|
Office of Research
Issue Focus Foreign Media Reaction |
|
Commentary from ... Europe Middle East East Asia South Asia Western Hemisphere |
| August 8, 2000 |
Iraq 10 Years After: Sanctions And Bombs Missing Their Target
Columnists and editorial writers, primarily in Europe and the Middle East, used the occasion of the 10th anniversary of Iraq's August 2, 1990 invasion of Kuwait to blast the continuing UN sanctions on Iraq. France's right-of-center weekly Le Point was the most succinct, declaring the sanctions to be "cruel, because they only punish the people; inefficient, because they do not force the regime to cooperate; and dangerous, because they feed the development of an embargo generation." The only positive assessments of the UN curbs on Iraq appeared in the British press. Washington and London were widely viewed as the sole instigators of the sanctions. For example, Rabat's L'Opinion erroneously asserted that "the embargo is illegal because it is simply imposed by Washington and London." At the same time, the commentators included no apologists for Saddam. Maksim Yusin in Moscow's reformist Izvestiya spoke for many when he marvelled that "Saddam has never been punished for what he did to Iran, Kuwait, the Kurds, and thousands of his opponents. He still rules that hapless country, wallowing in luxury." From a regional perspective; Middle East observers lamented that Iraq had opened rifts that bedevil efforts to solve the region's probems; European writers expressed frustration that a stand-off between the Iraqi regime and "the only remaining superpower" had produced such protracted suffering.
MIDDLE EAST: NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH
Writers in the neighborhood were disconsolate that Saddam was still giving them sleepless nights. Beirut's centrist Al-Anwar asked "Did time freeze on August 2, 1990? Why is Iraq still threatening, Kuwait still fearful, and the Arab world still unable to reach a strategy for the present and future?" Turkish columns detailed the cost to Ankara, both in dollars,"20 to 45 billion", and in terms of "struggling with troubles in northern Iraq." Kuwaiti media clearly still wanted Iraq kept at bay. Concerned that an Arab summit might help Iraq normalize its status, a column in independent Al-Qabas called on the Arabs not to hold a summit until after "condemning this dictatorial regime [with] the war criminal title it deserves." Kuwaiti fears of Baghdad re-entering the Arab fold were not shared by all. Bahrain's semi-official Al-Ayyam cited the example of the Arabs sitting down "face-to-face" with the Israelis, and urged the Arabs to "work together to repair the cracks...resulting from the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait."
EUROPE: AUDITING A 'DIALOGUE OF THE DEAF'
British papers, while noting the shortcomings of the UN sanctions, were positive on Iraq's 10- year containment: The independent Financial Times, claimed the "policy has succeeded in containing Saddam Hussein.... Without sanctions he certainly would have bolstered his weapons of mass destruction." In contrast, continental columnists dwelled on the toll of human suffering in Iraq, bemoaning the fact that "the United States, the only remaining superpower" and Baghdad must cooperate to end the suffering. Writers depicted Europe as unable to foster such cooperation when Washington and Baghdad are so committed to what Paris's left-of-center Le Monde dubbed "a dialogue of the deaf."
EDITOR: Stephen Thibeault
EDITOR'S NOTE: This survey is based on 56 reports from 27 countries August 1-8. Editorial excerpts are grouped by region; editorials from each country are listed from the most recent date.
KUWAIT: "We Need A New Media Message Characterized By Objectivity"
Independent Al-Seyasa published this view by Dr. Shamlan Yousef Al-Essa (8/8): "Our media message targeting the Iraqi people should be changed. We were embarrassed when Iraqi supporters asked why we did not broadcast Iraqi songs despite our claims that we were enemies with the Iraqi regime and not the people? It is important to reevaluate our media message to become more effective while continuing to stress Kuwaiti concerns and the release of the POWs as a humanitarian case that has nothing to do with politics. Iraqi media today is in a state of confusion and hysterics, therefore we have to commit to objectivity and neutrality, to clarify the facts using numbers, and to speak to their minds."
"No Summit Needed"
Dr. Fatimah Al-Abdali made this call in independent Al-Qabas (8/7): "We call on the leaders of Arab nations not to hold any Arab summit in the Arab League before condemning this dictatorial regime that denies the title war criminal, a titles it deserves. It is time to issue Arab decisions to protect the rights of Iraqi children as well as returning the rights of Kuwaiti children."
"Return The POWs... And Apologize"
Ali Mohammed Al-Mahdi noted in Independent Al-Watan (8/6): "One of the reasons that precludes the resumption of Kuwaiti/Iraqi relations, is the more than 600 Kuwaiti POWs who are still detained in Iraqi prisons after ten years. The release of these innocent POWs is the beginning of the road to good relations with Iraq, in addition to admitting one's fault and apologizing for it."
