Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)

EUROPE

FRANCE: "Saddam: A Threat For The Arab World"

Dominique Garraud pointed out in regional La Charente Libre (12/28): "Regardless of Ramadan, Saddam Hussein has decided to oppose the UN and to ignore the no-fly zone.... In this new arm wrestling match, some may be tempted to call Saddam a poor strategist. Yet it would be dangerous to ignore the fact that his latest gesticulations are of concern to the Arab world, which is already worried by the recent 'Desert Fox' operation and the repeated U.S. failure to bring Israel back into the peace process."

"Five Questions About A 70-Hour War"

Baudouin Bollaert and Isabelle Lasserre, in a joint article with Washington correspondent Jean-Jacques Mevel, opined in right-of-center Le Figaro (12/24): "The evaluation of the air strikes over Iraq show a total lack of real political strategy.... The Desert Fox operation shook up the very fragile foundations of an international security policy. A week after the first tomahawk strikes, we can evaluate the situation.... Military efficiency?... It seems that the damage to the Republican Guard went beyond Washington's hopes.... Does Saddam Hussein come out weakened or reinforced?... Saddam seems to be reinforced. In his own country, the majority of the population faced the external aggression.... Where is the Iraqi opposition?... Desert Fox did not bring any response among the opponents. What does America want?... After the Desert Fox operation, American policy seems more confused than ever. What will happen to UNSCOM?... Every one admits there is a big black hole--biological weapons. Tons of liters of culture medium for anthrax...have disappeared. Iraq claims they have been destroyed in the air strikes. Who should be believed? The whole difficulty of the past, present and future work of UNSCOM is summarized in this question."

"Desert Fox Weakens Iraqi Opposition"

Jean-Pierre Perrin stressed in left-of-center Liberation (12/24): "Operation Desert Fox is generous in paradoxes: It strengthened a regime it was supposed to destabilize, placing once again the discredited opposition between a rock and a hard place.... The regime took advantage of the air strikes to claim that it was the 'party of foreigners.'"

GERMANY: "Saddam Challenges His Adversaries"

Left-of-center Berliner Zeitung had this editorial (12/28) by Maritta Tkalec: "If there was evidence needed to support the notion that Saddam feels strengthened by the military strikes--here it is. Many countries, and among them three permanent members of the Security Council, are annoyed because the United States and Great Britain ignored international law and the world community. Baghdad perceives the current international mood as favorable to its desire to get rid of the 'embarrassment' of the no-fly zone. From Iraq's point of view it makes sense to increase the conflict with the United States over this particular issue. The no-fly zones were created without a special resolution by the UN and thus they are easy to attack. The UN agreed to them for a long time because they are an effective way of protecting the Shiites and Kurds from Saddam. But there are already voices warning of a constant restraint of Iraq aerial sovereignty over its own territory. Since the latest air strikes, France is not participating in the air patrols anymore. Baghdad is showing provocative behavior because it wants to change international policy and, in particular, force an end to the sanctions. This tactic seems absurd, but it may work in the end. The UN will need to at least consult about it in the coming weeks."

"Impossible"

Guenther Nonnenmacher commented in right-of-center Frankfurter Allgemeine (12/24): "It is probably correct to assume that hurt feelings are the reason why former UN weapons inspector Ritter is now criticizing UNSCOM chief inspector Butler. No matter how reliable the UN report was that caused Washington and London to strike against Iraq, this inspection team is suffering under impossible political preconditions. In a big country it is impossible to find every container with precursors for the production of chemical and biological weapons. The hypothesis that things that they did not find could still exist is the work basis of the weapons inspectors. But there is never final proof that what they did not find does really not exist (Zbigniew Brzezinski). Maximum distrust towards the Iraqi leaders is certainly justified. When it comes to inspections, they are notorious liars and cheaters. But they should not have the excuse that the country could not fulfill its requirements because--for political reasons--this was not possible."

ITALY: "Bombs Have Strengthened Saddam Hussein"

PDS (leading government party) L'Unita had this comment (12/28) by Umberto De Giovannangeli: "Those bombs have strengthened Saddam Hussein. If we needed additional evidence, that came yesterday from Amman, where an extraordinary meeting of the Arab Parliamentary Union is under way, and from Cairo, at the conclusion of the summit between Mubarak and Arafat. Saddam Hussein is at the center of Arab politics again and the Iraqi issue is replacing the Palestinian issue as an absolute priority."

