Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)

MIDDLE EAST

BAHRAIN: "The U.S.' Investment Project In Iraq"

Aqeel Swar commented in semi-independent Al-Ayam (11/18): "After eight years of the greatest financial, moral, political and cultural, investment project (conspiracy) in history, the United States is naively repeating the old conundrum of what it can do vs. what it wants to do.... The question is not whether the United States wants to or can change the political system in Iraq. The question is does it have the right to do this either directly or through the Iraqi opposition?"

"Review Of Sanctions Due"

Omran Salman observed in semi-independent Al-Ayam (11/18): The only guarantee that the crisis will not be repeated is that, in parallel with Iraq's cooperation with the UN inspectors, the UNSC should carry out a serious and comprehensive review that leads to lifting the sanctions. The Gulf and Arab countries should support such a step."

"Does U.S. Want Saddam Eliminated?"

Semi-independent Al-Ayam had this comment from Anisa Fakhro (11/17): "(The Americans) are able to eliminate Saddam, if they really wanted to.... But they want to keep him as a card which they can use whenever they want.... Amidst such frustration, a strong voice comes from Egypt calling for Jihad against America. But unfortunately, no one is listening and no one is understanding."

QATAR: "Iraq's Human Catastrophe Must End"

Semi-independent Al-Sharq opined (11/17): "What we demand is that all parties find a mechanism that will deal in a civilized manner with a human catastrophe from which a whole nation is suffering. Striking Iraq under the pretext of crippling its military capabilities is no longer acceptable after UNSCOM teams have spent eight years destroying these capabilities and after Iraq suffered several similar strikes under the same pretext."

EGYPT: "Iraq Should Open Doors Wide To Inspectors"

Pro-government Al Ahram (11/18): "The only acceptable logic behind this crisis is that Iraq only wanted to direct the world's attention to the tragedy of the Iraqi people.... But this logic is feeble.... The Iraqi leadership, whose foolishness drove the country to this tragedy, should start thinking of unconventional ways to get out of it. Iraq should open its doors wide to inspections until the inspectors say 'enough.'"

"World Should End Sanctions"

Abbass El Tarabilly, editor-in-chief, declared in liberal opposition Al Wafd (11/17): "We as Egyptians are against the bombing of Iraq.... Thank God the crisis ended this time and America did not bomb the Iraqi people and increase their suffering. We ask the world to do something to end the continuation of sanctions because Iraq is an Arab country and we cannot leave it an open country to be swept by Turkey while Iraq stands helpless, unable to stop this aggression."

KUWAIT: "Saddam, A Necessary Evil"

Independent Al-Rai Al-Aam ran this comment (11/12) by Shiite cleric Mohammed Baqer Al-Mosawi Al-Mahri: "Despite the knowledge of the major powers, particularly the United States, that the Iraqi regime is a the main source of tension and instability in the region, their calculations prompt them to keep this regime in office, because their interests necessitate it."

"What Is The American Strategy Toward Iraq?"

Independent Al-Watan carried this byliner (11/15) by Abdul Razzak al-Ahayji (Salafi): "Is there a specific American strategy toward Iraq? this is the question that comes to the mind of the average man in Kuwait. If America can remove Saddam, why does it insist on playing the cat and mouse game once or twice a year? I believe this is because: 1) the United States is the biggest beneficiary from the current situation in Iraq; 2) the United States and its allies, the Jews, have taken advantage of the Iraqi crisis by tempting the Palestinian leadership into signing the Oslo accord; 3) the GCC will remain silent toward the U.S. policy of double standards so long as there is need for American military presence."

"We Are Not Naive"

Abdul-Amir Al-Turk asked in independent Al-Seyassah (11/18), "What does it mean that a country like the United States beats the drums of war then backs down?. This game has become ridiculous and has lost its credibility. This has become America's pretext in order to drain the Gulf financially. Who is naive enough to believe the American scenario for striking Iraq or for supporting the Iraqi opposition?."

