26 November 1997
IRAQ: REGIONAL VIEWS DIVERGE--BUT MOST AGREE CRISIS NOT OVER
The flurry of foreign commentary regarding the latest U.S.-Iraq dispute has continued unabated. Broad themes can be detected in all of the assessments, but interesting and substantive regional disagreements also persist. As far as the areas of agreement are concerned, two themes stand out. First, a majority of analysts agreed with the view that the crisis is "far from over." There was, however, no consensus on the reason for the apparent continuation of the crisis. Some pundits attributed it to what they saw as Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's ongoing desire to undermine the UN sanctions. Other analysts blamed the U.S., noting that Washington is continuing its military buildup in the Gulf--allegedly looking for an "excuse" to attack Iraq. The second broad area of agreement--with a few notable exceptions in Germany--was the view that the Clinton administration has not handled this situation well, although there were different reasons given for that conclusion as well. Discord was most evident when reactions were considered on a regional and geo- political basis: --ARAB VOICES: Perhaps most striking of all was the intensity and vigor of the condemnation by Arab voices of the U.S. stance regarding Iraq. No one had anything positive to say about the U.S. strategy regarding Iraq--not even those very few writers who called for the Iraqi leader's removal. Kuwait's independent Al-Anba asked: "Why doesn't the U.S...think of ridding the Iraqi people of this tyrant? Why did it allow Saddam and his henchmen to suppress the popular uprising in southern Iraq? Why doesn't it stop Saddam's henchmen?" But such thinking was the exception. A majority of Arab observers put forth arguments that were strenuously against the U.S. and tellingly sympathetic to Iraq's "plight." A considerable number of editorialists railed at what they believed was the U.S.' desire to divide the Arab world by pressuring Iraq. Manama's leading, semi- indepenent Al-Ayam was typical in linking the Middle East peace process to the Iraqi crisis: "Had one quarter of the American anger at Iraq gone to Israel things would have changed, and U.S. credibility would be much stronger than it is now." Jeddah's conservative Al- Madina warned that "the restoration of friendship with the Arabs of the Middle East is vital.... If the U.S. does not move quickly to restore its friendship, it will not only lose its role as a mediator in the Middle East but its hegemony." --DEVELOPING WORLD: Most editors in the developing world used the crisis as another occasion to gripe about U.S. hegemony and the existence of a unipolar world as well as to reiterate their desire for a counterweight to the superpower. --RUSSIA, FRANCE: Media voices in Moscow and Paris viewed their governments' roles as a welcome and necessary response to the U.S.' mishandling of the situation. --U.S. ALLIES, SUPPORTERS: Notably, commentators most supportive of continuing the firm U.S. line on Iraq hailed mainly from Europe, Israel, and a scattering from Latin America, Asia and Africa. The strongest endorsements were found in the German press. Editorialists there and elsewhere worried that the international community was foolishly pursuing a policy of "appeasement" regarding Iraq. There was, however, even among this grouping of analysts, much disgruntlement with Washington's performance. This survey is based on 67 reports from 36 countries, November 21-26. EDITOR: Diana McCaffreyTo Go Directly To Quotes By Region, Click Below MIDDLE EAST EGYPT: "U.S. Must Relinquish Will To Humiliate Iraq" Pro-government Al Ahram judged (11/26): "The United States must relinquish the spirit of retaliation and the will to humiliate Iraq. If it proceeds to aggression, the biggest loser will be the whole Arab region." "Iraq Challenged The Sole Superpower" Ossama El Gammal, columnist for pro-government Al Akhbar, pointed out (11/25): "The crisis shows the role Russia can play to regain its international status.... Iraq's status in the Arab world rose and it succeeded in bringing the issue of sanctions to the international and Arab arenas.... Iraq succeeded in challenging the sole superpower in the world without any costs. Its cooperation and facilitation to the international monitoring team will refute American pretexts for continuing to maintain the sanctions." "Crisis Has Shown Arab Anger" Pro-government Al Ahram said (11/24): "There are no reasons for continuing to make the Iraqi people suffer from the blockade. Thus, there are possibilities that the crisis will be renewed.... The crisis has also shown Arab anger at the American insistence on blockading Iraq." BAHRAIN: "All Iraq Asked For Was Replacement Of American Inspectors" Ahmed Kamal held in leading, semi-independent Al-Ayam (11/23): "Why do Americans feel so superior?... They are a hodgepodge of people from all parts of the world.... They spread corruption and destruction in the new land, killing, without mercy, its aboriginal people...they enslaved them...and bred them like animals.... So, why is the U.S. administration angry about Iraq expelling American inspectors?... Can they not be replaced with inspectors from other nationalities?... Iraq did not expel the UN committee or reject it.... All it asked for was replacement of the Americans with people from other nationalities...and a date for lifting of the sanctions.... Had one quarter of the American anger at Iraq gone to Israel, things would have changed, and U.S. credibility would be much stronger than it is now." "Gain For Arabs In General" In the view of Sayed Zuhrah writing in leading, semiofficial Akhbar Al-Khalij (11/22): "Can Iraq speak of winning anything out of its latest confrontation with the United States? Yes, it can, and such gain was not for Iraq alone but for the Arabs in general.... The most important gain was revealing to the world American tyranny in its dealings with Iraq and the Iraqi people.... In short, during the latest crisis America realized that its hands are no longer free to do