WASHINGTON, October 6 (IslamOnline & News Agencies) - Almost as soon as the United States unleashed its might against Afghanistan, another conflict re-emerged between the U.S. military and the journalists covering the war.

Journalists and observers say much of what happened in the year since the war began remains hidden because U.S. military officials imposed strict controls on information and denied reporters access to the fighting, sometimes at gunpoint, reported Agence France-Presse (AFP).

Military officials, for their part, respond by saying secrecy is essential in a war against a shadowy enemy.

Both journalists and military officers familiar with the conflict say much of it stems from mutual misunderstanding.

"I think both sides benefit more from established professional relationships," said Army Colonel Hiram Bell, commander of the Defense Information School at Fort Meade, Maryland, which trains U.S. military officers to handle the news media.

Telling the story of the Afghan war proved costly to the media - at least eight reporters died in the past year. Many journalists have sought the relative security offered by close contact with U.S. troops even as they chafed at the restrictions on coverage.

Those who try to operate independently complain the U.S. military makes a dangerous situation worse by harassing and threatening them.

One notable incident occurred February 10, when Washington Post reporter Doug Struck was restrained at gunpoint by U.S. troops while investigating a missile attack in eastern Afghanistan that killed suspected members of the al-Qaeda militant group.

"It shows the extremes to which the military is going to keep this war secret, to keep reporters from finding out what's going on," Struck told The Post in an interview from Afghanistan.

Another reporter, Taiseer Allouni, had a very close call when the U.S. fired a missile destroying al-Jazeera Satellite TV's office in Kabul. Allouni escaped death miraculously then.

Military officials speaking on condition of anonymity point out, however, that the U.S. troops were on a combat patrol when Struck, accompanied by armed bodyguards, approached them in an unmarked vehicle similar to those used by enemy forces - creating the perception of a threat in the soldiers' minds.

The Afghan war began without the U.S. military activating pools of reporters set up for just that purpose. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld launched a crusade against leaks to the media that included threats of prosecution for anyone caught passing classified information.

It was only four months later, in late February, when the military allowed general access to combat operations, creating a pool of reporters to ride along in a massive offensive known as Operation Anaconda that began March 2 in the Shahi Kot valley of eastern Afghanistan.

The use of special forces and air power for most of the fighting in Afghanistan shifted the balance of power from the news media to the military bureaucracy - and the public is the biggest loser, said Richard Rubenstein, a professor at the George Mason University Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution in Fairfax, Virginia.

"There's a kind of strange naiveté on the part of journalists, especially in a war situation when it comes to accepting official explanations," he said.

"One gets the feeling that the press is being played."

The complaints from reporters in Afghanistan mirror those made during the 1990-1991 Gulf war, when the U.S. military kept most reporters away from the fighting, allowing only select pools to accompany troops.

In exchange for access, the pool reporters were required to submit their reports to military censors escorting them and who could delete information defined as a security threat under ground rules accepted by both sides.

A big problem in the Gulf war was disagreement over what constituted a security threat, said Carl Rochelle, a former CNN Pentagon reporter who covered the war.

"A lot of times, access was denied because they were afraid of how the story might come out," he said. "If you do something stupid and get people killed, expect it to be reported."

Military guidelines call for maximum access consistent with security requirements, Bell said, although he admits that doesn't always happen.

"Obviously, when you embed a journalist with a unit you're completely opening yourself up to them," he said. "A lot of commanders are apprehensive of that kind of exposure."

"No one has ever been fired for not talking to the media," he added.

Reporters need to do their part by taking the time to understand how the military works and by keeping an open mind and not viewing the military as "a bunch of baby-killers," Rochelle said, adding the key to better war coverage is better access to the troops.

Reporters and soldiers "need not be afraid of each other," he said.