"Iraq, The Last Fires"

An editorial in left-leaning, influential La Repubblica said (12/24): "Skirmishes, verbal attacks, threats and spites are the poisoned sequel of U.S. and British missiles against Baghdad. Iraq banned UN flights over its skies...but it was 'spite' and not a real threat of a flight ban. On the contrary, the Iraqis claim that they want to protect the security of UN operators from British-American planes that continue to fly over the country.... The United States also seems oriented to softening its tones. It says it is willing to increase the quotas in the 'oil for food' agreement, apologizes for the missile carrying an offensive message against Islam, and does not close the door completely on the debate that is underway about a revision of the embargo. It is on the latter ground--sanctions and the resumption of UN inspections to Saddam's military sites--that the United Nations is slowly regaining the initiative. France is leading this revenge by the UN with its proposal for a mediation which Clinton will be forced to consider. And Paris is backed by Russia which, prompted by the urgent need for additional economic aid from the West, is giving up the harsh language of the days of the attack. What is unpredictable is the Iraqi response to the possible new proposals by the UN: So far, there is a total rejection of a resumption, in any form, of inspections of the alleged plants of chemical and bacteriological weapons."

RUSSIA: "New Alignment Of Forces"

Colonel Vadim Solovyov wrote in centrist Nezavisimoye Voennoye Obozreniye (12/25): "The four-day American missile and bomb strikes against Iraq, apart from everything else, have signified a new alignment of forces in the military-political balance. Washington has clearly demonstrated that it sees the world only in a single-pole dimension: The military potential of the USSR-Russia, which only recently was regarded as a restraining counterweight, no longer exists and for this reason there is no particular need to heed the decisions of international political organizations that had used to a certain extent to regulate relations between big and small centers of force."

"U.S. Ruins Post-War Security System"

Iskander Khisamov and Aleksandr Shumilin commented in reformist weekly Ekspert (12/24): "No doubt, the Saddam Hussein regime is a threat to the world community, but the world community realizes that Bill Clinton orders an attack when he, Bill Clinton, not the world community, needs it. [The Americans] have de facto been ruining the post-war collective security system, with the UN existing more in name than in reality.... The Americans' taking over of the peacekeeping initiative from the UN, a sad fact in itself--particularly for Russia--is also a destabilizing factor. Bill Clinton's decision to bomb, not without reason, is said to be due to his personal problems. That makes the fate of a whole nation dependent on his private life, libido. The two world wars have shown that one person's wilfulness is impermissible. The UN was established exactly to prevent that kind of diktat. U.S. actions against Iraq, even if fair, are an excuse for other countries, i.e., India, Pakistan, North Korea or Libya, which consider themselves local superpowers, to try to solve their problems by violent methods."

TURKEY: "The U.S.' 'Iraq Plan'"

Sukru Elekdag contended in mass-appeal Milliyet (12/28): "There is speculation that the United States is trying to establish a Kurdish state in northern Iraq. Such a plan is actually against U.S. interests. A Kurdish state may eventually advocate Kurdish nationalism in Turkey, which may turn into a 'greater Kurdistan' cause. This kind of development will be a serious blow to the United States' alliance with Turkey. Washington cannot overlook Turkey because it is America's most important ally in the region after Israel. Also, the United States does not want a Kurdish state that is surrounded by enemies and without access to the sea. Such a development means a second Israel in the region, and from a strategic perspective, does not serve U.S. interests at all.... Washington hopes that an autonomous Kurdish entity in northern Iraq will unify Iraqi opposition groups. That will help achieve the plans to topple Saddam."

UKRAINE: "Saddam Became Victim-Victor"

Centrist Den concluded (12/22): "Now Saddam is even more of a hero for Iraqis, a greater authority for his Arab neighbors, and a victim of American (and British) aggression for most nations of the world. Now is probably the most convenient moment for Hussein, as a leader of a poor, bomb-stricken country, to ask about lifting sanctions and creating more or less tolerable conditions for his people. At the same time, Clinton, having used air strikes to postpone the impeachment procedure, inflicted damage both on himself and his compatriots."

MIDDLE EAST

ISRAEL: "Where Do We Go From Here?"