whatever it wants with Iraq, and this is of course a gain for the Arabs." ISRAEL: "Saddam Undermined UN, U.S. Credibility" The independent Jerusalem Post's editorial held (11/23): "The fact is simple--Saddam Hussein has played the UN for a fool while hiding his lethal toys, and everyone knows it, even those who are denying it. In so doing he has undermined UN authority, and as an extra bonus he has undermined American credibility.... Iraq and Russia between them have just made our world a more dangerous place.... They have made the world's policeman--the United States--look just a bit more like a bumbling small-town cop. Wake up, everyone; this is Saddam, and this is appeasement." JORDAN: "Crisis Has Just Begun" Daily columnist Tarek Masarweh said in pro-government, influential, Arabic-language Al-Ray (11/25): "We have noticed in the past week how Washington was inciting, provoking and inviting a kind of confrontation with Baghdad in order to justify a military strike. The United States thinks that using force will restore the international consensus and will extinguish the rebellion of some of the Arabs.... This clear U.S. provocation proves that no one should rest easy that the crisis is over. The crisis has just begun." KUWAIT: "We Have Become Sick Of The Situation" Independent Al-Watan's Abdullah Al-Shayji said (11/26): "Seven years and three months after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, the same scenario is repeated.... Each time, reaction to Saddam's actions are the same: Saddam rejects the Security Council's resolutions; America sends in troops and aircraft carriers, and threatens the use of power. The crisis is not over yet. I am concerned that in the year 2000, we will re-live the same circumstances. We have become sick of the situation. Hasn't the Security Council understood that after 88 months of dealing with Baghdad's regime that he isn't concerned about all these threats? It is a sad and miserable situation for the Arab world, caused by the treachery and an invasion fabricated by Iraq and for which we, the Arabs, are paying a dear price." "Why Doesn't U.S. Get Rid Of Saddam?" Kuwaiti Shiite cleric Al-Seyed Mohammed Baqer Mousa Al-Mahri wondered in independent Al-Anba (11/26), " Why doesn't the United States, which advocates democracy, think of ridding the Iraqi people of this tyrant? Why did it allow Saddam and his henchmen to suppress the popular uprising in southern Iraq? Why doesn't it stop Saddam's henchmen from demolishing religious and scientific schools, public libraries and historic relics in Iraq? Muslims all over the world should seriously seek to rid the region of Iraq's tyrant, Saddam." "How Is Saddam Allowed To Remain In Power?" Independent Al-Watan (11/22) ran this piece by Islamist writer Khaled Al-Adwa, "The House of Representatives recently ratified a resolution calling for the American government to try Saddam as a war criminal. It is a resolution reflecting the desire of the world, led by super-state (America) to commit to principles of peace and human rights. How is such a regime as Saddam's allowed to remain in power for over 25 years while its barbaric crimes and its use of weapons of mass destruction are documented? Despite this, France forgets these crimes and pushes for a lifting of the blockade in order to sign trade agreements with Iraq. So do Russia, China and Germany, to varying degrees. I have never expected these countries to fall into the [trap] of material interests at the expense of people who are suffering from this gang." MOROCCO: "The Confrontation Is Not Over Yet" A commentary signed by Khalil Jibran ran in opposition, leftist, Arabic-language Al Ittihad Al Ishtiraki (11/23), "Iraq has succeeded in achieving a victory over the U.S. administration, which is still planning a military strike. This big U.S. military build-up in the area is proof that the United States intends to strike Iraq and nothing can stop this except Arab support for their aggrieved brother." QATAR: "Washington Wants To Create A New Crisis" Semi-independent Al-Watan opined (11/25): "It is clear that the United States is not satisfied with a diplomatic solution to the Iraqi crisis...which is in fact a crisis with the U.S. administration. The diplomatic solution disillusioned the United States. It was expecting a different Iraqi position, but Baghdad was able to bring out its fair case, regarding the suffering of the Iraqi people, to the open.... U.S. demands that the Iraqi presidential palaces should be inspected...show that Washington wants to create a new crisis. We believe that the United States will not order its forces back before it strikes Iraq again. "American insistence on the continuation of the sanctions aims at weakening the Arabs at the time it continues to empower Israel.... Arab countries need to develop their position and to discuss their interests endangered by Israel and by America." SAUDI ARABIA: "U.S. Chose To Keep Saddam In Power" Commentary by Muhammad Salahuddin in Jeddah's religiously conservative Al-Madina (11/25) held, "After destroying and expelling the Iraqi army from Kuwait, the United States, with the awareness of its allies, chose to keep Saddam Hussein in power, (even though) it could have forever ousted him and his gang from power. Since it is easy to understand why Saddam Hussein was being supplied with components of weapons of mass destruction to attack Iran, we must ask why (the United States) decided to keep him in power after the invasion of Kuwait and portray the tyrant as the most dangerous man threatening the entire human race. In brief, it seems very clear that Iraq, without the criminal tyrant, would constitute a great additional asset to the Arab and Islamic nation and a valuable and powerful counterweight to Israeli interests that control American policy. However, Iraq and this criminal tyrant remain a great danger and threat to its neighbors...which might serve the Zionists' interests, and pave the way for maintaining foreign influence (over the region), which is really an umbrella protecting Zionist settlements and