Risk-taking
One of the unwritten rules of war reporting is that you can take a lot of risks for a story but it’s never worth losing your life. The problem is it’s sometimes difficult to predict where the boundary will be. Personally, I go by the principle that there can be a higher risk of danger as long as there’s not a reduced chance of success. 

Marie Colvin did indeed do her best to reduce the chance of danger, although that’s pretty difficult with all the random shelling in the opposition district of Baba Amr. Together with other journalists, she was sheltering in a makeshift press centre of the Syrian opposition. The day before, in an interview with the BBC, she described how terrible the situation is in Baba Amr. Countless grenades rain down and there is hardly any medical care for the badly injured. A child of two had died right in front of her eyes. Or rather, her eye – singular.

Years ago, Marie lost an eye during the fighting in Sri Lanka. She sported a black eye patch after that. The experience did not prevent her going on to cover many wars and revolutions. You saw her everywhere. In fact, you couldn’t be a war reporter without bumping into her sooner or later: Lebanon in 2006, the Balkans, Iraq and more.

Special stories
The last time I spoke to her was in September in the Libyan capital Tripoli, just after the fall of the city. She was able to sidestep the daily news rhythm to some extent, since she was working for a paper that only appears on Sunday. Of course, that meant searching for special stories, but it was something she was very good at. Her one eye registered events just as well as two. 

On Sunday she herself will doubtless be that special story in her own newspaper, something she never wanted. Even though the story about the death of Marie Colvin will probably help focus attention on the anonymous victims, many of whom are wondering why it is that the international community intervenes in some countries ‘for humanitarian reasons’ and not in others.

(imm)