Columnist Zvi Barel emphasized in independent Haaretz (12/27): "It is hard to believe that the financial cooperation between the U.S. administration and the Iraqi opposition groups will in fact bring about Saddam Hussein's downfall. The U.S. administration--like Israeli intelligence circles--now believe that only action from inside the Iraqi army, and not from the streets of London, can bring about a revolt. But even if this were to happen, nobody has any idea about who might replace Saddam. In any case, until this happens with the help of American cash, it seems that the United States will have to accept a few more demands from Saddam."

"Gas Masks In A Ghetto"

Nationalist columnist Uri Dan emphasized in popular, pluralist Maariv (12/24): "'We're not involved in the Iraqi crisis,' our leaders kept whimpering--and hastened to send the Jews of Israel rushing for gas masks.... Israel is the only country where the survivors of gas chambers...have been told to put their trust in gas masks.... Those who say 'Israel is not

involved' and hasten to distribute those masks do in fact betray their responsibility to have Saddam and his criminal regime eliminated. Instead, they look up to U.S. missiles and aircraft which so far proved their inability to do the job.... Israeli politicians who do not stop to boast that their country is the strongest in the Middle East are using gas masks as a fig leaf to hide their impotence."

EGYPT: "U.S. Logic Toward Arabs"

Ihsan Bakr, columnist for pro-government Al Ahram, said (12/27): "Yesterday, it was Sudan. Today it is Iraq, and tomorrow it will be Libya's and Syria's turn. This is not an exaggeration. The U.S. logic toward Arabs is to subdue them under its hegemony and Israel must be the most favored. Was the criminal American act against the Iraqi people aimed to liquidate Saddam? I doubt it. The United States cannot oust Saddam because he owns the most vicious dictatorship in the region. The so-called Iraqi opposition is worthless, neither domestically because they do not exist, nor abroad because they turned into groups hired by foreign intelligence. The Iraqi people are the only party in catastrophe. They know that mainly Saddam is responsible for this catastrophe, but they also hate the United States."

JORDAN: "Pragmatists Win The Day"

The centrist, influential among the elite, English-language Jordan Times said (12/28): "While the United States and Britain insist that the sanctions on Iraq will not be lifted before all of Baghdad's weapons of mass destruction are eliminated, the Arabs counter by demanding that all these weapons in the region be removed, an allusion to Israel's massive arsenal. The Arabs also remind the United States that while it is demanding that Iraq--as well as Libya and Sudan--adhere to UN resolutions, it is not demanding that Israel implement relevant Security Council resolutions or the agreements it signed. No matter how justified and politically correct the Arab demands are, the United States and its strategic ally in the region, Israel, are not about to agree with Arab arguments because the United States is the sole superpower and Israel is the sole regional power and because the Arabs are divided and weak.... It has been recognized at the Arab and international level that the Iraqi leadership could have averted most of the injustice that befell Iraq had it played its cards right. Unfortunately, Iraq not only alienated its allies in the West, but also its Arab brethren. While we agree that the new world order is unjust and unfair, we think that such a brutal order cannot be positively influenced by defiance. Great powers like China, France and Russia do not agree with the way the United States runs world affairs. They know very well that if they challenge it, they will lose. That is why they engage U.S. hegemony in a constructive manner. The least we should do is learn from them."

"Workable Formula Needed"

According to the centrist, influential among the elite, English-language Jordan Times (12/27): "The Arab Parliamentary Union's (APU) emergency meeting in Amman today to discuss last week's U.S.-British air strikes against Iraq is a triumph for the Arab parliamentary process in general and Jordan's parliament in particular. For the APU to hold such an emergency meeting to deal with an urgent Arab issue is a living testimony to the rising importance of the Iraqi dilemma in inter-Arab affairs.... In addition, the punitive sanctions against Iraq have lasted for much too long and a new mechanism must be found to replace them with the intention of alleviating the suffering of the Iraqis. While we recognize the need to eliminate all weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and elsewhere in the region, an equitable formula must be adopted that would end the embargo being slammed on Iraq. In this regard, Iraq should be encouraged to cooperate with the UN to end the standoff over weapons inspections.... Condemnations and denunciations are not enough. What the Arab parliamentarians should focus on is the elaboration of a new formula for relations between Iraq on the one hand, and the Arab world, the West and the UN on the other. Such a formula should make an end to the misery of the

Iraqi people its top priority."