"A Circle Of Siege And Militarism"
Independent Al-Watan ran this piece by Abdullah al-Shayji (8/2): "We have signed an insurance policy with the Americans for security arrangements.... We were then equipped with millions of dollars' worth of weapons and went to sleep on a comfortable American bed.... We have forgotten, or ignored [the need] to exchange this bed for one made with our brothers in the GCC.... The facts in this diabolic Iraqi equation will remain unchanged for the near future, keeping us in Kuwait, and in the Gulf in a circle of siege and militarism."
"Ten Years After Iraqi Invasion, Questions Remain"
Independent Al-Rai Al-Aam featured this piece by Ahmed al-Dayeen (8/1): "The American administration has yet to release the report containing the Iraqi president's comments to April Glaspie during their July 25 meeting. We have the right to wonder, since we were the victims of the [Iraqi invasion], what were the circumstances behind the invasion? We have a right to know the signals behind Ambassador Glaspie's statements. Was Saddam intentionally lured or deliberately encouraged? Did he turn the tables and go beyond the rules of the game on August 2nd and thus deviate from the pre-arranged scenario?"
BAHRAIN: "Repairing The Cracks"
Semi-official Al-Ayam (8/5-6) featured this view by Al-Shura member Ahmed Kamal: "We should realize that everything has an end and that the methods we use to solve our problems are not good.... What have the Zionists done to our Palestinian brothers...since 1947?... Despite that...we sat face-to-face with the Jews and have been negotiating with them. Therefore, we should realize that there are cracks which resulted from the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and we should work together to repair those cracks."
"Iraqi Regime Provides Pretext To Keep Sanctions"
Radhi Al-Sammak commented in semi-independent Akhbar Al-Khalij (8/3): "It is surprising seeing the hearts of many Arabs breaking for the victims of the econommic blockade, but not for the victims of the oppression of the [Iraqi] regime and those who are systematically killed by it. The invasion and the blockade are a single thing and should not be separated. The regime invaded Kuwait and is also the cause of the blockade and its continuation through its provocations, threats against its neighbors and its refusal to admit its mistake. Although we can't deny the American role in prolonging the sanctions, the policies of the Iraqi regime are providing American policymakers with the pretexts they need to keep the sanctions."
EGYPT: "The Non-Elimination Of Saddam"
Columnist Salah Montasser wrote in pro-government Al Ahram (8/3): "What was written about the results of the Gulf War...shows there was an American consensus on planning not to eliminate Saddam and only liberate Kuwait, without entering Iraq...and reaching Baghdad. This [Saddam's elimination] would have been possible and easily done if they so desired, but the Americans simply didn't imagine that Saddam would remain in power after his harsh defeat. Baker believed that sending troops to Baghdad would transform Saddam into a national hero and turn the liberation of Kuwait into an American invasion. In addition...finding Saddam was not guaranteed.... Baker explained that, contrary to general opinion."
"Iraqi Responsibility"
Hazem Abdel Rahman asserted in pro-government Al Ahram (8/2): "Now Iraq is under a blockade, and Washington intends to teach it an unforgettable lesson so that no one else repeats the threat to this oil region.... Iraq is said to be suffering daily casualties. Certainly, its media highlight that, but do not tell us about the hundreds of sheep and cows sacrificed for the birthdays of Iraq's royalty. What resources has the Iraqi regime wasted?.... Any wise politician would have grasped the golden opportunity to rebuild Iraq."
"The Blockade Is No Longer Acceptable"
Pro-government Al Ahram observed (8/2): "After ten years of the sinful Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, the rift is still deep in the Arab regional system.... The international blockade on Iraq continues and the Iraqi people continue to be crushed with suffering.... No one can acquit the Iraqi regime of its responsibility for all this.... However, the situation has become unacceptable. Egypt expressed this when Foreign Minister Moussa said that continuing the blockade on Iraq creates an unacceptable Arab situation. He also explained that the Iraqi problems aren't only an Arab issue, but an international problem involving UNSC resolutions."
ISRAEL: "Just Ask Saddam"
Analyst Zvi Bar'el wrote in independent Ha'aretz (8/4): "The U.S. has failed two extremely important tests so far: It was unable to prevent Iraq from invading Kuwait and it was similarly unable to generate any changes in Saddam's policy (or life, for that matter).... Saddam has become the central pillar of an anti-American orientation that is based on the belief that America's hatred for Iraq extends to the Arab world in general. Even if many Arab leaders don't buy this approach, they no longer feel at liberty to totally ignore it. This damage inflicted by Saddam...is having an impact on Washington's image as an 'honest broker.'"