guaranteeing (Israel's) strategic and military superiority." "A More Active Russian Role In Mideast Could Galvanize U.S." An editorial in the London-based, English-language Arab News commented (11/25), "Russia helped diffuse the Iraqi-UN crisis. And the same kind of assistance could find its way to the peace process.... A more active Russian role could galvanize Washington into doing more--and going one step better--in the peace process. This past week saw Moscow act as a world power. It was a rare diplomatic coup since the collapse of the Soviet Union six years ago, and Moscow reveled in it. It should not be the only one, but the first act of a permanent presence on the diplomatic stage." "U.S. Must Restore Its Friendship With Arabs" Jeddah's religiously conservative Al-Madina warned (11/22) that the crisis with Iraq revealed "that the restoration of friendship with the Arabs of the Middle East is vital, otherwise the American interests may be damaged to a point that even Netanyahu cannot compensate Washington.... If the United States does not move quickly to restore its friendship, it will not only lose its role as a mediator in the Middle East but its hegemony." TUNISIA: "Selective Legality" Mustapha Khammari wrote in independent Le Temps (11/22): "The recent crisis with Iraq has shown that Washington does not have the margin of maneuverability that it had at the time of the invasion of Kuwait. The former allies of Desert Storm have convinced the United States to abandon the military option. The situation of Iraq can no longer be isolated from the general context prevailing in the Middle East and the Gulf: The application of international law must not be selective.... Washington's former allies...now refuse to give Washington a blank check to act on their behalf in a region where (Washington) is partial to Israel.... The United States...owes a firm, clear condemnation to Israel, which is manufacturing weapons of mass destruction. American efforts for peace...will only be credible when they are applied equally to Israel." UNITED ARAB EMIRATES: "U.S Mideast Policy Faces Crisis" An editorial in influential, pan-Arab, internationally circulated Al- Khaleej remarked (11/21), "It is now clear that U.S. Mideast policy faces a crisis, and there are indications that the strong ties between America and its Arab friends are in a state of weakness. This is the result of Arabs' resentment towards the U.S. policy which has reversed its stance regarding the basis of the Madrid accords. Arab resentments were clearly (expressed) in a number of events that occurred recently. The first was the MENA summit which was boycotted by the majority of the Arabs, and the second was the Iraqi crisis during which the United States failed to rally the Arabs in favor of a military strike against Iraq. For the United States, the new Arab stance is not something to be brushed off.... The mounting anti-U.S. feelings among Arab countries can only be removed by eradication of its causes and then implementation of UN resolutions." WEST BANK: "The Equation Of Subjugation And Despair" Semi-official Al-Hayat Al-Jadeeda's Hasan Al-Kashef sharply criticized U.S. policy on Iraq (11/26): "Washington is defying the entire world in its stance against Iraq. It is going forward with a military buildup despite strong Arab and international opposition. Iraq is responsive to a diplomatic solution while Washington is beating the drums of war. It is only fair that Iraq asks to lift the sanctions now that it exhausted its people following the seven-year long sanctions. After failing to ensure an Arab and international umbrella for a military strike, it is clear that the United States has lost. The United States is isolated at the peak of its military power." "Arab Changes Toward U.S. Policy: From Palestine To Doha To Iraq" Semi-independent, pro-Palestinian Authority Al-Ayyam's columnist Abdallah Awwad commented under the headline above (11/25), "The region is in for heavy 'earthquakes' if the United States continues with its current policies. Arabs' outlook towards the United States as a sole power is changing. The United States is no longer the 'unavoidable destiny.' Arabs now have a new vision of relationships among the Arab countries and with the outside world. Automatic and quick receptivity of U.S. policy is diminishing. The Doha summit has certainly proved that receptivity to the United States is not without a cost." EUROPE RUSSIA: "Clinton's Policy Counterproductive" Dmitry Gornostayev asserted in centrist Nezavisimaya Gazeta (11/26): "Iraq, for all its wrongdoing, has started making concessions, but getting nothing in return and seeing the Americans acting ever more unabashedly make it jib exactly as Washington does. It seems that Washington's chief concern now is not how to stave off a crisis in the Persian Gulf but how to save face and maintain leadership." "Moscow To Have Difficulty Keeping Word To Iraq" Aleksandr Shumilin said in reformist, business-oriented Kommersant Daily (11/25): "Moscow and Washington have serious differences on 'the Iraqi files', as revealed by a telephone conversation between Boris Yeltsin and Bill Clinton last Saturday. That will make it hard for Moscow to keep the promises it gave to Baghdad." "Russia May Have To Go Down To The Mat Again" Reformist, youth-oriented Komsomolskaya Pravda (11/25) ran this comment by Yaroslav Karamov, Leonid Timofeyev and Maksim Chizhikov: "The Americans, apparently stung to the quick by Moscow's diplomatic successes, have resolved not to give in by a jot to their opponents in Baghdad, provoking them. So the Russians may more than once have to use their skills to try to reconcile Baghdad with the rest of the world." "Victory Of Common Sense" Under this headline, reformist Izvestia (11/22) published a comment by Aleksandr Bovin, a former Russian ambassador to Israel: "It is a fact that Baghdad provoked the current crisis over Iraq. "The reason was that Hussein decided he had to take extraordinary measures to boost his standing. That was easy to do. The way the Americans, the chief instigator