06 January 1998
IRAQ: PLIGHT OF CIVILIANS NOT HIGH ON BAGHDAD'S AGENDA, NOR U.S
Commentators following Iraq's ongoing standoff with the UN and the U.S., held both Baghdad and Washington equally responsible for the suffering of Iraq's civilian population under the international trade blockade against that country. In addition to the oft-repeated argument of the ineffectiveness of sanctions in bringing rogue governments to heel, pundits also opposed the Iraqi embargo on "moral" grounds. Manama's semiofficial Akhbar Al-Khalij, for example, expressed this recurring theme: "Imposing a blockade on the Iraqi people and starving them under the pretext of 'containing' the regime is immoral. There is no international law which allows for punishing people by sanctions for political reasons." This journalistic view persisted in December and early January despite reports that Baghdad has diverted crucial resources to areas that have nothing to do with humanitarian concerns and news of U.S. humanitarian flights to provide Iraqis with medicines and toys from the U.S. during the holiday season. In some instances, commentators went so far as to judge that America's goodwill gesture was counteracted by Iraq's recent announcement that it would cut the milk ration for its children. The announcement, New Delhi's centrist Hindu maintained, "is a reminder to the international community that the policy of imposing economic sanctions against recalcitrant regimes only ends up punishing innocent civilians." MIDDLE EAST PEACE CONUNDRUM--From the outset, the Arab media viewed the Iraqi crisis from the perspective of their frustration with the floundering Arab-Israeli peace process. Charging U.S. bias toward Israel, they contended that Israel is encouraged to exercise hegemony in the region--especially militarily--while Arab nations such as Iraq and Iran are held to a stricter "double standard." One of the Arab world's leading papers, London-based, pan-Arab Al-Hayat opined concerning a Washington Post article penned by Secretary of Defense Cohen: "The U.S. insists that it alone is correct and the entire world is wrong, a position...similar to that of Saddam Hussein's.... In sum, the U.S. will win the trust of the Arabs when it deals with Israel half as harshly as it does Iraq.... If it would do so, the United States will find most Arabs supporting its policy of changing the regime in Iraq but without weakening the Iraqi people." In the words of the West Bank's moderate, pro-peace process Al-Quds, "From Baghdad to Jerusalem, it's one siege. The Iraqi people will not eat without dignity.... The siege in effect is a big American-British imperialist prison." TERRORIST AMERICA?--Noting Iranian President Khatami's call for dialogue with the American people, Amman's pro-government, influential Al-Ray intoned, "Terrorism, for instance, is a big issue, and the accusation of terrorism can be directed at America itself.... Who is still killing the children of Iraq? Who is still blackmailing the Gulf countries? These are all questions that should be asked by Iran if it is to have a dialogue with the United States." This survey is based on 30 reports from 19 countries, December 1- January 6. EDITOR: Gail Hamer BurkeTo Go Directly To Quotes By Region, Click Below MIDDLE EAST BAHRAIN: "Plight Of Iraqis Is Certainly Not High On Baghdad's Agenda" Mohammed Fadhel (former International Visitors grantee) opined in leading, semi-independent Al-Ayam (1/1), "Our writers and commentators fail to point the finger at the Iraqi leadership for bearing a great share of the responsibility for the suffering of its people.... The Americans have their undeclared agenda, and ending the suffering of the Iraqi people is certainly not at the top of their priorities, but neither is it a priority of the Iraqi leadership, notwithstanding all the hell it is raising.... The Iraqi leadership should have asked itself since the Gulf war ended: Are the lives of millions of Iraqis worth sacrificing in order to retain a few tons of gas and banned weapons components? Here we can sense the kind of concern that moves the Iraqi leadership." "Even If Saddam Resigns, U.S. Will Not Lift Sanctions" A piece by Anisa Fakhro asked (12/30) in leading, semi-independent Al- Ayam, "Is it not America who waves the flag of peace while simultaneously refusing to sign an agreement banning land mines...and is the biggest producer of those mines in the world?... When Baghdad says that there is an American plan to attack the presidential palaces with chemical weapons, perhaps this is a fabrication.... On the other hand...did not (America) attack civilians in Libya? Did it not use poison gas to kill villagers and crops in Vietnam? Did it not plan and finance military coups in Latin America? Did it not use the veto to prevent condemnation of barbaric Israeli crimes against Arabs? Did it not blast Hiroshima with the atomic bomb?... Even if the Iraqi leader resigns, America will not lift the sanctions." "Why Such Bewilderment?" Leading, semi-independent Al-Ayam ran this comment (12/31) by Omran Salman: "Why such bewilderment and surprise? The overwhelming Arab solidarity with Iraq and its people bewilders only those who believed or relied on American claims. As for ordinary Arab citizens, they do not understand why this unjust blockade