| Office of Research | Issue Focus | Foreign Media Reaction |
|
Commentary from ... Europe Middle East East Asia South Asia Africa Western Hemisphere |
| October 13, 2000 Mideast: 'On The Brink Of War'? 'Next 48 Hours Will Be Crucial' |
XT 48 HOURS WILL BE CRUCIAL'
The dramatic escalation of violence in the Middle East dominated media coverage in the region and around the world today, as many commentators painted a bleak picture of a peace process all but dead and a region "on the brink of war." That said, a number of editorials, while raising the specter of a "broader military conflict," judged it "too early to talk of a full-blooded war yet" and reiterated the argument that "there is simply no alternative to the peace process." From the Middle East, in some of the most incendiary language in recent memory, Israeli and Palestinian papers saw themselves locked into "an unavoidable war," with both sides saying that they will take part in negotiations only if the violence stops at once. In Europe, some analysts--linking yesterday's apparent terrorist attack on the USS Cole in Yemen to the Israeli-Palestinian violence--worried about the possibility of the "dangers of contagion beyond the region itself." Regional highlights follow:
ISRAEL: Mainstream secular papers stood staunchly behind the military's retaliatory air strikes on Ramallah and Gaza, following the "horrific lynching" of two Israeli soldiers by a Palestinian mob on Thursday. Given the Israeli mood, Israeli Prime Minister Barak "had no choice but to act," mass-circulation, pluralist Yediot Aharonot determined. "Israelis will neither forget nor forgive what the Palestinians did," vented popular, populist Maariv. Approval of Barak's course of action was not forthcoming in the right-wing press, however, where some deemed the strikes "too little, too late" to end the new intifada. "The message Barak wished to convey [to the PA] did not reach its destination," nationalist Hatzofe judged. PLO Chairman Arafat "must be led to publicly admit defeat...in the simplest Arabic that a fellah can understand," the paper said.
ARABS: All three Palestinian dailies appeared this morning, but with far fewer pages than usual. PBC television was off the air as a result of the Israeli bombing of its building, but PBC's Voice of Palestine radio carried on its broadcast by using the facilities of a West Bank private FM station. Voice of Palestine broadcasts condemned yesterday's air strikes and vowed that the Palestinian leadership and people "will not bow to Israeli threats." Jordanian and Tunisian editorials repeated the call to stop normalization with Israel and to expel all Israeli representatives. Amman's independent Al-Arab Al-Yawm declared ominously, "The Arab people are ready for any sacrifice, even a long-term war."
ELSEWHERE: "The next 48 hours will be ones of extreme tension and fundamental significance for the region and beyond," judged London's independent Financial Times, echoing a common view. While some lamented "the absence of leadership on all sides," yesterday's "traumatic lynching" led editorialists in Britain, Germany, Italy and elsewhere to hold the PLO chairman "mainly responsible" for the current violence; they further worried that, at this point, he appears to have "lost control of his frustrated people." A few, however, claimed that Israel has used "disproportionate" force in answering Palestinian unrest. Leading papers remained convinced that Washington--and Mr. Clinton personally--is indispensable to peace.
EDITORS: Gail Hamer Burke, Katherine Starr, Stephen Thibeault, Irene Marr, Diana McCaffrey
EDITOR'S NOTE: This survey is based on 51 reports from 24 countries October 12-13. Editorial excerpts are grouped by region; editorials from each country are listed from the most recent date.
MIDDLE EAST
ISRAEL: "An Inescapable War"
Senior analyst Nahum Barnea wrote in a front-page commentary in mass-circulation, pluralist Yediot Aharonot (10/13): "'Enough blood and tears.' Yitzhak Rabin said on the White House lawn some seven years ago. 'The time for peace has arrived.' Rabin was apparently wrong. We were all wrong.... Two weeks of being at the verge of war ended Thursday in a horrific lynching in downtown Ramallah before a joyous Palestinian mob. Barak had no choice but to act.... Like von Clausewitz, [Arafat] is convinced that war is just an extension of politics by other means.... Whatever can't be done with negotiations will be done with blood.... Arafat grossly violated his central undertaking from Oslo: to desist from the use of force. Oslo succeeded in removing Arafat, for a number of years, from the world of terror, but it did not succeed in removing the terrorist heart from Arafat."