JORDAN: "It Is Your Fault"
Daily columnist Basem Sakijha argued in center-left, influential Al-Dustur (8/8): "Iraq was wrong to go into Kuwait. Kuwait was wrong to ask for foreign intervention. The Arabs were wrong to give the green light for that intervention. Iraq was wrong not to withdraw from Kuwait. And the greatest Arab sin was allowing the destruction of Iraq.. We are still living reliving those days. The Iraqis in August 2000 still use the same rhetoric of August 1990. They forget the ground shook beneath us because of them. The Kuwaitis continue to use the same pretexts to justify the worst thing that can be suffered by a people [the Iraqis]. They forget that land does not immigrate and that geography makes history and that the Kuwaitis will be the neighbors of the Iraqis until doomsday. Here we are in the future. The past 10 years have witnessed the making of a new world, where we have no role except that of an observer and a taxpayer. The Soviet Union is gone and the United States rules. Countries came into existence and others were wiped out. The Palestinians have paid their dues and the Arabs continue to ask, 'Whose fault is it?' The answer it is your fault, all of you."
"Ten Years Of Slow Death"
Center-left, influential Al-Dustur refected (8/7): "The worst part of the disaster is reflected in the futility of the sanctions regime on Iraq. No one can answer the question 'until when?' and no one can specify what Iraq has to do to get out of this cocoon of daily hunger, poverty, sickness and death.. The disintegration and deterioration that are characteristic of the current Arab situation are responsible in a major way for prolonging the crisis and the suffering of the noble and proud Iraqi people."
"Ten Years Since The Disaster"
Leading columnist Uraib Al-Rantawi commented in influential center-left Al-Dustour (8/3): "Ten years after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait the wounds remains unhealed. Kuwait has succeeded in healing some of its wounds, but others remain, as proven by its budget deficit and the prisoners of war issue. The Arab world spent the first half of the decade blaming one another for what happened, and the second half weeping over the fate of Iraq's children. Three American presidential election campaigns later, there is no reason to believe that Iraq won't still an election issue the next time around."
LEBANON: "The Tenth Anniversary Of Invading Kuwait"
Awni Al-Ka'aki noted in pro-Syria Ash-Sharq (8/4): "The Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and the impact it has had all these years confirm that what happened was not an ordinary crime or a tactical strategic mistake. The aim was clear: It was to give the U.S. a justification to control oil.... By invading Kuwait, Saddam destroyed Iraq and pushed the whole Arab nation into a historic crisis.... Today, Kuwait is still wounded, particularly concerning the Kuwaiti prisoners in Iraqi prisons.... As for the Iraqi people, their wounds are even more painful.... Saddam continues to
arrest and execute Iraqis, proving that the Iraqis remain the primary victims of this regime. It is time for an effective Arab move to save the Iraqi people and put a limit to the crimes of its regime."
"Mass Defeat And Individual Victories?"
An editorial by Rafiq Khuri in centrist Al-Anwar asks (8/3): "Did time freeze on August 2, 1990? Why is Iraq still threatening, Kuwait still fearful, and the Arab world still unable to reach a strategy for the present and future? How can a game managed by the U.S. continue for ten years at the Arab's expense, hinting that it is in their interest?... Whoever placed his bet on the U.S. to topple the Iraqi regime has realized that he is living a big illusion. Whoever ignored the dangers of Iraqi sanctions found himself unable to come up with any Arab position to help Iraq regain its normal status.... What is more dangerous than making mistakes, is refusing to admit them and failing to learn from them."
MOROCCO: "Ten Years After The Second Gulf War: The Inhumane Embargo"
Said Fahmi wrote in pro-government coalition L'Opinion (8/3): "Ten years after the invasion of Kuwait we continue to question the Iraqi regime's motives for its devastating adventure against its people, Kuwait and the entire Arab world. Was Iraq trapped by those who saw in it an emerging Arab power to counterbalance Israel?... Ten years after the war, Saddam Hussein is still in power. The embargo is illegal because it is simply imposed by Washington and London. More than that, the war has poisoned inter-Arab relations."
QATAR: "A Mandate To Destroy Iraq"
Semi-independent Arrayah editorialized (8/2): "What happened after [the Gulf War] indicates that there was an American mandate to destroy and disintegrate Iraq as a state and a people. Unfortunately we recognized this ten years after the invasion and the atrocious sanctions.... Sanctions must be lifted and Iraq should be reintegrated into the Arab family with a solid commitment from Baghdad that it will give up its malicious intentions toward its neighbors. Kuwait must also mellow and review its hard line position on reconciliation."
"A Race Between Washington And Iraq"
Semi-official Al-Watan argued (8/2): "The sanctions are affecting only the people of Iraq whereas the regime remains intact. Continuation of this 'game of death' is implausible and unacceptable. This race between Washington and the Iraqi regime is systematically killing the Iraqi people. The regime doesn't want to abdicate and Washington won't begin a dialogue or overthrow Saddam. The quandary continues, at a time when the regime masters the game of challenging the embargo by extending its hands to the outside world, whereas the United States, as usual, unilaterally challenges the international community on any Arab-related issue."