MOROCCO: "The Escalation of The Conspiracy Against Iraq"

This front page editorial appeared in opposition, leftist Arabic-language daily, Al Munadhama (11/12), "Although the Iraqi people have suffered for a long time, the conspiracy against Iraq has entered its most dangerous phase in recent days. The United States continues to create a series of reasons to maintain sanctions imposed on Iraq.... What is dangerous is that the recent escalation occurs amid Arab official and popular reticence. The concerned parties throughout the Arab world should speak up against the conspiracy which is aimed not only at Iraq but the entire Arab nation."

SAUDI ARABIA: "Removing Saddam Is Iraqi, Arab People's Responsibility"

London-based, internationally circulated Al-Sharq Al-Awsat ran an op-ed by Ridah Larry (11/18): "The United States will not remove Saddam.... (Thus) removing Saddam...is not only the responsibility of the Iraqi people, but also of the Arab people."

"Real Losers Are Iraqi People"

London-based, internationally circulated Al-Sharq Al-Awsat judged (11/17): "The real problem with Iraq is that the international alliance has failed to translate its military victory in the Gulf War into a new political reality in Baghdad. At the same time, Iraq has failed to develop a policy to accommodate the consequences of its defeat.... The losers in this game are the Iraqi people."

SYRIA: "What About Israeli Insurgency!?"

Mohamed Khair al-Jamali commented in government-owned Al-Thawra (11/13): "Silence continues to characterize the U.S. stand on Israeli insurgency against international law; this confirms the U.S. administration's persistence in exercising its hateful double standard, especially on Israeli armament; Washington turns a blind eye to Israel's ownership of weapons of mass destruction while she is very strict about any Arab country owning such weapons."

EUROPE

BRITAIN: "Topple Saddam"

The conservative Daily Telegraph had this lead editorial (11/18): "President Clinton and Tony Blair...are justified in setting the unfinished business of the Gulf War, the overthrow of Saddam, as their new goal.... The past seven years have shown that the Iraqi dictator will be very difficult to dislodge. Previous attempts at subversion have failed and the opposition is fragmented. It will require persistence, imagination and courage."

"Let's Give The Butcher The Chop"

The conservative Times carried this op-ed piece by columnist Michael Gove (11/17): "Iraq's agony will end only with Saddam Hussein's death. And only the West can bring that about.... The difficulties cannot be underestimated, but neither can the threat to peace while Saddam lives.... Why does the West not use its technology, and the men it has trained, to work with them to deliver the coup de grace?"

"Rethinking Iraq"

The independent Financial Times editorialized (11/17): "Washington appears resigned to moving from internal monitoring to external deterrence, whereby aggression and non-compliance with UN resolutions would invite prompt retaliation. In time, however, it should consider whether to refocus sanctions, and in particular, whether to lift the embargo on Iraq's oil exports.... The current sanctions regime is neither sustainable nor likely to end Mr. Saddam's rule. A policy of firm deterrence coupled with newly targeted sanctions stands a better chance of minimizing the threat he can pose to the region."

FRANCE: "Yes To Disarmament, No To The Embargo"

Left-of-center Le Monde opined (11/18): "By using the pretext of the lifting of the sanctions, Saddam has been able to provoke crises at will. To get out of this situation, a courageous decision is needed. What needs to be said is that disarmament is crucial, that the UNSCOM must stay. Not the embargo.... Therefore we need to dissociate the embargo and disarmament, by lifting the sanctions now and demanding full freedom of action for the UNSCOM. Then Saddam would no longer have a pretext to provoke a crisis.... Most importantly, the people of Iraq would no longer have to pay alone the price of excluding Saddam from the international community."

"Saddam's New Bluff"

Jean-Louis Dufour argued in left-of-center Liberation (11/18): "Clinton...needs to imagine a new policy to bring Iraq back into the fold.... The master of Baghdad...has essentially managed to focus attention on the inconvenience of economic sanctions. A more prosperous Iraq would probably be more helpful in changing the regime."

"Clinton's Admission"

Pierre Rousselin judged in right-of-center Le Figaro (11/17): "Caught off guard by Saddam Hussein's reversal, Clinton is hesitating between his containment policy toward Iraq and toppling Iraq's regime. Clinton's admission is crystal clear: The United States has no strategy regarding Saddam Hussein.... In his speech on Sunday, Clinton did not make clear whether the United States would continue indefinitely to 'contain' Saddam and to sanction the Iraqi population, or whether it wants to get rid of a regime that regularly scoffs at Washington....