SYRIA: "Welcome, Ramadan"

Saber Falhut commented in government-owned Al-Thawra (12/27): "The great popular anger manifested in the pan-Arab street during the Anglo-American aggression against our people in Iraq, which was conducted on behalf of international Zionism, should be read as a strong protest against the U.S. government attempts to wash away its crimes with the blood of Iraqi children. The United States continues to repress the Arab nation with arrogance and might.... Also it should be read as a protest against the Arab rulers who imagined that popular giant will remain in the bottle forever."

BAHRAIN: "Applause For Iraqi Regime Does Not Serve Iraqi People"

Leading, semi-official Akhbar Al-Khalij had this comment by managing editor Abdulmunãem Ebrahm (12/28): "Unlimited applause, by the Arabs, for the Iraqi regime does not serve the Iraqi people. The problem is not between Iraq and the Gulf countries. It is between Iraq and Washington. The Iraqi regime is responsible for its struggle with Washington and the West in general. It is not wise to stand with Iraq every time it clashes with the United States. The policies of the Iraqi regime draw international anger against it. On the other hand, we believe that the strikes do not make Saddam's regime weak. On the contrary they make it stronger. And we know that Washington and London realize this fact, and that is why we are suspicious of the goals behind the strikes."

"Arab Public Anger: Huge Gap With Governments"

Leading, semi-official Akhbar Al-Khalij had this comment by Sayed Zuhrah (12/28): "The Arab government will commit a great mistake if they do not take into consideration Arab public anger and protest over the attack on Iraq. Public response reveals that there is a huge gap between the Arab governments' position and that of the public. This gap proves that the Arab governments are unable to convince their people of their positions. They should realize that it is difficult to continue taking positions and policies that do not have public support."

MOROCCO: "The Aggressive Provocation Continues"

Government coalition Al Bayane front-paged this commentary by Bekkay, who insisted (12/28): "The United States and UK are provoking Iraq. Another carrier group led by the USS Carl Vinson has joined the U.S. military arsenal aimed at controlling the Middle East.... The probability of another attack is possible as enemy airplanes violate Iraqi airspace.... Despite division and conflicts, Arab countries must react. Their future might already be uncertain, as the imperialist dominance will not leave them alone. It has become urgent to lift the embargo so international legitimacy is not held up to ridicule."

"The Empire Of Terror Or The Empire Of Right?"

This front-page commentary by Ahmed Settati appeared in government coalition Al Ittihad Al Ishtiraki (12/26): "The aggression by the United States against the Iraqi people, and not against its leaders, has gone beyond all limits and has reached the point of destroying people that the United States pretends to defend.... The U.S. administration does not respect our people nor our leaders. A country that behaves like this cannot be categorized as a 'great country' on an ethical basis. The U.S. superpower can establish an empire based on terror, but not on justice. While we do not respect the U.S. administration, this does not mean that we do not respect the U.S. people, who are capable of bringing their leaders to justice and to impeach them when necessary. If the U.S. administration is concerned with the dignity of people and their rights, it should really promote these virtues all over the world."

QATAR: "To Release Ourselves From Blackmail"

Semi-independent Al-Sharq had this editorial (12/26): "We in Qatar support an Arab summit, not to cry as the foreign minister stated, but to open up to each other and to release ourselves from the blackmail and the instability the region has been suffering from for the last eight years."

"People Felt Humiliated"

Hamad Abdel-Aziz wrote in semi-independent Al-Rayah (12/24): "From the beginning, it is clear that the attack was not aimed at a regime we all hate. The goal was to destroy Iraq, to humiliate its people, and to neutralize its role, hence humiliating the whole Arab and Islamic world. Many thought that the attack would not end until the Iraqi regime was removed, but it has and the regime is still in place. The first thing we notice is the absence of Arab institutions, especially the Arab League. This is very dangerous and questions the raison d'etre of these institutions. On the other hand, the Arab street took matters in its own hands for the first time in a very long time. People felt humiliated by the aggression and angry at their leaders' killing silence. This development proved that the Arab street is not dead and, I believe, this popular response played a major role in the decision to stop the air strikes.... We as Arabs are required to learn from this crisis and capitalize on the lessons it offers and work towards regaining Arab solidarity. We in the Arab Gulf are particularly required to free ourselves from the circle we are in to overcome the crisis which is costing us dearly both morally and materially."

SOUTH ASIA

INDIA: "Restraining The U.S."