of the economic blockade, were acting was insolent, arrogant, void of any respect for the Iraqis' mentality and dignity. Moscow rightly figured that compromise was more constructive than ultimatums and the use of force, especially as, of the four files, two (missiles and nuclear weapons) were actually closed and the other two (chemical and bacteriological weapons) were almost closed.... For the Americans the temptation to use force was really great: a military risk would have been small. But they would have risked a lot politically: another rift with continental Europe, displeasure in Beijing and Tokyo, a rise of anti-American sentiment in the Arab world, and a stronger anti-American lobby in Russia. While the United States might have won tactically, it would have lost strategically." GERMANY: "Want To End Sanctions? Comply With UN Demands" In right-of-center Die Welt of Berlin (11/26), Manfred Rowold commented, "Ending the delaying tactics with the UN inspectors would be the quickest way to end the sanctions. That this is not happening is almost proof enough of secret and dangerous arsenals in Baghdad and a reason to continue the inspections." "A Mistake To Give In To Saddam" Right-of-center Frankfurter Allgemeine observed (11/25): "Even though the UN resolutions give the inspectors unlimited access to all Iraqi buildings, after six years, Iraq perceives it as its established right that the palaces are exempt from inspections. When the United States is now pushing for the inspections of the supposedly private rooms of the dictator, it knows that international law backs this request. Despite the defeat which it just suffered, Washington should try to avoid strong language and deal calmly with Iraq. Every other behavior would just serve Saddam Hussein." "Saddam Is Hiding Something" Right-of-center Straubinger Tageblatt/Landshuter Zeitung editorialized (11/25): "Saddam Hussein is hiding something. The fear, the government in Baghdad used the time between the expulsion of the UN inspectors and their return to hide something which the UN inspectors should not see, was nurtured. Those who act like this do not only have a bad conscience, but also bad intentions. That is why the world community via UN and Security Council has to make clear to Saddam that it runs out of patience." "No Other Choice But Containment" In centrist Sueddeutsche Zeitung of Munich (11/22), Josef Joffe wrote, "Paris and Moscow, too, know that Saddam, for almost any price, will hold on to his weapons of mass destruction. Such weapons in the hands of a man with such a long 'criminal record'? Even for the biggest oil contracts the world powers should not allow themselves to be blinded to the extent that they will forget their responsibility for world peace.... That is why it was right that the Americans did not lose their patience.... Their growing decisiveness in acting, if necessary even alone, impressed not only Saddam, but also Moscow and Paris.... The success proves that Clinton was right. Paris and Moscow remembered what their responsibility is: As of Friday, the inspectors are back in Iraq. The message to Saddam is reasonable and fair: Sacrifice your weapons of mass destruction and the sanctions will be scaled down. There is no other choice than patient containment--until Iraq accepts the minimal rules of intergovernmental conduct." BRITAIN: "Geneva: Diplomatic Cloak That Hides Coming Crisis With Iraq" Martin Woollacott commented in the liberal Guardian (11/24): "The crisis with Iraq is not over, but is instead moving toward a culmination that could come as soon as the next few weeks.... It involves far more than the survival of a dictator or the suffering of an unhappy people. "It concerns a potential shift in the balance of world military power and the spread of literally devastating weapons to many countries. The diplomatic maneuvers of the last few weeks have so much dealt with these terrible problems as covered them over.... Geneva has changed nothing essential. This is a bargain that can never work, and whose only effect is to put off for a while the crisis that will eventually burst on us in the form either of a new confrontation with Saddam over inspection, or his emergence, fully armed with the very weapons the UN has vowed to deprive him, not too long after sanctions have been lifted. The choices that still have to be made...will help decide not only what kind of country Iraq, potentially an immensely powerful state, will be in the future, but what kind of place the Middle East will be, and the kind of world in which we are all going to live in the next century." FRANCE: "Stalled U.S. Diplomacy" According to Jean-Jacques Mevel in right-of-center Le Figaro (11/26): "In Washington, rumors indicate that there is a more serious concern: The master of Baghdad is an insult to America's superpower status. The latest duel, like others before, leads the world to doubt America's preeminence.... Similarly, Moscow's newfound diplomatic success is irritating.... Other episodes have affected the anti- Iraqi coalition, such as the Total affair.... France today appears to be closer to Moscow than to Washington.... Former Secretary of Defense under George Bush Dick Cheney says: 'Rather than speaking of international solidarity, one should be concerned with Washington's isolation.'" "Major Success For Europe, Reason" Prime Minister Jospin's address to the Socialist Party congress was noted in right-of-center Le Figaro (11/24): "One important thing has just happened: The United States, rather than being isolated, under the influence of France, Great Britain and Russia agreed to change its attitude toward Iraq. Without giving in to Iraq, but offering instead hope in finding a way out of the present impasse, we have gone from the risk of conflict to the possibility of a diplomatic solution. This is a major success for Europe and reason." ITALY: "In Five Days, Situation Has Changed Considerably" Ennio Caretto said from Washington in centrist, top-circulation Corriere della Sera (11/25): "In only five days...the situation has changed considerably. The