"How then to bring Clinton and Hussein to reason? France has only one means at its disposal: the UNSC.... Baghdad must comply.... Only then will it be possible to ask Washington to stop its lonesome crusade."

GERMANY: "Containment"

Klaus-Dieter Frankenberger observed in right-of-center Frankfurter Allgemeine (11/18): "In its (policy) toward Iraq, the United States and the international community are in a dilemma. Massive air strikes would have offered a way out only on a temporary basis. It is true that they would have hit Saddam's military and repressive apparatus, but they would also have meant the end to weapons inspections, which were...very effective.... The continuation of a...U.S. military presence is the other indispensable element of a policy of containment to which there is no alternative for the foreseeable future. Air strikes are useful only to a limited degree against chemical, biological weapons."

"Saddam's Great Foolishness"

Josef Joffe wrote in centrist Sueddeutsche Zeitung of Munich (11/17): "There are no easy and quick solutions [with Iraq]--only patient containment and monitoring which is backed by a credible statement to use force. The UN approved `oil-for-food' deal must remain.... And what about the sanctions? Saddam could quickly get rid of them. He must only make us credibly understand that he is willing to give up his 'rubberband strategy' to pull to the point where the rubberband will break and yield as soon as bomber aircraft depart from their bases."

ITALY: "President In Embarrassing Situation"

Arturo Zampaglione said in left-leaning, influential La Repubblica (11/17): "Clinton is going through an embarrassing situation. The right accuses him of having given in to the UN without taking into consideration American interests. The only way the president can avoid looking unarmed is to relaunch his personal and political challenge against Saddam.... In the future, the White House is planning to open up new ways (to do so), beginning with the strengthening of domestic opposition...and through Radio Free Iraq."

RUSSIA: "Victory Too Costly"

Sergei Guly said on page one of reformist Izvestiya (11/17): "The White House does not look triumphant. The new 'victory' over Hussein has proved costly.... Obviously, the Americans lack what they had always considered their advantage, a sequence of steps thoroughly thought out and executed in a crisis. Kosovo and more recently Iraq have proved that. Clinton's close-knit team is falling apart. His key advisers--Secretary of State Albright, Defense Secretary Cohen, General Shelton--insisted on air strikes, in keeping with the initial plan. The president decided otherwise."

AUSTRIA: "Divided Victory"

Andreas Schwarz asserted in conservative Die Presse (11/17): "The United States acted skillfully over the past months.... It prepared a military strike with a determination unheard-of since the Gulf war.... Saddam has to meet UN requirements, otherwise neither the Americans (nor the British) will grant another pardon...but Saddam Hussein will certainly always be lurking. And this will reveal the complete helplessness of American containment policy: Even if all the conditions are met one day, one will never be sure of Saddam's potential revenge."

BELGIUM: "U.S. Wants Saddam Out"

Foreign affairs writer Manu Tassier observed in independent Catholic De Standaard (11/17): "Saddam Hussein must disappear: That is the only solution to the Iraqi threat in the long-term, according to President Clinton. The UNSCOM inspectors are going to take up their task again but, at the same time, Clinton is going to increase support to the opposition."

CROATIA: "American Bombers Mellowed Saddam"

Government-controlled Vjesnik (11/16) carried a commentary by Fran Visnar in which he wrote, "The latest Iraqi game of pulling the United States by its tail was to investigate what are the chances for lifting sanctions.... The only thing Saddam has learned out of this whole campaign is that the British are still shoulder to shoulder with the Americans, and that the joint military engagement won't be symbolical needle pricks, but destructive blows."

