, Annette Bening, and other Hollywood liberal luminaries gathered on Wednesday night for a talk by Scott Ritter, the former United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq whose recent statements about Saddam Hussein's weapons programs had undercut the Bush administration's arguments for a pre-emptive attack.
While the educational session at the home of Stanley Sheinbaum, the publisher and Democratic fund-raiser, was hardly unusual for the outspoken and politically active Mr. Beatty, what emerged was quite uncharacteristic: a measured, almost circumspect analysis of President Bush's confrontation with Iraq and his push for a Congressional resolution authorizing the use of force.
"To rush to pass such a far-reaching resolution before the election will be deemed by many to be opportunistic and will benefit neither the administration nor its opponents," Mr. Beatty said.
Mr. Beatty, whose political interests are so strong that friends urged him to run for president in 2000 and who was joined at the Ritter talk by Tom Hayden and Gary Hart, declined to discuss the Iraq matter further for the record.
Mr. Beatty is hardly alone in his reticence on Iraq. Like other celebrities known for their eagerness to take on controversial political subjects, Mr. Beatty is choosing his words carefully, intently aware, he said, that those who have questioned the White House's course have been demonized and marginalized.
"I don't like to speak out about public matters until I am sure enough of what I'm saying to avail myself of the attention that comes to me because I'm a movie actor," Mr. Beatty said in a lengthy interview. "I have found I need to be much more careful of what I say because when those opinions go against the grain, then one is subjected to all kinds of ad hominem attacks."
With few exceptions on both sides of the debate, prominent figures in the entertainment industry are largely keeping their opinions private. If there is a nascent antiwar movement in America, it is not being led, at least not yet, by Hollywood.
"This is not an easy one," said Jack Valenti, president of the Motion Picture Association of America. "That's why you don't see people clamoring on the rooftops with a megaphone."
Mr. Valenti, who served in Lyndon B. Johnson's White House during the Vietnam War, said that Hollywood is not, and never has been, politically monolithic. While there is little sympathy for Saddam Hussein here, people in the entertainment world are not rushing to judgment about the wisdom of waging war against him.
Mr. Valenti noted that Hollywood quickly fell in line with the White House after Sept. 11, expressing solidarity for the campaign against terrorism and meeting with White House officials to drum up public and international support. But extending the war to Iraq provokes more debate and uncertainty, he said.
"People I talk to — and I talk to a lot — feel that some debate on this war is essential," Mr. Valenti said. "If there's ambiguity, it's because they don't know what the facts are."
Hollywood's ambivalence reflects the divisions in the Democratic Party. Al Gore and Senators Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts and Paul Wellstone of Minnesota have raised alarms about the Bush course but have not served as rallying points for an antiwar stance. Other party leaders, including Representative Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri and Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, have been more supportive of a confrontation with Iraq.
Conservatives here expressed some pleasure at the Democrats' predicament. "There is growing antiwar sentiment out here, but I think they're split," said Lionel Chetwynd, a conservative writer and filmmaker. "There is a desperate yearning almost everywhere in the country, but certainly here, for some middle position."
Some well-known figures have made statements interpreted as supportive of the administration's Iraq policy, but they, too, have been relatively muted.
Tom Cruise made a few remarks about Iraq at the European premiere of the movie "Minority Report" late last month that many took as an endorsement of action against Baghdad. Steven Spielberg, sitting with him, also raised concern about Mr. Hussein's weapons programs, but quickly clarified his position after the European press and American gossip columns characterized him as taking a pro-war position.
"I did not say I support a war with Iraq," Mr. Spielberg said in a statement issued by his production company, Dreamworks. "I do not have access to information that only the president has which might cause me to take a different position. In any case, it was never my intention to give an endorsement of any kind."
Barbra Streisand has been among the most outspoken in criticizing the prospect of war against Iraq. At a fund-raising concert for House Democrats last weekend, Ms. Streisand called for a "regime change" in Washington and said, "I find bringing the country to the brink of war unilaterally five weeks before an election questionable — and very, very frightening."
A Streisand spokesman, Dick Guttman, said there was something near unanimity here, shared by Ms. Streisand, that Mr. Hussein is "a villain."
"But this debate isn't whether you are for or against Saddam Hussein," he said. "It's how you approach him."
The entertainment industry has long been a rich vein of financing for Democrats and liberal causes, and donors are expressing some of the same ambivalence as those who appear before the cameras.
Rob Reiner, the actor and director, has long supported Democratic candidates, is concerned that the administration has hijacked the debate on Iraq and is intent on pursuing war without a full public discussion, according to an aide, Chad Griffin.
Mr. Griffin insisted that Mr. Reiner, who declined to be interviewed for this article, is not reflexively antiwar. He supported the Persian Gulf war of 1991 and could yet be persuaded that a second round is necessary. But that case has yet to be made, he said. "The hawks in the administration decided what needed to be done, and it seems we are moving forward, with or without the United Nations, with or without the international community, with or without public support for their actions," Mr. Griffin said.
"The question lingers: why now?" he added. "What has changed that we have to do this right now. What is different?"
Lara Bergthold, the former executive director of the Hollywood Women's Political Committee and a political adviser to Norman Lear, said there is "close to panicked concern" that the country is rushing into war and that Democratic leaders in Washington have not sufficiently engaged the president in debate.
"Behind the scenes, there is a lot of conversation about what we in Hollywood can do, what's the antiwar response," she said. "But it's not appropriate for Hollywood to lead that conversation. That conversation should begin and take place in Washington."
There is a long tradition of entertainers using their celebrity and their access to the media to advocate for causes: Paul Robeson on civil rights, Jane Fonda on Vietnam, Marlon Brando on Native Americans, Martin Sheen on farmworkers. But they often followed political leaders rather than leading the charge.
"This is a complicated moment," said Danny Goldberg, founder and chairman of Artemis Records. "You can't look to artists to be on the cutting edge of political ideas. Artists can become important megaphones and adjuncts, but their role is to create art, not propaganda." |
