07 November 1997
IRAQ CRISIS: GLIMMERS OF HOPE, BUT CONFRONTATION STILL POSSIBLE
Observers continued to hold a few glimmers of hope that the ongoing crisis between the UN and Iraq could be diffused through diplomatic means. Nevertheless, most judged that the crisis is still in a "critical phase" and that a military confrontation could not be ruled out. Press commentary over the past few days appealed to the U.S. not to take "unilateral" military action against Baghdad's intransigent regime, no matter how warranted. Noting the UN's request for Saddam Hussein to change his mind about excluding American weapons inspectors and the U.S. suspension of U-2 spy plane flights over Iraq, those media appeals today turned into mild accolades with many commentators applauding both the U.S. and the UN for displaying "commendable forbearance in responding to the most recent series of provocations by Iraq." Moscow's reformist Segodnya pointed out that the row has raised suspicions about Iraq's "secret stores of chemical and bacteriological weapons" and judged that the world would not condemn an American military strike. Another Russian paper saw a U.S. military strike as the "logical end" of the dispute, but predicted, "Baghdad may benefit most from U.S. air strikes." Paris's left-of- center Le Monde intoned, "There is a unanimous stand at the UN. The feeling of 'appeasement' is gone...and once again there is talk of 'punitive options.'" ARMED AND DANGEROUS--A substantial portion of the commentary focused on the widespread perception that Iraq does in fact possess weapons of mass destruction and poses a danger to the world's population. Commentators uniformly described the dismissal of American weapons inspectors as a ploy by Iraq to gain more time to hide outlawed weapons and to evade UN surveillance "in suspicious sites." The growing consensus that Iraq poses a threat not only to the Middle East but to the entire world was felt as far away as Uruguay where the top- selling paper, conservative, El PaĦs referred to "terrifying" press reports that Saddam "has reinforced his bacteriological arsenal...with the potential to kill the world's population.'" The paper urged the UN "to take immediate action," concluding that "in this case, hesitation may mean the extermination of millions of human beings." ANTI-IRAQ COALITION HOLDING, MOSTLY--Other comment focused on the previous UNSC divisions that had emboldened the Iraqi dictator and the challenges now before the Council. Buenos Aires' leading Clarin held, "China...is heading the Security Council during November. Should the tension in the Gulf grow, Beijing and Washington must prove to the world that, after the Clinton-Jiang Zemin summit, they are capable of reaching an agreement." Several pundits emphasized that Iraq is in no position to dictate the terms of UN resolutions, but if it complies with the UN's mandates and its unlawful weapons are destroyed, then sanctions against it cannot be "open-ended." France's RTL held, "France has been in favor of...a 'critical dialogue' toward certain terrorist nations. It is a weak expression to point to France's distance from U.S. policy when Washington exerts pressure on dangerous governments.... U.S. foreign policy at times can be criticized, but it is better than an ineffectual and even non-existent policy." This survey is based on 69 reports from 36 countries , November 4-7. EDITORS: Gail Hamer Burke and Bill RicheyTo Go Directly To Quotes By Region, Click Below MIDDLE EAST IRAQ: "U.S.' Hostile Trend Against Our Patient People" Baghdad's Republic of Iraq radio network noted (11/6), "The National Progressive and Patriotic Front [NPPF] has said that the practices of U.S. inspectors working within the UN special commission show the U.S. administration's hostile trend against our patient people and their triumphant march.... The NPPF called for declaring 10 November a day of solidarity with the Iraqi people, who are confronting U.S. injustice and hegemony, as a demonstration of the vanguard Arab forces's support for Iraq and its historic leadership." EGYPT: "U.S. Military Action Unacceptable" Said Sonbol, columnist for pro-government Al Akhbar, wrote (11/5): "Any U.S. military action against Iraq is unacceptable.... The American administration should draw the congressmen's attention to the fact that hitting Iraq will only harm U.S. interests.... Arab nations are obviously frustrated and angry these days...because of the Israeli arrogance and the freezing of the peace process. They are angry with the American passiveness toward Israel.... Saddam may have made a mistake by threatening the United States, when everybody knows that he is incapable of implementing his threats. But, punishing Saddam will not happen by hitting the Iraqi people.... Any American attack on Iraq will increase hatred against the United States." "We Hope UN Carries Its Responsibility" In the view of pro-government Al Ahram (11/5): "Iraq insisted on its position of not dealing with Americans in the inspection team. In return, the Pentagon started military enforcements and talking about a possible strike against Iraq.... The issue is no longer inspecting Iraq's armaments...but is becoming political. There are no real reasons for this Iraqi position. It seems that the American administration is finding excuses to strike Iraq.... Washington will always succeed in provoking the Iraqi regime into making useless decisions.... We only hope that the UN carries out its responsibility and deals directly with Baghdad without Washington's intervention." JORDAN: "Avoid Confrontation" Daily columnist Mahmoud Rimawi opined on the op-ed page of pro- government, influential, Arabic-language Al-Ray (11/5): "The escalating conflict between the United States and Iraq is unjustified and unnecessary. We call for avoiding a confrontation, and this is not a call for Iraq to back down, it is rather a call to calm things down. The fact that Baghdad called for a dialogue with Washington means that Iraq does not have a negative attitude towards the American inspectors because they are Americans, but because of their actions. If the conflict is to continue, it would be better for it to revolve around the mission of these inspectors rather than their nationality." "Confrontation" Chief editor Taher Udwan said in independent, mass-appeal, Arabic- language Al-Arab Al-Yawm (11/5): "Iraq cannot stand up to the U.S. military force.... A classical military and political confrontation will not be in Iraq's favor and it will lead to more sanctions against the Iraqi people." ISRAEL: "Confront Saddam" The independent Jerusalem Post wrote in its lead editorial (11/5): "The choice before the United States is clear: Convince its former coalition partners that 'all necessary means' must be used to force Iraq to comply with UN resolutions