BRITAIN: "Iraqi Sanctions"
The independent Financial Times offered this assessment of Iraqi sanctions (8/7): "A decade after comprehensive United Nations sanctions were imposed on Iraq, the policy has succeeded in containing Saddam Hussein. The Iraqi dictator no longer poses a theat to his neighbors and without sanctions he certainly would have bolstered his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. But the sanctions policy has run out of momentum and the pain it has inflicted on
Iraq's population has eroded support for it in the Arab world and beyond.... The UNSC should not be satisfied with this stalemate. It must push for a resumption of inspections and renew the monitoring program which alone can ensure long-term Gulf security. Further modifications to the embargo should be examined, including the option of lifting civilian sanctions while maintaining a ban on arms sales and financial scrutiny over selected imports. Mr. Saddam must not be rewarded, but sanctions should target him rather than the Iraqi people."
"It Is As Important As Ever To Keep Saddam Hussein In His Cage"
The centrist Independent had this op-ed byliner by British Foreign Minister Peter Hain (8/7): "Has the 10 year commitment been worth it? The answer, without the slightest shadow of a
doubt, is yes. It is too easy for critics of our policy to point to the suffering of the Iraqi people and blame the sanctions imposed by the United Nations.... Iraq is now back among the top five oil exporters and the amount that will be available this year for humanitarian and food purposes is likely to be around $12bn. There is no reason why anyone outside the Iraqi regime should be blamed for the condition of the Iraqi people. As the U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said recently, the government of Iraq is in a position to improve the health of the Iraqi people. But it suits Saddam to let his people suffer, and to use that suffering to exploit credulous critics of our policy.... Ten years after the Gulf war, Security Council Resolution 1284 is on the table and offers a path out of sanctions. It is up to Saddam Hussein to take that path."
"Britain And U.S. Isolated Over Tottering Trade Embargo On Iraq"
The conservative Times observed (8/2): "When Iraq invaded Kuwait 10 years ago today, the world's reaction was swift. Within days, a total trade embargo was imposed. The sanctions remain, but are tottering. Smugglers are breaching them, and deep rifts have opened among the Gulf war victors over whether to continue them. Critics say sanctions are not working.... Last year, the heads of two UN agencies in Baghdad resigned in disgust at the human cost, measured in shockingly high infant mortality and in hospitals lacking basic drugs and equipment. Britain and the United States are now alone on the UNSC in insisting that sanctions must remain--saying they cannot be lifted until Saddam Hussein's remaining weapons of mass destruction...have been eliminated. Opponents of sanctions are growing. China, France and Russia now favor lifting sanctions even before Saddam allows inspectors back in. But America is unlikely to agree to that."
FRANCE: "Iraq Ten Years Later"
Mouna Naim observed in left-of-center Le Monde (8/4): "The Iraq affair has become a dialogue of the deaf between America and Iraq. The Iraqi president will not hesitate to use anything, even the brutal repression of his own people, to maintain his power, and he is succeeding. For its part, the United States, without whose agreement nothing can be done by the UNSC, affirms it wants him out of power but seems to believe Providence will take care of everything.... Nothing convinces us that lifting sanctions will create democracy in Iraq and end its isolation...however the embargo has not led to the collapse of [Saddam's] regime."
"Cruel, Inefficient And Dangerous"
Hubert Védrine declared in right-of-center weekly Le Point (8/4): "The sanctions imposed for ten years against Iraq have become cruel, inefficient and dangerous.... Cruel, because they only punish the people; inefficient, because they do not force the regime to cooperate; and dangerous, because they feed the development of an embargo generation."
"The Embargo Profits Saddam"
Jean-Pierre Perrin held in left-of-center Libération (8/2): "The United States remains rigid in its 1990 attitude, giving millions of dollars...to an invisible opposition and bombing Iraq daily without [UNSC] authorization...and does it all, to use the expression of a Western diplomat, 'without knowing why.' It is one deaf person against another, and the result is an incredible amount of damage and a country bled to death by an unending embargo."
"Outdated Embargo"
Pascal Arnaud in regional La Nouvelle République du Centre-Ouest (8/2): "Saddam Hussein, whose first worry is not that of the well-being of his people, immerses himself in anti-American
arguments and takes advantage of the year-by-year creation of an 'embargo generation' who holds a poor opinion of the outside world. He is still the master of the country. The embargo shows itself to be inefficient in destabilizing Hussein and his regime. Today, this desire to 'see things through to the end,' a true American and British obsession, appears to be more and more outdated."