CZECH REPUBLIC: "Saddam Emerges Harmed From The Crisis"

An analytical commentary in right-of-center daily Mlada fronta DNES said (11/17), "The bad news for Saddam and his regime is Clinton's announcement that the United States considers undermining his regime. 'This year, we strengthened our relations with the forces of change that are in Iraq,' Clinton said. Prague is playing some, albeit indirect, role for Clinton in his effort to weaken the position of Saddam's regime. 'We have reconciled the two biggest Kurdish opposition groups and launched Radio Free Iraq broadcasts,' Clinton said. The result of the entire crisis is the preservation and restoration of inspections which the West wanted to sacrifice in favor of a new strategy. However, heavy bombing and isolation of Iraq, which would have been applied instead of [these inspections], have been suspended."

DENMARK: "Testing Saddam"

Center-left Politiken indicated (11/17): "The way forward is for the inspectors to go quickly and thoroughly to work. Partly in order to test whether Saddam's promises hold good, and partly to complete their work so that the UN can switch to more routine surveillance. If this does not prove to be successful--the bombs will fall without warning."

FINLAND: "More Active Clinton Policy On Iraq"

Leftist Kansan Uutiset maintained (11/17), "President Clinton announced a significant change in the U.S. policy when he explained why the military strikes against Iraq were called off. Clinton seems to have come to the conclusion that the Iraqi situation, focusing on its potential weapons of mass destruction, can no longer be solved through UN weapons inspections. The solution is a change of Iraqi leaders and especially the ousting of Saddam Hussein. The new propaganda radio, 'Free Iraq,' which broadcasts out of Prague, and in which the United States invested $8 million, was an augur of a more active Clinton policy on Iraq. The costs of the radio station, and the aid that the United States has given to Iraqi opposition groups are, however, a mere fraction of the $10 billion billion that Clinton spent on last week's military operation."

KAZAKHSTAN: "Americans Don't Want To Wait"

Independent TV NTK (11/12) reported that "although the UN Security Council appealed to Saddam Hussein to cooperate with the UN and resolve the issue peacefully, the Americans aren't going to wait."

THE NETHERLANDS: "Eliminate Saddam"

Influential, liberal De Volkskrant commented (11/17), "Three Iraqi crises in one year. All three started by Saddam Hussein. It is understandable that particularly the U.S. is beginning to get frustrated about its role in this Saddam Hussein show. It is unclear what Saddam thinks he can achieve. But it is clear that the U.S. has had enough and said there won't be a warning next time. This reaction is understandable. However, the fact is that one can wonder about the useful impact of air strikes on Iraq. Clinton stated that the problem could be best solved by replacing Saddam's regime. This analysis is right. Nevertheless, what sense does it make by saying this out loud? It will only increase Saddam's paranoia. Eliminating Saddam and his close supporters, for example by a secret CIA operation, is not a theme to deliberate. Just do it!"

NORWAY: "The UN And U.S. Are Back To Square One"

Social democratic Dagsavisen Arbeiderbladet commented (11/17): "The crisis is over for now. But little has been achieved over the last few days. Saddam Hussein's brutal and authoritarian regime is still safely in office.... We find it encouraging, however, that Saddam Hussein has enjoyed less outside support this time than he did back in February.... Neighboring countries, which in January came out to support Saddam, have jointly issued an appeal asking him to adhere to the UN's demands. This is an opening we should build on. Only with the Arab world on our team will we be able to stop Saddam's dreams of regional dominance for good."

POLAND: "Remove Saddam"

Adam Szostkiewicz wrote in Catholic weekly Tygodnik Powszechny (11/18): "Both sides to this unresolved conflict are perfectly aware of their limitations. Saddam knows that the Americans do not strive to oust his regime but that they want to maintain control over Iraq's potential 'external aggression.' The Americans know that Saddam can weather the fiercest attacks and retain his image of a martyr in the eyes of his own people and in part of the Arab world. The key to solving the Saddam issue is to remove him from power."

SLOVENIA: "How To Get Rid Of Saddam?"

Left-of-center Delo remarked (11/17), "According to Washington the Iraqi diplomacy

was given another chance. But the facts are different: The White House is aware that just an attack will not solve the Iraqi problem. Even if Americans throw hundreds of rockets and shells on Iraq, (Iraq) will only be weakened militarily and economically whereas Hussein--the generator of all crises--will remain in power. The United States does not know how to get rid of him; therefore it has been postponing military intervention.... Hussein's deposition can only be achieved by an actual occupation of Iraq; this act would most probably face much disagreement in the international community. The question also is whether the White House really wants this. In the 1991 Gulf War, the United States missed its great opportunity to get rid of the Iraqi president; now, it has to face the consequences of this mistake.... By the time Washington will have found out how to get rid of Saddam's regime, similar tensions between the United States and the United Nations on one side and Iraq on the other can be expected to repeat."

