MEDIA REACTION MUGABE'S BROADSIDE AGAINST WEST;

UNCLAS HARARE 001975 SIPDIS DEPT FOR AF/PDPA FOR DALTON, MITCHELL AND SIMS; AF FOR MRAYNOR IRAQ PD FOR SMITH, PINESS AND ROOKARD NSC FOR JENDAYI FRAZER LONDON FOR GURNEY PARIS FOR NEARY NAIROBI FOR PFLAUMER E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PREL KPAO KMDR ZI SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION MUGABE'S BROADSIDE AGAINST WEST; HARARE ¶1. Robert Mugabe's broadside against the West, especially the United States and Britain, while addressing the 58th United nations General Assembly in New York, made the lead story in the September 27 edition of the government- controlled daily "The Herald" (circulation 5-70,000). Under headline "Don't dictate to us, West told: Zim's criticism of Britain, United States based on principles: President," the newspaper's Presidential Reporter Innocent Gore, who accompanied Mugabe to New York, filed the following report: ¶2. "Zimbabwe does not criticize Britain and the United States for the sake of it but its criticism is based on fundamental principles, President Mugabe said (09/26/03). Addressing the 58th U. N. General Assembly in New York, Mugabe attacked the emergence of unipolarism in world affairs in which powerful nations such as Britain and the U. S. sought to dominate the world and dictate to other countries how they should govern themselves. He lamented the invasion of Iraq by the U. S. and Britain without the mandate of the U. N. `Let it not be said that Zimbabwe enjoys criticizing the U. S. and Britain for the sake of criticism. Our criticisms are founded on sound, fundamental principles. Let it not be forgotten that Zimbabwe was in the chair when the Security Council authorized the first Gulf War. We stood firmly by the U. S., Britain and many other nations that removed Iraq from Kuwait. We did so on the basis that expansionism and occupation of a sovereign country and people cannot be right, can never be just and warranted under any circumstance. We admired the deployment of power under the auspices of the U. N. It is the absence of the same ingredients that explain our indignation, our sharp censure of the so-called coalition of the willing that does not seem to recognize that both the Iraqis and the world are unwilling to sanction the means employed, and the end achieved,' said Mugabe. ". . .Mugabe said at the heart of the tragedy in the Persian Gulf was the unprecedented assault on multilateralism in world affairs represented by the Security Council which is the only guarantor of global peace, order and security. `Some powerful western nations, led by the U. S. and Britain, went to a war of unclear objectives in the face of clear opposition from the rest of the world and as we now know, with clear opposition from their own people. It was and remains (an) unjust and illegitimate war, unjust to the extent that it was founded and prosecuted on falsehoods; illegitimate to the extent that it was not sanctioned by the U. N. and has transformed itself into effective occupation of a sovereign people.' Mugabe said there could never be world peace under conditions of foreign invasion and occupation. There could never be world security and order when naked power suspended and substituted with unilateralism the hallowed principle of multilateralism, on the basis of which peace had been made, kept, preserved and expanded since the Second World War. . .' It is a strange logic that the Iraqis pay for a bad president, a bad government and a bad war by occupation and loss of their sovereignty. Let us state here quite clearly to both Britain and the U. S. that the Iraqi people must have the sovereign right to determine the affairs of their country. . . .'" SULLIVAN