An editorial in the nationalist Hindustan Times asserted (12/28): "The bombing of Iraq has shown that the United States has now begun to regard the entire world, and not Latin America alone, as its backyard. Nothing underlined its arrogance more vividly than the manner in which the U.S. delegation to the UN is said to have torn up a letter advising restraint from the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan. The reason for American assertiveness is clear enough. The disappearance of the other superpower, the Soviet Union...has meant that the United States today can ride roughshod over any country it identifies as an enemy."

"Word's Worth"

An editorial in the centrist Statesman said (12/27): "At the end of it all, everyone is looking happy, most of all the bombed man, Saddam Hussein, whose people think less of the United States now than they do of their own leader, besides which he had the Arab masses demonstrating all over the place from Damascus to Cairo.... The principal fact therefore is: mission not accomplished. And perhaps, mission permanently jeopardized. Why should anyone who has been bombed for saying he hasn't done anything allow the bomber to once again come and find out if he has done something and face the prospect of fresh bombardment for repeating what he has already said and already suffered punishment for?... The moral ground is shifting in the Iraqis' favor, and they know it. Frankly, everyone feels that the thing has gone on for too long; all the bombing has achieved is to make it impossible to get rid of Saddam."

"Arrogant And Ominous"

An editorial in the right-of-center Indian Express argued (12/24): "There can be different opinions about whether the latest airstrikes were necessary.... Richard Butler has consistently held that Iraq continues to build its stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and is

deliberately preventing UN inspectors from tracking and destroying them. There is some truth in this. Compounding this is Saddam Hussein's behavior pattern.... He has used chemical and biological weapons.... He has shown a capacity for irrational and callous violence. All this, however, does not obfuscate the fact that Richard Butler is not functioning impartially. He has been unilaterally judgmental, abrasive and inclined to follow U.S. policy orientations rather than the policy directives of the UN secretary general.... Kofi Annan did the international community a signal service when he averted military operations against Iraq in February, 1998. Not to take him into confidence is an act of personal and institutional discourtesy.... The secretary general and the Security Council stand marginalized."

"Iraq's American Problem"

An editorial in the centrist Hindu said (12/24): "The American and British governments grudgingly admit that their strikes have subverted the weapons inspection regime since there is little chance of UNSCOM being allowed to return to Iraq.... Without inspectors on the ground, the monitoring of Iraq's weapons program is likely to be much less effective.... There can be no more convincing refutation of the claims that Hussein is a threat to regional security then the unanimous refusal by the Arab states, even Kuwait, to endorse last week's bombardment...(which) has bolstered Hussein's support within the region... The bombardment has also fractured the international coalition that came together during the Gulf War.... The Clinton administration's determination to launch the attacks precisely when the Security Council was debating the UNSCOM report also underlined the marginalization of Russia as a world power."

PAKISTAN: "Clinton And Islam, Eyeless In Gaza"

Akbar Ahmed declared in an op-ed column in the centrist News (12/25): "Muslims themselves inflict damage on their own people; Algeria, Sudan, Afghanistan are examples of societies tearing themselves apart. Savagery is conducted here in the name of Islam. But once again, the West is implicated--France's support in Algeria and those U.S. air strikes on Sudan and Afghanistan. Inevitably the theme of the power of Washington in the Muslim world will be picked up in the sermons in the mosques in the coming weeks of the month of Ramadan.... Young men expressing their anger by throwing grenades, killing innocent civilians in the bazaar, or kidnapping Western hostages--such actions are certainly not either the teaching or the spirit of Islam. But until Washington is able to open its eyes to the impact of its politics on the Islamic world, such atrocities will continue. It gives most Muslims no joy to say so, but the West needs to hear it."

"U.S. Misadventures"

An op-ed column by M.S. Jillani in the centrist national News contended (12/24): "The American and British air strikes on Iraq last week confirm that the United States has turned into a goon nationally and internationally.... Playing the policeman's role seems to have become routine. Afghanistan, Somalia, and the recent outburst of Vice President Al Gore in Malaysia are a few illustrations.... The common American is warm, friendly, and confident. His confidence essentially comes from the belief in freedom of thought and action. However, in spite all this, he is not a part of the establishment that rules him."

BANGLADESH: "Audacity"

Pro-government Bhorer Kagoj stated (12/24): "An American Air Force soldier wrote 'Ramadan gift from Chad Rickenberg' on the body of a laser-guided bomb to be dropped on Iraq. This is not only novel in case of gifts, but also unprecedented in cases of insult to religion. No language is adequate enough to describe such a joke of an American soldier when Baghdad was burning and many people, including women and children, were dying helplessly. The

American attack on the Iraqis during Ramadan has not only hurt religious sanctity but has also tarnished humanity. Is the chain of command in the American armed forces so loose that an ordinary soldier can write a message of felicitation on the body of a bomb?"