SPAIN: "Failed Policy Vis-A-Vis Iraq"

Liberal El Pais opined (11/18): "Now the U.S. will concentrate on overthrowing Saddam by supporting the creation of an alternative government that 'will represent and respect its people.' Clinton's announcement recognizes the failure of U.S. policy since the end of the Gulf War in 1991.... The task which Clinton has set for himself...will be no easy row to hoe, given the fragmentation of the Iraqi opposition which is stronger outside than inside the country.... That said, something needs to be done from outside to create a democratic alternative."

SOUTH ASIA

BANGLADESH: "Iraqis Caught In The Middle"

The independent Daily Star argued (11/18): "The odds against [Saddam] this time are quite serious, as both the United States and the UK have given to understand that they are looking for alternative leadership in Iraq. As Saddam allows the inspections to proceed, economic sanctions on the Iraqis must begin to be lifted. They cannot let the Iraqi people suffer any more through their unmitigated tug of war."

"Resist The War Mongers"

Pro-Iraq Inqilab held (11/17), "The United States opposed the wars of independence in many countries from Cambodia and Vietnam to Bangladesh. Clinton's announcement of support to Iraqi dissidents in order to establish a new government in Iraq reflects the naked imperialist policy of aggression and interference in other countries' internal affairs. If the United States is allowed to go unchallenged, its activities against humanity will continue. After Iraq, other countries will become victims of its unilateral actions. It is now imperative for every peace-loving country to resist the imperialist war mongers including the United States and the United Kingdom."

INDIA: "No Justification For Continued Sanctions"

The centrist Hindu opined (11/18): "It is a shame that the sane voice of the international community has been unable to persuade the UN to lift the economic blockade of Iraq. There can no more be justification for continuing with a sanctions regime that aims to hurt an authoritarian ruler while it ends up penalizing innocent people.... As for the United States, it found its Gulf War allies more and more reluctant to join in another assault.... There should be better ways of dealing with an unpredictable Saddam than the gunboat diplomacy of the United States."

"Gulf Worn"

The centrist Telegraph noted (11/17): "The foolhardiness of [Saddam's] defiance silenced many critics of Washington.... However, Washington needs to review its own Iraq policy. International support for sanctions that hurt all Iraqis except Hussein is waning.... The United States needs to accept that it cannot engineer Hussein's removal. The present cat-and-mouse games have sapped U.S. public support for containment.... Fortunately, Hussein's boorish tactics have helped the United States avoid changing a policy whose shelf life has expired. But even Hussein can see Washington is running on empty. Which is why the next and equally inconclusive chapter of the confrontation in the Gulf will not be long in coming."

PAKISTAN: " Iraq Had To Bow To U.S."

Ghulam Sarwar opined in pro-Muslim League, Urdu-language Pakistan (11/18): "We have been informed that Iraq has announced unconditional cooperation with the United Nations, has assured UN arms inspectors of its cooperation in the light of UN resolutions. The news is disturbing, for Iraq had to bow before America in utter humiliation, but the good thing is that Iraqi people were saved from being killed. May God make both countries resolve this issue in an atmosphere of harmony. We are sure that if the Security Council did not display negligence, the war clouds hovering over Iraq would go."

"Iraq-U.S. Face-Off"

Center-right Nation said (11/17): "While Saddam pays for his adventurism in Kuwait, the world polity did not give its consensus for the humiliation of the Iraqi people. The indefinite presence of the UN inspectors, together with the ever-impending threat of bombing would be taken by the Iraqis as a show of U.S. muscle. Since Iraq is very much within its rights to demand a time-scale for weapons inspections, a rational and prudent alternative to belligerent threats of war should be found."