and divulge and destroy its weapons of mass destruction, or take some symbolic response which will fool no one, least of all Saddam Hussein.... There will be no better opportunity to hold the line against the deadly combination of rogue regime with doomsday weapons." MOROCCO: "Iraq: A New Confrontation" Nadia Bengelloun wrote in semiofficial, French-language Le Matin(11/5): "Saddam's gamble is a risky one, as it will affect the balance of power between Iraq and the United States, testing U.S. determination to deal with the present situation.... Eight hundred and sixty inspections have so far taken place in Iraq, so it is difficult to believe that the UN still cannot draw a final conclusion about the state of Iraq's weapons. If Saddam's decision remains in force, will the United States respond with military force, as it has done three times since the end of the Gulf War, each time without success in forcing Saddam to change his policy?" EUROPE TURKEY: "U.S. Wants To Use Incirlik" Sedat Ergin wrote in mass-appeal Hurriyet (11/6): "The Turkish prime minister confirmed that the United States has asked for Turkey's permission to use Incirlik air base in a possible strike against Iraq. The prime minister described the Iraq-U.S. dispute as 'very serious' and said that the United States might strike once again. He also said Turkey did not give either a 'yes' or a 'no' answer to the United States, and added that Turkey will wait for the UNSC's decision. Sources close to the prime minister admit that if the United States decides to strike against Iraq, Turkey will have a real dilemma. American F-16s are stationed in Incirlik. As for the U.S. request, it seems Turkey is trying to gain some time so that the issue might be resolved via diplomatic means. And Turkey does not want to get the United States against its side by not giving a precise 'no' for an answer.... It is also clear that the flight restrictions on American planes during the Turkish army operations in northern Iraq did not make Washington happy.... When journalists asked the Turkish prime minister whether restrictions still continue, he said there are longer any restrictions." "U.S. Might Hit Anytime" Yalcin Dogan stated in mass-appeal Milliyet (11/6): "The United States is determined to hit Iraq, and has asked (to use) Incirlik base. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright calls Foreign Minister Ismail Cem, and asks for an increase in the reconnaissance flights of Northern Watch over the region, which was limited due to the Turkish incursion into Northern Iraq. Meanwhile, U.S. National Security Adviser Berger calls Prime Minister Yilmaz on the same issue. 'We did not respond to their request yet. We are hopeful that the dispute could be resolved through diplomatic means,' says Yilmaz. Although the tension seems to be decreasing for the time being, you can never know." "The Miscalculation" Fikret Ertan wrote in pro-Islamic Zaman (11/5): "The tension between Iraq and the United States/UN is rapidly mounting. This crisis will most probably end with Saddam Hussein's taking a step back, as was the case before. I believe Saddam is once again making a serious miscalculation.... Today the Arab world is even more divided than before the Kuwait invasion. However, the American presence in the Gulf is heavier than ever. Moreover, the United States has a new fleet, the 5th Fleet, solely responsible for the Gulf. Arab countries' support for the Palestinian cause is no longer very significant. It is as if they are beginning to think that Palestinians are on their own in finding a settlement. As for Turkey, the burden that Turkey has to bear is enormous. Turkey is suffering because of the embargo against Iraq, and facing security threats because of the power vacuum in northern Iraq." BRITAIN: "Stronger Saddam Tests U.S. Power In The Middle East" The centrist Independent had this commentary by Middle East editor Patrick Cockburn (11/7): "President Saddam Hussein's willingness to stage a confrontation now probably reflects confidence that his strength is growing. The explanation is probably simple megalomania and a desire to show 20 million Iraqis and the rest of the world that he cannot be pushed around.... The American position is a little weaker than it was in the Middle East. It has failed to push Israel to reach an agreement with the Palestinians. The Oslo accords are in tatters. The Arab world is angry but impotent. Western Europe does not support American economic sanctions against Iran. But the United States will fight hard to keep its dominance in the Middle East. This means maintaining the status quo of 1991 and the embargo on Iraq. The rest of the world may be suffering from 'sanctions fatigue'--but not Washington. And neither France, Russia nor China wants to confront the United States on this issue. The latest crisis over weapons inspection shows that President Saddam thinks he has a better chance than before of breaking the siege of his country, but he still has a long way to go." "Saddam Defies The UN, Again" The independent weekly Economist judged (11/7): "The ban on Americans has temporarily united the Security Council in indignation. But the new-found dignity would crack if, diplomacy failing, the Americans turned to force. A (UN) resolution endorsing force would almost certainly run into a veto. As the years creep by, the resolve of some council members has weakened." "Move To Suspend U-2 Had Washington's Approval" On Iraq, BBC Radio had this report from UN headquarters (11/5): "Although the move to suspend the U-2 flights clearly had Washington's stamp of approval, some diplomats here (in New York) believe it is a very dangerous concession. They fear Baghdad will see it as a sign of weakness and encourage the Iraqi leadership to seek more. Others feel, however, that the crisis is nearing an end and that having drawn the world's attention to what Baghdad sees as the UN's unjust sanctions, Iraq will now back down." "U.S. Vows To Retaliate If Saddam Fires On Spy Planes" The conservative Times reported (11/5): "Iraq's confrontation with the UN enters a critical phase today when a UN delegation arrives in Baghdad hoping to persuade President Saddam Hussein to reverse his ban on Americans serving in weapons inspection teams.... Even seasoned Saddam-watchers were reluctant to predict his next step. There were suspicions Saddam might even welcome limited American air strikes, calculating that they could deepen divisions within the Security Council and rally Arab support." FRANCE: "Renewed Tension Could Lead To Reprisal Against Iraq" Afsane Bassir Pour wrote in left-of-center Le Monde (11/7): "A new incident could worsen the crisis between Iraq and the UN.... One of Iraq's 'friends' admitted that 'it was impossible to say that Iraq does not have horrible things to hide. How then can we defend it?' This admission indicates that there is a unanimous stand at the UN. The feeling of 'appeasement' is gone...and once again there is talk of 'punitive options.'