GERMANY: "Collateral Damage"
Andrea Nuesse suggested in centrist Tagesspiegel of Berlin (8/2): "The link between sanctions and arms control has long since broken down. The conclusion should be to separate the two elements: sanctions for military products and industrial sites which could aid in arms production would remain intact; all other sanctions would be lifted. At the same time, one would have to renew UN Secretary General Annan's suggestion to introduce long-term monitoring of Iraqi arms production. Back then, Iraq agreed to such a plan. One has to admit that such an agreement is of little value. But without Iraqi cooperation, arms control remains impossible anyway."
"Ten Years After The Attack"
Dietrich Alexander argued in right-of-center Die Welt of Hamburg (8/2): "Hussein is not bothered by the embargo. Relying on his instinct, he makes use of the suffering and holds the United States responsible. He uses his wealth to purchase loyalty.... His strategy of not pushing oil exports to the permitted limit in order to buy food and medication is perfidious.... The Iraqi opposition is busy fighting ideological battles. Not even the Security Council is speaking with one voice: Russia, France, and China pursue economic interests and, more or less openly, oppose the harsh course steered by the United States and Great Britain. The Iraqi people will not be free unless they rid themselves of Hussein. Until that happens, bombs and sanctions will continue missing their target."
ITALY: "UN Must Change Its Position Regarding Embargo Against Iraq"
Commenting on Secretary Albright's front page op-ed in top-circulation, centrist Corriere della Sera (8/2) on the occasion of the tenth anniversary of Desert Storm, Rocco Buttiglione, leader of Italy's CDU, opposition-centrist party, opined in left-leaning, influential La Repubblica (8/8): "In her article...Madeleine Albright reiterated the decision to maintain both the embargo that isolates Iraq...and the no-fly zone for large parts of the Iraqi territory. The European Parliament...has clearly shown its deep doubts about both points. We all agree that Iraq must not keep weapons of mass destruction...and that Israel has the right to live in peace within its borders.... However, our reasons and goals related to the embargo...differ from the Americans'. We also differ about the reasons for maintaining the embargo. We assume that the embargo is necessary to force the Iraqi leadership to work with the UN Commission [on weapons
verification and dismantlement].... By contrast, it seems that Mrs. Albright meant something different [by the embargo]. It seems that she is convinced that [it] must continue until Iraq's current government is toppled.... It is immoral to impose on the entire population...endless suffering in order...to get rid of its leaders.... U.S. friendship is at the core of our foreign policy, both the Italian and European foreign policy.... (And) precisely because of this...we have no inferiority complex and want to put forth our reasons and make an independent contribution toward drafting a policy that is consistent with the goals and interests of the entire Atlantic Community."
"War And Peace In The Shadow Of Oil Wells"
Leading business Il Sole-24 Ore offered this analysis by Alberto Negri (8/1): "Ten years after
the invasion of Kuwait, Iraq is still at the center of a tangle of politics, diplomacy and economy. From the crisis, the United States has learned to temper too strong oscillations of black oil (both downward and upward)."
RUSSIA: "The Coalition Is Gone, Saddam Has Stayed"
Sergei Strokan opined in reformist weekly Itogi (8/8): "Meanwhile Washington is having more and more difficulty in drumming up support for its actions in Iraq. The idea of demonizing Hussein has been greatly devalued in recent years and is more and more difficult to sell. And not only in the Arab world or at the UN where criticism of American policy in Iraq is increasingly vocal and sympathy for Saddam is growing. The 'dissenting' ideas of former international observer Scott Ritter to the effect that sanctions against Iraq have outlived themselves and should be lifted are shared by three permanent members of the UN Security Council--Russia, France and China. Instead of an anti-Iraq coalition, a pro-Iraq one is being formed. Witness the recent visit to Moscow by Iraq's Vice President Tariq Aziz, who conveyed a personal message from Saddam Hussein to Vladimir Putin.... Enough has been said about Russia's serious economic interests in Iraq: Among other things, it expects Iraq to pay back its multibillion dollar debt after sanctions are lifted and Iraq's accounts are unfrozen. France too has considerable interests as a major Western creditor of Iraq prior to 1990."
"No Plan To Replace Saddam"
Yelena Suponina wrote in reformist Vremya Novostei (8/7): "The more time passes since the invasion of Kuwait the stronger becomes the impression that, despite the belligerent rhetoric of the Anglo-Saxons, who are declaring the Iraqi dictator to be a concentration of world evil, in reality Saddam Hussein has long ceased to be an obstacle to anyone. 'To this day the United States has not worked out any real plan to replace the Iraqi regime. The Americans have yet to find a suitable substitute for Saddam,' said the Kurdish leader and a prominent member of the opposition Jalal Talabani."