EAST ASIA

AUSTRALIA: "Why The U.S. Can't Finish Off Saddam"

The liberal Age said (11/17), "The Americans will now put renewed effort and money into bolstering Iraqi opposition groups, but few believe they can be other than a minor irritation to the Iraqi leader. The opposition is divided, quickly infiltrated by Saddam's spies, and has learnt the hard way that even supposedly secret assistance from the CIA can't be relied on."

CHINA: "Ineffective Sanctions"

Chen Keqin said in intellectually-oriented Guangming Daily (Guangming Ribao, 11/18): "Iraq wanted to utilize the Middle East nations' discontent with the United States...to attain its goal of revitalizing national strength and shaking off sanctions.... Persistent sanctions on Iraq seem unlikely to achieve the desired goals."

HONG KONG: "Jaw Not War Needed On Iraqi Front"

The independent Hong Kong Standard had this editorial (11/17): "Iraq's ever-defiant president...will undoubtedly continue to challenge UN resolutions.... On the U.S. side, there appears to be a greater determination and readiness to launch attacks against Iraq in an attempt to bring Saddam down.... Capitals that may be able to maintain a dialogue with Baghdad should work together to prevent the issue of Iraq from flaring again."

INDONESIA: "Diplomacy Averts Another Persian Gulf War"

Leading, independent Kompas concluded (11/18): "The international community breathed a sigh of relief that tensions in the Gulf did not evolve into open conflict.... The United States would have been condemned had it launched an attack because Iraq has once again agreed to cooperate with UNSCOM.... Indeed, history often illustrates that even the most complex issues can be resolved via diplomacy and negotiation."

JAPAN: "Iraq Can No Longer Reject Weapons Inspections"

Top-circulation, moderate Yomiuri editorialized (11/18): "Although the avoidance of the U.S.-Iraq military showdown was praiseworthy, Saddam's repeated obstruction or rejection of UN weapons inspections is extremely provoking and regrettable.... The Hussein regime can no longer continue obstructing or rejecting the UN weapons inspections. Iraq's disposal of weapons of mass destruction is the most important precondition for the international community to lift sanctions imposed on that country.... Iraq must fully realize that its repeated obstruction or rejection of weapons inspections will...make the chance of lifting...sanctions more remote."

SINGAPORE: "For Iraqis, The Misery Goes On"

The pro-government Business Times noted (11/18): "The Iraqi leader seems to think that the way to get UN sanctions lifted is to test the resolve of the Americans from time to time. What Mr. Saddam wants is to be left alone by Western allies to do what he thinks fit in his country and, perhaps, even be allowed to assert regional leadership.... Unfortunately for him, that is the one scenario that will never come about...the one binding factor that Mr. Saddam must face is that Iraq will only be freed from interference when he is removed from the political scene."

SOUTH KOREA: "U.S. Dilemma Over Iraq"

Senior columnist Kim Young-hee opined in business-oriented Joong-Ang Ilbo (11/18): "The 'vicious cycle' from Hussein's brinkmanship to U.S. rebuttal will have to continue until the economic sanctions against Iraq are finally lifted."

"Hussein Laughs, Baffling Clinton"

Washington correspondent Shin Jae-min of moderate Hankook Ilbo wrote (11/17), "An insulted U.S. now goes public with its plan to get rid of Hussein.... Nevertheless, the United States is not in a position to pursue it openly because it does not want a head-on confrontation with the whole Arab world. Besides, the United States cannot entirely ignore international opinion. All this means that Hussein's removal has to be a long-term project."

THAILAND: "Iraq Must Cooperate With UN Inspectors"

The lead editorial of the independent, English-language Nation commented (11/17), "Iraq's potential military capability, like North Korea's, demands patience and diplomacy to tackle. Sometimes, all these UN formalities seem tedious but in the post Cold War era they are still a better way to dissolve conflicts than to have one country decide."