"We Won't Forget, We Won't Forgive"
Columnist Ron Meiberg wrote in a page one piece in popular, populist Maariv (10/13): "The horrifying, outrageous and debased way they lynched the two IDF soldiers who had strayed into their city conjured up the days when Israeli leaders described them as 'two-legged animals' and called Arafat 'the man with the hair on his face'.... The Ramallah lynching will go down as the turning point in the present conflict and as an indelible stain on the entire peace process.... Israelis will neither forget nor forgive what the Palestinians did Thursday. Israel was established so that Jewish corpses would no longer roll in the street."
"Small-Time, Disappointing, But Still A Partner"
Senior columnist Yoel Marcus wrote in independent Ha'aretz (10/13): "Now that violence has again reared its ugly head, instead of responding to U.S. President Bill Clinton's proposals, Arafat is setting the entire region ablaze and is doing such a good job of it that there will not be even one Israeli left who will want to make peace with him or who will believe that he is at all interested in peace.... Unfortunately, this is the partner Israel is stuck with; and all that this partner has is Barak, who has been and remains Arafat's first and last window of opportunity for the creation of an internationally recognized independent State of Palestine on nearly all of the West Bank.... These two partners will have to arrive at an agreement, because there are no other options."
"Too Little, Too Late"
Editor Gonen Ginat commented in nationalist Hatzofe (10/13): "Israel is at war. It faces a danger of war not only with a Palestinian state, but with totalitarian Arab and Muslim regimes, including those in possession of non-conventional weapons. This can be avoided.... The present confrontation must be eliminated swiftly, in such a way that no one in the Middle East can present a different interpretation. Thursday's strikes were an appropriate step. The problem is that they came too late and therefore this was too little.... The message Barak wished to convey [to the PA] did not reach its destination. As during the intifada, the more Israel hesitates at this time, the higher the cost [to Israel]. Arafat must be led to publicly admit defeat...in the simplest Arabic that a fellah can understand. This ought to happen as soon as possible."
WEST BANK: "Palestinians Will Not Bow To Israeli Threats"
All three Palestinian dailies appeared this morning, but with far fewer pages than usual. PBC television was off the air as a result of the Israeli bombing of their building but PBC's Voice of Palestine radio carried on its broadcast by using the transmission and studio facilities of a West Bank private FM station. Voice of Palestine radio, which continued its news broadcasts in four different languages, Arabic, Hebrew, English and French, (10/13) condemned "the Israeli aggression on Palestinian civilian targets," saying that the Palestinian leadership and people "will not bow to Israeli threats."
"U.S.' Real Intention"
Sameih Shubeib opined in independent, pro-Palestinian Authority Al-Ayyam (10/13): "Another outcome of the current Palestinian intifada is the explosion of the Arab political street, which has a major impact on American interests and plans in the region. Thus, the Arab summit to be held in Cairo on October 20 and 21 will provide additional support for the Palestinian cause and national struggle. The United States and Israel are aware of the dangerous outcome of such a summit in view of the actions of the Arab street and the influence it has on the policies of Arab governments. Therefore, the United States and Israel are trying to marginalize this Arab influence in many ways, in particular by trying to convene a trilateral or quadrilateral summit that would include Arafat, Barak, Clinton and Mubarak. The meeting would aim at undermining the upcoming Arab summit. Consequently, it is important to reveal the real intentions behind the American-proposed summit and to define new national conditions for holding such a summit by changing the location of the negotiations and demanding that Israel recognize Palestinian national sovereignty over East Jerusalem and implement international resolutions 242 and 338."
LEBANON: "Wars Against The Summit"
An editorial by Talal Salman in pro-Syria, Arab nationalist As-Safir held (10/13): "Days ago the world froze in front of television sets to watch the historic march of the Yugoslav people towards freedom and democracy.... It was a success for the disarmed citizen against an oppressive authority equipped with weapons and intelligence apparati.... However, the same world opted for the Israeli logic, which is against logic and reality when it had to do with the Palestinian people! Demonstrations were labeled as terrorist acts threatening the Israeli entity...despite the fact that the young demonstrators were only carrying their blood.... The call for the Arab summit...was considered a declaration of war against Israel!... Is saving Barak worth this universal effort? Or is it an attempt to save Israel from itself? Is saving Barak worth killing all the Palestinians, threatening Arabs with war, and actually starting war in the region?"
"Beware Of War"
An editorial by Nizar Abdel-Kader in pro-Syria Ad-Diyar (10/13): "Are we on the verge of a new Arab-Israeli war?... The current war-like situation is not the result of a mistake in calculations by the Palestinian Authority. Neither is it a political whim of the Israeli leadership. Actually, it is the result of failure of negotiations to reach a minimal compromise between the two parties.... Israel should stop believing in war as a way to continue negotiations...and the Palestinian Authority should realize that it is very dangerous to allow the mobs to decide the Palestinian destiny. The role that will be played by the Palestinian Authority is extremely important.... Beware of a war for which Israel has been preparing for 20 years, while the military strength of the surrounding countries has been diminishing. It is wise to go back to effective diplomacy. The Arab summit decisions should support Palestinian rights in Jerusalem. They should not cause Palestinian displacement from Jerusalem."