Clinton administration is working on three fronts: It is trying to mobilize its allies, it hastens preparations for military retaliation and it puts pressure on the Israeli prime minister to restart the peace process, thereby nullifying Saddam's plan to reconstruct anti- Israeli and U.S. Arab solidarity." "Saddam's Victory And Moscow's Return" An analysis by Fiamma Nirenstein in centrist, influential La Stampaconcluded (11/24): "The main victor of this confrontation is...Saddam Hussein, and Primakov's Russia in second place. Bill Clinton is the loser and for more than one reason. Let's see what Saddam brought home.... First victory: the solidarity of all Arab countries.... Second victory: Saddam proved that the UN can be mocked without suffering any particular damage.... Third victory: the United States made a pathetic show of it.... Fourth victory: the United States let Russia return to the Middle East scene.... Last but not least: The first practical result of the event is that after a 17-year break, a long and profitable meeting between Iraqi Prime Minister Tareq Aziz and Syrian Foreign Affairs Minister Faruk Al Shara took place. Therefore, two states which are champions in human rights, political balance, and democracy are making joint plans on the basis of their anti-American and anti-Israeli hate. Let's hope it is not a sign of new times to come." AUSTRIA: "International Community Ought To Demonstrate Unanimity" Andreas Schwarz wrote in conservative Die Presse (11/26): "The conclusion of the international community ought to be: Demonstrate to the dictator unanimity, call for the unconditional compliance with the conditions stipulated, instead of giving in to him. With Russia as an acknowledged 'mediator,' this conclusion has become much more difficult." BELGIUM: "Maintenance Of Sanctions Cowardly, Cynical, Perverse" Tom Ronse commented in independent De Morgen (11/26): "With its veto, Washington can protract the sanctions forever. It would not be a risk for Clinton. The harsh line against Iraq is popular; there are never images of dying Iraqi babies on TV. However, the maintenance of sanctions is cowardly, cynical, perverse and a crime against humanity. If Clinton were genuinely concerned about the well being of the Iraqi people and didn't want to make them suffer needlessly, as he said on Friday, he would cancel the sanctions immediately, support the popular resistance against Saddam's regime and curtail his adventurism through an unambiguous policy of deterrence. Yet, don't hold your breath until that happens." "Genuine Struggle For Power Among U.S., France, Russia" Axel Buyse observed in independent Catholic De Standaard (11/26): "To the outside world, the crisis between Iraq and the UN seems to have died down now that the arms inspection teams are again at work. However, behind the scenes...a genuine struggle for power and prestige has broken out between the United States and countries like France and, above all, Russia. American sources even speak about a genuine 'diplomatic guerrilla warfare' launched by French and Russian diplomats 'in favor of Iraq.' The latter probably has to be taken with a grain of salt, but it is a fact that the French and, mainly, the Russians, are trying to prevent new confrontations between Baghdad and Washington for reasons of self- interest and diplomatic calculations." CANADA: "A High Price To Pay For Peace" The business oriented Financial Post (11/25) said: "The crisis in Iraq is over, for the time being, and the result is an astonishing U.S. defeat.... And what have the Americans got out of three weeks of frantic diplomacy? Only this: a postponement of the inevitable fight with Saddam Hussein. If Saddam ever develops the ability he seeks to poison thousands--or millions--of U.S. soldiers and civilians, rest assured, he will start the war himself. Isn't it better to fight now, while the United States could still easily crush him? War is always horrible. But peace can be costly too. And this peace is being purchased by gambling with the safety and security of the Western world and the pro-Western states in the Gulf. That is too high a price to pay to spare a weak-willed man from the necessity of, for once in his presidency, making a tough decision." "Sanctions And Saddam Hussein" The leading Toronto Globe and Mail (11/24) said: "If civilized behaviour in the world is to mean anything, Mr. Hussein cannot be let off the hook or the 1991 war effort will have been for nought. In a so-called oil-for-food swap administered by the UN, for example, Iraq has several times received permission to sell $1-billion worth of oil over a six-month period, with the money used exclusively to buy food and medicine for the Iraqi population. This is a sign to ordinary Iraqis that the rest of the world is not indifferent to their plight, which is why Mr. Hussein hates the program. Perhaps that is a good reason for expanding it, while keeping the screws tight on exchanges that Mr. Hussein wants to see take place." DENMARK: "Clinton, Blair Deserve Recognition For Tough Stance" The lead editorial in apolitical, business Erhvervs Bladet held (11/26), "Clinton and the British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, deserve recognition for their tough stance on Iraq.... But Iraq is clearly not ready to live up to the UN's demands.... If Saddam is allowed to produce chemical and biological weapons, the world can expect his aggression to continue.... The lessons of the past should not be forgotten. Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin are examples of dictators who have exploited appeasement." "U.S. Policy Going Seriously Off Track" Foreign Editor Michael Ehrenreich wrote (11/23) in center-right Berlingske Tidende, "A wave of anti-American sentiment is running through the Arab world.... The most unfortunate thing about the entire situation is that there do not seem to be any alternatives to U.S. involvement in the Middle East." HUNGARY: "Saddam Maneuvering, Manipulating Better" Laszlo N. Sandor wrote in Influential Magyar H¡rlap (11/22): "The trust of the American citizen in their state's omnipotence, which the Gulf war reinforced so well seven years ago, is shaking now. It is now Saddam maneuvering and manipulating better, having hinted that he would use the children, the old and the women of his nation as hostages and has made all necessary preparations. Finally the winner has been diplomacy but the feeling of being vulnerable, and helpless is penetrating into the brain cells of citizens deeper then ever." POLAND: "Russia Returning To Middle East" Centrist Rzeczpospolita commented (11/23): "Russia is triumphantly returning to the Middle East. Saddam Hussein turns into a winner in the confrontation he has provoked. The White House is putting a good face on a bad situation.... Formally, after the United States, Russia is the other guarantor of the peace process in the Middle East. In practice, however, in recent years they were pushed aside, with Washington playing the first--and the only--fiddle.... Clinton and his team let Primakov enter and use this opportunity to bring Russia back into the Middle East scene--in which Moscow had practically been absent since the collapse of the USSR." SLOVENIA: "U.S. Policy Mixture Of Mistakes, Errors" Left-of-center Delo commented (11/22): "Many years ago, American policy lost its compass for the Middle East and has not found it despite its many efforts. The superpower's policy is a unique mixture of mistakes, errors, and efforts to achieve the unachievable. Its endeavors sometimes remind of squaring the circle; the incompatible cannot be united.... Iraq's case demonstrates the difference between the slightly romantic American foreign policy and the European 'Realpolitik.' The Americans still see the world as black and white; for them, it is divided into the good guys and bad guys.... The United States has been expressing increasing readiness for solo actions, but gets less and less support by the international community. Instead of employing their leading role to build a system of international security, the Americans with their one-sided actions arouse distrust and doubt in other countries." SPAIN: "Saddam And The Time Factor" Centrist La Vanguardia of Barcelona remarked (11/23): "Time cures everything, so they say. But waiting for the years to fix what is not working well is, at best, a risky inclination. With the passage of time, things can also go to hell in a hand basket.... As a result of the victory over Saddam in 1991, it was said that the United States was playing two games in the Middle East: hardball with Iraq and softball with Israel.... And all was going the United States' way until the assassination of Rabin followed by Netanyahu's ascent to power. Now the obstructionism of the Israeli prime minister has stymied [the peace process], making a strike against Iraq politically difficult, especially when America's staunchest prot,g, in the Middle East, Egyptian president Mubarak, has shown his displeasure over U.S. permissiveness towards Israel, and has been rocked in the past few days by a resurgence of Islamic terrorism. Has letting time go by been useful to the United States in the Middle East or has it increased Saddam's room for maneuvering?" TURKEY: "Regional Balance Of Power Affected" Readers of mass-appeal Milliyet saw this piece by Sami Kohen (11/26): "Every crisis in the Gulf has an effect on the regional balance of power.... This time, Saddam plans to bring the Arab world to his side. A recent example of this came from Damascus, as Iraq's key player Tariq Aziz paid a surprise visit to Syria. Although it is too early to talk about a new cooperation and rapprochement between the two countries, it is a fact that this high-level contact between Baghdad and Damascus opened a new chapter in bilateral relations. If this rapprochement is realized, then Turkey will have to face a front that may cause serious security threats." EAST ASIA AND PACIFIC CHINA: "There Is A Long Way Towards Total Dissolution Of Crisis" Yu Yi wrote in intellectually-oriented Guangming Daily (Guangming Ribao) (11/22): "Iraq's decision to allow the UN weapons inspectors back into Iraq has temporarily neutralized the conflict between the United States and Iraq. But there is still a long way to go before the crisis is settled. The two nations chose a peaceful rather than military solution. The United States has always suspected that Iraq possesses weapons of mass-destruction. President Clinton's 'political solution' position will definitely change if Iraq decides to use any of these weapons.... If the United States does not abandon its goal of overthrowing the Saddam government, the U.S.-Iraqi crisis will not dissolve and an armed conflict is inevitable." AUSTRALIA: "Saddam Winning In Battle Of Wills" An editorial in the conservative Brisbane Courier Mail (11/24) noted, "One of the most disturbing factors in the recent stand-off (in Iraq) is the apparent fragmentation of the Gulf alliance and the perception that Saddam can defy the Gulf War ceasefire terms almost with impunity. The major and most determined player in the region, the United States, has been shown that it cannot depend upon the support of all its one-time allies or its colleagues on the Security Council.... The reality is that (Iraq's Arab neighbors) still live within striking distance of a tyrant who, while stripped of many conventional weapons, retains a sizeable chemical and biological arsenal." INDONESIA: "Iraq Crisis Not Over Yet" The leading, independent, English-language Jakarta Post asserted (11/24): "Baghdad should demonstrate its good will by cooperating sincerely with the UN inspection team and complying fully with the UNSC resolution.... The United States, for its part, could help ease tension in the region by refraining from being the world policeman so as not to provoke the anti-American sentiments among the Iraqis and other Arab nations. Besides, Washington should by no means adopt a double standard policy when dealing with violations of UN resolutions, even if the violator is its ally Israel." THAILAND: "Keep The Screws Tightened On Iraq" The