MEDIA REACTION ON U.S.-ARAB RELATIONS

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 AMMAN 004652 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 U.S.-ARAB RELATIONS Summary Lead story in all papers today, August 19, highlights the beginning of Israel's withdrawal from Gaza and Bethlehem. Front-page wire-service reports quote the Israeli Ministry of Defense, following a security meeting with the Palestinians, as saying that the implementation of "Gaza First" plan will commence August 19. Both Al-Arab Al-Yawm and Al-Dustour Arabic dailies carry wire service reports citing former U.S. Secretary of State Eagleburger's "objection" to an SIPDIS American "intervention" in Iraq "now". These reports are carried under the headline claiming an American campaign to "invent" justifications for an attack on Iraq. Editorial commentaries principally dealt with developments in Arab-American relations, with commentators feeding the growing perception that the goals of the U.S. war on terrorism are shifting to a broader offensive against all Arab regimes. At the same time, one influential columnist sought to put in perspective the outcry over the U.S. reaction to the Saad Eddin Ibrahim case by pointing out that a nation's decision to withhold assistance can hardly be termed "intervention". True intervention, he continued, is what America is doing in Iraq. Editorial Commentary -- "Reviewing Arab-American relations" Chief Editor Taher Udwan writes on the back page of independent, mass-appeal Arabic daily Al-Arab Al-Yawm (08/19): "The `war on terrorism' that the Bush administration announced is shifting away from its original objectives of pursuing Al-Qa'eda and moving towards pursuing Arab regimes without discrimination. Day in and day out, it becomes clear that the Iraqi regime is not the only target in this war on terrorism. There are targets that are being created in the Arab world by the warmongers in the Pentagon. Would that these developments push the Arab countries towards an organized and responsible reassessment of Arab-American relations before the iron gets too hot." -- "A new form of international relations" Daily columnist Mazen Saket writes on the op-ed page of center-left, influential Arabic daily Al-Dustour (08/19): "The American war against terrorism is expanding in our Arab region and is turning into an attack against all those who disagree with the United States and fail to do its bidding. The media campaign against Saudi Arabia continues . and political and economic pressures against Egypt increase. We can almost be certain that the U.S. plans for and pressures on the countries of this region are behind the recent media campaign against Jordan. It is an America campaign that seeks to force moderate political regimes to go along with American schemes and even take part in them. To oppose a military strike against Iraq and criticize the U.S. policy in favor of Israel's aggressiveness and expansionism is enough for the U.S. administration to consider those countries and regimes as targets for political, economic and media pressure campaigns. The U.S. administration's new form of relations with the Arabs is not a reaction to the September 11 attacks, nor is it a defense of American interests or a war against terrorism and extremism; it is a return to colonization." -- "American intervention in Egypt and Iraq" Daily columnist Fahd Fanek writes on the back page of semi-official, influential Arabic daily Al-Ra'i (08/19): "The Egyptian opposition criticized American intervention in Egypt's domestic affairs, but said nothing about the American intervention in Iraq's domestic issues. This `intervention' [in Egypt] is theoretical and is not borne out by proof on the ground. There is no `additional' assistance for Egypt simply awaiting the President's approval. On the contrary, there has been talk for years about decreasing U.S. assistance to Egypt and Israel. In addition, not giving further assistance can hardly be considered intervening in (another country's) domestic issues. The U.S. government is free to do what it feels like with its taxpayers' money. The countries that receive this assistance know that such assistance depends on the donor countries' approval of their conduct. Even the nature of the American `intervention' is not clear. The human rights activist Saad Eddin Ibrahim is an American citizen after all, and as such, the United States must try to help him out. The flagrant and blatant type of American intervention is the one that is happening in Iraq, [not Egypt]." BERRY