JORDAN: "What Peace Are We Defending?
Daily columnist Sultan Hattab, who had defied a Press Association ban against visiting Israel, wrote in semi-official leading Al-Ra'i (10/13): "That to which we maintain our commitment is not peace but aggression. What is the peace that we defend? Is it the just and comprehensive peace? It no longer exists. The Israelis have replaced by it by bullets, and the Palestinians have discovered that their share of it is the death of their children and the destruction of their houses. Why have the Israeli voices of peace and the peaceful organizations disappeared? Are they merely tools in the hands of Barak, to take part in the killing while he is in power, and when he is out of it, to protest against the Likud in order to whitewash Israel's international image?"
"Israel Is Losing By Points"
Tayseer Al-Zubri, reporting from Ramallah, wrote in center-left, influential Al-Dustour (10/13): "The United States is leading a conniving campaign to end the Palestinian intifada, and to return Israel and the Palestinians to the sterile negotiating table. America's objective is to sabotage the Arab summit and to stop the overwhelming Arab popular reaction that stood against Zionist racism. But with every day the Palestinian people gain points which Israel loses."
"Closure Of Israeli Embassies, Missions Is What Arabs Expect From Their Leaders"
The lead commentary in independent Al-Arab Al-Yawm said (10/13): "The unipolar world, led by the United States, cannot be expected to make a stand against Israel. But Arab capitals should act swiftly and firmly to fulfill at least a part of their national and religious duty, in order to avert a war that could burn many in the region, unless they deter Israel. Therefore, we call on Egypt to bring forward the date of the summit, and we expect Egypt, Jordan, Mauritania, Tunisia, Morocco, and Qatar to follow the Omani lead by closing down the Israeli missions as a sign of protest against the Israeli genocide against the Palestinians. We also call on the summit to form an emergency task force of Arab leaders to follow up the latest developments on the ground and in the UN. This committee will find that the Arab people are ready for any sacrifice, even a long-term war."
MOROCCO: "Palestine: From Moral To Material Solidarity"
Government coalition paper Al Ittihad Al Ishtiraki declared (10/12): "The Palestinian people who are facing the Zionist's military killing machine need solidarity and tangible material support.... Arabs and Muslims in many capitals have expressed their condemnation of the Zionist entity's barbarism and also expressed their solidarity with Palestinian claims to show world powers, especially the United States, that the Palestinian issue, including al Quds, is the cause of all Arabs and Mulsims; and if the gates of jihad were open millions of Muslims would participate in defending Muslim sacred sites."
"Al-Aqsa Mosque: Barak's Responsibility"
Government coalition paper L'Opinion published this comment by Said Fatmi (10/12): "The true war that the Israeli state has been leading against the Palestinians since Sharon's provocation and the atrocities inflicted on the children in the occupied territories shed clear light not only on the shaky state of the peace process, but also on the the fact that no will for peace has ever marked an Israeli leader. The Israeli political class is unanimous when it comes to the Palestinian issue. Counting on the [military] power balance that benefits Israel, and having unconditional U.S. support, it is the law of the most powerful that Israel is trying to impose. No balance can take place with all the killing of the people in the region. This situation cannot be associated with any normalization."
TUNISIA: "The Right To Respond"
Senior Editor Noureddine Boutar opined in independent As-Shourouq (10/13): "The Israeli air strikes represent a dangerous escalation of Israel's campaign to exterminate the Palestinian people.... So far, no one has acted to protect the Palestinians.... Arab governments have been slow to condemn the violence. Although they want to be seen as responsive to popular support for the Palestinians, they also want to appease the United States. Hence, their hesitant response to the Israeli attacks.... Indeed, the European/American response to the killing of the three Israeli soldiers was faster and more decisive than the Arab response to Israeli attacks against a whole population.... Arabs should react immediately. They should stop efforts to normalize relations with Israel and expel all Israeli representatives. This is the least that they can do in the face of Israeli intransigence."
"A Dangerous Escalation"
Senior Editor Fethi Abderrazak wrote in government-owned Al Horriya (10/13): "The Israeli air strikes have placed a great responsibility upon the international community and the United States to intervene immediately to stop the violence against the Palestinians."