... While President Clinton spoke in favor of 'patience and discipline,' this latest incident gives the United States an opportunity to harden its position without the risk of dividing the Security Council.... Several diplomats admitted that 'intermediary measures' would only provoke the Iraqis, 'who are capable of reacting dangerously, thus giving Washington a perfect opportunity to ask the Security Council to retaliate.'" "U.S. Policy Is Better Than France's" Jean Francois Revel said on RTL radio (11/7): "France has been in favor of what is commonly called a 'critical dialogue' toward certain terrorist nations. It is a weak expression to point to France's distance from U.S. policy when Washington exerts pressure on dangerous governments. As a foreign policy, it is not much. U.S. foreign policy at times can be criticized, but it is better than an ineffectual and even non-existent policy." "Saddam Hussein's False Miscalculation" Francois Schlosser wondered in left-of-center weekly Le Nouvel Observateur (11/6): "Has Saddam Hussein once again made a gross miscalculation? Saddam knows he is not totally alone when he asks for the lifting of sanctions. There is within the international community much unhappiness about the lack of effectiveness and the perverse effects of the UN sanctions against Iraq.... Public opinion in Arab countries is more and more upset with the way the Iraqi population is treated because of a policy which is essentially a U.S. policy. Syria and Egypt, in siding against Iraq during the Gulf war, hoped to influence U.S. policy in the Middle East conflict. Today, they feel they have been cheated because Washington continues its unconditional support of Israel. This slow reversal of Arab opinion has not escaped Saddam Hussein." "Moscow Comes To Baghdad's Rescue" Laure Mandeville said in right-of-center Le Figaro (11/6): "Until now, Russia had adopted a firm stand on Iraq, siding with the United States and calling for Baghdad to agree to the UN inspection. But Moscow has never accepted Washington's abrupt and unilateral approach to Baghdad.... Russia has always been in favor of easing sanctions against Iraq.... Never has Russia's position been so in tune with France.... This rapprochement between France and Russia over Iraq follows in the footsteps of their spectacular entente on Iran, to the annoyance of the United States. There is no question that the Paris- Moscow axis is prospering." "Saddam: Blowing Hot And Cold" Baudoin Bollaert wrote in right-of-center Le Figaro (11/5): "It is difficult to know what are the real intentions of the master of Baghdad.... In this poker game, Baghdad keeps repeating the same thing: It demands the end of the embargo. This political and commercial embargo is also at the center of a major disagreement between the members of the UN Security Council.... While France admits that UN resolutions must be respected, its interpretation is less 'hysterical' than London's or Washington's interpretation." GERMANY: "The Only Thing That Helps Is A Clear 'No'" Josef Joffe editorialized in centrist Sueddeutsche Zeitung of Munich (11/7): "Saddam is no 'lunatic,' as a German tabloid once called him. He goes as far as he can--and yields if the major powers show their teeth or even occasionally bite. The United States and England on the one side, and France, Russia, and China on the other, differ on (balancing) economic policy considerations and acting as a force for order. It may be possible to soften the trade blockade in particular if Saddam shows a good behavior. But weapons of mass destruction are a problem also for the governments in Paris, Moscow and Beijing. In this respect, there should be no rivalries about advantages, the only thing that helps is a clear 'no.' The louder it can be heard, the less likely this minimalist strategy requires the use of force." "Saddam On An Orderly Retreat" Frank Herold's editorial in left-of-center Berliner Zeitung concluded (11/6): "Saddam's maneuver was risky but also clever--in the end, however, he did not fully succeed. Nevertheless, the strong man from Baghdad can be more or less satisfied and begin his orderly retreat. The UN emissaries are welcome since they do something which the arch- enemy in Washington strictly rejects: They negotiate. Over the past few days, Saddam has achieved a number of his goals. He gained time to hide his poisonous gas depots again, which were about to be discovered. At the same time, he showed his people and the Arab neighbors that he continues to act steadfastly as a warrior in the 'mother of all battles,' this time not in the desert but in the diplomatic arena." "Washington's Policy Ailing" Centrist Darmstaedter Echo (11/6) opined, "Irrespective of the steadfastness of U.S. policy, Washington's policy towards Saddam is ailing because it is very one-dimensional. The relationship has turned into a rigid ritual. (The United States) is stepping on the toes of the arch-rival whenever he moves, and is otherwise pinning its hopes on the embargo. But does this embargo really fulfill its purpose? To be sure, certain effects can be measured--the Iraqi population is trying to avoid the poverty level. But over the past few years, the dictator build new palaces for himself. No, the misery of the country is not important for Saddam and will not prompt him to give in." "Provocation Iraq" Karl Grobe asked in left-of-center Frankfurter Rundschau (11/5): "Has Saddam again made a mistake? In the long run, he has not made a mistake. Obviously, he succeeds in making visible the ambiguity of Washington's policy towards the Middle East.... Towards Iraq and the adjacent hostile Iran, the United States rightfully complains about human right violations, but it does not do so towards the feudalistic dictatorships such as the one in Saudi Arabia.... In Kuwait, the ruling family has been reinstalled, and the majority of people who do not belong to the old Kuwaiti clans are not equal before the law and have no right to vote. When petroleum interests play a role, UN principles are ignored." ITALY: "Crisis Is Escalating" Antonio Ferrari held from Amman in centrist, top-circulation Corriere della Sera (11/7): "The crisis is escalating and the possibility of a military reprisal is again becoming concrete. 