"Iraq's Decision"

Pro-Iraq Bangla-language newspaper Inqilab opined (12/25): "Oppressed Muslim state Iraq has started taking counter measures. It has banned movement of all UN aircraft in Iraq. The tough Iraqi decision did not come in just a day. The UN has not performed the slightest role in protecting the Iraqis during the past eight years of sanctions. The UN has become a tool to achieve American goals."

"America's Ramadan Gift For 1.4 Billion Muslims"

Pro-Iraq Inqilab had this editorial (12/25): "The Americans have not only sent a Ramadan gift to Iraq, but also to each member of the Islamic Ummah. How long do we have to tolerate their arrogance silently? How long shall we let them bathe in our blood? No more burning the effigies of Clinton and Blair, no more rallies and processions only. The Muslim Ummah will have to stand beside the Iraqis breaking the unjust sanctions. This is the way that we must reply to their Ramadan gift."

NEPAL: "Who Will Go: Saddam Or Clinton?"

Government-owned Gorkhapatra (12/26) said: "It cannot be ascertained that anyone who deposes Saddam will not be as difficult and cruel as he is.... Saddam is threatened not by the Kurds in the north but by the Shiite Arabs in the south... The Shiites in power in Iraq would mean the emergence of another Iran for America.... If U.S. policy succeeds in fragmenting Iraq, suspicions about the American intention will definitely rise in the Arab world. In that situation they will not remain silent over whatever action the United States and Britain will take."

EAST ASIA

CHINA: "Crisis Co-Exists With Reconciliation"

An Guozhang, Lin Jiaoming and Lu Zhixing wrote in official Communist Party People's Daily (Renmin Ribao, 12/26): "Use of force by the United States has aroused vigilance by the Gulf countries. The U.S. is becoming increasing isolated in the Gulf region as evidenced by Arab discontent with the hegemonistic military attacks.... Obviously, using force was a very unwise move of the United States."

"Game Desert Fox Not Worth The Candle"

Ma Shikun and Zhang Yong commented in Official Communist Party People's Daily (Renmin Ribao, 12/26): "Air raids have strengthened the family status of Saddam Hussein. The opposition faction appears unable to challenge Saddam's powerful regime for the time being, which contradicts U.S. goals.... Operation Desert Fox intensified the dispute between the United States and the Islamic world.... The use of force demonstrated that the United States was already at its wits' end and was an unwise move. The United States paid a high price for failing to achieve its intended military goal."

"Massive Differences Stall Progress; UNSC Clears Up The Mess"

Shao Wen commented in official Central Legal and Political Commission Legal Daily (Fazhi Ribao, 12/24): "At a UN session on December 22, the American representative said the United States would consider expanding the 'oil for food' project, which would enable Iraq to export

more oil in return for more food that it needs.... The United States' real motive is to maintain the UN sanctions on Iraq."

HONG KONG: "Missile Strikes Give Saddam All He Wanted"

Neville de Silva commented in the independent Hong Kong Standard (12/25): "The Security Council has become badly divided, particularly the permanent members, and made future cooperation not only on Iraq, but other vital issues difficult. Moreover, such action has made certain that the arms inspectors will not return to Iraq--not in the present form under UNSCOM and headed by Richard Butler. Which makes the task of the Security Council doubly difficult for it must now work out a new strategy for dealing with Iraq and even contemplate lifting sanctions in exchange for arms supervision. In short, Saddam Hussein has got almost everything he wanted--at little human cost to him."

JAPAN: "Weapons Inspections System Must Be Restructured"

Liberal Mainichi had this editorial view (12/24): "The United States and Britain launched air strikes against Iraq only after it refused UNSCOM inspections of weapons of mass destruction. But it is inevitable that what was dubbed a unilateral U.S.-British military operation against Baghdad will touch off anti-American feelings in the Arab and Islamic world. In the past, the United States used force against Iraq to maintain the UN weapons inspection system. But the United States shifted more of its weight to undermining the Hussein regime by expanding the targets of military strikes from military bases to communications and oil refinery facilities. The United States decided--of its own choice--to give up on the weapons inspection system. Deputy Iraqi Prime Minister Aziz has declared that Iraq would not accept UNSCOM weapons inspections again. If Iraq resumes arms development, free of UN inspections, it will pose a direct threat to the security of neighboring countries. In that sense, the U.S. military strikes revealed, not only the lack of thoughtful consideration toward the Arab and Islamic world, but also the absence of its long-term policy toward the Gulf region."