EUROPE
BRITAIN: "Falling Over The Brink Into War"
The independent Financial Times said in its lead editorial (10/13): "The battle lines are now back on ethnic and religious grounds rather than political ones.... The Arab world is more united in its support of the Palestinian cause and condemnation of Israel than for a long time.... If the United States had not been in the throes of an election campaign, it is hard to imagine that Washington would not have acted sooner and more decisively to stop the Israeli-Palestinian bloodshed reaching current proportions. The United States must now try to remedy its earlier inaction. This means spelling out to Mr. Arafat and to Arab governments the disastrous consequences for the Palestinian people of abandoning the peace process. And it means bringing home to Ehud Barak the world's disappointment with him."
"A Fuse Is Lit"
In its lead editorial, the conservative Times judged (10/13): "The next 48 hours will be ones of extreme tension and fundamental significance to the region and beyond.... The disturbing truth, however, is that politics is no longer in the hands of the nominally powerful. The mob, the fanatical individual and the determined faction are all too capable of pushing Mr. Barak and Yasser Arafat towards the brink. The worst of all worlds would be a much broader military conflict. There are sound reasons why Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Syria would not want to throw their armies across the Israeli border. Iran and Iraq, by contrast, are unpredictable rogue states. Such a clash may be unlikely but the mood on the street means that it cannot be discounted. President Clinton will need to exercise every ounce of his influence. All other actors should allow him that space."
"An Absence Of Leadership On All Sides"
The lead editorial in the liberal Independent opined (10/13): "The only good news is what is not happening: There is no sign of the war dragging in other Arab countries, no sign that Arab oil producers are contemplating a repeat of their 1973 embargo.... The indisputably bad news is the crying absence of leadership on all sides: an overwhelmed Israeli prime minister whose only strength now is the rallying of his people at a time of crisis; a Palestinian leader who, as Ramallah proves, has lost control of his frustrated people; and a lame-duck U.S. president (and the two men vying to succeed him) taking--as American presidents always do when the chips are down--Israel's side of the argument."
"The Unity Of Israel"
The conservative Daily Telegraph offered this point of view in its lead editorial (10/13): "Israel needs, and now may have, a government with a parliamentary majority confident enough to match insurrection with appropriate responses. It also needs the wholehearted backing of allies that, apart from Washington, have been far too mealy-mouthed in recent days about Mr. Arafat's cynical recourse to a second intifada."
FRANCE: "Imperative Negotiations"
Charles Lambroschini argued in right-of-center Le Figaro (10/13): "In the Middle East, acts of war do not necessarily announce a war.... But in the face of the spiraling inferno, no one is in control any longer.... Bill Clinton...and other world officials are calling for a cease-fire. But when emotions are running so high, reason cannot win.... And the dangers of contagion go beyond the region itself. As the attack on the USS Cole and the burning of a synagogue outside Paris illustrate. Still, we must not forget that the first Camp David accords in 1978 were able to overcome all sorts of attacks, including the assassinations of Sadat and Rabin.... Diplomats may have to go back to the starting block. But nothing proves that the latest incidents will trigger an irreparable catastrophe."
"Over The Volcano"
Jacques Amalric held in left-of-center Liberation (10/13): "The horrible lynching was frighteningly effective in destroying the diplomatic efforts of the past few days.... Last night, we were literally on the edge. The region's stability appeared to be threatened by a general contagion, as proven by the attack on the USS Cole.... The intense efforts of world leaders may weigh little in the balance of the high-running emotions."
"Clinton's Last Battle"
Pierre Beylau maintained in right-of-center weekly Le Point (10/13): "President Clinton has invested an extraordinary amount of personal energy on the Middle East, deployed treasures of imagination and shown limitless and constructive obstinacy.... [Clinton] has at his disposal very strong trump cards in order to calm the situation and avoid a complete derailment of the peace process. First, there is America's power. There are the traditional ties with Israel, but also the close relationship which Clinton has developed with the Arab world.... As for France, it has learned that it cannot play a lone game. It is now making an effort to work with the Americans.... Everyone everywhere knows that it is Washington alone which can avoid the worst."