'A real option, but not an imminent one,' said the State Department. Yesterday evening Clinton reiterated that concept by asserting that the crisis is a 'stratagem' put up by Saddam in order to prevent UN inspectors from discovering additional illegal weapons. A confirmation of the seriousness of the crisis came yesterday from Turkey. Prime Minister Meust Yilmaz revealed that Washington asked him to use the Incirlik Air Base should an attack against Iraq be carried out." "Tension Is Not Decreasing" Leading business Il Sole-24 Ore's view from Amman was (11/7): "Lies and videotapes. Only sex is missing in this new crisis with Baghdad...which presents some mysterious and provocative aspects. The result, so far, is that in the wake of the apparently `positive' conclusion of the talks between the UN delegation and Iraqi leaders, the tension in the confrontation among Saddam Hussein, the United Nations and America is not decreasing.... U.S. Defense Secretary Cohen said that `military reprisal, if it occurs, will not be preceded by any warnings on the part of the United States.'... Given the political atmosphere in the region and the crisis facing the peace process between the Arabs and the Israelis, we cannot exclude the possibility that Saddam will be able to gain another moment of popularity." "A Diplomatic Way Out Shaping Up" Alberto Pasolini Zanelli commented in a report from Washington in leading rightist opposition Il Giornale (11/6): "A diplomatic way out of the crisis is shaping up. Saddam Hussein will be able to give a television speech announcing to the Iraqi people that he was able to keep away American planes, and Clinton will be able to calm the fury of the 'hawks' in Congress who would like an immediate military reprisal in response to each provocation by Baghdad. Clinton has, at a minimum, gained some precious time in order to issue a warning to Saddam Hussein which is also a suggestion: He asked him not to make 'serious mistakes' and not to hinder the work of the UN investigating committee." RUSSIA: "Ambivalent Moscow" Aleksandr Shumilin said in reformist, business-oriented Kommersant Daily (11/6): "Less rigorous on Iraq than the other permanent members of the Security Council, Moscow has learned to capitalize on this fact. By identifying with the rest of the Security Council, the Russians make Baghdad doubt their pro-Iraqi stand, causing it to respond, always in the same manner--it offers Russia new oil contracts." "Saddam May Get It Hot" Nikolai Zimin filed from Washington for reformist Segodnya (11/5): "The row over the UN inspectors has increased suspicion that they were really close to uncovering Iraq's secret stores of chemical and bacteriological weapons. And second, Saddam's actions make America even more determined in its anti-Iraqi stand. No matter how strong his anti-American rhetoric is, his is a challenge to the Security Council and indeed the entire United Nations. In other words, should the Americans strike at Iraq again, the world would hardly blame them for that." "Baghdad Will Benefit By U.S. Strikes" Aleksandr Reutov wrote on page one of centrist Nezavisimaya Gazeta(11/5): "Baghdad is apparently not going to back down, determined to let the crisis reach its logical end, rather than trying to resolve it. Logically, it must end with U.S. and British military interference in the form of missile strikes. Baghdad evidently provoked this confrontation with a view to splitting the former (anti- Iraqi) coalition. In fact, Saddam has been working on that, without success, ever since the Gulf War. But it is unlikely that Russia, France and China will openly challenge the United States now. Interestingly, the way things go, Baghdad may benefit most by U.S. air strikes, as it did in September of 1993." BELGIUM: "American Arabs Care About Iraqi Children" U.S. correspondent Nathalie Mattheiem reported (11/5) in independent Le Soir, "Weariness, concern: The American Arabs are following the crisis with more attention than the rest of public opinion. And (they do so) with obvious discomfort. From 3 to 4 million-member strong, the community of Americans of Arab origin is less important than its Jewish American counterpart, with its 6.5 million people. Moreover, it weighs less politically, without powerful influence in Congress. 'It is a community richer than the average' says Sam Hussein, from the American-Arab Anti Discrimination Committee (ADC), 'but not used to advocating its viewpoint, probably because the newcomers have lived under repressive regimes.'" Mattheiem also quoted Sam Hussein as saying: "'No one likes the Iraqi regime, but we had observed a positive evolution among editorialists.... This new death dance will stiffen positions. One can only hope that this will be an opportunity to remember that Iraq exists and that they will be informed of the situation of the civilian population.'" "Inspectors Need Much Time" Foreign affairs writer Manu Tassier stated in independent Catholic De Standaard (11/16), "Satellites, espionage planes and helicopters are keeping an eye on (Iraq's) territory. In strategic locations, video cameras have been installed. Yet, in six years, the inspectors have not succeeded in accomplishing their task.... In 1995, UNSCOM thought that its work was almost over but, a high-level Iraqi defector gave information about the manner in which Saddam Hussein's regime deceived the UN. Since that moment, the inspectors appear to believe only what they can see themselves. However, some observers believe that there is another motive behind UNSCOM's 'slowness.' Allegedly, the United States's only interest is in eliminating Saddam Hussein. By allowing the arms inspections--and the sanctions--to drag on, the United States, reportedly, are able to maintain pressure on the Iraqi leader." CANADA: "Iraq Duped By U.S. strategy?" Columnist Richard Gwyn observed in the liberal Toronto Star (11/7), "Throughout this week, Saddam has prevented UN inspectors from carrying out their rounds.... There is very little in this exercise for Saddam except that he will be again able to claim to his countrymen...that Iraq is being victimized by the Great Satan of the United States. Sheer stupidity is a good explanation.... The principle beneficiary of what's happened thus is the United States. The sanctions represent the U.S.'s permanent punishment for its failure to achieve complete victory in the Gulf War. Continued tough sanctions, and also the current threats to launch some more cruise missiles at Baghdad, also represents a way for President Bill Clinton to reassure his domestic critics that while he may have gone a bit soft on China recently, he remains as hard-eyed as any Republican would be about Saddam.... Saddam is too stupid to have figured out that smart types in Washington have lured him into creating the event that now justifies those sanctions, and the UN's intense surveillance, being continued." "Saddam's Insanity" An editorial in the conservative Calgary Sun (11/4) queried, "What we ask is why Iraq is so determined to bar U.S. weapons experts? It seems the answer is simple: Iraq thinks it can fool UN officials, but can't fool U.S. military experts. That just