MEDIA REACTION ON MIDDLE EAST AND IRAQ

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 AMMAN 004377

SIPDIS

STATE FOR NEA/ARN, NEA/PA, NEA/AIA, INR/NESA, R/MR,
I/GNEA, B/BXN, B/BRN, NEA/PPD, NEA/IPA FOR ALTERMAN
USAID/ANE/MEA
LONDON FOR GOLDRICH
PARIS FOR O'FRIEL
USCINCCENT//CCPA, USCENTCOM REAR MACDILL AFB FL
STATE PASS TO AID

E.O. 12958: N/A

TAGS: KMDR JO
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION ON MIDDLE EAST AND IRAQ


Summary

-- Lead story in all papers today, August 6, focuses
on Israel's increased measures of isolation against
Palestinian towns and cities, and highlight Israel's
bombing of Gaza in response to the Palestinian suicide
bombing. Front-page reports also highlight the
Security Council's deliberation regarding Iraq's
invitation for a visit by the inspectors. The same
reports highlight Washington's rejection of Iraq's
similar invitation to Congress to visit Baghdad.

Editorial Commentary on Middle East

-- "Who convinces Bush of his responsibility for the
violence"

Chief Editor Taher Udwan writes on the back page of
independent, mass-appeal Arabic daily Al-Arab Al-Yawm
(08/06): "President Bush alone has the power to drive
the Palestinian-Israeli confrontation out of this
cycle of murder and violence and towards just and
peaceful solutions. This fact means that the
President of the United States bears the
responsibility of the consequences of his Middle East
policy. By adopting policies that support Sharon's
military operations and political objectives,
President Bush has pushed the Palestinians into a spot
where life and desperation are one and the same. The
Palestinians' belief in the justice of their cause and
their struggle has nothing to do with the nature of
the ruling regime. Their struggle with Israel and its
occupation has everything to do with defending the
identity, the land and the homes. It has everything
to with their right to live like human beings, to
determine their own destiny on their own soil, as
opposed to giving in to the invaders who want to
uproot them altogether from geography and history."

-- "Israeli measures reflect the Sharon government's
political bankruptcy"

Semi-official, influential Arabic daily Al-Ra'i
(08/06) editorializes: "The iron-fist measures
adopted by the Sharon government against the
Palestinian civilians reflect more a political and
military bankruptcy rather than a vision towards
seriously reviving the peace process or towards
learning the lessons from events over the past few
months. All these measures have proven futile in
breaking the will of the Palestinian people and in
forcing them to surrender and give up their national
rights. Israel's insistence on continuing to use
force, oppression, destruction and arrests means that
it is firing a fatal bullet into the peace process and
thwarting all efforts, without actually providing an
alternative or a political project that can be
adopted."

-- "It is the Palestinian people's expensive war for
independence"

Daily columnist Sultan Hattab writes on the semi-
official, influential Arabic daily Al-Ra'i (08/06):
"the Palestinian war for independence continues.
Sharon is responsible for the killing of Israelis and
Palestinians, because he is entrenching his occupation
with blood and is denying the Palestinians their
freedom and security. We could differ in opinion
about the type and usefulness of Palestinian
operations, but that is a minor detail. The
Palestinian people's war for independence continues.
Those who can do anything to bring this day closer
must do, and those who cannot must shut up. The
Palestinian path to independence is hard and requires
support and encouragement, and not people who stand in
the way. As long as there is occupation, there is
either humiliation or blood. I believe the
Palestinians have already opted for the second."
Editorial Commentary on Iraq

-- "Legal concerns"

If the United States is to launch a war against Iraq
soon, what legitimizes such an attack from both
national and international perspectives? U.S.
Democratic Senator Joseph Biden, chairman of the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee raised the specter
of the legality of waging war against Iraq without
congressional consent. Internationally, an attack by
any U.N. member state against another must reckon with
the U.N. Charter. None of the existing U.N. Security
Council resolutions on Iraq offers a legal basis for a
fresh attack on Baghdad. What complicates and even
clouds the issue of whether to start a war against
Iraq is the incoherence of the rationale offered to
explain the urgency of such a war. For national and
international purposes, one wonders what really is the
ultimate objective of a U.S. war on Iraq. Is it the
toppling of the Iraqi regime led by Saddam Hussein? Or
is it the elimination of all real or imaginary weapons
of mass destruction existing on Iraqi soil? Better
still, Washington could very well be aiming to achieve
the two goals simultaneously. In either case, before
the U.S. president is able to seek and obtain
congressional consent to go to war against Iraq, he
must first articulate his purpose to the House and
Senate. And if Bush succeeds in convincing the U.S.
Congress that his justifications for going to war are
legitimate, he will still have to reckon with
international authority. Against these backdrops, the
United States would remain ill put to rationalize and
legitimize an attack against Iraq."

GNEHM