independent, English-language Nation held (11/23), "The Iraqi people, especially the young, have suffered terribly as a result of the trade...but to release the choke hold on Iraq is simply too dangerous. Saddam's reputation as the world's No.1 bogey man is not just the product of Western media hype or a Western-Arab ideological clash. The man is one of the century's great killers and a genuine threat to international peace... It is important that the UN arms inspections--in an aggressive and long-term form-- continue. There is simply no other option." "Don't Give Saddam Any Special Promises" The lead editorial in the largest circulation, moderately conservative, English-language Bangkok Post stated (11/22), "The insistence of the Iraqi government to make trouble a couple of times a year is not a reason to grant President Saddam Hussein and his regime any special promises.... A very early deadline for the end of UN sanctions against Iraq exists. It has existed for nearly seven years. All Iraq has to do in order to end the trade embargo and other economic and diplomatic sanctions is stop making, storing and using weapons of mass destruction-nuclear, biological, chemical weapons, and missiles. This deadline is extremely easy to meet.... There is no excuse for causing malnutrition in Iraq, or for denying medicine. But the Iraqi regime has use chemical and biological weapons against its neighbors and its own people. It has invaded neighbors on two occasions. Iraq must be stripped of all opportunity to repeat such horrendous acts." "Propaganda War" Trairat Soontornprapat contended in the mass-circulation Daily News(11/22), "The West's dissemination of news is done systematically and credibly. The news inciting hatred against Iraq, making it look like an inveterate warmonger and hence deserving of punishment...commands the belief of at least half the world's news consumers.... To be fair, Iraq, as a sovereign nation, has as much a right as ten or so other mostly big nations who develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons." SOUTH ASIA INDIA: "Gain For Diplomacy" The centrist Hindu opined (11/25): "By exposing the weaknesses of the Western alliance, Saddam Hussein may have prepared the ground for a later diplomatic assault.... Whoever else has gained, the successful defusing of the crisis is a victory of sorts for diplomacy. What must puzzle the international community is how Moscow succeeded where the United Nations...failed. Does the Iraqi crisis signal the end of the unipolar world and the re-emergence of multiple poles?" "Crisis Defused" K. Subrahmanyam observed in the pro-economic reforms Economic Times(11/24): "Yeygeny Primakov...appears to have succeeded in defusing the escalating crises.... Even as the crisis was deepening there were tacit suggestions that Iraq could be permitted to sell double the quota of oil it is now allowed to sell and thereby mitigate the sufferings of the Iraqi people. Therefore, it is quite possible that there will be significant relaxations in sanctions in the near future. When that happens Saddam Hussain will claim a great victory and his popularity within Iraq will go up." NEPAL: "Too Soon To Know" In the view of government-owned Gorkhapatra (11/22): "Although the conflict between Iraq and the United States appears to be ended now...it is too soon to conclude that Iraq will allow the UN inspection team to conduct its work smoothly.... The Arab world is beginning to feel that Iraq was barred from protecting its sovereignty when Turkish forces were attacking Iraqi Kurds intermittently.... Arab countries, along with Russia, France and Egypt who want to promote trade with Iraq, now state that the resolutions of the Security Council, which has been giving priority to the insistence of the United States and Britain, should be softened.... Arab countries made it clear to Madeline Albright, during her recent visit...that the present scenario is not like that of 1991, and that Iraq has been treated unjustly." PAKISTAN: "Unite Against U.S. Oppressor" An op-ed by General Mirza Aslam Beg stated in the center-right Nation(11/24), "During the previous Gulf War, America and her allies had staged a gory drama, the parallel of which is hard to find in recent history. These so-called custodians of human values, had let loose hell on the Iraqi people, the disastrous effects of which is still felt by the Iraqi people in the form of various sanctions imposed on them. As a result of this horrendous war, oil wealth of the entire Middle East region has virtually fallen in the hands of America and Arab countries have been virtually reduced to the status of surrogates.... Weighing dispassionately the situation, we feel concerned to remark that Pakistan has abysmally failed to fulfill its obligations. Its response to the Iraqi crisis is at best lukewarm and half-hearted. Under the stringent stranglehold of the World Bank and the IMF, it has perhaps been totally incapacitated to fulfil its obligations. We feel that Pakistan must assert vigorously as an independent nation and play a more meaningful role in thwarting the nefarious design of the enemies of Islam. Pakistan must act in complete unison with Muslim countries, especially Iran, and form a united front against the oppressor." SRI LANKA: "UNSCOM Tool Of U.S.?" Mervyn de Silva filed this commentary in the English-language, independent Sunday Times (11/23): "The role of the United States and the diplomacy of the Clinton administration, its tactics and maneuvers, do call for reflection and close scrutiny.... The Iraqi authorities did claim that all the missile attacks on the Rushed Hotel, the Iraqi Intelligence Agency Headquarters. and the Nidaa Establishment had been based on intelligence gathered by the U.S. U-2 plane. The question that the UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan cannot dodge is how quickly and effectively he can rescue the United Nations from the United States, so that the world body could serve these objectives that have been identified, plainly, by the UN. The United States though now the sole superpower, is