heightens all our suspicions about what Saddam is really up to." "Obstruction In Iraq" The left-of-center Calgary Herald (11/4) observed that "Saddam's illegal rejection of American inspectors on an international team searching for weapons of mass destruction inside Iraq suggests the UN teams may have been closing in on the caches of biological and chemical weapons Iraq is rumored to possess.... The proper steps have been taken by the UN. The inspections have been suspended and a diplomatic team has been sent to Baghdad to demand that they go ahead, including the American inspectors. For all concerned it would make sense to get on with the inspections as a necessary prelude to restoring Iraq to the world community and one day restoring democracy to Iraq." "Saddam's Bet" Montreal's liberal French language Le Devoir said (11/5), "Saddam Hussein's behavior is such an invitation for an explosion of American anger that it almost seems a trap.... By demanding only the American members of the disarmament commission leave, the dictator is trying precisely to make the most of the divisions that have started to be drawn within the Security Council of the UN regarding the adherence to the sanctions... Obsessed by its visceral hate of the Iraqi dictatorship, pushed by the Congress of Newt Gingrich, pressured by the confused implications of its threat of a military response, the Clinton administration could find itself stuck between 'the tree of its international allies and the bark of its internal policy.'" CZECH REPUBLIC: "Saddam Is UN Inspectors' Nightmare" A commentary in left-of-center Slovo observed (11/6), "Stubborn Saddam could hardly be expected to cope calmly with investigations of the international commission. Therefore, the current crisis was bound to start sooner or later. The problem now is how to get out of this mess. A new war would probably end in the same way like the previous one, i.e Saddam would be defeated but would stay in power. Or, more and more sanctions could be imposed as proposed by the United States and Britain but they would have a devastating impact on innocent Iraqi citizens. Or, it is possible to play a waiting game as France and Russia do, especially for oil reasons.... Nobody seems to know today how to approach the powerful Iraqi ruler. The question of how many and what kind of weapons Iraq is hiding will probably remain unanswered for a long time." DENMARK: "Tighten That Sanctions Noose" Center-right Berlingske Tidende held (11/4), "The Security Council must remain unified during the next few extremely important days.... The world powers, with the USA taking the lead, should reconsider their attitude towards Iraq. Seven years of sanctions have not brought Saddam's fall any nearer. It must be possible to focus sanctions more directly against the dictator and his thugs with the intention of deposing the regime without destroying the fabric of the country." "Hard And Fast Reaction" Center-right Jyllands-Posten stated (11/4), "[Saddam Hussein] should be told directly by the UN that its inspectors should be able to work freely within the country. If he does not meet this demand, the reaction ought to be hard and fast." HUNGARY: "A Devil Of Ideas" An op-ed piece in centrist conservative Magyar Nemzet (11/7) stated, "Washington can now regret that it had stopped 'right before the gates' and had not entirely liquidated the Saddam Hussein regime seven years ago.... Saddam now challenges how far he can go with his disobedience. The devil of his ideas hides the possibility of a new war. But that could also make it clear that neither the Europeans nor the Arabic countries are as united in joining the United States in carrying out military actions against Iraq as they were seven years ago. But if we look at it, Washington itself could not start operations lightheartedly either, as the Middle East peace process has become a priority in recent years. If the Pentagon imposes threat on an Arabic country, even if called Iraq, other Arabic countries might take it seriously in the region and peace then is over there." LATVIA: "Iraq Not Alone Against the World" Aris Jansons of centrist Diena wrote (11/6): "By hightening the confrontation between the UN and America, Hussein is really testing the strength of his regime... The Iraqi president can play these games as long as there is lack of unity among the world's leaders.... A war of diplomatic nerves would be less harmful to the population...and the only casualty might be the UN and international cooperation. Right now we need maximum diplomatic efforts, but there is no consensus on what the efforts should look like." NORWAY: "Saddam's High Gamble" Conservative Aftenposten commented (11/5) "Once again, Iraq is on a collision course with the rest of the world. President Saddam Hussein will not stop at anything to prevent the UN from conducting weapons inspections at plants where weapons of the worst kind have been produced before.... Suspicions that Iraq has something to hide have gradually been confirmed, both by high-level defectors and by inspections. Much indicates that the latest political crisis is a classic example of a diversion of attention from the fact that the inspectors were tracing stored deadly chemical weapons.... Saddam the Cheat has been caught in the act. Like all others caught cheating, he's very dangerous. One does not negotiate with people like him. But as UN Secretary General Annan said, Saddam must be convinced--convinced that it is in his own best interest to give in." "A United Front Against Saddam" Social democratic Arbeiderbladet comments (11/4) "We have good reason to use tough measures in the UN's conflict with Saddam Hussein. If the weapons inspections in Iraq are to have any purpose at all, the UN and not Saddam must decide the composition of the team of inspectors. Saddam Hussein has put an endless amount of obstacles in the inspectors' way, and this only strengthens our suspicions that he has illegal biological and chemical weapons in his arsenals. He may also try to get atomic weapons. This could have frightening consequences, and poses a threat far beyond the Gulf region.... Saddam Hussein's attempt to dictate who gets to control his activities really demonstrates the need for a united front against the Baghdad Bully." POLAND: "Time For Russian Diplomacy" Right-of-center Zycie ran this commentary by Lukasz Modelski (11/5), "Both France and Russia are interested in lifting international sanctions imposed on Iraq in the wake of the Gulf war. Russia, which has signed a billions-worth contract on oil purchases with Iraq, should really care that Iraq make a rather symbolic gesture and allow for the United States inspection under the auspices of the United Nations.... Since the legal sale of oil is a viable issue for Iraq, it may let the inspectors in.... In this event, the UN may soon have a new motion on lifting the sanctions put to debate. The ball will be on the U.S. side. If the U.S. supports the motion, it will be the biggest success of Russia's diplomacy since signing the Russia-NATO Charter." "Punishing Iraq Is A Must" In the view of Ryszard Malik, writing in centrist Rzeczpospolita(11/5), "The Iraqi dictator and his men have no future--and they know it very well.... Punishing Iraq is a must today. [The world] can no longer tolerate the fact that Baghdad does not abide by the Security Council resolutions, adopted in accordance with international law. The question is, how to do it? The Arab world as a whole is against another 'Iraqi fuss.'