GERMANY: "Rule Of Violence; Arabs And Israelis Wasted Historic Chance"
Heiko Flottau noted in centrist Sueddeutsche Zeitung of Munich (10/13): "As justified as the anger of the Palestinians is, the execution of two Israelis in Ramallah cannot be justified. Arafat's police forces which are responsible for law and order in Ramallah and other Palestinian territories have failed.... Again it is becoming clear that Arafat is a miserable tactician.... But we also have our doubts about whether there is a politician on the other side who thinks beyond the day. Barak and Arafat, both were unable to look over the fences which they themselves put up.... And to make matters worse, there was also the news from an attack on a U.S. ship in Southern Yemen. Will terror now spread and again ravage Arabs and Israelis? Time is almost up in the Middle East. There is only one extreme alternative to peace: Naked violence against armed and unarmed people. To blame the other side is now a cheap excuse.... It is a fact that all of them have failed."
"No More Chance For Peace?"
Dieter Schroeder argued in left-of-center Berliner Zeitung (10/13): "After the killing of two Israeli soldiers in Ramallah and the retaliatory attack by Israeli combat helicopters this [peace] process is dead in its previous form. We can still not rule out that both sides come back to reason and resume their talks.... Hostilities directed against Israel's main ally in the United States aim at...discrediting Washington as mediator between Barak and Arafat. In addition, President Clinton is only a lame duck."
"On The Brink Of War"
Dietrich Alexander front-paged this view in right-of-center Die Welt of Berlin (10/13): "Arafat's calculation to use the unrest for his own interests has fatally changed. He no longer controls the streets, if he had any control over the streets at all. Violence is now forcing its way. And the Palestinian leader is the one who is mainly responsible for it. His pigheadedness, his almost blind zeal and inability to make concessions to his partner Barak...resulted in the street scenes in Ramallah. They forced Israel's premier to act.... The seeds which Ariel Sharon sowed with his visit to the Temple Mount, have now borne fruit. Even though he did not want this, he should have known it."
ITALY: "The Time Of Hatred"
Leading foreign affairs commentator Franco Venturini opined on the front page of centrist, top-circulation Corriere della Sera (10/13): "The traumatic lynching of the Israeli soldiers in Ramallah has suddenly torn the cloth of dialogue that Kofi Annan and Clinton had been weaving. There are no words to describe such a revolting crime, no mercy and no indignation can compete with the dreadful images we saw on television.... Arafat's declarations indeed seem to throw oil on the fire.... Arafat is riding a horse he can no longer control, he is obliged to make war because he no longer has the strength to negotiate peace.... Arafat is a politically finished leader because he has no room to maneuver.... The nightmare of a large-scale war exists, notwithstanding the geopolitical realities suggesting that it is unlikely.... After the horror of the lynchings, who can affirm that the missiles launched from the Israeli helicopters yesterday were an exaggerated response? And how could Barak make himself available for negotiations again after such a massacre?... And if the terrorist nature of the attack on the U.S. ship in Yemen is confirmed, the picture will be even darker, with an America engaged in a presidential transition, and a Europe that does not have the strength to express its fear of a war."
"A Crisis At The Worst Time"
Prominent commentator Stefano Silvestri front-paged this opinion in leading, business Il Sole-24 Ore (10/13): "The terrorist attack against the U.S. ship in Yemen is an event that is far from Palestine geographically, but too close to it politically.... In reality, the prospect of a new Arab-Israeli war is unlikely, since the imbalance of forces between the warring parties is too great, and because key nations like Egypt and Jordan, while supporting the Palestinians, have no intention whatsoever to embark on such an adventure. What is at risk, however, is the wider scenario of regional balances, that now has to take into account Iraq's strong return and the possible destabilizing initiatives inspired by the Iranian religious leadership.... The question at this point is whether we can do more.... This seems to be the time for the EU and G-8 leaders to communicate to the two warring parties, with a strong and united voice, the absolute need to resume negotiations, and to give Clinton the enhanced collective international prestige that will make up for his decreased influence on the domestic level."
"The Crisis That Comes From Hatred"
Prominent Middle East commentator Igor Man wrote on the front page of centrist, influential La Stampa (10/13): "In different circumstances, Sharon's provocation...would have been only a flash in the pan. Given the current situation, however, it may go down in history books as the spark that ignited the fifth Arab-Israeli war."
RUSSIA: "It's Gone Too Far"
Vladimir Dunayev said in reformist Izvestiya (10/13): "It's gone too far. Now only a miracle can save peace in the Middle East."
"Hope All But Dead"
Reformist Segodnya carried a report by Andrei Pravov of Ria Novosti in Tel Aviv (10/13): "After yesterday's tragic events, hope for successful mediation is all but dead."