was imposed and allowed to continue for so long." "Pretext Of 'Containing' Iraq Is Immoral" Sayed Zuhrah commented (12/1) in semiofficial Akhbar Al-Khalij, "Imposing a blockade on the Iraqi people and starving them under the pretext of 'containing' the regime is immoral. There is no international law which allows for punishing people by sanctions for political reasons. Indeed, such sanctions are considered war crimes by international law and agreement.... There is no moral or legal justification which gives America the right to rule that Iran and Iraq cannot be allowed to strengthen their defense capabilities. And of course there is no justification which gives America the right to impose on the countries in the region what it does not impose...on Israel." EGYPT: "Double Standard Policy" Columnist Mohamed Sid Ahmed wrote for opposition weekly Al Ahali(12/31): "President Clinton sent a message to the GCC countries telling them to avoid statements that oppose the use of force against Iraq. He seemed to be dictating his terms, rather than issuing a statement from a president of a friendly country. Certainly, Clinton did not use this language with Netanyahu, whom he himself admits is an obstacle to progress toward peace. How can the American president expect confidence in his role as a peace sponsor during his intended meetings with Arafat and Netanyahu while he is openly adopting a double standard policy?" "It's Now Up To Iraqi Regime" Abdel Atti Mohamed, columnist for pro-government Al Ahram, remarked (12/30): "Santa Claus visited Iraq as an indication of rising international sympathy with the Iraqi people. Even in the United States, a non-governmental organization gathered a million signatures demanding the lifting of sanctions. This means that the international community has started to distinguish between the mistakes of the Iraqi political regime and the Iraqi people. It also means that there is an international awareness that that the blockade is out of its political purpose and the U.S.' insistence on maintaining it is only part of its direct conflict with Saddam's regime. This sympathy, however, needs to become an international public opinion that can pressure the United States to change its policy. The Iraqi regime must pursue a better policy. Experience showed that only the regime--not the people-- benefited from the partial lifting of the blockade, which is why the United States insists on maintaining it. The ball is now in the court of the Iraqi regime." "Iraqi People Suffer From Both Baghdad's Repression And International Sanctions" Ahmed Bahgat, a columnist for pro-government Al Ahram, held (12/8): "Traditionally, a defeated leader would withdraw or commit suicide.... The Iraqi regime did not admit its defeat [after liberating Kuwait], while the world imposed sanctions on the Iraqi people.... They are suffering a major tragedy, first with their repressive regime, and then with the sanctions led by the United States and England.... Why do Iraqi children have to suffer?... Politicians believe that the sanctions on the Iraqi people strengthen Saddam Hussein, rather than hasten his downfall. Is this what the United States wants?" "Arab Concilation With Saddam? I Think Not" Wagih Abu Zikry, a columnist for pro-government Al Akhbar, querried (12/5): "Can there be Arab conciliation with Saddam Hussein? I believe this is impossible, because he has not shown good intentions toward Kuwait.... Is Saddam a party in starving the Iraqi people? Yes, he and Clinton are both parties in starving the Iraqis.... Saddam has always been a burden to Arabs.... The Arab world rejects the starvation of the Iraqi people, but we hope that they get rid of their dictator. The Arab world will not sympathize with Saddam when his palaces are inspected. He led the Arab nation into a nightmare...opened the way for American troops, and gave the Gulf's riches to the West." "Saddam's Rash Policy" Ibrahim Nafie, editor-in-chief of pro-government Al Ahram had this to say (12/7): "What is happening in Iraq is a perfect model for rash policy. The Iraqi people would not have suffered if not for Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait.... Any delay in the mission of the international inspection team will add to the Iraqi people's suffering. When will the inspection team finish its work?" JORDAN: "Iranian-U.S. Dialogue" Frequent contributor and Islamist Bassam Umoush opined on the front page of pro-government, influential Al-Ray (12/18): "The Iranian leadership did very well recently...