S E C R E T SECTION 01 OF 02 AMMAN 005295

SIPDIS

WHITE HOUSE FOR TUCKER ASKEW

E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/16/2012
TAGS: PREL MOPS KPAL ISRAEL'>IS IZ JO UNSC
SUBJECT: PRESIDENT'S IRAQ SPEECH: JORDANIANS WELCOME MOVE
TO UNSC, FEAR WAR IS COMING, AND ASK "WHAT ABOUT ISRAEL?"

Classified By: DCM GREGORY L. BERRY FOR REASONS 1.5 (B) and (D)

--------------
SUMMARY
--------------


1. (C) Initial reaction in Jordan to the President's UNGA
speech has been mixed. The government issued a generally
supportive statement on September 12 calling for the return
of inspectors to Iraq, and many of our GOJ interlocutors have
privately praised the forcefulness of the speech. Those
Jordanians who view the speech in positive terms point to the
U.S.'s renewed commitment to multilateral diplomacy as its
most important component. However, local media and numerous
contacts outside the government have been decidedly negative.
Those critical of the speech say the President did not
convince them that a preemptive strike was necessary.
General public opinion and press commentary pointed to a
perceived "double standard" in U.S. foreign policy between
enforcement of UNSCRs on Iraq but not on ISRAEL. Whether
critic or admirer, however, the Jordanian public is
increasingly convinced that a U.S.-Iraq war is coming. End
Summary.

-------------- --------------
PRAISING THE ART OF THE SPEECH, IF NOT ITS CONTENT
-------------- --------------


2. (C) On 9/12, Minister of State for Political Affairs and
Minister of Information Mohammed Adwan issued the only
official GOJ response thus far to the President's UNGA
speech. After welcoming the President's reference to
establishing a Palestinian State in three years, Adwan said
"We also hope that President Bush's speech will lead to an
immediate dialogue between Iraq and the United Nations for
the implementation of all UN resolutions" including the
"immediate return of UN arms inspectors to determine whether
Iraq has weapons of mass destruction."


3. (C) In a 9/14 discussion with A/PolCouns, Ashraf Zeitoon
of FonMin Muasher's Private Office gave a positive assessment
of the speech. Zeitoon said that by focusing the discussion

back on the Security Council, the President made it "much
harder for the U.S.'s international critics to say anything."
Zeitoon qualified his praise, however, noting that he and
other MFA colleagues feel that while the President had won
points among Jordanians for his renewed multilateralism, he
had not provided convincing evidence that a preemptive strike
was warranted. Ali al-Ayed, also of the FonMin's Private
Office, told A/DCM on 9/15 that he understood Mubarak soon
would be making a tour of the region to drum up Arab support
for the return of inspectors. The President's speech,
al-Ayed noted, had made Iraq the issue of the moment in the
GOJ, pushing aside, at least for now, the ISRAELi-Palestinian
conflict.

--------------
SOME POSITIVE REACTIONS
--------------


4. (C) Samplings of other Embassy contacts also show that the
speech resonated in some quarters. Former Iraqi Oil Minister
Issam Chalabi said he was "extremely impressed." The speech
was "well-balanced, turned the issue around, and covered
points that were long overdue." Chalabi was particularly
full of praise for the President's emphasis on the plight of
the Iraqi people under Saddam: "This was very important. So
many democratic governments have forgotten this, as have
people in the Arab world. They should be ashamed of
themselves." Jamal Tahat, a telecommunications researcher,
observed that the speech "made it easier to defend the
American position. If there is going to be a war, it will be
a more rational war." Several other business contacts also
offered a general positive reaction, noting that "anything
that reduces uncertainty is welcome."

-------------- --------------
MEDIA NEGATIVE: U.S. WANTS WAR, WHAT ABOUT ISRAEL?
-------------- --------------


5. (SBU) Those positive statements among Embassy contacts
notwithstanding, Jordanian media and opinionmakers almost
unanimously discussed the speech in negative terms. Even the
government-affiliated English language Jordan Times (which is
generally very measured in its criticism of the U.S.) stated
in an editorial on 9/13 that the President "failed yet again
to show solid evidence that Iraq has weapons of mass
destruction. His argument that Iraq is a threat to the world
remains unconvincing." The paper went on to argue that it
was the U.S. -- not Iraq -- that posed a threat to regional
stability: "Baghdad says it does not want a war. It will
have to demonstrate that. That Bush wants a war, it has long
been clear. It is not too late to deny him the chance to get
it."


6. (U) Arab language daily "Al-Arab Al-Yawm," in a 9/13
editorial was particularly critical of the perceived U.S.
"double standard" in the region: "We, the Arabs who live in
an area that the U.S. Administration is seeking to turn into
a zone of war and destruction, cannot but feel bitterness for
the double standard policy that was clearly evident in Bush's
speech. He totally ignored what the Palestinian people have
been enduring for the past four months at the hands of the
ISRAELi troops, while showering the world with the
'violations' of the Iraqi regime."


7. (C) Other conversations with Embassy contacts over the
past several days have keyed in on the "double standard"
issue. Urayb Rantawi, Director of the Al-Quds Center for
Research characterized the President's statements on
Palestine as "the clearest U.S. statement thus far" in
support of Palestinian aspirations. He qualified that
praise, however, by adding that "what's going on on the
ground, however, undermines its credibility." Former
Jordanian Ambassador to Iraq Faleh al-Tawil told us
"attacking Iraq because of WMD is unconvincing, especially
when you don't do anything about ISRAEL and its WMD."
Several other Embassy contacts asked rhetorically why the
U.S. is focused on Iraq while ISRAEL, they feel, is guilty of
the same offenses: flaunting UNSCRs, possessing WMD, and
occupying others' territory.

-------------- --------------
IN ANY CASE, WAR (EVERYONE NOW BELIEVES) IS COMING
-------------- --------------


8. (C) What has solidified in the thinking of most Jordanians
-- both among critics and admirers of the President's speech
-- is a growing sense that war between the U.S. and Iraq is
coming. For those who praised the speech, the direction
ahead lends itself to a straightforward interpretation.
Former Iraqi Oil Minister Chalabi summed it up succinctly
saying: "The U.S. appears truly sincere in wanting to topple
Saddam this time. I hope that means we are nearing the end
of this tragedy." For the critics, the U.S. challenge (or to
some "threat") to the UN to "shoulder its responsibilities"
is only a superficial repackaging of U.S. war plans.
Journalist Musa Keilani in a 9/15 opinion piece stated: "On
the surface, it looks great . . . but it is an easy task to
reject Iraqi compliance as falling short. The new U.S. move
is deceptive and another stepping stone to military action
against Iraq."

--------------
COMMENT
--------------


9. (S) Many of the Jordanians who praised the President's
speech welcomed the U.S. pledge to work with the UN in the
hope that it will give Iraq one last chance to permit
inspectors into the country and avoid military action, which
they fear would have serious consequences for Jordan. In
contrast, the negative street and media reaction focused on
the perceived U.S. double standard in dealing with Arabs
versus ISRAEL, a strong undercurrent in the popular Jordanian
view of regional issues across the board.
GNEHM