MEDIA REACTION KUWAIT MARCH 29-31: AHMAD YASEEN

1. SUMMARY: Festering outrage over the assassination of
Sheikh Yaseen and perceived U.S. approval, if not
complicity, in the act, continues to color local perception
of U.S. reform efforts in the region. "So, what are these
human rights that the Americans are calling for, if they
allow their planes to attack a sick quadriplegic old man?"
writes Former Islamist MP Dr. Abdel Muhsin Jamal in
independent Al-Qabas (3/29). Still, calls for Arab reforms
remain strong, but only if they stem from home-grown efforts
and not U.S. imposition. END SUMMARY.




2. "The Martyr Sheikh"
Saleh Ashoor wrote in independent Al-Watan (3/29): "Sheikh
Yaseen's assassination at the hands of Zionists caused great
grief. In this confrontation, we would become total losers
if we depend on Arab governments to support the Palestinian
cause fairly. The road to confrontation is clear, it is the
same road taken up by heroes and members of the national and
Islamic resistance in southern Lebanon, whose crowning feat
resulted in a humiliating Israeli withdrawal and an exchange
of prisoners. We must mobilize all Islamic nations and arm
them with faith, education and knowledge so that we can be a
formidable challenge against an enemy that is armed with the
most technologically advanced weapons."

3."Sheikh Ahmad Yassen . Martyr"
Abdul Hussen Al-Sultan wrote in independent Al-Rai Al-A'am
(3/30): "Our gratitude to the United States for liberating
our country cannot silence our condemnation toward America's
bias and encouragement of Sharon's policy. America's
justification on the murder of Sheikh Yaseen and its
position as the Zionist's best ally will sabotage all its
positive undertakings in the area. This will also drive us
to take a hostile position toward American policy. In the
face of such unjustified bias and a policy of double
standards, any American initative will clash with the wider
Arab and Islamic will. Unless the Americans reconsider
defending a regime [Israel] which does not accord any
respect or significance to international law, the image of
America will stay distorted in the Arab and Islamic world."



4. "Foolish Defense"
Former Islamist MP, Dr. Abdel Muhsin Jamal wrote in
independent Al-Qabas (3/29): "with his wheelchair, Sheikh
Yaseen proved he was stronger than an American crusader jet
piloted by a Jew. He also proved to be stronger politically
than the American Administration, which did not have any
qualms using its right of Veto. The American Administration
shamelessly backed Sharon the war criminal. America had
given terrorist Sharon the green light to kill our children,
women and men. America is a full partner in the massacring
of Palestinians. So, what are these human rights that the
Americans are calling for, if they allow their planes to
attack a sick quadriplegic old man? Even a madman wouldn't
believe those American fools hypocritically calling for the
protection of human rights."



5. "America and Human Rights Organization"
Mohammed Kadhem wrote in independent Al-Watan (3/29): "The
recent Human Rights report revealed gross violations by
American forces in Afghanistan. We hope that a similar
report will reveal further and similar violations
perpetrated in Iraq. The main reason behind America's entry
to Iraq is to dominate the region's resources.
Justifications such as the search for Bin Laden, or to get
rid of remnants of the Iraqi Baath regime are feeble excuses
designed to keep the American presence indefinitely in the
region."



6. "Pouring Oil on Fire is How America Deals With
Terrorism"
Faisal Al-Zamel wrote in independent Al-Anba (3/29): "The
war on terrorism requires neutralizing the streets in some
countries, because arbitrary arrests, random shelling and
applying torture in detention camps, be it in Iraq or
Afghanistan, will constitute an ideal environment to breed
terrorism. Pure military technique in dealing with
terrorism is like pouring oil on fire. Just look at
Chechnya and how terrorist activities have now moved to
Russia itself. Will Washington create for itself another
Chechnya-style war through the Iraqis?"



7. "Amr Moussa, Leave"
Dr. Ayed Al-Mana'a wrote in independent Al-Watan (3/29):
"The postponement of the Arab summit in Tunisia is a clear
indication of the failure of the present General
Secretariat, headed by Amr Moussa, in reconciling various

SIPDIS
Arab appeals on the necessity of reform of the Arab League.
Moussa must understand that since the escalation in tensions
between the US and the Iraqi regime eighteen months ago,
confidence in the Secretary General has been waning. This
is due to his eagerness to protect the former regime from
the US hammer, and his justification that foreign
intervention would create havoc in the region."