... The Arabs are concerned over the stalemate in the process of the Israeli-Arab dialogue initiated by Prime Ministers Yitzhak Rabin and Simon Peres. And then there is Iran, hidden in the shadow and waiting to see how the situation will develop.... It takes great wisdom and responsibility for the fate of not only the region, but the whole world, to make a proper decision. Iraq under Hussein's rule must be put in the corner. The cat-and- mouse game can not last for ever." SPAIN: "Another Kick Aimed at Saddam Lands In The Pants Of The People" Independent El Mundo wrote (11/7): "Beyond the mutual bravado, it is important for the United States, the UN, and the entire international community to reconsider its sanctions policy against the Iraqi dictator, which has hardly bothered him at all during the past six years, but which has caused serious problems for an impoverished populace, the true victims of the sanctions.... Is no other policy possible?" "In The Eye Of The Storm" Conservative ABC maintained (11/5), "The primary source of petroleum on which the economic security of the West remains dependent cannot remain subject to the nationalist lunacy of Saddam Hussein indefinitely.... Baghdad realizes [the Nimitz carrier group is nearby] and for this reason one supposes it will not continue its game of cat and mouse much longer. [Such a] policy cannot be maintained in the eye of the storm." SOUTH ASIA INDIA: "Iraq: Dangerous Situation" Independent, Urdu-language Siyasat from Hyderabad editorialized (11/5): "The situation has taken such a serious turn that another round of raids against Iraq seems imminent.... The activities of the UNSCOM are also surrounded by thick clouds of mystery. It is amazing that the high-powered team could not complete its job in the seven years after the Gulf War, especially in a country which the allied invaders had not only declared as comprehensively thrashed but which they had made helpless by imposing merciless sanctions against it. The UNSCOM's inability to complete its inspection in such a devastated country leads to the conclusion that either the allies were lying to the world about Iraq or the commission was not up to the responsibility it was assigned.... One thing is certain: If Iraq doesn't act wisely as advised by Russia and France, the United States is bound to attack, compounding the sufferings of the Iraqi people caused by the mistakes of the Saddam government." "UN Fighting U.S.' Battle?" Middle East correspondent Kesava Menon wrote in the centrist Hindu(11/4): "With world opinion...having determined that Mr. Hussein should not be left in possession of such weapons, the justification for UNSCOM's existence and activity appears unassailable. But the question is whether Mr. Hussein has defied world opinion by taking the decision which set off the latest confrontation.... No one has bothered to explain why UNSCOM...should absolutely need the U.S. experts if they are to succeed in their mission." "Gunning For Saddam" The centrist Times of India editorialized (11/5): "The drama...in Iraq is a direct consequence of the United States and Britain seeking to achieve through the charade of endless UN inspections and open- ended sanctions what Operation Desert Storm could not: the ouster of President Saddam Hussein.... What Washington forgets is that UNSCOM's tardy progress undermines the 'verification regimes' built into the Chemical Weapons Convention and the proposed Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty.... The representatives of the UN now in Baghdad on a trouble- shooting mission should...establish a clear time-frame within which UNSCOM should wrap up its work. Though the United States is itching to use force, it must realize that the international community is tiring of the victimization of Iraq and will not welcome any display of muscle-flexing on Washington's part." PAKISTAN: "What Are They Up To?" Karachi's independent Dawn editorialized (11/6): "The U.S.-UN warnings to Iraq following Baghdad's refusal to admit international weapons inspectors with American nationality to carry out investigations of Iraq's suspected production and stockpiling of chemical weapons and missiles have lately assumed a menacing tone, posing an imminent threat of military action against Baghdad. Although U.S. officials claim that they are not seeking a military confrontation with Iraq, this is precisely what they seem to be getting poised for.... In view of the menacing American moves against Baghdad, the Arab nations need to put the past behind and present a solid front to the rest of the world in this, Iraq's hour of peril." NEPAL: "Peaceful Talks Are The Only Way To Solve The Problem" In the words of the independent Himalaya Times (11/5), " The Iraqi people have been compelled to live a terrible life because of Saddam Hussein. The direct and awful impact of the economic embargo against Iraq has been rather hard on the people. Even if there is military action by the United States, the negative impact will be always on the people of Iraq, not on Saddam Hussein. Innocent people must not be tortured.... Talks are the only peaceful means to resolve the problem. The UN must not dance to the tune of the self-centered United States. The innocent Iraqi people should not be the victims of the egotistic U.S. and Iraqi presidents." EAST ASIA AND PACIFIC CHINA: "Iraq Will Postpone Expulsion Of The U.S. inspectors" Tu Longde stated (11/6) in official Central Legal and Political Commission's Legal Daily (Fazhi Ribao): "In the current face-off, neither the United States nor Iraq shows any inclination to back down. Iraq is expressing its resentment against the endless inspections by suspending its cooperation with the U.S. inspectors. By showing the disastrous consequences of the seven-year sanctions, Iraq wants to arouse the sentiments of the international community. This goal has been achieved. Most countries are opposing the use of force in their efforts to urge Iraq to abide by the UN resolutions. If the United States exerts military forces against Iraq, it will find itself in a passive and isolated position. The