AFRICA

BURKINA FASO: "The Interminable Renewal"

Independent Le Pays (11/17) carried in its rubric "Internal Dialogue": "Iraq is ready, according to official propaganda, to die and even commit collective suicide to have the honor of the country rather than suffer the humiliation of the curiosity of a disarmament committee that supposedly has been peppered with American spies. True or false, still the fact remains that the Iraqi fears are reinforced by the official presence in the region of the CIA in the scope of the Wye Plantation agreement.... One can, in fact wonder how much more time the investigators will take to terminate their mission, as Washington does not seem to be in a hurry as long as Saddam Hussein has not fallen. The question is knowing if the UN has the means [to support] its policy. The UN is asked to play fireman in Iraq while not being listened to, while excluded from the peace process between Israel and Palestine, and while carefully handling the Hebrew state that is as much, if not more, a menace to peace in the world."

COTE D'IVOIRE: "Saddam Hussein Backed Down"

Villard Sanogo wrote in leftist opposition Notre Voie (11/16): "With this umpteenth crisis, we understand to what extent the United States wants to control the entire world....[and] for what reason does the United States want to defend another country (Kuwait) to the point of making this a personal matter."

SENEGAL: "Iraq-USA"

Independent daily Le Matin published in its column (1/17) on foreign news looked at the Iraq-American confontration as a "cruel game" played against "ordinary Iraqis". It said, "With Saddam Hussein's reversal of his position, one can understand better why the U.S. administration did not want to chase Saddam from power after the Gulf War. The master of Baghdad is perfect in his role as the villain. Defeated, weakened, presiding over a country ruined by the embargo, he remains sufficiently troublesome to make rich oil producers in the Gulf shaking in their boots. But Uncle Sam is around to protect them. Furthermore, a Saddam would have to be invented to show other countries the costs of defying America's power."

SOUTH AFRICA: "Inspectors Remain The Best Option"

The liberal, independent Star commented (11/17): "This round goes to Saddam.

The threat that Iraq poses to regional and world peace is not going to go away easily.... The United States is working to unify and arm opposition groups, but it may be a long time before they can mount a significant threat.... The inspectors remain the best option to contain Saddam, at least until the next round."

UGANDA: "Lift Sanctions"

The government-related New Vision held (11/17): "Sanctions were not supposed to overthrow Saddam Hussein, but that has now become their purpose. The loser has been the Iraqi people, not Saddam Hussein who is still in power. When the elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers. Malnutrition and disease have reared their ugly heads in a country which before the Gulf War had a high standard of living. Education and medical services have collapsed. This is not fair. The Iraqi people did not choose to live in a police state or to invade Kuwait. Moreover the greater the sanctions, the more Saddam can appeal to primitive nationalism. If sanctions are lifted, Saddam will lose the little remaining popularity that he claims as the national defender of his people. Then he is more likely to fall under the weight of his own repression and isolation."

WESTERN HEMISPHERE

CANADA: "Playing A Dangerous Game"

Foreign affairs analyst Eric Margolis remarked in the conservative Ottawa Sun (11/16): "Feel-good bombing of Iraq is not strategy. It is childish petulance, expressed with B-52s. Brainpower, not firepower, is needed. If the United States can sup with the devil in North Korea or Serbia, why not Iraq? After all, Saddam used to be the West's favorite Mideast s.o.b. Why not again?"

"Playing For Keeps"

The new conservative National Post commented (11/14), "It is safe to say UNSCOM will never disarm Iraq. It cannot even prevent Saddam from substantially rearming.... Mr. Clinton should therefore focus on a long-term political strategy to depose Saddam and replace him with a stable government friendly to the West."

ARGENTINA: "The Reasons For Baghdad's Paranoia"

Robert Fisk, on special assignment in London for pro-government La Prensa, stressed (11/18): "Sanctions have not affected [Saddam Hussein] yet. The irony is that those who want to maintain the embargo are doing so by showing its failure. Because if Saddam can still build palaces, it is because sanctions have not worked. And no one asks about what French call 'the

strong smell of oil' around the 'pax Americana' in the Persian Gulf. If the oil embargo were lifted, how deep down would the already low oil price go?"