"Crime Without Punishment"
Maksim Yusin said in reformist Izvestiya (8/4): "Iraq's many lobbyists have almost had us believe that it is a normal country, not a rogue state, that sanctions against it are unfair, that Saddam is quite sane, and that there is nothing wrong in doing business with him. The memory of the events of a decade ago, however, explode that myth. This is why the Russian political elite prefers simply not to remember what happened in August of 1990. This way, it feels better. Saddam has never been punished for what he did to Iran, Kuwait, the Kurds, and thousands of his opponents. He still rules that hapless country, wallowing in luxury. The sanctions do not affect him. While children die because of a lack of medicine, he has more and more plush palaces built for him. From time to time those palaces see delegations of 'Russian
friends,' from Duma deputies to oil company executives, who come to see him, hoping to win profitable contracts."
"Hussein Helped U.S."
Aleksandr Reutov commented reformist, business-oriented Kommersant (8/3): "The Americans (in the Gulf) feel quite strong. They owe that to Hussein. The 1990 invasion was a dream-come-true, a chance for them to regain control over the strategic area they had to leave after the 1979 revolution in Iran. Now there is nothing to stop the Americanizing of oil-rich monarchies. Young Kuwaitis, used to the attributes of Western civilization, will find it hard to abandon them in favor of traditional Islamic values."
AUSTRIA: "A Low-Profile War"
Senior foreign affairs editor Gudrun Harrer wrote in liberal Der Standard (8/3): "It makes political sense that the United States is still accusing Iraq of illegal weapon arsenals: A tame Iraq would neither justify the U.S. presence in the Gulf region nor the long-standing mass purchases of American weapons by Arab Gulf states and the ongoing strictest sanctions of human history.... There is a low-profile war going on in Iraq between U.S. and British fighter jets and the Iraqis in the no-fly-zones established by the Allies in the south and the north. Civilians are regularly hit by those fighters providing Saddam Hussein with a wonderful propaganda show."
BELGIUM: "Iraq: Ten Years Of Suffering"
Baudouin Loos lamented in left-of-center Le Soir (8/2): "With the exception of London and Washington...everybody agrees that the sanctions policy has failed.... The facts are clear: during the last ten years, over a million Iraqis died, according to estimates from UN specialized agencies.... As for the 'oil for food' program...it has shown its limits. [It] did not prevent the regime from reinforcing itself--and enriching itself--or even from gaining in popular support in face of this embargo.... Saddam Hussein continues to rule in one of the most merciless and cruel manners.... How does one get out of this deadlock when all specialists judge that total disarmament will never be a certainty?... The Iraqi people's suffering must end. As the European Parliament requested on April 13, the economic sanctions on Iraq must be lifted.... At the same time, Baghdad should be subject to a severe embargo, but limited to weapons."
"The Only Remaining Superpower"
Middle East affairs writer Many Tassier in independent Catholic De Standaard commented (8/2): "It has become evident that international operations can be successful only if the United States, the only remaining superpower, supports it with its full weight.... Washington never made it a secret that stability in the oil-rich Gulf region is a top priority.... With its military presence, the United States maintains the status quo in the Gulf and supports monarchies, which are no models of democracy."
FINLAND: "Only The Iraqis Can Overthrow Saddam"
Leading, independent Helsingin Sanomat asserted (8/3): "Saddam continues to defy the only superpower, the United States, as well as the United Nations in spite of several years of economic sanctions, flight-ban zones and intense retaliatory bombings. No wonder that Saddam is a hero in the eyes of those radical Arabs who do not have to live under his rule themselves.... Economic sanctions also maintain the sense of hopelessness.... When Saddam says that the sanctions won't have an effect ever and in any way, it awakens among the Iraqis bitterness not against him but against the United States and the West."
HUNGARY: "Saddam Still Free!"
Endre Aczel commented on the 10th anniversary of the Iraqi invasion in leading Nepszabadsag (8/3): "Iraq has become isolated and poor and it still has to follow regulations on how to spend its oil export revenues. From this aspect nothing has changed in ten years. And Saddam is still there in his place where he has been (just like Slobodan Milosevic), because wars and sanctions can hit and ruin nations but not dictators, it seems. The biggest villains, at the end of the story, are always wandering around free."
NORWAY: "Everything As It Was In Kuwait And Iraq"
Independent Dagbladet commented (8/2): "It is sad that the West's rescue of Kuwait hasn't lead to any democratic development in the country. Is it even more unfortunate that the dictator Saddam Hussein seems to be even stronger than he was ten years ago.... Five thousand children die every month--first and foremost because of undernourishment and malnutrition and a lack of medicines. The Iraqis' anger is not first and foremost directed against Saddam, but
against the Western sanctions. Not least from the American side it is pointed out that Saddam himself is to blame for his people's suffering.... From many quarters there are now demands for a change in the sanctions so that they affect those that should be affected. It's about time. It wasn't the Iraqi children who elected Saddam as president."