nonetheless just one member of the Security Council and the General Assembly. Countries like China, Russia, India and Japan represent more plainly 'We, the people', more truly than the United States. Right now however the Sheriff in the White House, playing globocop in a unipolar world, has picked his posse." AFRICA KENYA: "Where Now In The Gulf?" A lead editorial in the centrist weekly East African said (11/24): "What Iraq has managed to establish is that there is no appetite, not even in Kuwait, for military action against the Arab country.... The United States is likely to find itself under increasing pressure from the Arab states to consider an easing of sanctions.... But the U-2 flights and the inspection of sites must continue. Mr. Saddam Hussein has once again proved himself much too untrustworthy to be left unwatched." NIGERIA: "Triumph Of Reason, Dialogue And Diplomacy" Lagos's respected, independent Guardian (11/26) observed in an editorial, "It is heartwarming that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has finally agreed to allow the United Nations (UN) inspection team to do its job. This makes military confrontation on the vexed issue of weapons inspection in Iraq unnecessary.... This development is a triumph of reason. There does not seem to be too many war enthusiasts around the globe this year.... Dialogue, diplomacy and restraint have prevailed over the option of war offered by the friction in Baghdad. This is at once a celebration of the resolution of a potentially volatile situation and the triumph of the ideals of the UN." SOUTH AFRICA: "I Support The U.S. In Its Crusade Against Saddam" An op-ed piece by editor of Enterprise Magazine, Thami Mazwai, appeared in the independent Business Day (11/24): "I support the bullyboys [U.S.] in their crusade against Saddam Hussein, the madman if not the devil incarnate of the Middle East. Who else but a bloodthirsty and ruthless maniac would murder his sons-in-law?... He does not hesitate in spraying the Kurds in Iraq, and those in adjoining lands, with chemicals dare they annoy him. He invaded Kuwait and his thugs...raped the country and its women. "He defied the world until the Gulf War broke out, which he ignominiously lost. As his thugs left, they torched Kuwait's oil fields.... To crown it all, there is simply no democracy in his land. He is the be-all and end-all of Iraq.... How then can any person not side with the Americans when they want his arsenal dismantled? One shudders at the mere thought of this demon having a stockpile of biological and chemical weapons.... We cannot allow such a mentally unbalanced and certainly certifiable megalomaniac to have such power at his disposal.... I am not anybody's puppet, particularly not of the Americans. However, if saying power-hungry despots should not be allowed to have weapons of mass destruction condemns me to being called an American puppet, then I happily plead guilty. My Muslim friends describe him as a disgrace to the religion.... Just as the colonizers of the previous millennium used Christianity to colonize Africa and later justified apartheid on the basis of the scripture, Hussein is also using Islam for his personal gratification and his depraved and iniquitous designs." LATIN AMERICA ARGENTINA: "Moscow Took Over The Stage" Oscar Raul Cardoso wrote in leading Clarin (11/22): "The concessions that Primakov and his diplomats obtained from Saddam Hussein...brought Russia back to playing a real role on the international stage.... Paradoxically, the cost of the United States not having flexed its muscle could be high to Washington in the future. In the solution of this phase of the crisis, Clinton must prepare himself to confront a new international attack against the system of sanctions.... Russia's public promise has been to head this (international) effort and some analysts ask themselves which other promises...Hussein might have heard." BARBADOS: "Excuse For U.S. To Flex Muscles" The centrist Bridgetown Nation took a swipe at the United States (11/23): "For all his shortcomings Saddam Hussein has stood between some semblance of order and chaos in that part of the world.... But the United States is quite prepared to wage war under its banner when it suits U.S. interests." "Giving Comfort To A Near-Lunatic Armed With Arms Of Mass Destruction" The populist Advocate (11/22) called the ambivalent reaction to Saddam's refusal to obey UN security council orders "most unfortunate" and regretted the lack of movement on a "serious international problem that certainly threatens the well-being of so many people.... Maybe the reaction is born of a desire by many to see 'Uncle Sam' taken down a peg or two because it has ranted and raved about so many things, and has appeared to be pusing round the weak and helpless for no reason other than that they dared to prefer another course, or had another view on a particular question. But now is certainly not payback time. And no time is a good time when the perceived comeuppance of a power, super or otherwise, can only be achieved by means of giving comfort to a near-lunatic armed with massively destructive weaponry and possessed by a motive for unleashing them." PERU: "France's Surprising Attitude" An editorial in center-right Expreso (11/20) stressed, "The attitude that some European countries are assuming toward Saddam Hussein is surprising.... France is playing an individual game, pursuing its own interest, that in the short term could be income-producing, but in the long term will be self-defeating.... We are sure that their position will be rejected by everyone.... The lesson is very simple but not less true: Governments should not yield to terrorist's blackmail even if it is disguised as a conventional warfare." ## For more information, please contact: U.S. Information Agency Office of Public Liaison Telephone: (202) 619-4355 11/26/97 # # #Europe Middle East East Asia and the Pacific South Asia Africa Latin America and the Caribbean
Return to Foreign Media Reaction Reports page
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