PHILIPPINES: "Might Makes Right"

Skyke Garcia argued in his column in independent Malaya (12/27): "What we are witnessing now in the bombing of Baghdad is the resurgence of that old maxim that 'might is right.'... Saddam Hussein has wisely refrained from making a counter attack. There has been no formal declaration of war, yet no one can deny that the bombing of Baghdad by the U.S. government is nothing but an act of war. How long will the U.S. government continue making pre-emptive strikes against perceived enemies? Perhaps as long as she is the world's only superpower. Or until some country develops the guts to file charges of crimes against humanity before the International Court of Justice against President Clinton.... We must praise the stand taken by President Erap [Estrada] expressing regrets over the Baghdad bombing. His instincts, which time and again have proven to be right, may yet be the saving grace of this presidency."

SOUTH KOREA: "Is U.S. The Sole Superpower?"

Former Foreign Minister Han Sung-joo wrote in business-oriented Joong-Ang Ilbo (12/28): "The latest U.S. strike against Iraq was a clear failure. It neither took Saddam Hussein out of office nor shattered the arrogance of the Iraqi leader. Instead, the international reputation of the United States suffered and its diplomacy is now further isolated as a result. The purpose of the strike was never clearly defined, and the charges have continued that it was linked to Clinton's domestic political trouble.... In the end, the show of force proved nothing but a lack of means to settle the situation otherwise, and this directly points to the limitations of U.S. diplomacy."

SRI LANKA: "Remedies For Human Rights Violations"

A commentary by Milinda Rajasekera in the independent and respected weekly tabloid Midweek Mirror held (12/23): "It was unfortunate that the world had to witness the abominable spectacle of one nation attacking another just after it celebrated the 50th anniversary of the adoption of the UN human rights charter. Whatever justification the United States and the UK may have for this attack, the world community will not approve of such blatant aggression as the attack on Iraq, another sovereign state, however much they detest the recalcitrant attitude of Saddam Hussein."

THAILAND: "Nothing Smart About U.S. Bombs This Time"

The lead editorial of the independent, English-language Nation commented (12/24), "For Americans, such a diabolical message ('Here's a Ramadan present') scribbled on a Tomahawk missile may represent nothing more than a small blip in its well oiled propaganda machine, but for Arabs--who trace their history back to the dawn of human civilization--the Ramadan 'present' will be etched in their memory as yet another blatant show of Western arrogance.... Yes, Saddam is a dictator. But to many Asians, he is no worse than other dictators that the United States has kept on its payroll. And indeed, the United States and Britain had courted Saddam with reckless abandon before he rolled his tanks into Kuwait."

"War Demons, Part II"

According to the lead editorial of centrist Ban Muang (12/24): "The long UN inspection has never unearthed any evidence to substantiate this claim, which is based on so much hot air and the desire by certain parties to trespass on other nations' sovereignty."

AFRICA

GHANA: "Anglo-American Madness"

The government-owned weekly Mirror insisted (12/24): "These sanctions that have claimed the lives of scores of innocent Iraqis, including the aged and children, have made Saddam a folk hero. And it is the Iraqi leader's heroic stoicism that has endeared him to his people and made Western moves to have him overthrown, abortive. The latest air strikes against Iraqi have brought to the fore the fact that the United States loves its notoriety as the gendarme of the world. This position underscores the supineness of Kofi Annan's UN."

NIGERIA: "If Iraq, Why Not Israel?"

The associate editor of Lagos-based independent National Concord judged (12/28): "No matter what political capital America and Bill Clinton make out of the latest pounding of Iraq and its citizens, it is increasingly becoming an oddity. It is difficult to see the threat Iraq poses to its neighbors that Iran and Israel do not. When will there be a level playing field?... For how long will Iraq and the Iraqi people be used to test the effectiveness of modern weapons of warfare and their impact on human beings?"

#

For more information, please contact:

U.S. Information Agency

Office of Public Liaison

Telephone: (202) 619-4355

12/28/98

# # #