Military

DATE=09/25/01

TYPE=WORLD OPINION ROUNDUP

TITLE=ANTI-TERROR COALITION

NUMBER=6-12475

BYLINE=ANDREW GUTHRIE

DATELINE=WASHINGTON

INTERNET=YES

EDITOR=ASSIGNMENTS

TELEPHONE=619-3335

CONTENT=

INTRO: Newspapers around the world are commenting in editorials about the coming offensive against terror by the United States and allies. We get a sampling of the latest in reaction from the foreign newspaper comment from V-O-A's ___________ with this World Opinion Roundup

TEXT: In Pakistan, some newspapers are publishing what the U-S State Department calls "disinformation." They contend, among other things that a U-S official has said Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida "were not involved" in the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks. However the independent Frontier Post in the border city of Peshawar did blame the Taleban for "not knowing how to play their political and diplomatic cards" from "the very beginning."

In Europe, opinion divides into basically two catagories: those supporting a NATO alliance against terror and others who feel there is considerably less agreement among their governments. Some newspapers in other parts of the world say they want more proof that Osama bin Laden and his followers were definitely behind the attacks.

We begin our sampling in London, where the Times says, in part:

VOICE: In the past ten days, the Bush administration has built a diplomatic fence around Afghanistan that leaves the Taleban without recourse to backing from any other country. America's diplomatic footwork has been as astute as anything its allies could have wished...Allies have been consulted, doubters reassured and longtime opponents won over...

TEXT: The Financial Times has another worry, that because of Taleban fears of an impending U-S attack, famine relief has been suspended and many anti-Taleban Afghans may starve.

VOICE: This crisis presents (President) Bush with a challenge. ... If he attacks the Taleban as part of an effort to capture Osama bin Laden ... there is a high probability that vital food aid would continue to be blocked. This should not be dismissed as "collateral damage." It could well prove a humanitarian disaster on a vast scale. ...If ... large numbers of Afghans were left to die, there would be no shortage of people to blame the U-S and its allies, however unjustly.

TEXT: In France, Liberation -- talking about how different this war will look from past wars -- sees a similarity in both European and Gulf reactions.

VOICE: ... A general agreement to cooperate militarily against 'clear objectives' but no blind solidarity. Once again, Europe's lack of military unity has become apparent: Great Britain is once more Washington's companion in arms, contrasting with the rest of the continent's cautious attitude...

TEXT: In Italy, Milan's Il Sole-24 Ore is pleased there will be:

VOICE: No 'crusade' against Islam. That has certainly reassured European nations and has helped reinforce their decision to explicitly support the American response...

TEXT: In Spain, Madrid, El Mundo speaking of the President Bush's speech last week, expresses reservations.

VOICE: (President) Bush's words have raised some questions. In a generally balanced speech there were some imperative...expressions that would justify some worry in Europe about (his) true intentions.

TEXT: Also in Madrid, El Pais is worried about what would happen to Pakistan if the Afghan leadership proclaims a jihad or holy war.

VOICE: The consequences for neighboring Pakistan could be devastating...The United States cannot control an outburst of religious passions in an unstable country where a significant part of its population does not agree with ... its leaders... (However) despite the evident dangers, the September 11th attacks cannot go unanswered...

TEXT: In Turkey, Yeni Safak in Istanbul, comments:

VOICE: Responding to terrorism with counter-terrorism is a matter of primitiveness. The world cannot give up the essential principles of law like no one is guilty until proven otherwise and the right of defense for the accused. Everyone has the right to a fair trial, including ... terrorists...

TEXT: Turning to the Middle Eastern press, the English-language Arab News, published in London, notes:

VOICE: September 11th seems to have brought about a number of unexpected changes in the way countries view each other. The marked adjustment in Beijing's attitude to the United States is just one such example. From initial shock and sympathy, the Chinese government has progressed to broad support for Washington's planned war against international terrorist. ...The Bush administration would do well to take care of how it handles this rapprochement...

TEXT: In the United Arab Emirates, Abu Dhabi's Al-lttihad condemns the terrorist attacks and discusses Islamic teaching as it relates to war.

VOICE: Islam, even in wars ... had defined limits and laid foundations, which cannot be overstepped. ... No one can classify the bloody events in America as anything but terrorism or criminal acts which no mind or logic can accept. ... Those who did this are the enemies of Islam, and in fact stand ... as racist gangs, whose only goals are occupation and bloodshed...

TEXT: Pakistan's Frontier Post in Peshawar is critical of the Taleban.

VOICE: If the Taleban had known how to play their political and diplomatic cards, they would not be in the mess they find themselves in.

TEXT: Elsewhere in Pakistan, Jang in Karachi insists:

VOICE: The nation (Pakistan) needs to openly demonstrate solidarity with the decisions President General Musharraf and his team has taken ... because a few elements, despite being in (the) minority, are struggling to promote their narrow-mindedness for their (own) interests and objectives.

TEXT: In Australia, the Sydney Morning Herald is pleased with President Bush's speech last week.

VOICE: (Mr.) Bush has perfectly captured the public mood that this is a defining moment. His address ... was proclaimed as his best ever and compared with the ...speeches of (the late British Prime Minister Winston) Churchill and (the late U-S President Franklin) Roosevelt.

TEXT: Indonesia's Republik in Jakarta takes this view:

VOICE: Even if Osama (bin Laden), after strong evidence, was proven responsible for the tragedy, it would not be appropriate for the United States to attack Afghanistan.

TEXT: In Canada, there is this reaction to President Bush's speech in the Ottawa Citizen.

VOICE: Anyone who doubted George W. Bush's ability to rally his nation in time of crisis would have been dumbstruck by last night's powerful address...Why did American politicians react with such enthusiasm? ... Their support stemmed from Mr. Bush's uncompromising insistence that the fight against terrorism is the defining moral battle of our age....

TEXT: On that note, we conclude this World Opinion Roundup on global reaction to the developing response to the terrorist attacks.

NEB/ANG/JWH