"It's Too Early To Talk Of War"
Reformist, business-oriented Kommersant front-paged a comment by Leonid Gankin and Aleksandr Reutov (10/13): "It is too early to talk of a full-blooded war yet. The situation is under control, the war-like attitudes of both sides notwithstanding. Arafat had three hours' notice that Israel would strike. After the bombing, a spokesman for the Israeli army's staff said that peaceful talks were possible if Yasser Arafat kept his word to stop violence. Israel's Arab neighbors except for Iraq are in no hurry to threaten it. War is too much of a risk for any political player to take."
"War Out Of The Question"
Neo-communist Slovo ran this by Yuri Glukhov (10/13): "Arafat and Barak, unwilling or unable to control the situation, are passive. The Americans' one-sided attempts at peacemaking have been untenable. We can't do much either. Igor Ivanov's Mideast mission amounted to little more than showing the flag. The Americans have monopolized the Middle East settlement process, bringing Russia's co-sponsorship to naught.... No matter how dramatic the situation, a full war is out of the question. Israel has no worthy adversaries among the Arabs."
AUSTRIA: "The Logic Of Violence"
Conservative Die Presse ran a front-page commentary by foreign affairs editor Andreas Schwarz stating (10/13): "The Israeli army did what it used to do when it thought Israeli interests were threatened: It increased the disproportional violence to even more murderous violence...the Palestinian mob's thirst for killing is only the reaction to the reaction to the reaction. Why does nobody shout 'Stop!'... Why did Arafat and Barak not demand an immediate ending of the madness on both sides to save what still can be saved? Why did they not get together and talk? Because the logic of violence is a different one. Because their respective populations expect them not to give in now. Because the disappointment at their opponent is unbridgeable. Because in times of the fists, a stretched out hand would be a sign of weakness, which the internal enemy would mercilessly abuse.... In the Middle East, we are back to score one. This is the true logic of violence."
"The Street Reigns, Not Politics"
Foreign affairs editor Livia Klingl commented in mass-circulation Kurier (10/13): "Not politics, but the street has taken control of the events. The politicians react in a spiral of violence.... When the Israeli Deputy Defense Minister argues that the military action was not 'directed against the Palestinian people'--how should the bombed people believe him? How should Arafat be moved to return to the negotiating table with a 'symbolic warning' that blows up his offices? Israel's weakened prime minister's decision to react to the cruel lynch murders with a 'strong message,' with bombs and grenades, is one of high risk. Because nobody knows whether or not the escalation will set the whole region on fire.... Syria, the protective power of Lebanon, but above all of the extremists there, is as much involved as Iran. Today's Friday prayers at the mosques in Egypt and Jordan will probably further add fuel to this mood. Arafat has already called for the support of the Arab world. That this military action remains 'limited,' as Ehud Barak says, is out of his control."
BELGIUM: "War Process"
Middle East affairs writer Baudouin Loos editorialized in left-of-center Le Soir (10/13): "Everything is in place for a major conflict. Hatred prevailed. The leadership on neither side seems capable of controlling the situation. The entire world, the UN, the United States, and Europe have the duty to prevent a war which would turn into a slaughter."
"Doomed To Peace"
Foreign editor Axel Buyse opined in independent Catholic De Standaard (10/13): "Continuing the violent escalation on the tit-for-tat principle does not make any sense.... The question is whether Barak and Arafat have enough statesmanship to go beyond their strategy of personal political survival, and to use the increasing tension for a new political breakthrough. There is simply no alternative to the peace process."
IRELAND: "From Bad To Worse"
The conservative, populist Irish Independent held (10/13): "The Israeli response was not just excessive. It bordered on a declaration of war. Bombarding the residential compound of the Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat, was an astounding move by any standards. And it showed an appalling bankruptcy of comprehension. Senior Israeli politicians and military officers have persuaded themselves that Arafat personally is directing the violence. But almost the opposite is the case. It is all too clear that he and his security forces are not in control of the Palestinian areas. That makes the situation all the more dangerous, and all the more difficult to resolve. If Arafat cannot deliver a truce, and if the Jerusalem government of Ehud Barak, itself extremely shaky, cannot deliver a wider settlement, who is to negotiate with whom, and to what end? Only outside mediation can save the day. This must be led by the United States. However, the Americans cannot be regarded as honest brokers. There is an obvious need for a UN role, but it is far from clear what that can be. It is therefore greatly in the Americans' own interest to work for a temporary, followed by a permanent, peace. However, any efforts they make will fail unless they can persuade the Arabs that they have adopted a more sensitive and even-handed approach."