United Nations' efforts at mediation will provide an opportunity both for both the United States and Iraq." HONG KONG: "Iraq Has Become A Lingering Problem" The English-language, independent Hong Kong Standard stated (11/6), "Iraqi opinion is that the inspections are dragging on interminably because Washington wants to punish Saddam Hussein, not just for the invasion of Kuwait seven years ago but for challenging the might of the United States. Washington will argue that Iraq is still a danger to regional peace and that it still has weapons of mass destruction which should be eliminated. There might well be merit in both arguments and the best way for Baghdad to clear any doubts might be to allow inspections. If the inspection reports clear the Iraqi government of hiding such weapons or attempting to build new ones, the sooner the tough UN sanctions will be lifted. In the meantime it is the Iraqi people and particularly children, who suffer from malnutrition and lack of basic medicines and proper medical care. For humanitarian reasons at least a quick cure must be found to this festering sore." JAPAN: "Iraq's Risky Attempt to Have UN Sanctions Lifted" Business-oriented Nihon Keizai's Bahrain correspondent Yamada observed (11/5), "Iraq, fatigued by over seven years of UN sanctions, has moved to break the deadlocked situation following the UN adoption in October of a U.S.-led resolution calling for additional punitive measures against Saddam Hussein's leadership. If Iraq takes strong measures-- including expulsion--against American inspectors, it will not only make the chances of lifting UN sanctions more distant but also raise the possibility of inviting another U.S. military intervention. Iraq's move can be called a risky gamble." INDONESIA: "U.S.-Iraq Sparring Heats Up" Ruling Golkar Party Suara Karya pointed out (11/6), "At first glance, Saddam's maneuver seemed odd. If he meant to bluff the United States over the draft UN resolution, it was an ill-considered action because only Britain favored the draft.... Saddam's rejection of American members of UNSCOM will most certainly affect the supplies of dry goods the Iraqis need. Why was Saddam so desperate? Perhaps, he wanted to take advantage of U.S.-Iran tensions...in an effort to convert Iran into an ally.... Of course, he also wants to isolate the United States from its allies. He has seen Russia and France soften their stands. In fact, the international community has seen that the economic embargo against Iraq has caused the Iraqi people to suffer. Whatever his reasons, Saddam's acts this time and those in the past have forced the United States to make large defense expenditures to maintain its position as world policeman." "The Drama Of U.S. Vs. Saddam" Muslim intellectual Republika observed (11/5), "The United States seems to have deliberately maintained the Gulf War conflict. The United States makes Saddam angry on purpose then pretends to become angry, and ends by making empty bluffs. In this way the United States is builds on the international view that Saddam has created unrest in the Gulf, thus making it necessary to continue to pressure him.... We assume that this U.S.-versus-Saddam conflict will continue, following the established pattern of mutual threats without direct confrontation. Of course, this pattern could change if Saddam becomes desperate or the United States (and the UN) have their fill of toying with Saddam." AUSTRALIA: "Iraq Tests UN Diplomacy" The liberal Age of Melbourne commented (11/7): "The United Nations and the United States have acted with commendable forbearance in responding to the most recent series of provocations by Iraq.... As America positions ships and aircraft and the UN mission confers in Baghdad, it is clear President Hussein would not be so obdurate unless he had something to hide. The world must pursue its decision to frisk Iraq for weapons of mass destruction." PHILIPPINES: "Saddam's High-Stakes Poker: Can He Pull It Off?" Former ambassador to Europe J.V. Cruz wrote in the independent Manila Chronicle (11/6): "Clinton has not responded in his usual arrogant and overbearing manner to these challenges and provocations from the Iraqi leader.... Will Saddam press his demand for the expulsion of all the Americans working with UNSCOM? If a U-2 plane darkens the skies over his country, will he make good on this threat to shoot it down? If he does this, Clinton will probably order that Iraq be obliterated from the face of the earth. There is no question the Americans can do this effortlessly, and there is no question either that Saddam knows it. So, is the man serious or bluffing? Well, no one knows but he." SOUTH KOREA: "Crisis With Iraq Should Be Resolved By International Coalition" The Pro-business Joong-Ang Ilbo held (11/5), "The United States will only be taken advantage of by Hussein if it takes unilateral military action. Such action will only end up in solidifying the Islamic world against the United States, creating a serious division among the UN Security Council countries and eventually hurting world peace. The United States would do best to seek an international coalition first." "Iraqi Adventure" The Anti-establishment Hankyoreh Shinmun stated (11/5) that Iraq "is pushing its 'brinkmanship diplomacy' in the belief that the United States won't be able to garner international support against it this time.... If, however, Iraq goes ahead with the expulsion of the American inspection team members and shoots at the U.S. U-2 surveillance planes, the United States will have to answer to it unilaterally. The chances of Hussein to preempt an attack are not great." THAILAND: "It's Hard To Sympathize With Iraq" Largest circulation Thai Rath's Dao Sao commented (11/7), "Saddam Hussein should not be worried that American or representatives of any nations are recruited in the UN inspection team, given he has no weapons of mass destruction to hide.... It seems that Iraq's suffering from its own roguery will not easily end. If Iraq is unable to improve its image in the eyes of the world, it would be difficult for the country to expect sympathy from others." "Saddam Has To Distort The Issue" Elite Naew Na's Charnnarit Boonpharod commented (11/4), "With the economy in a shambles, no foreign revenue, and people starving to death daily, the toppling of the Iraqi leadership seems increasingly imminent.... One way out is to divert the public's preoccupation from domestic hardship and stir up nationalist sentiments.... President Suddam Hussein is well aware that Iraq's chance of defeating the United States is nil, but he has few choices. This confrontation may be his last gasp in a bid to survive." AFRICA BURKINA FASO: "Is Saddam Playing With Fire?" The "Internal Dialogue" column in independent Le Pays offered this (11/4): "For Saddam Hussein, Iraq