8. "Reforms"
Mohammed Musaed Al-Saleh wrote in independent Al-Qabas
(3/29): "Disagreements between ministers or even presidents
is quite a healthy phenomenon, which must be encouraged. It
appears that internal reforms are the reasons behind the
problem and the indefinite postponement of the summit.
Usually, leaders who attend summits inherit their positions,
or win elections designed for the nomination of a sole
candidate; therefore they have no intention for reforms. As
a result, not holding a summit will not have any effect,
because decisions are just ink on paper."



9. "Home-grown Reforms and External Reforms"
Ahmad Shihab wrote in independent Al-Watan (3/30):
"American and British plans for reforms in the Arab world
don't necessarily stem from sincere intentions, nor do they
instill much hope. However, the degree of progress toward
reforms in the region is non-existent or frozen to say the
least. In spite of a real desire for reform, the question
is how do we go about it? Will homegrown reforms take place
or will they be imposed externally? The solution is in
homegrown reforms, such as implementing qualitative reforms
within the government, applying changes in the
infrastructure of political parties and activating social
and cultural organizations. Such procedures would give a
real meaning to homegrown reforms and exclude external calls
for reforms."



10. "Iraq As A Model For GMEI"
Dr. Jalal Mohammed Rasheed wrote in independent Al-Rai Al-
A'am (3/29): "The new provisional Iraqi constitution is a
minefield in that it imposes the rule of Kurdish minority
over the Shiite majority. This is an American point of view
that is utterly contradictory to the spirit of true
democracy. And when we apply such a model to the general
Arab reality, particularly to the GMEI and Iraq, we find
that American promises initially are very promising, but in
the end they become deadly nightmares. To the Arab
governments: why not mend your domestic affairs so that we
can all live a better life? Must we trust American
promises, which seem initially to lend us a helping hand but
eventually turn lethal?"



11. "They Seem in Agreement, While In Fact Not"
Ahmad Budastoor wrote in independent Al-Watan (3/31):
"Regrettably, some Arab countries completely rejected the
American reform initiative, citing interference in domestic
affairs as a reason. Many observers believe that Israel
will be the biggest benefactor as a result of imposing this
initiative over the Arab states. America is attempting to
divert attention from the Arab-Israeli conflict, and to
present Israel as the only democracy in the region, thereby
opening the region's vast market to Israel's disposal. If
the American government seeks the support of the Arab and
Islamic counties for its reforms initiative, it must be
sincere in finding a comprehensive and just solution to the
Arab-Israeli conflict."



12. "We Reject Such Democracy"
Dr. Sami Naser Khalifa wrote in independent Al-Rai Al-A'am
(3/31): "The American conduct in Iraq is our first
practical example in measuring the seriousness of American
democratic partnership (GMEI), which the Administration aims
to market in the region. Unfortunately, this American
democracy falls toward reinforcing American interests in the
area, and sustaining the dominance of foreign firms over
Iraqi resources. The occupation authority is not only
fabricating reasons to prolong its presence in Iraq, but is
also working to enact laws that will legalize its presence.
The new Transitional Administrative Law has become a
document that executes American dictums through a
constitutional guarantee for their presence. This is the
democratic model imposed on the Iraqi people."



13. "The New American Colonization Initiative"
Dr. Yaser Al-Saleh wrote in independent Al-Rai al-A'am
(3/31): "The problem that most Arab governments and regimes
have with the GMEI, is that such an initiative in one way or
another calls for regime change. Therefore, these same
regimes are trying to convince the American Administration
not to impose such changes. Current governments and regimes
are ready to make superficial changes and only marginal
transformations, which will allow for minimum forms of
democracy and freedom of expression. In the mean time, the
same regimes will guarantee the interests of America and
Israel. American and Jewish Zionists are trying to market
and impose the GMEI over the peoples of the region; is there
worse colonization than this?"

Urbancic