THE NETHERLANDS: "Caution"
Centrist Algemeen Dagblad in its editorial (10/13) : "The Israeli's calling their actions a limited military operation does not hold much ground. These are acts of war--and this is not the view of only Israel-opponents. However, the fact that President Clinton and Secretary of State Albright called for an immediate cease-fire says enough. The United States wants to do everything to mediate but is completely right by demanding Israel to back-off.... In order to retaliate the death of two Israeli soldiers--who became victims of extremely condemnable methods on the Palestinian side--Israel triggered the use of heavy weapons.... However, in order to overcome this crisis, Israel will have to execute some caution. There is no alternative."
NORWAY: "The Triumph Of Violence"
Newspaper-of-record Aftenposten said (10/13): "No one has the right to criticize Israel's fury over two Israelis being summarily lynched in a police station in Ramallah. But the Israelis have no right to look away from the fact that it was Palestinian policemen who tried to protect the two--and that Yasser Arafat disassociated himself from the misdeed. And by attacking the institutional heart of the Palestinian self-government, Israel attacks more than a couple of buildings. It is the hope for peace itself that is a victim of a totally unacceptable overreaction. The next days will be decisive for the development.... And as the leader of the strongest party Prime Minister Barak has an enormous responsibility that an historical process not end in a triumph of violence over the hope of the peace."
"Towards The Edge"
Independent VG commented (10/13): "Through exaggerated use of power has Prime Minister Barak has managed something that Yasser Arafat has had problems managing: to fuse the Arabs together and strengthen the world's sympathy for the Palestinians and their cause."
ROMANIA: "It Is Hard To Speak About Peace"
Cristina Terenche observed in pro-government Romania Libera (10/13): "It is obvious that in such a violent environment...it is hard to speak about peace.... That is why the leaders of the world are trying to overcome the deadlock (in the talks) in order to create the necessary conditions for continuing the dialogue since there cannot be any negotiations as long as violence is dominant."
SPAIN: "Mortal Blow To Peace"
Conservative ABC asserted (10/13): "Israel is mistaken if it insists on bringing the fire-power of its ultra-modern army to the table. It is a dangerous option that must be carefully and calmly
weighed, as this is not a matter of making war against the army of another state, but against three million civilians in the occupied territories and another million within its own borders. And the Muslim world, which in the last two weeks has experienced an unusually united response, would stand against Israel. It is time to stop confrontations and extinguish provocations."
"Towards War"
Left of center El Pais opined (10/13): "No one can in good faith can regard sorties by attack helicopters against buildings in Gaza and Ramallah as proportional. Israeli missiles not only destroy lives and property, but also the diplomatic efforts in place in the region.... Arafat must make a supreme effort to cool down his people."
"The Mideast On Fire, The West Shudders"
Independent El Mundo commented (10/13): "The United States and Europe have reasons to shudder. Yesterday's attack against the U.S. ship in Yemen could be the beginning of an escalation in terrorism. But the blast of a war would especially damage Jews and Palestinians. Israel would become a militarized state, internationally isolated while Palestine would be flattered by an enemy whose strength is far superior. Peace should be imposed if Arafat and Barak have a modicum of common sense."
SOUTH ASIA
PAKISTAN : "Mubarak's Pragmatic Stand"
An editorial in the Islamabad rightist English-language Pakistan Observer held (10/13): "President Mubarak's has said that an appropriate climate has to be created before an Israeli-Palestinian summit, (and that) Israel should stop its brutalities. Talks cannot be held amidst Palestinians' bloodbath."
EAST ASIA
VIETNAM: "Can Peace Be Saved In The Middle East?"
Manh Kim, writing in Sai Gon Giai Phong mouthpiece of the Ho Chi Minh City's Communist Party, noted (10/12): "Leaders from the UN, the United States, Europe, and Egypt are making efforts to seek a solution that aims at defusing or avoiding a war in the Middle East. Regardless of the results of these efforts, such actions show that nobody wants war to break out at this moment, just as the world is facing the threat of an oil crisis. However, this doesn't mean that a sixth war in the Middle East won't happen. The problem here is how big the war will be if the conflicting sides can't control themselves.... The world public feels that the United States needs to be fair in carrying out its mediating role in the Middle East peace process. Anti-American sentiments among the Arab community increased sharply after the United States abstained from the vote on the UN resolution condemning Israeli military actions against the Palestinians.... The Middle East Peace Process is now in danger; however, the respective sides can avoid war if they respect each other and strictly observe the 'Land-for-Peace' agreement signed in 1993."