(with) Iranian President Khatami's call for dialogue with the American people.... Terrorism, for instance, is a big issue, and the accusation of terrorism can be directed at America itself.... Who is still killing the children of Iraq? Who is still blackmailing the Gulf countries? These are all questions that should be asked by Iran if it is to have a dialogue with the United States." "The Iraqi Presidential Palaces" Daily columnist Nicola Naser maintained in independent, mass-appeal Al-Arab Al-Yawm (12/18): "The American psychological war against Iraq aims to use the insistence on inspecting Iraqi presidential palaces as a pretext for continuing the blockade against Iraq; but not only that. By violating the sanctity of the presidential palaces as symbols of Iraq's sovereignty, they aim to humiliate Iraq's will power and to strike a blow against Iraq's pride. This is not only meant to degrade the Iraqi leadership in the eyes of its own people, but also to provide an object lesson to all Arabs...that no symbol of Arab sovereignty in any Arab country is sacred, if its leader dares defy the American idol, the one and only idol worshipped at this time and age." "Life Is Cheap In Iraq" Urayb Rintawi argued in center-left, influential Al-Dustur (12/13): "Jordanians, who settled for nothing less than complete bias and support for Iraq, are now being rewarded by the execution of four of their sons for mere auto parts. We would not blame Jordanians if they boycott Iraq. Iraq is not safe and the human life there is very cheap." KUWAIT: "Iraq's Sense Of Insanity Over Palaces" Independent Al-Anba's Abdullah Al-Hadlaq pointed out (12/30), "The presidential palaces have now become the core of the conflict between the Iraqi authorities and the international inspectors and despite the fact that foreign journalists were allowed to enter these palaces, the Iraqi authorities are saying that they will never allow the international inspectors' entry, because, according to them, it is in violation of Iraq's sovereignty. What is really funny is the sense of insanity that seized the Iraqi leadership when it stated that Washington was going to attack the presidential palaces with chemical weapons. The American administration continues to apply a diplomatic approach as a solution, but the United States is keeping a mighty military power in the Gulf, and it will use it if all else fails." MOROCCO: "U.S. Blames Saddam For Iraq's Humanitarian Tragedy" Commentary on semi-independent Medi 1 Radio (estimated listenership from 8-10 million) stated (1/2), "UN Secretary General Kofi Annan will release a report this month outlining ways to streamline the delivery of humanitarian supplies to Iraq. The U.S. lays all blame for delays in delivering these supplies at the feet of Iraq, yet Mrs. Albright recently agreed to look for ways of expediting applications. She acknowledged then that things could be done better. The United States has accused Iraq of reducing its expenditures on essential food items and diverting resources to presidential palaces. According to the United States, Saddam has plowed resources into areas that have nothing to do with meeting Iraq's humanitarian needs. Recently, the Vatican has called for an end to UN sanctions. Russia has also recently expressed concerns about American dominance in world affairs. Tensions may be rising between the two countries due to the Iraq issue." "U.S. Primarily Responsible For Suffering Of Iraqis" A front-page commentary in opposition, leftist, Arabic-language Al Ittihad Al Ishtiraki (12/31) remarked, "Iraq confirmed yesterday that it has not yet received any milk for its children as part of the second phase of the oil-for-food agreement. As a result of U.S. intervention to block contracts, more than 960,000 Iraqi children under the age of five suffer from malnutrition and about 250,000 are in danger of dying each year. It is surprising to see the United States, which is the primary party responsible for the suffering of the Iraqi people and children, express its sorrow through the State Department. The United States finds nothing wrong in its behavior and does not recognize its own mistakes, but it expresses regret for Iraq due to the reduction of its supplies of milk. As if this is Iraq's choice and not an obligation of the provisions of the embargo. We feel sorry for the U.S. position--to see the most powerful country in the world allowing itself to block milk from reaching the mouths of infants. The U.S. position reminds one of a person who kills you and then marches in your funeral procession." QATAR: "GCC Will Urge Iraq To Take Steps To Reduce Iraqi People's Suffering" Semi-independent Al-Rayah noted (12/22): "The GCC summit's final communique...will probably urge Iraq to take steps that will clear the way for reducing the Iraqi people's suffering due to the implementation of Security Council resolutions." SAUDI ARABIA: "U.S. Policy Toward Iraq" London-based, pan-Arab Al-Hayat ran this commentary by its editor-in- chief (12/7): "We do not believe what President Clinton says about Saddam Hussein's being a threat to the children of the entire world, a position repeated by Secretary of Defense Cohen in great detail in a Washington Post article.... The United States has preached democracy to us for years and attempts to force us to swallow it like a pill being thrust into the throat of a sick child.... The United States insists that it alone is correct and the entire world is wrong, a position...similar to that of Saddam Hussein's.... In sum, the United States will win the trust of the Arabs when it deals with Israel half as harshly as it does Iraq.... If it would do so, the United States will find most Arabs supporting its policy of changing the regime in Iraq but without weakening the Iraqi people." TUNISIA: "For The Sake Of The Iraqi People, Finish The Inspections" Mustapha Khammari penned an editorial on the inspection of Iraq's presidential palaces for independent, French-language Le Temps (12/18) that said in part: "Whether the inspectors are Americans or non- Americans, the