cannot be asked to destroy its strategic potential while israel possesses a nuclear arsenal. An argument that is respectable. But that is not the problem of the UN and its master, the United States. Finally, for Iraq, behind this mission, hides an American mission that smells of 'spy mania.' Even more so since in the past, an American inspector had faxed the contents of the information collected in Iraq directly to Washington instead of transmitting it to the Security Council. But whatever the well-founded arguments of the 'master of Baghdad,' it must be recognized that his partisans are few, even inside the Arab world, who are frightened by his wish to conquer, and elsewhere where his dictatorship brings little friendship." NIGERIA: "Renewed Tension In Gulf" The government-owned Daily Times (11/7) commented editorially: "To be sure, Iraq has no right to dictate to the UN which countries should be represented on the inspection team, but many would think that they should be interested in those who make the team.... But we do not think that Iraq should have expressed its frustrations in such a dramatic and precipitate manner, without first discussing them with the world body.... Any effort to provoke dialogue and reach a peaceful solution to the problem is preferable to the bellicose noises already being made and the brinkmanship we have seen so far. In order to douse the trend towards another conflict in an already volatile region, we call for a speedy, amicable and final settlement of the sanctions regime on Iraq." "U.S. Should Be Less Visible On Iraqi Matters" The Ibadan-based, independent Nigerian Tribune held (11/5), "We are sure that the two principal actors in all UN resolutions on Iraq are the UN itself and Iraq as a state. In this wise, all negotiation, dialogue and objections should be between the two parties. This immediately raises questions on the hyperactivity of the United States on matters relating to the nation of Iraq.... It is left for the UN to allay the fears of Iraq, reconstitute the team or take any other such step as would befit an unbiased world body..... On matters of such sensitivity, we think that the United States should be less visible, and show that it is a nation whose opinions can be overruled by the position of the world body." LATIN AMERICA ARGENTINA: "'Pax Americana': Still A Game Of Recurrent Crisis" Guillermo Ortiz, international analyst for business-financial El Cronista, maintained (11/6), "The suspicions of the existence of non- conventional arsenals in Iraq is well-founded.... On the other hand, the UN is an organization in search of a mission and wants to prove it is still useful as an instrument which confers legitimacy to each of Washington's international actions and is capable of granting the U.S.' 'power' policy a multilateral characteristic. This is why mediators are in Baghdad. The UN needs the U.S.' military power in order to be credible, and the United States needs the diplomatic coverage in order to be 'legitimate.' This interaction is the basis of the 'pax Americana.' Regarding Saddam's reasons, his anti-U.S., position bears fruits at home, and may capitalize the allies' differences and force decisions. But his challenge is product of his weakness. His remaining in power after the war was the result of Bush's deliberate policy; he leads an impoverished country divided into exclusion zones and subject to inspections. Even though the crisis is a game of mirrors, everything which is reflected may not be real." "U.S. And China Must Cooperate" Ana Baron, the Washington-based correspondent of leading Clarin wrote (11/5), "China...is heading the Security Council during November. Should the tension in the Gulf grow, Beijing and Washington must prove to the world that, after the Clinton-Jiang Zemin summit, they are capable of reaching an agreement." BRAZIL: "Authoritarian Logic" According to an editorial in liberal Folha de Sao Paulo (11/4), "It is obviously in everybody's interests to prevent Iraq from having a powerful arsenal. Dictators like Saddam Hussein would not be inhibited in using it in a dreadful way, as has already occurred even against civilians. But the U.S. government took the prohibition more as a personal offense and reacted with the spirit of the world's police, a role which it is used to--especially after the defeat of its great ideological and military rival, the Soviet Union. Besides, the American reaction seems to be disproportionate to the offense. To provoke a military action against Iraq is not an adequate answer to the Iraqi veto of two members of a commission. The most elementary common sense indicates that it is the United Nation's role - and not only that of a powerful nation, no matter how powerful it is-- to decide how to reach the objective that the United States is also looking for, which is to avoid the rearmament of a regime considered vile in every way." MEXICO: "Middle East" An editorial in moderate El Heraldo de Mexico remarked (11/5), "Tension is building up in the Middle East because of Iraq's threat to attack U.S. planes overflying Iraqi territory to inspect Iraq's weaponry, and because of the U.S. response that it could attack Baghdad.... On the one hand, Saddam Hussein still believes he has been sent by God, and brags about his country's weapons. On the other hand, the United States continues to insist on its hegemonic goal of becoming the world's policeman--no matter how far the conflictive region can be.... We hope that an armed conflict will not take place and that diplomacy can solve this matter. The victims of war are usually innocent human beings who have nothing to do with ideologies or hegemonic interests." URUGUAY: "Reason For Refusal" Top-selling, conservative El PaĦs opined (11/4), "The (London) Observer has indicated that Hussein has reinforced his bacteriological arsenal 'with the objective of creating a cocktail of weapons with the potential to kill the the world's population.' This is terrifying news, first because this (scenario) is a possibility, given the type of insane and self-delusional tyrant we're dealing with. (But) what is also terrifying is to think that so much destructive and deadly power can be concentrated in his hands and that an all-out effort is not being made to avoid it. For the moment these are only press reports, but given the sources and particularly because of Hussein's character, they are serious enough for the United Nations to take immediate action. In this case, hesitation may mean the extermination of millions of human beings." ## For more information, please contact: U.S. Information Agency Office of Public Liaison Telephone: (202) 619-4355 11/7/97 # # #Europe Middle East East Asia and the Pacific South Asia Africa Latin America and the Caribbean
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