AFRICA
GHANA: "No Need For Another War In The Middle East"
The government-owned, national circulation Daily Graphic held (10/13): "Despite the glaring nature of the violence imposed on the Palestinian people...the international community's attempt at ending the violence has been half-executed and hypocritical.... How anyone expects that the violence would end by restraining the stone throwers but leaving the trigger-happy Israeli Defense Force, which is the occupying force and the very cause of the conflict, beats the imagination of the progressive world.... Ever since...1948, the Jewish state has been treated favourably by the United States and her allies who control the direction of international diplomacy and 'interpret' international law as if it was above all the norms of decent behaviour.... But the most astounding aspect of the whole tragic drama is the silence of those who matter and the attempt by the international media to present the facts as if the death of the two soldiers of the Israeli army of occupation justified the near genocide that has been inflicted on the innocent people of Palestine.... The danger that this could escalate and widen is underpinned by the attack on a U.S. destroyer in Yemen.... The Graphic would wish to appeal to the international community to apply, the same yardstick it uses against other countries to Israel or any other country that tramples on international law and UN resolutions. Serbia was bombed into rubble for maltreating Kosovo-Albanians. What the Israelis are doing to the Palestinians is no different and since there is a benchmark, there must not be selective justice."
WESTERN HEMISPHERE
CANADA: "Support Israel"
The conservative National Post concluded (10/13): "It is time for the United States to stop playing neutral mediator, and to start living up to its duty as Israel's ally.... Now that war appears imminent, it is time for us to call right and wrong by their proper names. Israel is our ally; the undemocratic, violent PLO is not."
"Cradle Of Conflict, Crucible Of Peace"
The leading Globe and Mail commented (10/13): "At this point, it is not clear what is actually under way in Israel and Palestine. It could be brinkmanship gone awry--demonstrations of force on both sides, designed to maximize bargaining strength, that simply got out of hand. It could be an elaborate endgame, designed to ensure that commitments vital to lasting peace are made in the full glare of worldwide publicity, and thus more difficult to betray. Whatever the case, it is imperative that everyone who has anything to do with the Middle East take a deep breath and pull back from the edge. The rest of the world can help; if it takes more money to improve conditions for Palestinians, or more offers of support for peace monitoring and conflict resolution, so be it. But the chief responsibility lies with Palestinian and Israeli leaders themselves. They must concentrate their energies on two things: maintaining the trust of their followers, and persuading each other that the will to reach a definitive settlement has not been destroyed. They have succeeded before, with efforts nothing short of heroic. For the sake of their peoples, they must do so again."
BRAZIL: "Striving for the Ideal, Arafat Loses The Possible"
Center-right O Estado de Sao Paulo's former Middle East correspondent Moises Rabinovici commented (10/13): "Yasser Arafat now has the power to transform Ramallah, Jericho, Gaza and Nablus into another bloody Lebanon. If Arafat is not able to appease his people today, as he failed to coordinate all the PLO factions, who else could be Israel's interlocutor in the peace negotiations? If a provocateur like Gen. Ariel Sharon has the power to stir up another intifada, what kind of fragile peace will this be? Arafat is once again losing what is possible [to achieve]. The discussion is not about who started the new cycle of violence. It is about a real chance for peace. Never has an Israeli government gone so far in concessions to the Palestinians. It may not be the ideal... but it is the possible."
"Villains Of History"
Center-right O Estado de Sao Paulo's columnist Luis Fernando Verissimo said (10/12): "Ariel Sharon...is an irrelevant villain. Of the two basic problems in the region, one--the Jews' right to Israel and that of Israel to exist, a condition formerly denied by the Arabs--is already decided. What remains to be resolved is what to do with the Palestinians. Everything else, like coexistence in Jerusalem, is part of what will come afterwards and that will become a reality in the course of time and with peace, regardless of the heroes and bandits."
ARGENTINA: "Weak Leaders And Vacuum Of Ideas In Powers"
Oscar Raul Cardoso, leading Clarin's international analyst, opined (10/13) "The most revealing facts of the serious situation in the Middle East are: the weakness of the leaders of the two confronted societies, and the unbelievable vacuum of ideas in the diplomacy of extra-regional powers which are able to make feel their influence.... The more Barak threatens and the more his military and police commanders seem to dictate him a policy of attacks, the nearer is that total war which seems to concern so much the UN secretary general.... The moment Barak accepts a coalition government with the right-wing Likud...he, in fact, suggests that he continues as prime minister only because this crisis allows him to.... The more Arafat denounces the Israeli attacks...and the more he demands his society to refrain from (violently) acting..., it is impossible not to notice that his leadership is crumbling into pieces."
##
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