important thing is to finish the inspection in order to devote the energy which being wasted today to reconstructing Iraq and achieving progress for the Iraqi people." WEST BANK: "From Baghdad To Jerusalem It's One Siege" Moderate, pro-peace process Al-Quds columnist and poet Ali Khalili (12/8) sharply criticized the United States for imposing an economic siege on Iraq: "The siege on Iraq is like a deadly fire. University professors are selling their books on the streets to afford medicine. Iraq, a country deep-rooted in history is selling its history on the streets. The streets are filled with hungry, sick and shocked people as a result of the American siege. [Americans represent] the barbarians of the 21st century. In Jerusalem, Palestinians face the same siege. From Baghdad to Jerusalem, it's one siege. The Iraqi people will not eat without dignity and under the siege which in effect is a big American-British imperialist prison." EUROPE BRITAIN: "Iraq Cuts Baby-Milk Ration" The liberal Guardian (12/29) reported, "Baghdad said yesterday it would cut baby-milk (infant formula) rations by a third next month, accusing Britain and the United States of deliberately delaying supplies to 'punish' Iraqi children.... The Iraqi news agency INA said the milk ration was being cut because the U.S. representative on the UN sanctions committee refused to register a supply contract with a Tunisian company." GERMANY: "Iraq: The House Of Fear" Udo Ulfkotte had this to say in an editorial in right-of-center Frankfurter Allgemeine (1/2), "Once again we hear reports of opposition groups according to which many prisoners have been tortured to death in Iraq. We cannot verify these reports. UN human rights commissioners, however, have reported again and again about the bad situation in Iraq. It is well known that deserters' ears [are cut off] and that political dissidents are killed. By doing so, the regime creates fear and bends the people to its will. Saddam Hussein proved that he exactly knows how far he can go without having to fear an intervention. As bitter as it may sound but because of a few hundred of victims of torture, the West will not forge an alliance against Saddam. The dictator from Baghdad is very good at preserving his power. He has no scruples and turns his people to martyrs but not himself." FRANCE: "Iraq--Washington's Big Headache" Jacques Amalric asked in left-of-center Liberation (12/18): "Is Baghdad's regime...the victim of a particularly humiliating treatment on the part of what is commonly called the international community? Are the UN inspections an underhanded tactic to prolong indefinitely the economic embargo on this oil-producing nation? It is impossible to say...but clearly Iraq, the initiator of armed aggression, is being submitted to the law of the strongest.... The real question is whether Iraq is still a threat to peace.... For the majority of experts...Saddam remains dangerous.... But we are entitled to wonder about the strictness of an embargo that has no effect on the real culprits. This does not mean we should underestimate the regime's capacity to do harm.... In leaving Saddam in position after the war, the United States...avoided a regional crisis that would have benefited Iran. In so doing, the United States created a major headache for itself." AUSTRIA: "Iraq Seems To Think That There's No Limit" Middle East specialist Gudrun Harrer wrote (12/18) in independent, respected Der Standard, "While...the old Gulf War alliance proved to be irrefutably broken apart, Baghdad seems to believe once again that there's no limit. At the very moment when Crown Prince Hassan from Jordan called at the summit of the Islamic conference in Tehran for the world to have mercy on the Iraqis, who suffer from the UN sanctions, four Jordanians were killed in Baghdad because of smuggling. The opposition 'Iraqi National Congress' reports about a wave of executions in Iraqi prisons. Baghdad enthusiastically ignores everything political smartness--let alone law and humanity--would demand.... The American UN Ambassador, Bill Richardson, pointed out discreetly on Tuesday that an American military attack against Iraq would be covered by earlier UN resolutions." CANADA: "Darts And Laurels...A 1997 Treasury" Under the headline above, an end-of-year editorial the liberal Toronto Star (12/31) said in part, "[A dart goes the Clinton administration]-- For leading the charge to pressure countries like Iraq and North Korea by starving their people. There's no evidence that Saddam Hussein or Kim Jong II are bowing to external pressure, but millions of people are going hungry, or lack basic medicines, because of international trade sanctions. Hunger and deprivation rarely affect tyrants; they hurt only innocent people." EAST ASIA AND PACIFIC AUSTRALIA: "Saddam Puts Iraq In Worse Position" The liberal Canberra Times told its readers (12/1): "Iraqi President Saddam Hussein is a tyrant who rules by fear and oppression and whose international behavior is utterly reprehensible. He has almost nothing to commend him and few disagreed with the recent description by U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright that he is 'a cheat, a liar and a thief.' But while he is not to be trusted, it is quite wrong for the international community to punish the people