BRAZIL: "Saddam's Strategy"

Center-right O Estado de Sao Paulo held (11/18): "Saddam Hussein intends to develop his own atomic bomb. The major hardship for the Iraqi people is a result of the economic embargo.... Despite so much suffering, Saddam Hussein denies UN inspectors access to what remains of his arsenal and laboratories.... He only allows them to enter when the pressure by the allies becomes intolerable.... This pattern of behavior was just repeated.... Many observers feel that the attack should have been long enough to make the terms of Saddam Hussein's letter acceed to the UN demands. This, however, is not the best political option for the United States.... What has prevented the Iraqi military from re-equipping itself is the economic embargo imposed by the UN. And the embargo has been maintained thanks to a precarious understanding between the permanent members of the Security Council.... It is the fragility of this coalition that encourages Saddam Hussein to defy the Security Council's resolutions. But if the dictator is capable of challenging the United States openly, he cannot re-arm his military, and this has condemned him to win skirmishes but to lose the war."

CHILE: "The Correct Path"

Leading circulation, popular, independent La Tercera opined (11/17), "When lives are at stake, and innocent ones, and the path chosen to resolve the conflict cannot discriminate between regular soldiers or armed civilians, it is worth carrying the efforts for reason to prevail to the limit.... Any negotiated solution in the case of Iraq, in spite of how bad it might be for the UN and the objectives which that multinational organization has set for itself, will always be better than a solution achieved by force from which new pain will engender more hate."

ECUADOR: "The Cat And Mouse Game"

Quito's leading centrist El Comercio held (11/16), "The United States is increasingly restless and upset over Saddam Hussein's repetitive game, and is ready to move its war apparatus, then lower its guard and wait for things to return to normal. It is happening once again. It is said that this is the game of the powerful cat with the frightened mouse.... In the meantime, the U.S. feels drained by these threats and war movements. U.S. impatience goes in two directions. On one side, there are the increasing assurances that the only viable solution is to put Hussein out of the scene, a task that seems more than difficult; then, the warning that at the next opportunity the United States will act without awaiting the approval of the United Nations, which is a dangerous idea and proposal. The expectation that Iraq will allow arm inspections conducted by a UN special commission is open. It is also possible that nothing special will happen because Hussein continues perfecting his game, draining and bothering his fearsome adversary."

JAMAICA: "Between Iraq And A Hard Place"

University lecturer, attorney at law and regular columnist Stephen Vasciannie wrote in the moderate, influential daily Gleaner (11/16): "Iraq's defiance is not...the just and honorable defiance of a beleaguered but principled state. It is...the defiance of a leader who apparently cares very little about the consequences of his actions. Saddam Hussein now claims justice, but his treatment of the UNSCOM inspectors amounts to a strong disregard for the United Nations.... Saddam cannot assume that the United Nations will roll over and play dead, and, surely, must realize that his actions have consequences."

PERU: "Tensions In The Gulf"

Analyst Cesar Arias-Quincot commented in his (11/16) column in uncritical, pro-government daily El Sol: "Apparently, Iraq is not now in a position to defy the world powers. But it is possible that Saddam is trying to strengthen his image before his people. But in that region it is not only Iraq that is a threat to peace. We also have the threatening force of the Islamic fundamentalism which dominates Iran, is strong in Afghanistan, commits violence in Palestine, Egypt and Algeria, and has reached into New York, Nairobi, and Dar es Salaam. An important step towards creating a secure situation in the region is to deepen and accelerate the peace process between Israel and the PLO, a process that requires the denial of irrational prejudices, dogmatism, and radical positions by both Jews and Muslims. The scenario faced by the region's statesmen, the world powers and the UN is complex and terrible, because they not only have to confront Saddam Hussein, but they have to hold in their bottles the demons that might get free if a general conflagration occurs."

URUGUAY: "The Last Days Of Saddam"

Second-leading El Observador's international editor pointed out (11/17): "With their statements, Bill Clinton and Tony Blair--the two leaders directing the international offensive against Iraq--have revealed that their main objective is to eliminate Hussein for good.... In light of this situation, the only remaining possibility is to carry out a multinational operation to put Hussein up against the wall--or under the rubble--and finish with his despotism.... It is true that the world would have one dictator less but there will be no winners as, in war, everyone is a loser."

For more information, please contact:

U.S. Information Agency

Office of Public Liaison

Telephone: (202) 619-4355

11/18/98

# # #