POLAND: "Strong President Of A Ruined Country"
Ryszard Malik expressed the following opinions in centrist Rzeczpospolita (8/3): "Saddam Hussein was invited to the summit of the Islamic Conference Organization scheduled for November in the capital of Qatar. It will be the first foreign trip of the Iraqi president since Iraq's aggression against Kuwait.... Qatar, which was under fire from Iraqi artillery during the Gulf War, made a radical decision that breaks the present isolation of the dictator. It allegedly did not happen without consultation with the other Gulf countries and with the leaders of major Arab and Muslim nations. Ten years after Iraq's attack on Kuwait, the Arab world is increasing the gestures and declarations that undermine the significance of international sanctions imposed on Iraq."
PORTUGAL: "The World Disorder"
Moderate-left Público's Editor-in-Chief José Manuel Fernandes wrote (8/2): "You knew who the good guys were, and who the bad guys were.... Optimism was the dominant tone: after all, a 'new international order' was being born.... The illusion of this new order was kept up for some time.... There seemed to be conditions for a more peaceful and orderly world. But there weren't.... Without the United Nations having any kind of effective capacity to intervene--or even showing any intention to do so--the....world revealed itself to be a much more dangerous, unpredictable and disorderly place than it was during the Cold War."
SPAIN: "Only Saddam Remains"
Conservative La Razon observed (8/2): "Saddam, then the great loser, could today pass as the victor of the televised Gulf War. In the end, the allies could not, or did not want to, finish off a Saddam who would seem to serve (with Russian and Chinese support) as a retaining wall against the radical Muslims.... Ten years after the victory over Iraq, all the leaders of the alliance have disappeared from the political map. Only Saddam remains. It is pretty clear, therefore, that the war was not aimed at eliminating a dictator but at limiting his expansion. Like Milosevic in Serbia. In geopolitics, human rights mean little."
TURKEY: "Ankara's Iraq Impasse"
Asli Aydintasbas commented in intellectual Yeni Binyil (8/4): "Although Ankara is against such adventures, Republicans favor increased military support to the Iraqi opposition in their effort to topple Saddam.... It is not the Clinton administration but the Republican wing of the Senate which is the greatest supporter of a figure Ankara dislikes: Iraqi National Congress (INC) leader Ahmad Chalabi. Bush's closest aides Wolfowitz and Perle and his vice presidential candidate Cheney are all close friends of the INC leader. It seems that we will have much disputation over Iraq if the Republicans win the elections."
"Iraq: Winners And Losers"
Hasan M. Hazar wrote in conservative/religious Turkiye (8/4): "The United States did not come out a loser from the decade-long Gulf crisis and sanctions on Iraq. From Kuwait to Saudi Arabia, oil rich countries continue to pay huge amounts of money to the United States for protection, not to mention the military equipment and weapons they buy. Thanks to ongoing sanctions, Saddam is increasing his control over the Iraqi people. The prevailing situation hinders efforts to establish democracy in the Middle East.... Turkey has suffered economic losses of $40 billion, and is merely observing the pseudo 'prime ministers, ministers, and administration' in northern Iraq. What if the United States and the West suddenly decides to 'officially' recognize them?"
"Ten Years After"
Derya Sazak commented in mass-appeal Milliyet (8/2): "The Western world created a war machine out of Saddam Hussein by arming him for ten years during the Iran-Iraq conflict. The United States could easily have entered Baghdad and toppled Saddam in 1991, but Washington chose to leave the work unfinished. Ten years later Saddam is still in power, while Turkey is busy struggling with troubles in northern Iraq. To some extent, the United States owes its presence in the Middle East to the 'Saddam threat.'"
"Ten Years Later, Region Still Endures Pain Caused By Saddam"
Fikret Ertan maintained in conservative/religious Zaman (8/1): "Today, on the tenth anniversary of Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait, Iraq feels the weight of devastating presence of political, economic, and military sanctions on Baghdad.... The Iraqi economy has deteriorated for 20 years because of Saddam's aggression, and UN estimates claim that the Iraqi people will have to pay about $200 billion in restitutions to international companies and neighboring countries.... Saddam's irrational moves caused the Arab economies suffer losses of $700 billion, dealt a heavy blow to the Palestinian cause, and destroyed the notion of Arab League. Turkey got its share, and suffered a loss of $20 to $45 billion. Ten years later, the region is still enduring the pain of Saddam's ill-considered aggression against Kuwait."
JAPAN: "Lessons From 10th Anniversary Of Gulf Crisis"
The liberal Mainichi editorialized (8/3): "Has the root of the war been eradicated? Although Kuwait was liberated, the UN continues to impose sanctions on Iraq's Saddam Hussein, who continues to crack down on the Kurds. The UN has been unable to initiate its own policy toward Iraq because of differences of opinion among permanent UNSC members. While Russia and France are in favor of lifting the UN sanctions against Iraq, the United States and Britain continue to insist on special UN inspections of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.