of Iraq a second time--not only must they suffer through the oppression of Saddam, they are further debilitated by economic boycotts." PHILIPPINES: "Motives Behind Iraq's Sanctions" Columnist Bernardo Lopez of independent Business World asked (12/18), "Do superior nations, like the United States or in a consortium like the UN have the right to induce famine on a grand scale as a way to 'discipline rebellious' leaders and make them concede to their demands?... What is worse is the fact that U.S. sources said the Clinton administration did not want to concede only so that they would not be criticized for showing weakness. For their 'image,' they are willing to let millions of people go hungry or sick. Such are the ethics of affluent nations.... The sanctions...were intended to force Saddam Hussein to destroy his 'weapons of mass destruction.' But those wanting the sanctions also have these weapons of destruction.... The United States alone has its own set of top-secret chemical weapons.... What other motives does the United States have in preventing the oil of 'enemy' Arab nations from being sold to the international community... This move keeps oil prices high while the United States, having ample supply...keeps its local prices down.... This is why we cannot rise from our economic mire." SOUTH ASIA BANGLADESH: "End All Sanctions" Pro-government Ajker Kagoj ran this anti-sanctions piece (12/29): "In Libya, 17,000 people have died and the country has suffered a loss of $17 billion over the past five years due to the UN sanctions.... Not only Libya and Iraq, Cuba is also under UN sanctions for a long time. The people of the two countries (Iraq and Libya) are in utter distress. Especially, thousands of children in Iraq have died due to the UN sanctions. This is a crime against humanity. Although a specific country is behind this crime, its responsibility goes to the entire world in the name of the UN. The people of the world must raise their voices against this. We hope that the UN will come to its senses and refrain from taking any measures against humanity." INDIA: "Trifling With Hunger" An editorial in the centrist Hindu (12/6) held, "Iraq's decision to cut the milk ration for its children is a reminder to the international community that the policy of imposing economic sanctions against recalcitrant regimes only ends up punishing innocent civilians.... The tragedy is that the international community can only watch as an avoidable humanitarian tragedy is enacted in Iraq.... The United States is unrelenting in its campaign to demonize Saddam Hussein, almost the only bete noire left from the Cold War days. Unbelievable and even dramatic is Washington's decision to immunize its soldiers against the deadly anthrax, alleged to be part of the undisclosed Iraqi chemical warfare arsenal.... "Washington must cease to behave as though when it says jump, the duty of its friends and foes alike is to ask how high. The United States must have realized in the last two months that no country in the region is eager for military action against Iraq, however much some of them hate the Saddam Hussein regime and want to see it wiped out from the face of the earth. Washington's isolation is now complete with the European allies openly opposing punitive military or economic action against Baghdad.... Most of the Gulf war allies acknowledge the untenability of continuing with the sanctions but no arguments seem to convince Washington. It is as if the United States will refuse to agree to the lifting of the sanctions as long Saddam Hussein remains on the scene." SRI LANKA: "U.S. Should Not Attack Iraq Again" An editorial in the English-language, government-run Daily News stated (12/24), "Though the United States was itching for war it found itself without allies, except for Tony Blair's new-look Britain which has still to shed its colonial arrogance. The United States had made no secret of its desire to get rid of President Sadam Hussein. The only thing that prevents it achieving its aim is the will of the Iraqi people and international solidarity, which Iraq enjoys. It is time to call the United States' bluff. The United Nations should not allow the United States to attack Iraq again." "Daily News Reflects Iraq's Viewpoint Better Than Baghdad" In response to the Daily New's editorial stance above, the English- language, independent Sunday Island retorted (12/28), "Even the ordinarily discerning newspaper readers who read that commentary would surely have smelt a rat. When the government's Lake House indulges in Yankee bashing at a time when U.S.- Sri Lanka relations are touted as excellent, something is obviously up. The editorial was a two-fisted attack on what the United States is allegedly doing to Iraq. It reflected the Iraqi point of view even better than Baghdad might have done. But the fact remains that the Daily News is the flagship of the government controlled Lake House and what it says in its editorial columns is widely interpreted to be the views of the government itself." ## For more information, please contact: U.S. Information Agency Office of Public Liaison Telephone: (202) 619-4355 1/6/98 # # #Europe Middle East East Asia and the Pacific South Asia Africa Latin America and the Caribbean
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