During the Gulf war, the United States worked closely with the UN, Europe, Russia, Arab and Gulf states and Japan, opening the way for joint world action against Iraq. But its post-war action...has since been criticized as arbitrary."
CHINA: "Sanctions On Iraq Increasingly Criticized"
Xiao Tai said in official China Youth Daily (Zhongguo Qingnianbao, 8/8): "Despite the United States' insistence, the international community now opposes sanctions on Iraq."
PAKISTAN: "Kuwait's Just Demand"
Islamabad's rightist, English-language Pakistan Observer declared (8/4): "This chapter must end now. Reconciliation and normalization are not only in the interest of Iraq and Kuwait, but also of the Arab world and entire Muslim Ummah as well. The sufferings of the Iraqi people due to sanctions have hurt all, including the Kuwaitis. Thus the Muslim world should find a way out of this sad state of affairs."
"Sanctions On Iraq Must Go"
Islamabad's rightist, English-language Pakistan Observer said (8/1): "It is very unfortunate that the United Nations has not fulfilled its responsibilities toward the Iraqis. The country has been devastated beyond comprehension and to claim that it still poses a threat to others is the biggest disinformation of the century.... Arabs in particular should lead the campaign for ending the Iraqi Miseries."
CANADA: "It's Time To End Iraqi Embargo"
Human-rights activist Samaa Elibyari wrote in Quebec's conservative, English-language Gazette (8/4): "Every time Washington suspects that the plight of the Iraqi population is gaining sympathy, reports emanate from the U.S. capital claiming that Baghdad continues to be a global menace and must be contained by the blockade. The latest allegations deal with testing short-range missiles. Those weapons do not violate 'the Mother of All UN Resolutions,' which lays down what sort of weaponry Iraq can have.... This tragedy must end now. All men and women of conscience should call for an immediate lifting of the embargo against Iraq."
"The Implacable Iraqi Regime And The American Superpower"
Charles-Philippe David, a Fulbright scholar and head of the Teleglobe Chair on strategic and diplomatic studies at the UQAM, and Jean-Philippe Racicot, researcher at the Teleglobe Chair, wrote in liberal Le Devoir (8/1): "Why is the American superpower still hounding a nation impoverished by ten years of war and economic sanctions? There are many valid answers, but one seems particularly appropriate: the inability of the United States to change its strategic philosophy.... Certainly the American strategy must be reviewed, but it remains very popular at the Pentagon, and in the Congress, and everything seems to indicate that both presidential candidates also approve it.... In the meantime, the isolation of Iraq continues and American decision-makers are still looking for an exit strategy: The one that consists (in vain) of putting an end to the rule of Saddam Hussein."
BRAZIL: "Saddam Hussein's New Threats"
A byliner in independent, afternoon Jornal da Tarde (8/8) by Brazilian diplomat Antonio Amaral de Sampaio judged: "Saddam Hussein refuses to learn the lessons of war he has been submitted to and continues with his megalomaniac dream of making Iraq...into a new Prussia.... Baghdad's crazy man wants to exert political dominance by using the myth of Arab unity, galvanized by hatred against Israel and Western values.... The paralysis of the UNSC, where certain permanent members prefer to do business with Baghdad over inspecting Iraq's rearmament, has let Saddam resume his posture of threatening regional stability and world peace.... Since Saddam does not hesitate in using any means to satiate his ambitions of power, what remains to be seen is what his next target will be and when the chosen victim will be hit."
"Bush May Revive Dispute With Dictator"
Center-right O Estado de S. Paulo's Washington correspondent reported (7/30): "Having survived ten years of U.S. attempts at destabilization, the Iraqi leader continues to be one of the major U.S. foreign policy concerns.... Saddam has succeeded in transforming the suffering that the embargo continues to inflict on the Iraqi population, especially the children, into ammunition for a propaganda war that he is winning.... The international consensus that Saddam should be kept in the most complete diplomatic isolation fell apart two years ago."
"An Autistic Clash"
Paulo Daniel Farah reported in liberal Folha de S. Paulo (8/6): "According to Arab and American analysts, the next U.S. president will adopt a posture even more rigid in relation to Iraq, totally opposing the end of the embargo and favoring new military interventions.... Both Al Gore and George W. Bush have already publicly repudiated Saddam Hussein and promised to increase financial support to the Iraqi National Congress. Gore has also met with leaders of the movement.... Ten years after the invasion of Kuwait, the negotiations regarding Iraq suggest an autistic clash. On one hand, an isolated regime, separated from the international community. On the other, the United States has maintained the same attitude since 1990. It supports the threat of a semi-invisible and divided opposition and bombs Iraq without the UN Security Council's authorization."
##
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
